Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-0504 Council Mtg PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND 1~-~6~~:rlt:;'A1~:Citii~:':~aY~~11~i~~k:ess_ th~i ,C~un-6il on nOJ1~ag~~da Ojie~~:~~ri~g:i~~ P~bli~i6~in.- Any citizen .m~;';ubmit ~tten comments :', ~othe:g()im~_il'on_any,iteryi;pn'the Agerid,~fu~less" it is_ t,he subject 0(3 publi~ ~eadngan~. tp~ recoid:is 'closed; Except fOr public he~rings, there is :00 ; .- _ abs'?]1.!t~:ngi1tt(roryllly'~ddress, the-~ounci1:9jl'a'n agendl;l item. Time:pe~itti~g;.t~ei " ~resiqing_9fficer:mayanOw ora] testirilOnY;,however, public ,; ~ee~~ngs_-,l~w.~guararyte_es only public ~tt~nd~ce, not pu~_]ic_parricipatiori;; lfy~u,>>,jsh lospe_ak, please fill out the Speaker Request(orm If?Cated near ': the entryin"ceto the Council Chambers:' The chair' will rec'ognize you and informyou'as to'tlie amount of time alloned to you; if any, The time granted will ~'9~.dent to ,soin~ ext~t on,thf~ab;~ ?f~e. i~em urider dis~ussion~;the~lunber, Of people ~ho wish ,~~ be heard;.and.t!lelength of the agenda. '. ..' ..' ...-." " - . -'. ," .... . '. ' . AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL May 4,2010 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? [5 minutes] 1. Study Session of April 19, 2010 2. Regular Meeting of April 20, 2010 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Mayor's Proclamation of May 8 - 14 as National Tourism Week [5 MinulesJ 2. Mayor's Proclamation of May 9 - 15 as National Historic Preservation Week [5 Minutes) VII. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes} 1. Will Council approve the minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Commiltees? 2. Should Council approve continuance of First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance creating Chapter 11.43 relating to storage of personal and recreational vehicles and amending AMC 11.24.020" from May 4, 2010 to June 29, 2010? 3. Should Council approve continuance of the First Reading of nine ordinances concerning classification of offenses and court fees from May 4, 2010 to July 20, 2010? 4. Should Council exlend the Charter Communication Franchise Agreement for eighteen months 10 facilitate negotiation of a new franchise agreement? 5. Will Council. acling as the Local Contracls Review Board, approve a Change Order for an addilional amount of $55,000 (Iota I aggregate cost change of 47%) for disposing of biosolids during the remainder of the current fiscal year? 6. Does Council wish to enler into an Intergovernmenlal Agreemenl wilh the Federal Bureau of Investigations to participate in the Southern Oregon High-Tech Crimes Task Force (SOHTTF) in order to recognize investigations related to high-tech and internet crimes? 7. Will Council approve a $10,750 contract amendrnent to the existing contract with Thornton Engineering for the design of the Liberty Street Local Improvement District projecl? COUNC'IL MELTINGS ARE BROADCAST' LIVE ON CHANNEL <) VISIT TilE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SirE AT WWW..'\SIILAND.OR.LJS - 8. Will Council approve a City of Ashland Municipal Airport 10 year extension to a ground lease as well as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator Agreement for Valley Investments? 9. Should Council authorize the City Administrator to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement between Jackson County School District #5 (Ashland School District) and the Cily of Ashland in relation to collection of the Construction Excise I' ax? 10. Does Council accept the quarterly financial report as presented? 11. Should Council approve a resolution to adjust budget appropriations for changes in operational expenses to remain in compliance with Oregon Budget Law? 12. Does the Council wish to appoint Donald Morris as an "at large" member of the Ashland Water Advisory Committee? VIII. 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 10 a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council (AMC S2.04.050)) 1. . After considering comments at the public hearing, will Council approve a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Establishing Rates for the Ashland Municipal Airport, and Repealing Resolution 09-21" which increases rates? [10 Minutes] 2. Should Council approve a resolution adjusting the FY 2009-2010 Budget to create. appropriations and authorize exp.enditures for unanticipated expenses during this year? [10 Minutes] . 3. Does Council approve First Reading of ordinances adopting Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill and related ordinance, Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map amendments? [90 Minutes] IX. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience nol 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] X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Will Council approve a fund exchange agreement with 0001' to fund the Laurel Street Sidewalk project and an engineering services contract with Thornton Engineering for design? [15 Minutes] 2. Does the Council wish to direct staff to submit written comments on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Draft Supplemental Environmenlallmpact Statement? [15 Minutes] XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should. Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance relating to Water Curtailment, Definitions, Exhibits, Determinations of Water Shortage, Water Curtailment Stages, Exemptions and Appeals, and Amending Sections 14.06.010 through 14.06.060"? [15 Mi(1utesJ 2. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relaling to Public Contracting and Personal Servic!'l Contracts and Repealing Chapters 2.50 and 2.52"? [15 Minutes] XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS XIV. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35. 102-35. 104 ADA Title I). COUNCIL 1vlEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL <) VISIT 'I'll E crry OF ASH LAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.'\SHLAND.OIUJS CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 19. 2010 Page lof4 MINUTES FOR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Monday, April 19, 2010 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Lemhouse, Voisin, Navickas, Jackson, Chapman and Silbiger were present. 1. Look Ahead Review City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the items on the Council Look Ahead. 2. Does Council wish to direct staff to prepare written comments on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement? Ethan Rosenthal an Environmental Planner for David Evans and Associates provided a presentation on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion review of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) in relation to Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL: NEP A Timeline . 1998 Mt. Ashland Association proposes expansion . 2000 Draft EIS circulated, generates considerable public comment . 2003 Second Draft EIS circulated with added project alternatives . 2004 Final EIS and Record of Decision issued by Forest Service . 2005 Legal action ensues . 2007 Court of Appeals upholds Forest Service on several counts, but failed to properly evaluate several issues (next slide) 2007 Oregon DEQ Issues Bear Creek Watershed TMDL, including Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL . 2009 Forest Service circulates Draft Supplemental EIS (DSEIS) to address issues identified by Court of Appeals Mr. Rosenthal explained the focus was on the Record of Decision (ROD) instead of the 1991 Mt. Ashland Ski Lodge Master Plan because it was currently out for public review. Issues Identified by Court of Appeals and Included in DSEIS . Pacific Fisher -NFMA Claim o Non compliance with requirements of Rogue River LRMP, does not include a compliant Biological Evaluation . Restricted Riparian and Restricted Watershed Terrain - NFMA Claims o Failure to designate Restricted Riparian (Management Strategy [MS] 26) and Restricted Watershed (MS 22) terrain o Failure to evaluate soils standards and guidelines for MS 26 and MS 22 Riparian Reserves - NFMA Claim o Failure to designate Landslide Hazard Zone 2 (LHZ 2) as Riparian Reserve . Restricted Watershed Terrain - NFMA Claim o No Forest Plan Amendment to Exclude Restricted Watershed (MS 22) from Special Use Permit (SUP) Area Restricted Riparian and Restricted Watershed Terrain - NFMA Claims . Failure to designate Restricted Riparian (Management Strategy [MS] 26) and Restricted Watershed (MS 22) terrain . Failure to evaluate soils standards and guidelines for MS 26 and MS 22 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 19. 2010 Page2of4 DSEIS Response Hil!hlil!hts . All perennial streams and wetlands, including 100 foot buffer, were incorporated into Restricted Riparian (MS 26) (48.8 acres) . 27.9 acres ofMS 26 subject to soil standards, but only 0.83 acres of impact would occur. . Restricted Watershed (MS 22) designation applied to portions of the SUP within Ashland Municipal Watershed (approximately 796 acres). . For MS 22 mineral soil exposure standard is up to 30%, proposed expansion would result in an estimated 16.5% . Staff further explained the mineral soil exposure standard of up to 30% required exposure not to exceed the following limits overall, based on the erosion hazard rating of the soil: . 40% mineral soil exposed on soils that are classed as very slight, slight, low or moderate. . 30% exposure on high or severe erosion hazard soils. . 15% exposure on very high or very severe erosion hazard soils. Riparian Reserves - NFMA Claim . Failure to designate Landslide Hazard Zone 2 (LHZ 2) as Riparian Reserve DSEIS Response Hil!hlil!hts . LHZ 2 was mapped and described in FEIS, but not designated as Riparian Reserve . DSEIS incorporated these areas into Riparian Reserve areas, resulting in: o 10.08 acre increase in clearing areas o 0.56 acre increase in grading areas . Clearing to occur in areas not associated with streams or wetlands . Grading would occur high on slope, primarily in open dry areas not associated with streams or wetlands Mr. Rosenthal confirmed there was an overall 1.6% increase in riparian reserve affected and clarified clearing activities were not associated with streams and wetlands specifically regarding LHZ 2 areas. Grading would occur high on the slope. Restricted Watershed Terrain - NFMA Claim . No Forest Plan Amendment to Exclude Restricted Watershed (MS 22) from Special Use Permit (SUP) Area DSEIS Response Hil!hlil!hts . Court of Appeals found that Forest Service violated the NFMA by failing to ensure expansion will comply with Rogue River LRMP standards and guidelines . Through the DSEIS Forest Service acknowledges that MS 22 is not excluded from SUP areas . Forest Service address the standards and guidelines as applicable in the DSEIS Issues Identified by Court of Appeals and Included in DSEIS - Summary Conclusion . DSEIS only addresses issues of 2004 ROD identified by Court of Appeals as deficient . DSEIS appears to adequately address these issues . Changes are to management unit designations . No change to proposed actions described in 2004 ROD DSEIS and Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL Connection . TMDL sets strict sediment loading capacity, no significant increased delivery to reservoir over that which would occur naturally. . TMDL developed with full acknowledgement of MASA expansion project . TMDL utilizes sediment modeling results from the MASA expansion FEIS CITY COUNCIL STUD Y SESSION April 19. 2010 Page 3 of 4 . DSEIS only resulted in change to management unit designation, not project design; therefore, no need for revised sediment modeling Sediment modeling incorporated aspects of soils, slope, land cover, etc., but did not rely on management units; therefore, again no need for revised modeling The Forest Service based the modeling on the actual geography of the location not the map designation. . TMDL notes need for NPDES 1200-C permit (erosion control permit) prior to MASA construction TMDL and WQMP acknowledge proposed design features, mitigation measures, and monitoring to control erosion and likelihood of no long-term increase in sediment input Summary . DSEIS adequately addressed issues identified by Court of Appeals No changes to proposed project resulted Gust management unit designations) . Therefore, likely no need to comment on specifics ofDSEIS . However, open comment period provides opportunity for City concerns to be included in the public record Comment Recommendations To foster good communications and successful project implementation: . Establish coordination committee between Forest Service, City, and Mt. Ashland Assoc. to discuss project on an on-going basis (e.g. monthly during pre- and post-construction periods, and weekly during construction) . City should have opportunity to review and comment on project design plans (e.g. storm water system design, erosion control plans, grading and clearing plans, etc.) . City should have opportunity to visit project area during and post-construction Staff explained the Forest Service declined to address global climate change because there was not' sufficient new data specific to Mt. Ashland Ski Lodge to warrant analysis. Seek clarification of statements in 2004 ROD that MAA required to post bond to restore SUP area in event of bankruptcy How will original required $200,000 bond amount be increased "proportionally" due to expansion? . How will original required bond amount be increased to meet current day or future projected costs? . The City requests bond to be posted prior to Forest Service authorization of expansion project Council and staff discussed options to track the process for compliance included coordinating with Mt. Ashland Association and making use of open comment periods. Council debated whether to add language referencing Mt Ashland Association's economic assessment from 2004 and ask the Forest Service if the required $200,000 for restoration was sufficient at this time. Council directed staff to remove the first paragraph on page 6 of the Memorandum Draft Letter from Evans and Associates to the City regarding the draft letter; "Based on the City's DEIS we believe that the Forest Service has addressed and rectified the issues addressed by the Court of Appeals noted above, incorporating the new areas into their proper management units. The City understands that the analysis work did not result in modifications to the proposed project described in the FEIS, as it was determined that proposed actions still fell within the management restrictions of the various management units. Generally speaking, between the FEIS, DSEIS, and supporting documentation, it appears that considerable effort has gone into analyzing and documenting potential impacts to watershed resources and outlining the methods with which to address them, particularly at a planning level of design." CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 19, 2010 Page 4 of 4 Mayor Stromberg left the meeting at 6:34 p.m. Council noted the potential impact TMDL sedimentation standards could have on the expansion, the need to protect the watershed and the willingness of Forest Service to work with the City without officially going on the record. BG IUcks/190 Vista StreetlNoted the list from the consultants was powerful but without the City's own inspection team of specialists there was no way of knowing what was happening. Additionally, everyone's lives have been affected by the economy and it was unrealistic to think those changes did not extend to the proj ect. Council will forward specific language arid additional questions to staff. Meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20, 20 I 0 Page I of 10 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 20, 2010 Council Chambers 11 75 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Navickas, Lemhouse, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced the Demobilization Ceremony for the 41" Brigade Combat Team of the Oregon National Guard (11186) would occur April 24, 2010 at the Spiegelberg Stadium in Medford. The troops were currently in Washington State reuniting with their families, managing their finances and making education arrangements as they return to society. Approximately 60% of the 1/186 returning will be unemployed. Annual Appointments to various Commissions were completed this meeting and vacancies on the Historic, Housing, Planning and Tree Commission were announced. Mayor Stromberg noted that agenda item number 3. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance amending AMC Chapter 14.06 relating to water curtailment? under ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS would move to the end of the ordinances to accommodate the ordinances regarding classification of offenses. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes of the Study Session of April 5 , 20 I 0 and Regular Meeting of April 6, 2010 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & A WARDS Mayor Stromberg presented the Ragland Ward to the "Ashland Food Project," and introduced Paul Giancarlo and John Javna who shared the Ashland Food Project's mission and described the program. Division Chief Fire Marshal Margueritte Hickman introduced the new Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Coordinator Richard Randelman. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Will Council approve the minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Does Council wish to approve the Mayor's recommendations for the Annual Appointments to the various Commissions, Committees, and Boards? 3. Should Council approve a resolution authorizing the City Administrator, Finance Director, or designee to enter into a Full Faith & Credit financing agreement to refinance the DEQ loan that was used to construct the Wastewater Treatment Plant and to dedicate ongoing Food & Beverage Tax proceeds allocated to the Wastewater Fund to pay annual debt service? 4. Does Council wish to appoint Donna Rhee, Southern Oregon Land Conservancy, to the Ashland Water Advisory Committee (A W AC) for the Water Master Plan update? 5. Will Council approve a contract with StreamFix in an amount not to exceed $75,000 to design and facilitate the development of the Ashland Creek Bank Restoration Project near Water Street? 6. Should the Council acceptthe 2010-2011 Certified Local Government grant of$15,360 from the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office for historic preservation activities? 7. Should Council re-allocate $16,500 in unused Community Development Block Grant - Recovery Act Funds, previously awarded to the Public Works Department for ADA accessibility improvements along ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 2010 Page 2 of 10 Iowa Street, to the Conservation Division for Weatherization and Energy Efficiency upgrades to homes occupied by low-income homeowners? City Recorder Barbara Christensen and Councilor Chapman requested that Consent Agenda items #2 and #7 be pulled for discussion. Councilor Navickas/Jackson mls to approve Consent agenda items 1 and 3-6. Voice Vote: all A YES. Motion passed. Ms. Christensen explained the Audit Committee appointment was included in the annual appointment in error and Council would receive a separate communication regarding appointment to that Committee at a future meeting. Councilor Jackson/Chapman mls to approve Consent Agenda item #2 minus the Audit Committee appointment. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Chapman suggested moving the $16,500 unused CDBG-R funds to the Adult Disability Act (ADA) improvements throughout the City by placing the funds in Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). Staff explained the $16,500 was stimulus funds and a timeline was involved. Councilor ChapmanNoisin mls to approve Consent Agenda item #7. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Should Council adopt the Draft 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan for the use of the City's allocation of Community Development Block Grant Funds? [30 Minutes] Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided the staff report and explained the plan would set spending priorities for future years. Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid further explained the five-year plan would prioritize the spending ofthe CDBG funds through goals. Each objective had to benefit low to moderate-income people, aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight and meet a need having a particular urgency. Council could allocate funds to Adult Disability Act (ADA) projects in the 5-year plan as well. Public Hearing open: 7:25 p.m. Public Hearing closed: 7:25 p.m. Councilor JacksonlLemhouse mls to approve revised Consolidated Plan for CDBG Funds. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson and Voisin expressed appreciation to staff for their efforts in creating the plan. Councilor Chapman opposed the plan, thought the overhead was too high, and did not have enough public participation. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Jackson, Silbiger, Navickas and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. 2. Will Council award $168,484 in Community Development Block Grant funds as recommended by the Housing Commission and Staff? Senior Planner Brandon Goldman explained staff received uncontested applications from Ashland Supportive Housing and St. Vincent de Paul with a combined total less then the full award. Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid explained St. Vincent de Paul Home Visitation Program applied for the grant to fund emergency rental and utility assistance and counseling to .households to prevent homelessness. Ashland Supportive Housing applied to receive funds to repair an existing unit to be used as a respite home to serve 416 special needs developmentally disabled individuals annually. Public Hearing open: 7:32 p,m. Rich Hansen/585 Pierce Road, Medford/St. Vincent de Paul/Applied for the $30,000 Services Grant to help expand the St. Vincent de Paul Visitation Program. The goal is to help low-income families in crisis with rent, ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 20 I 0 Page 3 of 10 utilities and other essentials to avoid homelessness. The Outreach Program assisted 590 families last year and they anticipate helping 620 this year. Of the groups helped, 60% live within Ashland City limits. He went on to describe how the program works. Sue Crader179 Nutley Street/Ashland Supportive Housing (ASH)/Explained ASH has provided services to adults with developmental disabilities' since 1982.. She shared history on the property, the need for respite care and described what would be rehabilitated in order to open for services. Additionally, the project would create nine jobs. Public Hearing closed: 7:39 p.m. Councilor Chapman supported both proposals but wanted to divert the remaining $27,623 to ADA improvements instead of weatherization. Staff could provide a project list and determine low and moderate-income areas where the improvements would apply. Councilor NavickasNoisin m/s to approve award of $30,000 to the St. Vincent de Paul Home Visitation Program for emergency rental and utility assistance and $110,861 to Ashland Supportive Housing for rehabilitation of an existing dwelling to be used as a respite home for people with disabilities. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas thanked both organizations for submitting applications and commented on the valuable services they provide. Councilor Voisin noted the Society of St. Vincent De Paul was.a Ragland award recipient. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Chapman, Voisin, Silbiger, Lemhouse and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Chapman/Lemhouse m/s to direct Public Works staff to work with Housing staff on an immediate need list for ADA requirements that have not been addressed in the City and spend the remaining $27,623 for that list. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas was sympathetic to providing ADA accessibility but weatherization would address the Council goal of Tier Two Power needs as well as the regressive and excessive nature of the Electric Users Tax. Councilor Jackson acknowledged the need for ADA improvements but supported using the funds for weatherization. Councilor Voisin would not support the motion because it was important to provide some of the. citizens with the ability to weatherize houses to keep energy bills low and there were few sources to assist those in need of various forms of weatherization. Councilor Lemhouse supported using the funds for ADA accessibility improvements. Staff explained the total allocation for weatherization was $50,000 and would affect 17 households on the Ashland Low Income Energy Assistance Program and save approximately $400 per house annually in energy costs. The additional $27,623 would add another 9 or 10 houses for weatherization. Councilor Chapman provided an example of an immediate need for an ADA improvement that entailed of adding tree grates to enable easier access. Councilor Navickas commented on administrative efficiency. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Silbiger and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Navickas, Voisin and Jackson, NO; Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with Ii YES vote. Motion passed 4-3. 3 What direction does Council have on the proposed 2010-2020 SOU Campus Master Plan and implementing ordinances? Councilor Voisin declared a conflict of interest and requested Council to recuse her from the discussion. Councilor ChapmanlNavickas m/s to recuse Councilor Voisin from participating due to a conflict of interest. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson questioned Planning Actions and Comprehensive Planning Activities meant to exclude employees of an organization doing a Master Plan. City Administrator Martha Bennett explained under Oregon Ethics Law SOU as Councilor Voisin's employer created a conflict of interest. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Voisin left the meeting at 8:05 p.m. Mayor Stromberg called the Public Hearing to order at 8:06 p.m. for Planning Action No. 2009-00817 - A request for adoption ofthe Southern Oregon University Campus Master Plan 2010-2020 as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. (This plan replaces the previously adopted 2000-2010 Campus Master Plan.) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETiNG April 20. 2010 Page 4 of 10 DESIGNATION: Southern Oregon University; ZONING: S-O. ABSTENTIONS. CONFLICTS. EX PARTE CONTACTS Councilor Jackson and Chapman noted familiarity with the campus. Mayor Stromberg disclosed conversations with Rivers Brown who had voiced concern with encroachment on his property and potential issues with the community garden that did not bias him or his ability to make an impartial decision. Mayor Stromberg announced all participants have the right to rebut and can challenge or discuss the issues revealed in the Ex Parte contacts during Public Testimony. He went on to state the applicable substantive criteria as Ashland Municipal Code 18.108.170 Legislative amendments and noted the guide handout. CHALLENGES - None STAFF REPORT Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the State Planning Program requires universities within urban growth boundaries to coordinate their planning with the City Planning Department to ensure their Master Plans are consistent with the local Comprehensive Plan and City ordinances. He provided a presentation on the SOU Master Plan 2010-2020 Update that included: . Prior Planning Efforts . Procedure . Faculty Housing . Faculty Housing - Ashland/Mountain & Henry Street - Commission Recommendations: . Detail Site Review Zone - SOU Amendment Mr. Molnar explained the Detail Site Review Zone was a narrow band of 150 feet depth along the commercial corridors. The transition between zones would still require site review approval, be subject to SOU Guidelines, documents as well as City landscaping and orientation standards. . Housing & Student Life - Ashland Street - Commission Recommendations: . SOU Campus - Parking Standards - Commission Recommendations . SOU Master Plan Update: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) - Commission Recommendations Mr. Molnar clarified there was no specific housing density requirement on the SOU campus; it would depend on parking and transportation issues. However, SOU was anticipating three story buildings for high-density housing along Ashland Street. Councilor Jackson/Chapman mls to extend public hearing until 9:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Liz ShelbylSOU Chief of StafflExplained the outreach process used to inform the community and adjacent property owners during the Master Plan process. Eric RidenourlSERA Architects/Represented the applicant and addressed the Council. Mr. Ridenour stated the Master Plan elements and major goals were driven by retention, recruitment, and fiscal responsibility. He indicated the Campus/SO Zoning area and that the University had no plans for acquiring additional land to implement the Master Plan. He listed the key elements of the plan as follows: . Academic Buildings: Renovation and expansion . Athletics: Field use changes, increased access and visibility projects . Contemporary Student Housing: North side of Siskiyou Boulevard . Student Housing: Location, access and unit types ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 2010 Page 5 of 10 Mr. Ridenour clarified the height for student housing would not exceed four stories. . Faculty Housing: Campus-Community Edges with intent to help recruit, reduce commute, integrate community . Improved Gateway: West and East area . Enhanced Pedestrian Gateway . Sustainability Leadership He noted the process involved in preparing the Master Plan and briefly addressed the following questions and concerns: the Ecos Garden would remain intact under the plan, State Funds would not be used to develop the proposed student and faculty housing and property would be subject to property taxes. Additional questions were answered in the Planning Action packet. THOSE WISHING TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY Steve Vincent/580 Business Park Drive, Medford/Oregon Business Regional Manager-A vista Utilities/Supported the SOU Master Plan and noted other campuses he has visited and explained how SOU blends well with the community and the neighborhoods adjacent to the campus and highlighted SOU's collaborative nature. Rick Bleiwess/I I3 I Highwood DrivelExplained SOU adds an educational and cultural dimension and bring young people and diversity to the community. The Master Plan implements sustainability, adds jobs and better housing that will bring more students and faculty. The SOU Theater Program is the best theater program west of the Rockies. The Master Plan will enable the Theater Program to retain its high level of respect and education while creating proper rooms and theater spaces through renovation. He encouraged. everyone to support the university, doing so supported the town, the youth and the future. Mary Margaret Modesitti/540 South Mountain A venuelOwns property adjacent to SOU and the Master Plan incorrectly shows SOU as the owner of her property. Until similar issues like that are worked out, the plan should not be approved. There are problems with parking and multiple housing. The theatre buildings were renovated within the last 8 years yet dorm maintenance has been deferred for 12 years. Some students have used her personal showers because only one was working in their dorm. SOU needed to perform due diligence. She has had to request the university remove her property from the Master Plan three times. Sandra Slattery/I 10 E Main StreetlIntroduced herself as a current member ofthe SOU Presidents Advisory Board, a former member of the SOU Foundation Board and past President of the SOU Regional Advisory Board. SOU is the largest employer in Ashland with student enrollment reaching 5,670 winter term 2010. SOU is committed to recruiting, developing and retaining outstanding faculty and staff but housing costs and current wages have made housing challenging. The proposed SOU Master Campus Plan will not only be the guideline for campus development for the next 10 years but will provide the flexibility necessary to meet the changing needs of the campus. Master Plan improvements will enrich and expand the existing educational and recreational opportunities as well as provide student and faculty enhancements and jobs. She urged Council to endorse SOU's continued success through the support of the Master Plan. Carl Marsakl458 Beach Street/Owns the Beach Street Condominiums next to the Ecos garden. He noted the Master Plan has had three options for that space and wanted confirmation that retaining the garden included the open space and circular driveway. There was concern from the Home Owners Association because one of the options had included high density faculty housing in that area. REBUTTAL BY THE APPLICANT Larry Blake representing SOU answered Mr. Marsak's question regarding the Ecos garden that there were no plans to develop any of the land surrounding the garden. Mr. Ridenour added any development in that area would require a separate use process. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 2010 Page 6 of 10 Mr. Ridenour addressed the ownership of properties issue, eXplaining the distinction between actual SOU land and the SO-Zone, the information came from the City GIS department and the current data in the Master Plan is accurate. He went on to contradict earlier information regarding multiple housing on Henry Street, indicating a sector immediately to the west of that area indentified for potential university land. Faculty village housing was included in the Master Plan out of recognition of the fact SOU needs to track and retain faculty housing. Mr. Blake clarified that in the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) the provision for "approved campus boundaries" it is common for campuses to indicate a zone for possible expansion in the future and noted an area west of campus that extends to the south and east where historically boundaries have been expanded. Currently there was no intention of purchasing any additional property over the next 10 years. It was unclear why portions of the approved campus boundary were rolled into the City's SO-Zoning map because they are not owned by the university. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING and RECORD - 9:08 p.m. ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF Mr. Molnar explained how the zoning affects property owners who want to develop their land. Seven parcels under private ownership were identified that appear within the boundaries of the SO-Zone. The purpose of the SO-Zoning district essentially applies to properties owned by the Board of State Higher Education. The Master Plan does not show any change to land use so the properties remain as is and can be developed like any other residential property until the SOU approaches them to purchase their property. Staff will review the ordinance to ensure the private property has a zoning designation that allows them to do what they need to do. The east and west gateways are in the conceptual stage and may have design changes to Siskiyou Boulevard but would require work through the City and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and could be addressed during the Transportation System Plan. Council supported the Plan and noted concerns regarding parking, private property showing in the SO-Zone and housing density. Staff will ascertain density in transition zones, look at options like staggering masses and determine if faculty housing in the proposal includes families with children. . Councilor N avickasILemhouse mls to tentatively approve the 2010-2020 Campus Master Plan Update with the modifications suggested by the Planning Commission and direct staffto prepare an ordinance for first reading for adoption of the Plan and continue the hearing to May 18, 2010. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas appreciated the focus not being on parking but expressed concern using green space for development instead of existing parking lots. Looking at the Plan without demanding the retention of parking lots could have opened up creative opportunities for faculty housing. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Chapman, Lemhouse and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Voisin returned to meeting at 9:36 p.m. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 9 concerning weed abatement? City Attorney Richard Appicello read the ordinance title aloud. Bill Heimannl647 Siskiyou BoulevardlRequested reinstating certified mailing for weed abatement violation in the ordinance. Councilor JacksonIVoisin mls to approve Ordinance #3009. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Navickas, Chapman, Jackson, Voisin and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. 2. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance amending adding a uniform violation abatement procedure to the Ashland Municipal Code? ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20, 2010 Page 7 of 10 City Attorney Richard Appicello read the ordinance title aloud. He explained that notices under 2.31.010 are required certified mail return receipt requested in accordance to 1.08.005 (E). Councilor JacksonlLemhouse mls to approve Ordinance #3010. Ron Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Chapman, Jackson, Lemhouse, Silbiger and Navickas, YES. Motion passed. 3. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 1.08 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses, and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? a. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 4 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses, and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? b. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 6 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? c. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 9 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? d. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 10 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? e. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 11 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses, and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? f. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 13 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses, and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? g. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 14 to add provisions concerning the classification of offenses, and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? City Attorney Richard Appicello provided a presentation on Classification of Offenses that included the following: An City ordinance offenses have $500 maximum fine and $362 base fine (amount on front ofticket) ($317 plus $45 surcharge) . Dog loose in park - $362.00 . Illegal Cross Connection - $362.00 . Unnecessary Noise - $362.00 . Failure to pay food 7 Beverage taxes - $362.00 Oregon Uniform Citation and Complaint . Smith, John - AMC 10.68.200 A. Dogs not permitted in City Park - Base Fine: $362.00 . 4/20/1 0 9:00 AM Ashland Municipal Court (2009 surcharges add $45 without surcharge, base fine is $317) Proposal: 4 Classes of Offenses . Class A $720.00 maximum . Class B $360.00 maximum . Class C $180.00 maximum . Class D $90.00 maximum . Consistent with State Law- ORS 153.018, replaces one size fits all maximum of$500 and the base fine of $362. Legislative decision . City Council assigns class of offense based on community values about the seriousness of a particular offense Example: Oregon Legislature - ORS 815.280 . No bicycle light - Class D - $90.00 max finelbase fine $97.00 Example: Oregon Legislature - ORS 471.430(1) . Minor in possession of alcohol- Class B - $360.00 max finelbase fine $242.00 Why Class B for MIP & Class D for Bicycle Light? . Legislative determination that Minors Possessing Alcohol is a more serious offense than not having a bicycle light Apply same legislative choice to City ordinance offenses . Dog in Park - Class D - ($97.00 ticket) . Noise Violation - Class A - ($427.00 ticket) ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 2010 Page 8 of 10 . Why: Because a loud party at 2 AM disturbing your entire neighborhood is more serious than letting your dog run in the park Decision belongs to City Council . Recommendations for Chapters 9, 10 and 11 are based on input from Police and Parks Department . Recommendations from Finance and Public Works for Chapters 4, 6, 13 and 14 . Council may disagree with staff proposal to classifY "Offensive Noise" as Class A and classifY it as Class B, CorD Oregon Uniform Citation and Complaint . Smith, John - ORS 815.280 (State Law) -Bicycle Equipment Violation - Light - Class D Base Fine $97.00 . (2009 surcharges not used in examples. With surcharge, base fine is $142) Appearance Options ORS 153.061 . Appear personally on or before Court date . Submit written request for trial . Enter guilty or no contest plea by mail with base fine and optional written statement (unless personal appearance is required) Base Fine: Class D . $45.00 foundation amount (1/2 $90 max) . $37.00 State assessment - ORS 137.290 . $15.00 County Assessment - ORS 137.309 . $97.00 Base Fine - amount written on front of ticket (with no City assessment) . County and State get $52.00 - City gets $45.00 Efficiency, Predictability and Fairness Court options . . Can summon defendant to increase fine or impose other remedy (e.g. drug and alcohol assessment for MIP) . Can reduce fine consistent with State Law violations ORS l53.093(l)(a) Already in Use . 13.03.110 Class A - sidewalk regulations . 10.44.020 Class C - nudity ordinance . 11.22.030 Class C - Failure to carry chains . 18.112.090 Class A- Development Code Minimum Fine Statute - State Law for all Class A, B, C and D violations: . "notwithstanding any other provision of law, may not defer, waive, suspend or otherwise reduce the fine for a violation to an amount that is less than 75% of the base .fine amount" [ORS l53.093(l)(a)] Application of Minimum Fine Class D $97 base fine . $37 to State . $15 to County ($52 County & State) . $45 Remainder to City . If Court reduces base fine to $72.75 per minimum fine statute City gets $20.75 Minimum Fine statute applies to all State Law Violations . The minimum Fine Statute currently applies to all State Law violations [ORS} prosecuted in Ashland Municipal Court . Reduction of all State Law violations designated A, B, C and D limited to 25% of base fine Minimum fine would apply same way to City ordinance violations . Smith, John Jr. - AMC 10.68.300 A. Dogs not permitted in City Park . Base Fine: $97.00 Minimum Fine $72.75 ($52 County & State 1 City $20.75) - surcharge not included in this example Mayor Stromberg suggested separating the issue of a classification system from reducing the Ashland Municipal Court Judge's discretion and directing the City Attorney to create a classification scheme similar to the State and include the minimum fine standard. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 2010 Page 9 of 10 Mr. Appicello clarified if a Judge reduced the fine to zero the City would still pay the State and County assessment. Council could direct staff to adopt a four-class violation with different titles that would not follow the minimum fine statute and allow the Judge a 50% fine reduction. Surcharges will not be in effect until20ll and will apply along with the State and County assessment. Language could also be added stating the City is not complying with 1.50.93 Minimum Fine Statute and apply something else instead. The Court is required to follow general law when not otherwise provided in City ordinances. Ashland Municipal Court Judge Pam Burkholder-Turner thought the proposed ordinances would affect the integrity of the Ashland Municipal Court and its ability to administer justice. She did not object to the classification standard but opposed mandatory minimums because she felt it removed the Courts discretion and interfered with combining education with enforcement. She shared examples of cases showing the need for discretion instead of minimum fines. She suggested the following language for $500 fines: "This is the maximum fine that can be imposed. It is up to the Judge what of that fine, if any, will be imposed or what other penalty might be imposed." She expressed further concern the proposed ordinances focused on generating revenue and would interfere with fairly administering justice. Justin Rosas/604 West MainlIntroduced himself as a Public Defender in Medford and explained he was there to partially speak for the Southern Oregon American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Municipal Court. The proposed amendments were alarming because it removed a lot of due process and crippled the Judge's ability to evaluate the situation of every violation. Legislature gives the Judge discretion. He noted a potential error to raise ORS 161.615 Sub 3 from 30 days maximum punishment for a Class C misdemeanor to a maximum of 60 days that went against State Law. He stressed the importance of open communication and that policy should not replace the process. Cate HartzelV892 Garden Way/Questioned whether the ordinance would have the desired affect of keeping people from contesting sentences on violations or increase the number of people to take violations to trial because fines were higher and noted the increase in adrninistrative costs to the City. The process of having an elected evaluator review violations rather than having a blind policy determine the penalties was invaluable. The proposed ordinances could motivate people to be more reckless or irresponsible because the price is fixed. She commented that other cities have offered amnesty programs that allow people to pay lessened fines once they have accumulated a large volume of fines and violations. Economic situation and mental health states should be considered before fines are imposed. In this recession, it was not appropriate to lesson government costs by increasing fines on the people. Discretion should be left to the judge and the process returned to the people and the courts. Councilor Lemhouse expressed support and appreciation on how Judge Turner-Burkholder ran her courtroom and explained that Municipal Court is different from other courts. It was appropriate to allow an elected Judge discretion to respond to the community as he or she saw fit. He thought the classification system was prudent but the process should allow the Judge discretion. Councilor LemhouselJackson m/s direct staff to change the ordinance from A, B, C and D to 1,2,34, make necessary changes and not adopting minimum state fines. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas expressed concerns on having a classification system and repeat offenders paying only the minimum fine. He thought the current system was adequate and worked well. Councilor Jackson clarified her intention was not to establish minimum fines. Councilor Chapman would not support the motion because he did not have enough information to make a decision on the matter. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Silbiger, Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Navickas, Voisin and Chapman, NO; Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES vote. Motion passed 4-3. Councilor JacksonlLemhouse m/s to move readings of ordinances to June 15, 2010. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained she would not be attending the June 15,2010 meeting and wanted to be present for the discussion. Roll Call Vote: Couucilor Jackson and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Navickas, Voisin, Chapman and Silbiger, NO. Motion failed 4-2. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 20. 2010 Page 10 of 10 4. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Establishing Fees and Charges for Municipal Court Administration" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Staff directed to bring item back for further discussion. 5. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance amending AMC Chapter 14.06 relating to water curtailment? Item delayed due to time constraints. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:29 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor , I. CALL TO ORDER: 6:08 PM by Matt Warshawsky who temporarily filled in for Swale. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of February 18, 2010 were approved as submitted. III. PUBLIC FORUM: IV. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA: Grandview Drive Pedestrian Improvements were moved to the first position to accommodate the large amount of public testimony. V. ACTION ITEMS: A. Grandview Drive Pedestrian Improvements Jim Olson gave the staff report. Staff had looked at physical improvements to Grandview after they received a petition signed by 19 residents. Easements would be needed to widen the road as well as an extensive retaining wall system. The cost was estimated at $1.3 million which would be funded through an Local Improvement District which now has no cap as to the property owners' financial responsibility. The Subcommittee looked at this and other options and decided to designate Grandview as a "shared road" (an area of road where equal priority is given to vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian traffic). This would consist of signs, pavement markings and education. A traffic study was conducted showing approximately 550 vpd with an average speed of 26.7 mph which is considered a borderline higher speed problem. Staff did not recommend speed humps. Female resident, 500 Grandview Drive, believed that the shared road designation would not help and children were at risk as there were several school bus stops on Grandview. With continued building, vehicles would only increase. She favored sidewalks or one way traffic. Steph Johnson, 329 Grandview for 37 years, would vote no on a sidewalk project. She read a letter into the record in favor of the shared road and a painted centerline from top to bottom. Lee Perlman, 235 Sunnyview, did not receive notice of the meeting. He considered Grandview a one and a halflane road. He did not walk Grandview because he thought it was dangerous. He also favored a centerline. He thought there was not enough room for sidewalks, but supported widening the travel lanes. C:\DOCUME-l\shipletd\LOCALS-l\Tcmp\XPGrpWisc\3 18 10 TC Minutes.doc Page I of4 Olson noted that the "Share the Road" signs would be on the shoulders. He estimated six signs would be installed in either direction, 150' apart. Hillary Tiefer, 565 Wrights Creek Drive, loved existing tree canopy. She recommended 15 mph speed limit with increased police enforcement. John Owen, 500 Grandview Drive, noted that Grandview was a wildfire evacuation route and wondered if, considering this, speed bumps were possible. He recommended a wooden walkway with pullouts for pedestrians and wondered about cost. Olson said a cantilever walkway would have to be intermittent and be approved by City Council as a variance. Pedestrian pullouts could be studied. Mona McArdle, 352 Grandview Drive, circulated the petition requesting sidewalks. She read a letter from Jennifer Croyle of 225 Sunnyview Drive into the record. Croyle had safety concerns for pedestrians who used Grandview including residents, hikers and runners. She hoped stimulus money would be available to fund sidewalks. Nancy Soas, 300 Grandview Drive, said she and her husband Eric recommended reducing the speed to 15 to 20 mph and speed humps. Soas favored sidewalks and noted that Grandview was a major route to the Strawberry 1 Hald Park. She would like to see studies that showed shaITows worked. She suggested adding fog lines for a "virtual" sidewalk. Jennifer Carr, 388 Grandview Drive, agreed with Johnson and opposed sidewalks. She noted this issue was discussed before and all ideas turned out to be expensive. She noted that Grandview was not an urban area. Dan Fellman, 352 Grandview Drive, asked about the LID on Strawberry. Olson reported that the Strawberry LID was funded with contributions from approximately 60 lots and a private developer. How much variation in street standards? Design must comply with the American Disability Act and include storm drains. State and federal law removes any flexibility in design. . Fellman sug'gested that development of Carlos Riechenhammer's two lots include upgrades to Grandview. He was disappointed that the traffic study did not include a pedestrian count. Commissioner Swales arrived at the meeting at approximately 6:45 pm. Commission Discussion: Gaffey wondered about existing trails that could serve as an alternative route for pedestrians. Olson said none were available. Hauck favored the suggestions of bumpouts and a centerline. Olson said effective bumpouts may necessitate cutting into the bank. The benefit of a painted centerline was questionable. Kat Smith, RVTD, reminded the Commission that Grandview was a "Safe Route to School" and therefore eligible for grant money. Heesacker wondered about "tractor bumps" that grate into the asphalt. Olson noted that the road was chip sealed and only an inch thick; not enough for tractor bumps. Heesacker asked about accident statistics for Grandview. Olson was not aware of any accidents. Heesacker favored the idea of a LID. C:\DOCUME-l\shiplctd\LOCALS-l\Temp\XPGrpWisc\3 18 10 TC Minutes.doc Page 2 of 4 , Motion: Thompson moved to follow the Subcommittee's recommendation that Grandview Drive be designated as a shared road and that staff research the feasibility of designating pedestrian refuges using paint. Hauck seconded the motion. Commission Discussion: Chapman noted that the definition of "shared road" included pedestrian refuges, brochures, signs and pavement markings. He suggested that the police increase enforcement to catch speeders. The neighbors could also, as a group, use radar to alert the Police Department of time of day speeders use Grandview and also build neighborhood gateway signs. Olson was asked about the cost of the road designation. The signs cost $125 each while the pavement markings cost $55 each. . Vote: Motion passed unanimously. B. Election of Vice Chair for 2010 Thompson nominated Steve Hauck for Vice Chair. Gaffey seconded the motion and if passed unanimously. C. Discussion Regarding Extended Meeting Hours Swales eXplained that Sommer sent an he and staffan email asking for the full support of the Commission during her upcoming chairpersonship. One item she mentioned was for the ability to lengthen the meeting time past two hours if the topic warranted it. Thompson noted the useful life of meetings was two hours. He moved to retain the two hour limit. Warshawsky seconded the motion. Commission Discussion: Hauck noted that the City Council used to make a motion to extend their meetings in 30 minute increments. Heesacker mentioned a babysitter conflict that could be overcome if advance notice was give~. Vote: Motion passed 3 votes to I. D. Additional Bicvcle Parking at North Main Street Associate Engineer Pieter Smeenk gave the staff report. He noted that the standard width of a compact space was 8', Although curb stops were not planned, he thought the bike spots would be adequately protected from vehicles. Gaffey wished additional information regarding the unsafe parking spot to be removed. Swales said that, although more bike spaces were nice, he agreed with Sill Sarchet's letter of February 16, 20 I 0 noting the need for an overall downtown parking plan. Warshawsky did not think there was a downtown parking problem, that people without compact cars would use the compact spaces; that the bike parking was too exposed; and that this project was just a stop-gap measure. C:\DOCUME-l\shiplctd\LOCALS-I\Temp\XPGrpWise\J 18 10 TC Minutes.doc Page 3 of 4 Smeenk reminded the Commission that the proposed downtown parking study was rejected by the City Council and the Commission last fall and so was not likely to be resurrected soon. Motion: Thompson moved to take no action on this request from staff. Gaffey seconded the motion and it passed with five votes and one abstention. E. Siskivou Boulevard Beacon Update Staff reported that all four beacons were operating. The problem was fixed through the summer. Before winter, three beacons would be hard wired to the adjacent street light for backup power. F. Commissioner Sponsorship of Events Olson reported that the Fire and Parks Departments were sponsoring the Bike Swap this year, but sponsorship of other events such as Car Free Day were yet to be determined. In addition the term "sponsorship" would need to be defined; it may mean by name only or full responsibility. VI. NON ACTION ITEMS A. Update on SOU Master Plan Larry Blake, Associate Vice President for Facilities Management and Planning, reported that the master plan was approved by the Planning Commission with a couple of transportation-related conditions: that any future modifications to SOU's Eastern Gateway area be subject to a transportation impact analysis, access management standards and a pedestrian safety plan. The plan was scheduled to go before the City Council for final approval. Gaffey expressed frustration that neighbors' comments had been addressed even before the Transportation Commission had an initial chance to review it. B. Transportation Svstem Plan (TSP) Update The consultant's contract was waiting for ODOT's approval signature. VII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS & COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None. VIII. ADJOURN: 8:01 PM Respectfully submitted, Nancy Slocum, Accounting Clerk I / C:\DOCUME-l\shipletd\LOCALS-l\Temp\XPGrpWise\3 18 10 TC Minutes.doc Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Ordinance Relating to Storage of Vehicles May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Richard Appicello City Attorney's Offi E-Mail: appicelr@ashland.or.us Police Departm Secondary Contact: Terry Holderness Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent '. Question: Should the Council approve continuance of First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance creating Chapter 11.43 relating to storage of personal and recreational vehicles and amending AMC 11.24.020" from May 4,2010 to June 29, 201O? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council continue First Reading of this ordinance to June 29, 2010. Background: This item was originally scheduled for the March 16,2010 Council meeting but was automatically continued to April 6, 2010 by operation of AMC 2.04.030.E. The item was again continued [on Consent] to May 4,2010. City Administration requested this matter be continued again to the June 29, 2010 council meeting. Related City Policies: NIA Council Options: I. Move to approve continuance of First Reading to June 29, 2010. 2. Postpone First Reading to another date certain. Potential Motions: Motion to continue First Reading of the ordinance to June 29, 2010. Attachments: None. Page 1 of I r.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Continuation of Classification and Court Ordinances to July 20, 2010 Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Richard Appicello Department: Public Works E-Mail: appicelr@ashland.oLus Secondary Dept.: NIA Secondary Contact: Megan Thornton Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Tirne: Consent Question: Should the Council approve continuance of the First Reading of the nine ordinances concerning classification of offenses and court fees frorn May 4, 2010 to July 20, 2010? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council continue First Reading of the nine identified ordinances to July 20,2010. Background: The following nine ordinances were advertised for the April 20, 2010 council meeting but were automatically continued to May 4,2010 by operation of AMC 2.04.030.E. To ensure sufficient agenda time and to ensure Councilors can all be present, we request continuance to July 20,2010. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1.08 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING CLASSES OF OFFENSES, AND REPEALING AMC 10.104.010 AND AMC 11.04.010 ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 4, REVENUE AND FINANCE AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 6, BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 9, HEALTH AND SANITATION AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 10, PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND SAFETY AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 11, VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 13, STREETS AND SIDEWALKS AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS Page I of2 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND ORDINANCE RELATING TO CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENSES, AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 14, PUBLIC UTILITIES AND REMOVING UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING FEES AND CHARGES FOR MUNICIPAL COURT ADMINISTRATION Related City Policies: NIA Council Options: 1. Move to approve continuance of First Reading to July 20,2010. 2. Postpone First Reading to another date certain. Potential Motions: Motion to continue First Reading of the identified ordinances to July 20,2010. Attachments: NIA Page2of2 rA' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Charter Communications Franchise Extension A~reement Meeting Date: May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Richard Appicello Department: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: Appicelr@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Administration Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett Approval: Martha B Estimated Time: Consent Question: Should the City Council extend the Charter Communications Franchise for eighteen months to facilitate negotiation of a new franchise agreement? Staff Recommendation: City Legal and Administration staff recommends approval of the attached extension agreement to facilitate negotiations. Background: The Charter franchise expires on June 30, 2010. In August 2005, in accordance with the Cable Communications Act, Charter notified the City of its intent to renew its franchise with the City. A public notice was published inviting written and oral comments on an extension. No written or oral comments were received by the Council on the February 21, 2006 public hearing date. In 2008 the Council extended the existing agreernent thirteen months to facilitate negotiations. Charter has requested an additional franchise agreement at this time. Personnel at Charter Communications has recently changed and staff recommends the requested extension. Staff further recommends, given the lapsed time, that any further extensions or franchise agreement approvals involve at least one public hearing. Related City Policies: AMC Title 16. Council Options: (1) Grant an extension. (2) Grant less than the requested extension. Potential Motions: Council: Motion to approve attached Extension Agreement. Motion to approve an extension of _ months to Charter franchise. Attachments: Extension Agreement Page 1 of 1 r~' FRANCHISE EXTENSION AGREEMENT WHEREAS, Falcon Cable Systems II, L.P., locally known as Charter Communications ("Charter") currently holds a cable franchise with the City of Ashland, Oregon ("City"), dated February 5, 2004 ("Franchise"); and WHEREAS, Charter's Franchise with the City expired on June 1,2008; and WHEREAS, the City initially extended the term of the Franchise until June 30, 2009, and Charter requested a subsequent extension until June 30, 2010; and WHEREAS, the City and Charter have begun informal renewal negotiations in accordance with Section 626(h) of Title VI of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended and the parties continue to reserve all rights under the formal procedures of Section 626 of Title VI of the Communications Act of ]934, as amended, and do not waive any rights related thereto; and WHEREAS, Charter has requested that the City further extend the existing franchise while a new franchise continues to be negotiated; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to further extend the current Franchise for an additional period of time so that cable service to the public will not be interrupted. NOW, THEREFORE, the Franchise of Charter shall be extended through December 31, 2011 or until a new Franchise Agreement is negotiated whichever comes first. APPROVED this _ day of ,2010. City of Ashland, Oregon By: Print Name: Title: ACCEPTED this _ day of Falcon Cable Systems II, L.P., lIk/a Charter Communications By: Charter Communications VII, LLC, its General Partner By: Charter Communications, its Manager By: Print Name: Title: President Charter Communications West Operating Group CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of Airport Ground Lease and SASO for Valley Investments Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Scott A. Fleury 552-2416 Department: Public WorkslEngi E-Mail: fleurys@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Legal Secondary Contact: Mike Faught Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Question: Will Council approve a City of Ashland Municipal Airport Ten (10) Year extension to a ground lease as well as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator Agreement (SASO) for Valley Investments? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval ofa City of Ashland Municipal Airport Ten (10) Year extension to a ground lease as well as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator Agreement (SASO) for Valley Investments. Valley Investments currently has a set of eleven privately-owned set of "T" hangars and a ground lease from the City of Ashland that is set to expire June 30, 20 10. The current ground lease is an extension that was granted to Valley Investments on July I, 2000. Staff and the Airport Commission recommend the City Council grant Valley Investments an additional extension to a ten year ground lease beginning July I, 2010 and ending June 30, 2020. Background: The goal of the Ashland Municipal Airport is to become self sufficient. Revenue sources for the Airport include: aircraft fuel sales, Specialized Aviation Service Operator agreements (SASO), tariffs from freight operations, fees from aircraft tie downs, along with fees from hangar leases and rentals. The Council sets these rates and fees based on the recommendations of staff and the Airport Cornmission. The Fixed Base Operator (FBO) is responsible for collecting and monitoring these fees. Fees and rates are adjusted each year to keep pace with inflation and increased operating costs. Hangar rentals and leases provide a majority of the revenue rnaking it important to establish the proper balance between need, availability and financial impact to ensure a steady revenue stream to the City. Since the Airport's beginnings, major improvernent projects at the Airport (totaling over $4,000,000) have been funded by grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Oregon Department of Aviation (ODA). Accordingly, the City must follow the Fair and Equitable Treatment Act developed by the FAA as well as a list of assurances that the City will provide basic Airport- related services and will continue to operate the Airport in accordance with FAA requirements and . standards including treating everyone using the Airport fairly and grant no special privileges to tenants. It is important for the hangar lease agreements to reflect all of these conditions. In 2009 the Legal Department and the Airport Commission worked to develop an updated standard lease template to use for all future leases at the Ashland Municipal Airport. There are two types of leases used at the Airport, one for a City-owned hangars and the second for a privately-owned hangar like those owned by Valley Investment. The price varies with each of the two ground lease options Page I of2 I ~~, CITY OF ASHLAND from 19.1 cents per square foot per year to 44.9 cents per square foot per year. The rate for these leases adjusts each year based on the January CPI-U index. The ground lease for Valley Investments was prepared using FAA conditions and the Airport lease template approved by the Council in 2009. In addition to the ground lease, Valley Investments will also need an approved Specialized Aviation Service Operator Agreement (SASO), an additional agreement for entities that perform an aviation-related service. Staff and the Airport Commission recommend approval of the ground lease extension and SASO agreement in order to the meet the Airport goal of financial self sufficiency. Related City Policies: The City, through its City Council, is empowered to approve documents relating to leasing City owned property. Council Options: . Council may approve the Valley Investments Ground Lease and SASO as presented; . Council may approve the Valley Investments Ground Lease and SASO with modifications; . Council may reject the Valley Investment Ground Lease and SASO and return to staff with additional direction. Potential Motions: . Move to approve Valley Investments Ground Lease and SASO; . Move to approve Valley Investments Ground Lease and SASO with modifications; . Move to reject the Valley Investment Ground Lease and SASO and return to staff with additional direction. Attachments: . Valley Investment Ground Lease . Valley Investment SASO . Airport Map Valley Investment Hangars Page 2 of2 ~~, LESSOR: LESSEE: Alan DeBoer dba Valley Investments CITY OF ASHLAND, (CITY) Address: PO Box 249 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT Ashland Oregon 97520 Contact: Public Works Director 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520 Telephone: 541/488-5587 Fax: 541/488-6006 T elephone:541/488/3695 Fax: 541/482/1841 , E-mail: awdbtnlaol.com Reaistration #: AIRPORT POINT OF CONTACT: Robert Skinner, Fixed Base Operator Teleohone: 541/482-7675 403 Dead Indian Memorial Hiahwav, Ashland OR 97520 AIRPORT HANGAR LEASE ABSTRAC'( ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT .. ......c.:.A.'.:, City-owne~ T changar. . . (Month-tocmonth. .c...... . rental)' . B ';':'." .:,..':.;.....:,....;.,.', ' PrivatElIYcowned, " hangar,gr()lmd .Iease Ol)ly,l)1il)il)1umsi.ze .60 X40hangar. ." .... (MulticYll<lrterl)1) Size: 16.573 . "(square feet) City-owned, privately built Box Hangar. (month to month rental) 2. Starting date of lease: Julv 1. 2010 3. Ending date of lease: June 30. 2020 (leave blank if month-to-month lease). 4. Estimated initial base rental rate: $ 7535.58 per month@circle one). Based on (C o@$MQ1per square foot. Actual rate will be established by approved Council Rate Sheet on file. A Heat Source B Bathroom C Office Space .Ol/sq-ft x~=~ .03/sq-ft x = .25/sq-ft x = Totalsl ............. I tel \ p,. Imonth (Note: rate adjustment is made July 1 every year according to master rates established by City and in accordance with Master Hangar Lease Agreement. All rentals and lease's rates will be updated to reflect new rates.) 5. Security Deposit Received: Date: ,,-,11\ Amount: , NIA- 6. Description of Premises Leased/Rerited: II \-\"-,, ~a.,.." c... 1\, "'\,0'1 t 7. Value of Improvements (Lease Option C or D): 017.,,\ ..sil 0 8. Yes, I have received a copy of the airport rules entitled "Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities, Ashland, Oregon" 9. Yes, I have read and agree with, and have received a copy of, the City of Ashland Master Hangar Lease Agreement. 10. Activities may require a separate SASO lease: See section 5.3 of lease. . '. , . < b 62<<", L.l 0</-e/? _ Lessee Signature: V 1'1110'1 I Vlu-e .,,{. In.-".'>) (, 1 Date: 3- (> ,~ - I 0 Printed Name: po, q\-N 'D~ ~()" 1<': Page 1 of 1 - Airport Hangar Lease AbstractG:\pua.WRKS\ENG\DEPr-ADMIN\AIRPIOEBOER LEASE 2010 NEWlDEBOER MASTER HANGAR LEASE WITH Approved by: Title: for City of Ashland. Date: GitY.l.J~~Qnly:/i "'c... .. '///I~s~[ahc:~c.e6ifi~t~FJ~c:eiv~~." "\'::Yahoci.co;n'.i3usi~bssU(;ens~:Requii~cl: ." o o ~".':.:i :,"<: ,',,':; ,;"C_;.,_:..."-:,,.:::;,_. ::',':-,.:.,:;\',:"':',:':''-' -;-..;.,..::.,:..,.::.:..,':.::.,>-:::->:.,.-'..... n.,..::....::::",,,_.,,:.,::,:,' Page 1 of 1 - Airport Hangar Lease AbstractG:IJ>UB-\NRKS\ENGIDEPT-ADMINV\IRP\OEBOER LEASE 2010 NElMDE80ER MASTER HANGAR lEASE WITH ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT MASTER HANGAR LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON, by and through the City Council, hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and the Lessee. 1. Lease Abstract City and Lessee have signed a Master Hangar Lease Abstract ("the abstract") which contains individual terms specific to the particular hangar or ground being leased. By signing the abstract, City and Lessee have agreed to the terms and conditions of this Master Hangar Lease Agreement. 2. Description of leased premises. City leases to Lessee a part of the Airport described in the abstract ("the premises") and identified on Exhibit A. 3, Lease Fees. An initial rental is established as set forth in the abstract and shall be paid in advance at the office of the fixed base operator (see Airport Contact Person listed in the abstract) 3.1 Periodic rent increase. For month-to-month rentals, the rental fee is subject to adjustment on July 1 of each year at the option of the City and is payable, monthly in advance, on the first day of each month. 3.2 Annual rent increase. For other than month-to-month rentals, the rent shall increase annually on July 10f each year, but not decrease, based on the previous calendar year's Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). The CPI will be calculated on the difference between January of the prior year and January of the current year. The adjustment will be the increase in the CPI using the All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), U.S. City Average, CPI--Allltems Index as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. If the CPI is no longer being published, then the Index shall be the figure reported in the U.S. Department of Labor's most recent comprehensive official index then in use and most nearly answering the description of the CPI. All sums resiJiting from the computation of annual lease fees shall be rounded up to the nearest whole dollar. 3.3 Past due fees. Lease fees will become past due ten days past the due date and the Cily will charge interest of 1.5% per month on past due lease fees. 3.4 Securitv Deposit. For month-to-month rentals, Lessee shall pay a deposit in the amount of one month's rent to secure Lessee's compliance with all terms of this agreement. The deposit shall be a debt from City to Lessee, refu'ndable within 30 days after expiration of the lease term or other termination not caused by Lessee's default. City may commingle the deposit with its funds. Lessee shall not be entitled to interest on the deposit. City shall have the right to offset against the deposit any sums owing from Lessee to City and not paid when due, any damages caused by Lessee's default, the cost of curing any default by Lessee should City elect to do so, and the cost of performing any repair or cleanup that is Lessee's responsibility under this agreement. Offset against the deposit shall not be an exclusive remedy in any of the above cases, but may be invoked by City. at its option, in addition to any other remedy provided by law or this agreement for Lessee's nonperformance. City shall give notice to Lessee each time an offset is claimed against the deposit, and, unless the agreement is terminated, Lessee shall within 10 days after such notice deposit with City a sum equal to the amount of the offset so that the total deposit amount, net of offset, shall remain constant throughout the agreement term. 3.5 Improvement Fee. For leases which require Lessee to construct a hangar, Lessee may be required to pay a non-refundable improvement fee at the time of executing the lease abstract. The fee shall be used by City to make improvements at the airport. Page 1 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE 4. Term. The term of this lease is month-to-month (unless otherwise specified in the abstract) commencing on the date specified in the fronl page abstract. A month-to-month lease may be terminated by the Lessee at any time upon 30 days prior written notice to the City. The City may only terminate the lease for cause as specified in Section 16 of this lease. For other than month-to-month leases, the term commences and ends on the dates specified in the abstract and a Lessee not in default shall have the first right of refusal to lease the premises from the City at the rates and terms then in effect as established by the City. 5, Use of Premises. Except as provided in this paragraph, the premises shall be used only for the storage of aircraft. No commercial activities. includina but not limited to aircraft mechanical or maintenance work or repair or service. are to be conducted on the premises unless otherwise permitted under section 5.3. The preceding sentence does not apply, however, to . work, maintenance, repair or service on aircraft owned by the Lessee. Other items of personal property may be stored temporarily when such storage in no way interferes with the normal storage area of the aircraft in the hangar, and does not otherwise violate this rental agreement. 5.1 Flammables and explosives prohibited. Lessee shall not store any flammable or explosive liquids or solids within the premises. For the purpose of this rental agreement. "flammable or explosive liquids or solids" shall not apply to fuel or other flammables contained within any airplane placed in the hangar. Fueling of the aircraft while in the hangar is strictly prohibited. 5.2 Pets and animals prohibited. Lessee shall not. without the City's written consent keep any pets or animals on the premises. If allowed, Lessee agrees to be liable for damage to the premises or other persons caused by the pet or animal. 5,3 When commercial activities permitted. For other than month-to-month rentals, Lessee may conduct airport related commercial activities upon obtaining a business license, as specified in the "Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities, Ashland. Oregon", and entering into a Specialized Aviation Service Operator (SASO) lease agreement, which allows the Lessee to operate as a Specialized Aviation Service Operator in accordance with current adopted standards. 5.4 When vacant hanaar not permitted. For month-to-month rentals, any hangar that remains vacant of any aircraft for more than five months shall be a violation of this lease. 6. Rights Reserved to the City. The City reserves the following rights: 6.1 Improve landina area. The right to develop or improve the landing area of the airport without interference or hindrance of the Lessee, . 6.2 Maintain airport. The right, but not the obligation, to maintain and keep in repair the landing area of the Airport. together with the right to direct and control all activities of Lessee. 6.3 Protect airport. The right to take any action considered necessary to protect the aerial approaches of the airport against obstruction, together with the right to prevent Lessee from erecting, or permitting to be erected, any building or other structure on the Airport which, in the opinion of the City. would limit the usefulness of the Airport and constitute a hazard to aircraft. 6.4 Temporarv closures. The right to temporarily close or to restrict the use of the Airport or any of the facilities for maintenance, improvement, or for the safety of the public. 7. Compliance with laws. Lessee shall comply with: 7.1 The current adopted, or any future, "Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities, Ashland, Oregon" (Minimum Standards) are part of this lease agreement. If this lease and the Minimum Standards conflict in the requirements for the Lessee, the Minimum Standards take precedence. . Page 2 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE 7.2 All federal, state, county, and city laws, orders and ordinances, and rules and regulations. Including but not limited to all rules and regulations of the Oregon Department of Aviation and the Federal Aviation Administration. 8. Lessee compliance with environmental laws. As used in this paragraph, the term "hazardous material" means any hazardous or toxic substance, material, or waste, including, but not limited to. those substances, materials, and wastes listed in the United States Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Table (49 C.F.R. ~ 172.101) or by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as hazardous substances (40 C.F.R. Part 302) and any amendments, ORS 466.567, 466.205. 466.640 and 468.790 and regulations of the Oregon State Department of Environmental Quality, petroleum products and their derivatives. and such other substances, materials and wastes as become regulated or subject to cleanup authority under any environmental laws. Environmental laws means any federal, state, or local statutes. regulations, or ordinances or any judicial or other governmental orders pertaining to Ihe protection of health, safety, or the environment. 8.1 Lessee's compliance with laws and permits. Lessee shall cause the premises and all operations conducted on the premises (including operations by any subtenants) to comply with all environmental laws. 8.2 Limitation on uses of hazardous materials. Lessee shall not use or allow any agents, contractors or subtenants to use the premises to generate, manufacture, refine. transport. treat. store, handle, recycle, release or dispose of any hazardous materials, other than as reasonably necessary for the operation of Lessee's activities as contemplated under this lease. 8.2.1 Disposal and contamination clean-up. Lessee shall be responsible for disposing of all hazardous materials in compliance with environmental laws, and Lessee shall be responsible for any environmental clean-up of the premises that is necessary due to Lessee's activities. 9. Title to Improvements. For Type C leases, upon completion of construction and issuance of a certificate of occupancy. improvements included in the Hangar Construction Requirement including any further improvements to the premises approved by the Airport Commission, shall become property of City, free and clear of all claims of Lessee, anyone claiming under Lessee or caused, permitted or suffered to attach through Lessee. Lessee or anyone claiming under Lessee, shall indemnify and defend City against all liability and loss arising from such claims. 10. Maintenance. Lessee shall keep and maintain the premises and all improvements in good and substantial repair and condition, including the exterior condition. The City shall make all necessary major repairs and alterations not directly attributable to Lessee's negligence, and shall maintain the premises and all improvements in compliance with all applicable building and zoning laws and all other laws, ordinances, orders and requirements of all authorities having or claiming jurisdiction. Lessee shall provide proper containers for trash and garbage and shall keep the premises free and clear of weeds, rubbish, debris, and litter at all times. City shall have the right.to conduct reasonable inspections and investigations of the premises and the operations conducted on the premises at any time, and from time to time with reasonable advance notice, and Lessee shall cooperate fully with City during such inspections and investigations. 11. Utilities, Lessee shall promptly pay any charges for electricity, water and sewer, and all other charges for utilities which may be furnished 10 the premises at Lessee's order or consent. 12. Liens, Taxes. Lessee shall pay all sums of money that become due for any labor, services. materials, supplies. utilities, furnishings. machinery or equipment which have been furnished or Page 3 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE ordered by Lessee which may be secured by lien against the premises. Lessee shall pay all real and personal property taxes assessed against the premises. such payments to be made no later than November 15 of the year in which the taxes become due and payable, and will submit a copy of the receipt for the taxes to the City's Director of Finance. 13. Insurance. Lessee shall obtain and maintain continuously in effect at all times during the term of this lease, at Lessee's sole expense, the following insurance: 13.1 Comprehensive insurance. Owner's, landlord and tenant or premises insurance protecting City and its officers, agents and employees against any and all liabilities that may allegedly in any way relate to the operation by Lessee, this insurance to be in the minimum amount of $1 ,000.000. combined single limit coverage. Such limit shall automatically increase in the event of any change in the provisions of ORS 30.270, or in the event these limits are found to be not totally applicable to a city. 13.1.1 All policies shall include the City. its officers, commissions, elected officials, employees and agents as additional insureds. 13.1.2 A certificate evidencing such insurance coverage shall be filed with the City prior to the effective date of this lease, and such certificate shall provide that such insurance coverage may not be canceled or reduced or changed in any way adverse to the City without at least 30 days prior written notice to the City. The policy shall be continuous until canceled as stated above. If such insurance coverage is canceled or changed, Lessee shall, not later than 15 days prior to the termination or change in the insurance coverage, file with the City a certificate showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or provided through another insurance company or companies. Cancellation or termination of the policy shall terminate the lease. In the event Lessee shall fail to furnish the City with the certificate of insurance required, City may secure the required insurance or self-insure at the sole cost and expense of Lessee. and Lessee agrees to reimburse City promptly for the cost, plus ten percent of the cost for City administration. 13.2 Property Insurance. Lessee shall bear the expense of any insurance insuring the personal property of Lessee on the premises against such risks. but Lessee shall not be required 10 insure his personal property. , 14. Indemnification. Lessee will defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims. actions, costs, expenses, judgements, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to this lease. Lessee will not be held responsible for damages caused by negligence of City. 15. Damage or Destruction of Premises. 15.1 For other than month-to-month rentals, if the premises or any improvements are damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, Lessee shall: 15.1.1 Promptly repair, rebuild or restore the property damaged or destroyed to substantially the same condition consistent with the applicable building codes; and 15.1.2 Apply for any net proceeds of insurance resulting from claims for such losses. as well as any additional money of Lessee necessary. If the damage or destruction which occurs is such that the cost of repair, rebuilding or restoration of the property damaged or destroyed exceeds 50% of the fair market value of the improvements, Lessee shall have the option within 60 days from the date of damage or destruction, to notify City in writing whether or not Lessee elects to repair. rebuild, or restore in Page 4 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE accordance with paragraph 15.1 or to terminate this lease. Upon giving such notice to terminate, this lease shall terminate on the date specified in the notice and City shall be entitled to the net proceeds of insurance. 15.2 For month-to-month rentals, Lessee shall be responsible for damage or destruction to the premises or any improvements resulting from Lessee's operations. or anything done or permitted by Lessee under this lease. 16. Events of Default. The following shall be events of default:, 16.1 Default in Rent: Failure of Lessee to pay any rent or other charge within ten days after it is due. 16.2 Default in Other Covenants: Failure of Lessee to comply with any term or condition or fulfill any obligation of the lease (other than the payment of rent or other charges) within 30 days after written notice by City specifying the nature of the default. If the default is such that it cannot be completely remedied within the 3D-day period, this provision shall be complied wilh if Lessee begins correction of the default within the 3D-day period and proceeds in good faith to effect the remedy as soon as practicable. 16.3 Insolvencv: Insolvency of Lessee and assignment by Lessee for the benefit of creditors; the filing by Lessee of a voluntary petition in bankruptcy; an adjudication that Lessee is bankrupt or the appointment of a receiver of the properties of Lessee; the filing of an , involuntary petition of bankruptcy and failure of the Lessee to secure a dismissal of the petilion within 30 days after filing; attachment of or the levying of execution on the leasehold interest and failure of the Lessee to secure discharge of the attachment or release of the levy of execution within ten days. 17. Remedies on Default. In the event of a default. the City at its option may terminate the lease by notice in writing by certified or registered mail to Lessee. The notice may be given before or within thirty days after the 'running of the grace period for default and may be included in a notice of failure of compliance. If the property is abandoned by Lessee in connection with a default, termination shall be automatic and without notice. 17.1 Damaaes. In the event of termination of default, Cily shall be entitled to recover immediately the following amounts as damages: 17.1.1 The reasonable cost of re-entry and reletting including the cost of any clean up. refurbishing, removal of Lessee's property and fixtures, or any other expense occasioned by Lessee's failure to quit the premises upon termination and to leave the premises in the required condition. any remodeling costs. attorney fees, court costs, broker commissions and advertising cost. 17.1.2 The loss of reasonable lease fee value from the date of default until a new tenant has been or, with the exercise of reasonable efforts could have been secured. 17.2 Re-entrv After Termination. If the lease is terlTl-inated for any reason, Lessee's liability to City for damages shall survive such termination, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be as follows: 17.2.1 Lessee shall vacate the premises immediately, and within 60 days remove any property of Lessee including any fixtures which Lessee is required to remove at the end of the lease term, perform any cleanup, alterations or other work required to leave the property in the condition required at the end of the term. City may re-enter. take possession of the premises and remove any persons or property by legal action or by self-help with the use of reasonable force and without liability for damages. 17.3 Relettina. Following re-entry or abandonment, City may relet the premises and in that connection may: Page'5 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE 17.3.1 Make any suitable alterations or refurbish the premises, or both, or change the character or use of the premises, but City shall not be required to relet for any use or purpose (other than that specified in the lease) which City may reasonably consider injurious to the premises, or to any tenant which City may reasonably consider objectionable. 17.3.2 Relet all or part of the premises, alone or in conjunction with other properties, for a term longer or shorter than the term of this lease, upon any reasonable terms and conditions, including the granting of some lease fee-free occupancy or other lease fee concession. 18. Assignment of Interest or Rights. Neither Lessee or any assignee or other successor of Lessee shall sublease, assign, transfer or encumber any of Lessee's rights in and to this lease or any interest, nor license or permit the use of the rights granted except as provided in this paragraph, Lessee shall not assign all or any part of its rights and interests under this lease to any successor through merger, consolidation, or voluntary sale or transfer of substantially all of its assets, without prior written approval of the City. Written approval of the City shall not be unreasonably withheld. 18.1 Richt of first refusal. For other than' month-to-month rentals. City shall have the following described right of first refusal with respect to the interest of Lessee under this lease after the expiration of the lease term and all extensions authorized under this lease: 18.1.1 Lessee shall not sell, sublease. assign or transfer to anyone other than City, unless Lessee shall have first communicated to City, by written notice, a written offer to sell, sublease, assign or transfer this lease or any interest, which offer shall specify, in commercially reasonable detail, the price, terms and conditions upon which Lessee is willing to sell, sublease, assign or transfer this lease or any interest. 18.1,2 City shall have a period of 30 days, following the notice. within which to accept the offer by giving Lessee written notice of acceptance. If the offer is accepted, the parties shall be obligated to close the sale, sublease. assignment or transfer in accordance with the terms of Lessee's offeL Closing shall occur within 60 days following acceptance or within such longer closing period as may be specified in the offer. 18.1,3 If City does not accept the offer, Lessee may sell, sublease, assign or transfer the lease or any interest to any other party, provided that such a sale must be consummated within 60 days following the earlier of the expiration of the 30 day acceptance period specified in paragraph 18.1.2 for the offer or the date of any written rejection of the offer by City, and for and upon the same price, terms and conditions as those specified in the offer. 18.1.4 City's rights under this paragraph shall apply to any subsequent or contemporaneous offer made to Lessee or Lessee's successor or successors in interest. 18.1.5 For the purposes of this subparagraph. a devise under a will by the Lessee shall not be considered a sale, sublease, assignment or transfer. 18.2 Option to Purchase Lessee's Interest. For Type C leases, in addition to the right of first refusal described above, City shall have the exclusive right and option to purchase all of Lessee's right under this lease upon the following terms and conditions: 18.2.1 If City exercises this option, the purchase price during the initial year of this lease for Lessee's rights under this lease will be the actual reasonable construction cost of the hangar plus 10%. The purchase price during each subsequent year shall be the purchase price determined in the immediately preceding sentence less 1/251h of such purchase price for each full year the lease has been in effect. 18.2.2 This option shall be exercised by written notice given by City to Lessee at any time, which notice shall specify that City has elected to exercise this option. Page 6 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE 18.2.3 Closing shall occur as soon as possible following exercise of this option by City and, in any event, not later than the 35th day following the date of exercise of this option. 18.2.4 At closing, Lessee shall deliver to City a duly executed and acknowledged statutory quitclaim deed quitclaiming all of Lessee's rights and interest in the premises free and clear of all liens and encumbrances of Lessee. anyone claiming under Lessee or caused, permitted or suffered to attach through Lessee. 18.2.5 At closing, City shall pay to Lessee in cash the entire amount of the purchase price. 18.2.6 City's rights under this paragraph shall apply to any successor of Lessee and shall apply whether or not City exercises its rights under the right of first refusal paragraph. City may not exercise its rights under this paragraph while the Lessee who signed this lease is in possession and has not sold, subleased, assigned or transferred its interest in the lease. For the purposes of this subparagraph, a devise under a will by the Lessee shall not be considered as sale. sublease. assignment or transfer. 18.3 Subleases without consent. Lessee may sublease portions of the premises for the purpose of placing other aircraft within the hangar without consent of City. 19. Nonwaiver. Waiver by either party of strict performance of any provision of this lease shall not be a waiver of or prejudice the party's right to require strict performance of the same provision in the future or of any other provision. 20. Consent of City, ,Whenever consent, approval or direction by the City is required, all such consent, approval or direction shall be received in writing from the City Administrator. 21. Hangar Construction Requirements. The Hangar Construclion Requirements are incorporated into this Agreement and shall apply to any construction that takes place on the leased property. 22. Notices. All notices required under this lease shall be deemed to be properly served if sent by certified or registered mail to the last address previously furnished by the parties. Until changed by the parties by notice in writing, notices shall be sent to: CITY: LESSEE: City of Ashland At address shown on abstract. Attn: City Administrator 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 ORDER Pursuant to ORS 271.360 the governing body hereby approves and authorizes the terms of this lease as set forth above. . LESSOR: Mayor/Mayor's Designee, City of Ashland Date Page 7 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE END OF AIRPORT MASTER HANGAR LEASE AGREEMENT Page 8 of 10 - AIRPORT MASTER LEASE CITY OF ASHLAND SPECIALIZED AVIATION SERVICE OPERATIONS LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT This Lease is between the City of Ashland ("City") and Alan DeBoer dba Valley Investments ("Lessee"), and it is effective on July 1. 2010 for the Original Property. RECITALS: A. City is the owner of the Ashland Municipal Airport (further referred to in this lease as "the airport".) B. On the date of the aforementioned Building Permit. the City and Lessee entered into a Lease of real property described in the attached Exhibit A (further referred to as "Original Property"), The "Original Property" lease is not affected by this lease agreement. C, The City of Ashland, through its Airport Commission, has adopted the Oregon Department of Aviation Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities as shown in their Oregon State-Owned Category IV Airports (dated April 17, 2002) adopted by the City Council on June 21. 2002 as they now exist or as they may be changed in the future. D. Lessee desires to now be authorized as a Specialized Aviation Service Operations (SASO) as defined in the Oregon Department of Aviation Minimum Standards, (further referred to as "Minimum Standards"). E. The City is willing to authorize Lessee as a SASO and 10 lease additional property 10 Lessee for this purpose. City and Lessee agree: 1. Description of leased premises. In addition to the Original Property, City leases to Lessee space for increased use at the airport, supplementary parking and landscaping in the amount of 1,0 times the Original Property Hangar footprint, or 16,573 SF X 1.0 = 16,573 SF as shown on the attached drawing (to be defined as the "Leased Property" for this SASO Agreement); located as a part of 391E12 Tax Lot 301. 2. Term. The term of this lease shall commence at 12:01 AM on July 1, 2010, and the lease shall continue for a period of 10 years or as long a commercial operation exists. 2.1 Extension of Agreement. The term of this lease shall be the same as the term of the associated ground lease for the Original Property. otherwise known as the Airport Master Lease, or until a commercial operation no longer exists, whichever comes first, if no material breach exists or continues in the performance of any of the provisions o,f this agreement. Any extension of this lease shall be as provided in this section. 2.1.1 The renewal terms shall be on the terms, covenants and conditions as the parties may mutually agree. 2.1.2. Lessee shall exercise the process for a renewal in the following manner: At least 60 days prior to the expiration of the term, Lessee notifies Lessor in writing of its election 10 exercise the process to renew the term of this lease. G:J/legaUMEGAN/Airport Leases/Burl Brim Leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page 1 of9 r~' 2.1.3. Upon the giving of such notice, this lease, subject to the parties agreement on the terms, covenants and conditions shall Be deemed to be renewed and the term renewed for a period of ten years from the date of expiration of the preceding term. 3. Lease Fee to City. 3.1 Base Lease Fee. During the original term, Lessee shall pay to City as base lease fee the sum of $0.193 (based on the January 2010 All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index for the fiscal year starting July 1,2010 through June 30. 2011) per square foot of the Leased Property, rounded up to the nearest dollar, per year in advance, Lease fee shall be payable on the date this lease is executed to the City of Ashland, attention Public Works Director. Subsequent annual payments shall be made on this date each year during the term of this lease. First year's base lease fee is $0.193 x 16,573 SF = $3,198.59 rounded up to $3,199.00 3.1.1 Periodic lease fee increase. The base lease fee is subject to adjustment on July 1 of each year at the option of the City and is payable, monthly in advance. on the first Clay of each month. 3.1.2 Annual lease fee increase. The lease rate shall increase annually on July 1 of each year, but not decrease, based on the previous calendar year's Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). The CPI will be calculated on the difference between JanuarY of the prior year and January of the current year. The adjustment will be one increase in the CPI using the All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), U.S. City Average, CPI-- Allllems Index as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. If the CPI is no longer being published. then the Index shall be the figure reported in the U.S. Department of Labor's most recent comprehensive official index then in use and most nearly answering the description of the CPI. All sums resulting from the computation of annual lease fees shall be rounded up to the nearest whole dollar. 3.1,3 Past due fees. Lease fees will become past due ten days past the due date and the City will charge interest of 1.5% per month on past due lease fees. 3.2. Proration of Lease Fee, If the Lessee terminates the single commercial activity or limited aeronautical commercial services that made this lease necessary, the Lessor shall prorate the lease fee using the first date for which the Lessee no longer carried on the activity as the end date of the lease: The Lessee must submit proof acceptable to the Lessor that the activity was discontinued on a date certain to establish the end date for the lease. 3.3. Records. Lessee shall keep proper books of account and other records pertaining to gross receipts and render monthly statements of gross receipts at the time monthly payments of percentage fee are due. The books and records shall be kept or made available at a location reasonably accessible to City, who may inspect all such books and records, and copies of Lessee's federal and state income tax returns for relevant years. at all reasonable times to verify Lessee's gross receipts. Lessee shall submit to City a copy of any sales report filed by Lessee with any local, state or federal taxing authority promptly after filing. 3.4. Continuous Operation, Lessee shall occupy the Original and Leased Property continuously for the purpose stated in this lease and carryon business during the hours customary in comparable businesses similarly situated with adequate inventory and G:llfegal/MEGANfAirpon Leases/Burl Brim LeasesINew Properties SASO Lease Page2019 . ~.l' personnel. This shall not prevent Lessee from closing for brief periods when reasonably necessary for inventory, repairs, remodeling (when permitted), or other legitimate purpose related to the business carried on, or when closure is the result of a labor dispute, however caused, or other factors not within Lessee's control. . 3.5. No Partnership. City is not by virtue of this section a partner or joint venturer with Lessee in connection with the business carried on under this lease, and shall have no obligation with respect to Lessee's debts or other liabilities, and no interest in Lessee's profits. 4. Purpose. Lessee shall provide a service at the airport solely for the uses and purposes relating to conducting the business of a Specialized Aviation Service Operations (SASO) as described in the Minimum Standards as they now exist or as they may be required to be changed in the future by the Oregon Aeronautical Division or the FAA. Any other changes to these standards shall not apply to Lessee unless mutually agreed upon. As a SASO, lessee shall provide: 4.1 Aircraft Storaae and Hanaars, An aircraft storage and hangar service operator leases and rents hangars, multiple T-hangars, and/or shade hangars to aircraft owners or operalors solely for aircraft storage purposes. The aircraft storage and hangar service operator shall comply with all of the requirements in the minimum standards. (see also 14 CFR 43) 5, FAA Exclusive Riqhts Prohibition. Nothing contained in this agreement shall be construed to grant or authorize the granting of exclusive rights within the meaning of section 308 (a) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 as amended. 5,1 City shall require of other lessees or permittees at the airport to comply with substantially the same requirements of Lessee, if applicable, as set forth in this lease, City shall enter into such leases or grant such permits in a manner so as to not favor any lessee or permittee over Lessee under this lease. It is the intent of the parties that City treat Lessee on an equitable basis with other lessees and permittees of City so that Lessee is not put in an unfair advantage. 6. Insurance. Lessee shall obtain and maintain continuously in effect at all limes during the term of this agreement, at Lessee's sole expense, the following insurance: 6,1 Comprehensive Insurance. Comprehensive general liability insurance protecting City and its officers, agents and employees against any and all liabilities that may allegedly in any way relate to the operation by Lessee, this incurrence to be in the minimum' amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage. Such limit shall automatically increase in the event of any change in the provision of ORS 30.270, or changes to the Oregon Department of Aviation requirements as adopted by the City, or in the event these limits are found to be not totally applicable to a city. 6.2 Additional insured, All policies shall include the City, its officers, commissions, elected officials, employees and agents as additional insured. 6.3 Primary Insurance, The insurance shall be considered primary to any other insurance of self-insurance of the City. GJ/tegallMEGAN/Airport leases/Burl Brim leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page 3 of 9 r~' 6.4 Insurance Certificate. A certificate evidencing such insurance coverage shall be filed with the City, and such certificate shall provide that such insurance coverage may not be canceled or reduced or changed in any way adverse to the City without at least 30 days prior written notice to the City. The policy shall be continuous until canceled as stated above. If such insurance coverage is canceled or changed, Lessee shall, not later than 15 days prior 10 the termination or change in the insurance coverage. file with the City a certificate showing the required insurance has been reinstated or provided through another insurance company or companies. In the event Lessee shall fail to furnish the City with the certificate of insurance required. City may secure the required insurance or self-insure at the sole cost and expense of Lessee. and Lessee agrees to reimburse City promptly for the cost, plus ten percent of the cost for City administration. Lessee and Lessee agrees to reimburse City promptly for the cost, plus ten percent of the cost for City administration. 7. Indemnification. Lessee will defend. indemnify and save City, its officers. employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs. expenses. judgements, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (inCluding injury resulting in death,) or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to this lease. Lessee will not be held responsible for damages caused by negligence of City. 8. Additional ResDonsibilities of Lessee. Lessee further agrees to: 8.1 Utilities, Initiate, contract for, and obtain, in its name, all utility services required on the premises, including gas, electricity, telephone, water, and solid waste collections and services, and pay all charges for those services as they become due. If Lessee fails to pay the charges, City may elect to apply them and the charge will then be added to the fee installment next due. 8.2 Irrevocable Election. Make an irrevocable election (binding on Lessee and all successors in interest under this agreement) not to claim depreciation or investment credit with respect to any property financed with tax-exempt obligations of the City (inClUding all property used by Lessee under this Agreement); (2) Lessee certifies to the City the term (as defined in 168 (I) (3) of the IRS Code) is not more than 80 percent of the expected economic life of the property used by Lessee under this Agreement (as determined in Section 147 (b) of the IRS Code); and (3) Lessee acknowledged that it has no option to purchase any such property. 8.3 Limited Office Space. Certify it will not use any part of the hangars, except for office space that is de minima in size and cost and that is directly related to its day-to-day operations at the airport as required by Section 142 (b) (2) of the IRS Code. 8.4 Prohibited Uses. Not use or permit the use of the premises as any lodging facility, any retail facility (including food and beverage facilities) in excess of a size necessary to serve passenger and employees al the airport, as any retail facility (other than parking) for passengers or the general public located outside the terminal, as an office building for individuals who are not employees of the city, or as any industrial park or manufacturing facility. No part of the premises financed with any portion of the proceeds of any tax-exempt obligations issued by the City shall be used to provide any airpiane, skybox or other private luxury box, health club facility, a facility primarily used for gambling, or store the principal G:fIIegaVMEGAN/Airport Leases/Burl BrIm Leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page4of9 ~~, business of which is the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off-premises as prescribed by Section 147 (e) of the IRS Code. 8.5 Graphics and Signs. All graphics and signs on the premises shall be consistent with the objectives and conform to the regulations for graphics and signs as contained in the rules, regulations. and ordinances of the City of Ashland as they now exist or may be amended in the future, and as accepted by FAA requirements. 9. Alterations or Improvements. Lessee may not make alterations or improvements without the prior written consent of City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Prior to any construction. construction plans must be approved by the City in writing as to the physical and aesthetic design, site location, color landscape design, parking, and land use. All alterations or improvements that Lessee may desire to make to the premises shall be done by Lessee and at the expense of Lessee. The term 'improvements" means any buildings, structures, or facilities placed or erected on the property. All, such work shall be done in a good and worker like manner in compliance with all applicable building and zoning laws and ordinances. 9.1 Ownership of Improvements, Title to all improvements made by Lessee of a permanent nature shall be the property of Lessee. 9.1.1 Lessee, however, shall be required to enter into a ground lease with the City prior to any improvement being made that increases the footprint of existing structures or that utilizes additional land at the airport. Ground lease fee shall be at fair market rental value. 9.1.2 Prior to construction of any improvements, the parties agree to negotiate in good faith as to ownership of the improvements to be constructed, Unless previously agreed in writing between the parties, the improvements shall become property of City, free and clear of all claims of Lessee. anyone claiming under Lessee or caused, permitted or suffered to attach through Lessee upon completion of construction and issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Lessee. or any one claiming under Lessee, shall indemnify and defend City against all liability and, loss arising from such claims. 9,1.3 Upkeep. The premises shall be kept in good repair, free of waste material and debris. 10. Compliance with Laws. Lessee shall promptly observe and comply with all laws specified below and all reasonable laws, orders, regulations, rules, ordinances and requirements of Federal, State, County and City governments with respect to the use, care and control of the leased premises, except in the event where Lessee reasonably objects to the application of any such proceeds in good faith with all reasonable and necessary diligence to protest the same and provided Lessor's interest in the premises is not jeopardized. 10.1 Lessee Compliance with Clean Water Actfor Toxic Pollutants. The effluent standards or prohibitions established under Section 307 (a) of the Clean Water Act for Toxic Pollutants. Lessee shall install all facilities necessary for the operation and shall properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems and relaled appurtenances of treatment that are required to keep compliance with the Clean Water Act for Toxic Pollutants. G:/llegaI/MEGAN/Airport Leases/Burl Brim Leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page 5 of 9 ~~, 10.2 Lessee Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act, Lessee shall be solely responsible for any improvements, alterations or repairs to the premises required pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. 10.3 Lessee Compliance with Environmental Laws. Definition of "hazardous material". As used is Ihis paragraph, the term "hazardous material" means any hazardous or toxic substance, material, or waste, including, but not limited to, those substances, material, and wastes listed in the United States Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Table (49 C.F.R. 172.101) or by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as hazardous substances (40 C.F.R. Part 302) and any amendments, ORS 466.567,466,205, 466.640 and 468.790 and regulations of the Oregon State Department of Environmental Quality, petroleum products and their derivatives, and such other substances, material and wastes as become regulated or subject to cleanup authority under any environmental laws. Environmental laws means those laws sited in this subparagraph, 10.3.1 Lessee's compliances with laws and permits. Lessee shall cause the premises and all operations conducted on the premises (including operations by any sublenants) to comply with all environmental laws, 10,3.2 Limilation on uses of hazardous materials. Lessee shall not use or allow any agents, contractors or subtenant to use premises to generate, manufacture, refine, transport. treat, store, handle, recycle, release or dispose of any hazardous material, other than at reasonably necessary for the operations of Lessee's activities as contemplated under this agreement. 10.3.3 Citv's RiQhts. City shall have the right to conduct reasonable inspections and investigations of premises and the operations conducted on premises at any time with appropriate notification and from time to time. and Lessee shall cooperate fully with City during such inspections and investigations. 10.3.4 Indemnification. Lessee agrees to defend (with counsel approved by City), fully indemnify, and hold entirely free and harmless City from and against all claims, judgments, damages, penalties, fines, costs, liabilities, or losses (including, without limitation, diminution in value of premises, damage for the loss or restriction on the use of rentable or usable space or of any amenity of premises. damages arising from any adverse impact on marketing of space, sums paid in settlement of claims, attorneys' fees, consultant fees, and expert fees) which arise during or after the lease term and which are imposed on, or paid by or asserted against City by reason or on account of, or in connection with, or arising out Lessee's generation, manufacture, use, transportation, refinemenl. treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials, or any release of hazardous materials as a result of Lessee's use or activities, or of Lessee's agents, contractors, or subtenants, Lessee shall not be held responsible for damages caused by the negligence of City, 10,3.5 To the extent permitted by law, City agrees to indemnify Lessee from and against all claims, judgments, damages, penalties, fines, costs. liabilities, or losses (including, without limitation, sums paid in settlement of claims, attorneys' fees, consultant fees. and expert fees) which arise during the release term and which are imposed on, paid by. or asserted against Lessee by reason of the presence of hazardous materials in the soil, groundwater, or solid vapor on or under the premises, except to the extent that the hazardous materials are present as a result of Lessee's activities on the premises, or the activities of Lessee's agents, contractors, or subtenants. G:/llegallMEGAN/Airport Leases/Burl Brim leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page 6 of 9 ~~, 11. AssiQnment. 11,1 Lessee shall have the right to .assign or sublease the whole or any part of Lessee's rights and duties under this Lease, subject to the written approval of the City, which such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The City. in considering approval, may take into consideration the experience, qualifications and financial ability of the proposed assignee to do the obligations required of Lessee. and to operate the airport for the benefit of the public. 11.2 For the purposes of this paragraph, the sale, assignment, transfer, or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Lessee, or a change in principal officers or directors of the corporation, if Lessee is a corporation, or of Ihe interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member or co-tenant, if Lessee is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy, which shall result in changing the control of Lessee. shall be construed as an assignment of this lease. Control, as used in this paragraph, means 50 percent or more of the voting power of the corporation. 12. Federal Preeminence. All rights, privileges and liabilities imposed by this agreement are subject and subordinate to any conditions, restrictions, limitations, rules, regulations or future requirements for modification of this agreement, by any agreement or contract pertaining to the Airport between the United States Government or any other department or agency of either the United States Government or the State of Oregon. 13. Minoritv Business Plan. As required by the FAA. Lessee agrees to the terms and conditions of the City's adopted Minority Business Plan currently in effect with the FAA and to be amended from time to time. 14. Tennination. This lease may be terminated upon proper notice 90 days in advance of such termination date, and upon the following conditions: 14.1 Termination bv Lessee. This agreement shall be subject to tennination by Lessee in the event of any one or more of the following events: 14.1.1 The abandonment of the Airport as an airport or airfield by the City, 14.1.2 The default by the City in the performance of any of the tenns, covenants or conditions of this agreement. and for the failure to continue for a period of 30 days after receipt of notice from Lessee concerning the default, provided that if the remedy takes longer than 30 days. then the term of notice shall be so extended, 14.1.3 Damage to or destruction of all or material portions of the Airport, and which are necessary for the operation of Lessee's business, and election by City not to replace such improvements within six months after destruction, 14.1.4 The lawful assumption by the United States, or any authorized agent of the operation, control, or use of the Airport. or any substantial part or parts, in such a manner as to substantially restrict Lessee from conducting business operations for a periOd of in excess of 90 days. 14.2 Termination bv Citv. This agreement shall be subject to termination by City in the event of anyone or more of the following events: 14.2.1 Failure to pay the basic or percentage fee or failure to pay any money due to the City as set forth in this agreement on the due date after ten days written notice by City to Lessee. GJflegallMEGAN/Airport Leases/Burl Brim leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page 7 of 9 r~' 14.2,2 The default by Lessee in the performance of any of the terms, covenant or conditions of this agreement (other than payment of the basic or percentage fees or any other money due), and the failure of Lessee to remedy or undertake to remedy, to City's satisfaction, such default for a period of 30 days after receipt of notice from City to remedy the same, . 14.2.3 The filing of a voluntary petition in bankruptcy, including a reorganization plan, or filing in Chapter 11 of Ihe Bankruptcy Act, and general or other assignment for the benefit of creditors, or as adjudicated as bankrupt or if a receiver is appointed for the property or affair~ of Lessee. 14.2.4 The failure to conduct the business or to perform any duty as required in section 5. 15. Affirmative Action Proqram. Lessee assures that it will undertake an affirmative action program as required by 14 CFR. Part 152, sub-part E, to insure that no person shall. on the grounds of race, creed, color. age. national origin or sex, be excluded from participating in any employment activities covered in 14 CFR, Part 152, sub-part E. Lessee assures that no person shall be excluded on these grounds from participating in or receiving the services or benefits of any program or activity covered by the sub-part. Lessee assures that it will require that its covered sub-organizations will provide assurances to the City that they similarly will undertake affirmative action programs and that they will require assurances from their sub-organizations as required by 14 CFR, Part 152. sub-part E to the same effect. 16. Taxes. Lessee covenants and agrees to pay all real and personal property taxes assessed against the Leased Property during the term of this Lease, such payments to be made no later than November 15th of the year in which the taxes become due and payable, and will submit a copy of the receipt for the taxes to the City's Director of Finance. 16.1 In the event that there is a change in the method upon which property taxes are imposed upon the Lessee and such change increases the property tax liability of the Lessee, City and Lessee agree to renegotiate fee payment to reflect the change, 17. Public Use. Lessee shall also have a non-exclusive right to use. in common with others, all public airport facilities and improvements of a public nature. which are now, or which in the future may be connected with landing, taxiing, parking areas, and other facilities. INTENDING TO BE BOUND, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date written below. LESSEE By: City of Ashland ~,A--~~ Alan DeBoer Martha Bennett, City Administrator G:/JIegaIIMEGAN/Airport Leases/Burl Brim Leases/New Properties SASQ Lease Page 8 of 9 ~~, ORDER Pursuant to ORS 271.360 the governing body hereby approves and authorizes the terms of this lease as set forth herein. LESSOR: Mayor, City of Ashland Date Approved as to form: City Attorney I Date G:/IIegallMEGAN/Airport leases/Burl Brim Leases/New Properties SASO Lease Page 9 of 9 ~~, ... /' ,../ '( A A .... / ,../ ,../ Cl> DEAD INDIAN MEMORIAL RD. :1:< 00 :J = <.Om 0'< -, - Ul :J < m (J) ~ 3 m :J ~ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Intergovernmental Agreement - Construction Excise Tax Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar Department: Community Development E-Mail: molnarb@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Legal Secondary Contact: Richard Appicello Approval: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: Consent Question: Should the City Council authorize the City Administrator to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement between Jackson County School District #5 (Ashland School District) and the City of Ashland in relation to collection of the Construction Excise Tax? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement. Background: The 2007 State Legislature passed Senate Bill 1036 allowing School Districts to impose a construction excise tax (CET) on improvements to certain real property that result in a new structure or additional square footage. The decision to impose a CET rests solely with the school district. State law then requires the local government body that issues building permits to collect the construction taxes pursuant to a written agreement. At the January 11th, 2010 regular session of the Ashland School District, the School Board approved a resolution (2009-14) establishing a Construction Excise Tax. Pursuant to Senate Bill 1036 . (ORS320.179(2)). As local government bodies that issue building permits within the Ashland School District, both City of Ashland and Jackson County are to enter into agreements with the School District to collect the CET on their behalf. The CET is triggered by the new development within the school districts boundaries and will be collected at issuance of a building permit for any non-exempt structural permit. The School District's Resolution 2009-014 as attached shows the rates of tax imposed on improvements to real property that result in new structures or additional square footage. The State law exempts a number of entities from paying the tax including: . Private school improvements. . Public improvements . Residential housing that is guaranteed to be affordable . Public or private hospital improvements. . Religious facilities . Agricultural buildings . Facilities that are operated by a not-far-profit corporation and that are: . Long term care facilities . Residential care facilities . Continuing care retirement communities Page I of2 ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND In 2009 the State Legislature (HB20 14) modified the original enabling legislation (ORS 320.179), which now establishes that a city or county may retain an administrative fee of no more than 4% of the tax revenues collected. The proposed Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the City and the Ashland School District provides for the City of Ashland to receive a 4% administrative fee for calculating and collecting the CET. Related City Policies: Oregon Senate Bill 1036 Oregon House Bill 2014 Council Options: I. The Council could decide to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement as proposed. 2, The Council could decide to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with modifications. Potential Motions: I. Move to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement 2. Move to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement, with the following amendments Attachments: . Intergovernmental Agreement . Ashland School District - Letter and Board Minutes . House Bill 2014 Page2of2 ~~, CONSTRUCTION EXCISE TAX INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into this _ day of . 2010 by and between ASHLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT No.5, hereinafter referred to as "School District," and THE CITY OF ASHLAND, an Oregon municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," RECITALS A. ORS Chapter 190 authorizes City and School District to enter into written agreements for the performance of any or all functions and activities that either entity has the authority to perform on its own. B. School District is authorized by ORS 320.170 to ORS 320.189, hereinafter referred to in this IGA as the "CET law", to impose a Construction Excise Tax ("CET") to fund capital improvements to school facilities. C. Pursuant to the CET law, School District has adopted a resolution establishing a CET throughout its jurisdiction. The resolution provides that the CET be collected by the City and remitted to School District pursuant to an Intergovernmental Agreement. D. City and School District desire to enter into an IGA meeting the minimum requirements of ORS 320.179, and to establish certain procedures needed to effectively collect the CET and remit the tax to School District. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration for the mutual covenants contained herein the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the City and School District agree as follows: 1. RECITALS. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2. DURATION, [ORS 190.020(1)(e)]. The term of this Agreement shall commence and the agreement shall be effective after execution by both parties and shall not expire until the CET expires, the statutory authority is repealed, or the IGA is terminated by the City or the District. The parties agree to review the Agreement on or before January 2, 2018 to determine if any changes will be necessary. 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 1 3. FUNCTIONS OR ACTIVITIES, [ORS 190.020(1)]. a, The School District agrees to the following: i.Information and Forms. School District will provide all of the forms and information necessary to collect the CET Including a general description of the CET, School District contact information, an exemption request form, and a certified copy of the Resolution establishing the CET. ii.Refunds. School District agrees to process and issue any required refunds of CET. iii.Exemptions/Enforcement. If the building permit applicant asserts that the applicant is exempt from the CET and shows proof of filing a School District CET Exemption Form at the time the CET would otherwise be due, City will recognize the exemption. School District is responsible to determine the validity of the exemption and to institute collection procedures to obtain payment of the CET, as well as any other remedy School District may have under law, if the applicant was not entitled to the exemption. iv.Payment. School District will promptly pay all invoices as required by Section 4. b. The City of Ashland agrees to the following: I. Staffing. City shall provide sufficient staff to calculate and collect the CET in accordance with the terms of this IGA. School District shall provide sufficient staff to implement all other aspects of the CET program established by the School District. ii. Collection; City will collect the CET on behalf of School District for those properties that are within the School District boundaries and within the city limits of City when such CET is triggered by a non-exempt application for a permit for structural improvements regulated by the state bUilding'code. 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 2 1. Applicability. The CET will apply to all non-exempt taxable building permits as determined by the CET law, deemed complete for processing after the collection start date noted in subparagraph 3 below. 2. Collection shall be in conjunction with the collection of the other building permit fees by the City. Payment shall be in one check payable to the City of Ashland. When the applicant pays fees with one check payable to the City, City will direct the portion representing the CET payment to a dedicated account line item and process a payment to School District for all CET payments received, at least quarterly. 111. 1. The collection start date will be July 1, 2010 following the receipt by the City of a certified copy of School District's approved resolution establishing the CET which is in compliance with the CET law together with a fully executed original copy of this Intergovernmental Agreement. In no instance will the start date be earlier than the effective date of the resolution adopting the CET. 2. City will continue collection until the CET expires, the underlying statutory authority is repealed, the program is terminated by School District, or this IGA is terminated by either the School District or the City as provided herein, City and School District will monitor the CET statute and make amendments to this Agreement as necessary. IV. Remittance. City will remit the collected CET to School District by processing a City check, less the 4% administrative fee, along with copies of completed CET collection forms or proof of filing of a School District's CET Exemptioh Form at least quarterly. No other CET reports are required. v. Failure to Pay CET. The City shall collect the CET from the building permit applicant at the time that the permit authorizing construction subject to CET is issued. Upon refusal or failure to pay the CET when due, or failure to provide proof of filing the School District CET Exemption Form, the City will 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 3 not issue the building permit. In no event is the City liable for failure to collect CET when due. VI. Records. City shall make all records relating to the building permit authorizing construction subject to the CET and CET collections available to School District, or its designated auditors, as necessary for School District to audit CET collections. VII. Noticing. School District shall publicize all CET tax rate or policy changes and be responsible for any required public noticing. School District shall provide the City with a minimum 20 days advance notice of any changes 4. P A YMENTI REVENUE. [ORS 190.020(1)(a)(b)]. As consideration for the above described services, City shall retain a 4% administrative fee as authorized by ORS 320,179. No other revenues expected to be derived pursuant to this Agreement need to be apportioned between the parties. 5. PERSONNEL. [ORS 190.020(1)(c)]. No employees will be formally transferred pursuant to this Agreement. School District and City are subject employers under ORS Chapter 656, and shall procure and maintain current valid workers compensation insurance coverage for all subject workers throughout the period of this Agreement. This Agreement does not change the status of any employee, contractor or officer of the respective entities. 6. REAL OR PERSONAL PROPERTY. [ORS 190.020(1)(d)]. There shall be no transfer of title or possession to any real or personal property pursuant to this Agreement. 7. TERMINATION. [190.020(1)(f)]. a. This CET Collection IGA will be terminated if the City of Ashland ceases to be the issuer of permits for structural improvements regulated by the state building code. b. This CET Collection IGA may also be terminated by either the City or School District for any reason upon 90 days written notice to the other party. In addition, this Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of both parties; or by either party upon a default upon notice in writing. In the event of termination of the Agreement, School District shall pay any fee due and owing to the City and City shall remit any tax collected on behalf of the School District to the date of 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 4 termination. Such termination shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either p~rty accrued prior to such termination. 'c, There shall be a default under this Agreement if either party fails to perform any act or obligation required of that party by this Agreement. Before declaring a default, the party claiming a failure has occurred shall give written notice to the other party specifying the nature of the breach with reasonable particularity. No default shall occur if the breach is remedied with thirty (30) days after the notice is given. d. If the breach specified in the notice is of such a nature that a remedy cannot be completely performed within the thirty-day period, no default shall occur if the party receiving the notice begins performance of the act or obligation within the period and thereafter proceeds with reasonable diligence and in good faith to effect the remedy as soon as practicable. e. In addition to the remedies specified elsewhere in this Agreement, if a default occurs, the party damaged by the default may elect to , terminate this Agreement and pursue any equitable or legal rights and remedies available under Oregon law. 8. HOLD HARMLESSJ DISCLAIMER To the extent permitted by the Oregon Constitution and the Oregon Tort Claims Act, School District shall hold harmless, defend and indemnify the City of Ashland its officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims, demands, damages, expenses, or injuries, liability of damage that anyone may have or assert by reason of the any error, act or omission of City of Ashland, its officers, agents and employees in the performance of their duties under the terms of this Agreement, except for those caused by the sole negligence of the City or its officers and employees.. It is further agrees and understood that neither party is, by virtue of this Agreement, a partner or joint venturing with the other party and neither party shall have any obligation with respect to the other party's debts or liabilities of whatever kind or nature, If any aspect of this indemnity shall be found to be illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this indemnification. 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 5 9. METHOD AND PLACE OF GIVING NOTICE, SUBMITTING BILLS, AND MAKING PAYMENTS. All notices, bills, and payments shall be made in writing and may be given by personal delivery or by mail. Notices, bills, and payments sent by mail should be addressed as follows: City of Ashland Attn: Martha Bennett, City Administrator 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Phone: 541-488-2100 Fax: 541-552-2092 Ashland Public School Attn: Juli Di Chiro Superintendent 885 Siskiyou Blvd. Ashland, OR 97520 Phone 541-482-2811 Fax: 541-482-2185 and when so addressed, shall be deemed given upon deposit in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, In all other instances, noti'ces, bills, and payments shall be deemed given at the time of actual delivery, Changes may be made to the names and addresses of the person to whom notices, bills, and payments are to be given by providing notice pursuant to this paragraph. 10. ATTORNEY FEES. In the event an action, lawsuit or proceeding, including appeal there from, is brought for failure to fulfill or comply with any of the terms of this agreement, each party shall be responsible for their own attorney fees, expenses, costs and disbursements for said action, lawsuit, proceeding or appeal. 11. NO WAIVER. The failure by any party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by that party of that provision or of any other provision of this Agreement. 12. SEVERABILITY. Should any provision or provisions of this Agreement be construed by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void, invalid or unenforceable, such construction shall affect only the provision or provisions so construed, and shall 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 6 , not affect, impair or invalidate any of the other provisions of this Agreement which shall remain in full force and effect. 13. HEADINGS.. The headings of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be used to construe or interpret any provisions of this Agreement. 14. APPLICABLE LAW. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon. 15. ASSIGNMENT/DELEGATION.. Ashland shall not delegate the responsibility for providing services hereunder to any other individual or agency. Neither this Agreement nor any of the rights granted by this Agreement may be assigned or transferred by either party. 16. AMENDMENT, This IGA may be amended only by mutual written agreement of the City and School District. City and School District further agree to negotiate in good faith to amend this IGA should the CET law be amended by subsequent legislation or judicial proceedings so that this IGA is consistent with the most current legislation 17. MERGER. This writing is intended both as the final expression of the Agreement between the pa~ties with respect to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the Agreement. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until it is made in writing and signed by both parties, 18. OTHER AGREEMENTS. This CET Collection IGA does not affect or alter any other agreements between School District and City. 19. BINDING EFFECT, The terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of each of the parties and each of their respective administrators, agents, representatives, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed in two (2) duplicate originals, either as individuals, or by their officers, thereunto duly authorized, 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 7 School District No.5, Ashland, Oregon Dated this day of ,2010. JULI DI CHIRO, SUPERINTENDENT City of Ashland, Oregon Dated this day of .2010. By: JOHN STROMBERG, MAYOR Approved as to Form: City Attorney 2010 City of Ashland - Ashland School District Excise Tax IGA Page 8 AShLJAND PUBLIC SCHOJLS BOARD OF DffiECfORS o RUfII ALEXANDER CAROL DAVIS KElTH MASSIE HEIDI PARKER EVASKURATOWICZ Imp/r/llg Leamlllg for Life FebrualY 8, 2010 Mayor and City Council City of AsWand 20 E Main Street AsWand OR 97520 Honorable Mayor and City Councilors: JULI DI CHIRO Superintendent JILL TUlINER Business Mflllager SAMUEL UOGDANOVE Director of Sludent Sen'lces The Ashland School District is asking for approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement between Jackson County School District No.5 (Ashland) and the City of Ashland. This Intergovernmental Agreement sets up the process for the City to collect the School District Construction Excise tax, The City is compensated for this collection by retaining four percent ofthe proceeds. The School Board held a public hearing on the tax and heard pro and con comments from the public. Respecting those comments, the School Board delayed the implementation from February until July of201O. The 2007 Legislature passed legislation allowing for school districts to enact a constlUclion excise tax. Some of the higWights are: . Tax is a simple flat tax on square footage of construction; . Tax is $1.00 per square foot for residential; . Tax is $.50 per square foot for commercial up to a maximum of$25,000; . Tax is added to the building permit; . Tax can only be used on capital improvements by the District; and . City 01' County collecting the tax is allowed to kccp four perccnt. Thank.you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, ~/l/ . ~r~ Jill TU1'ller Business Manager JT:ac ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 885 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 541-482-2811 FAX 541-482-2185 Ashland School District No.5, Jackson County, Oregon - The Board of Directors met in regular session November 9, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Ashland Council Chambers. Present were: ) Keith Massie ) Chair Ruth Alexander ) Carol Davis ) Board Members Heidi Parker ) Eva Skuratowicz ) Juli Di Chiro, Superintendent Jill Turner, Business Manager Tom Knox, Certified Representative District Administrators Media Representative Jeanne Peterson, Administrative Assistant 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chair Massie. II. Pledge of Allegiance III. Roll Check ) A roll of the board was taken and all members were present. IV. Welcome Visitors and Ackuowledgments A. Vision and Mission Statement Board members read the vision and mission statements. V. Consent Agenda A. Approve minutes.ofFood Service Advisory Committee Meeting of September 28, regular session of October 12 and Capital Projects Advisory Committee meeting of October 19,2009. ' , B . Personnel 1. Retirement Requests Jeff Schlecht, Ashland High School Principal, submitted a letter of intent to retire November 30, 2009. He further requested permission to complete the balance of the school year on a 1039 contract. ) 12 ) Director Skuratowicz moved to approve the consent agenda as presented. Director Alexander seconded and the motion passed unanimously. VI. Hear Public Requests not a part of the agenda There were no public requests. VIT. Public Hearing Regarding Construction Excise Tax - 30 minutes Jill Turner provided background on the proposed construction excise tax. In 2007 the Oregon Legislature passed a law to help school districts pay part of new facility costs. Senate Bill 1036 allows school boards, in cooperation with cities and couinies, to tax new residential and lIOn-residential deveiopment. This excise tax option was created with bipartisan support by the Oregon Legislature. Agencies and groups supporting it include the Oregon Home Builders Association, the Oregon School Boards Association, the Confederation of Oregon School Administrators, Stand for Children and the Oregon PTA. The Ashland School Board held a hearing regarding implementing an excise tax on residential, commercial, and industrial development. The revenue would allow the district to make improvements to existing sites and protect our investment. The tax would be $1 per square foot on residential construction and 50 cents per square foot on non-residential construction, not to exceed $25,000 per building permit or $25,000 per '--'j structure, whichever is less. Implementing the excise tax on new construction would ) involve intergovernmental agreements among the school district and several government entities including the City of Ashland and Jackson County. John Schleining expressed his support for the schools. He explained that there are many contractors and subcontractors out of work at this time. This tax would he a huge disservice to people to pass this now during these difficult financial times. You will be taxing people who do not have school-age children and will have no' benefit from the school district. Chuck Keil spoke in favor of the construction excise tax. The economy is beginning to rebound. The schools have been shortchanged for too long. This tax will help the school district and the students. Darrell Boldt explained his history in Ashland and in construction. He expressed concern for the cost involved during the present economy. It will be years before the economy is on track again. He urged the Board to consider delaying this until the economy is better. John Schweiger supported the proposed tax but urged the Board to talk with the City about tbe excessive system development charges. I disagree that the economy is getting better. Wben I heard about this proposed tax, I wondered when it will stop. ) Keith Massie asked if it was possible to implement a tiered construction excise tax where you start with commercial, then residential, etc. The administration will research this. 13 He further asked for a breakdown on the residential and the commercial costs of this tax. Carol Davis asked for information on the costs from the city for remodels. ) VIII. Reports A. Student and Staff Representative Reports Toni Knox, Certified Representative, reported on concerns expressed by licensed resulting from budget reductions: insufficient educational assistant time, lack of physical space, increased parent conferences, less intervention support for special needs students, not enough time to provide extra help to students. B. Second Language Task Force Michelle Zundel introduced the members of the Second Language Task Force. Committee members referred to the Strategic Plan to utilize a task force to research how to strengthen second language programs and provide a comprehensive second language acquisition program for students K-12. Total Immersion was explained and recommended. The committee reported on the research of the efficacy of models that begin second language instrUction at the elementary level. They recommended a sustainable program and highly qualified second language teachers. First Class Recommendation: Every student K-8 has the opportunity to participate in a French or Spanish immersion program; AHS French, Spanish and Chinese instruction Levels 1-5. -) ... .Business Class Recommendation: Magnet Spanish Immersion School K-8; FLES for all K-5; AMS French and Spanish Language Teachers 6-8. Economy Class Recommendation: FLES K-5 highly qualified language teachers teach Spanish or French to all students in grades K-12. The committee urged that these recommendations be reviewed by the district leaders to determine if these recommendations could be considered at all during the next budget development. Public comment was received as follows. Karen Preskenparen explained that she and a group of about 20 parents formed a Spanish Play Group. She would like to have her children in an immersiOJi program. Mark Decker preferred having a second language program in the early years of public instruction if you have to make a choice between that and the secondary level. Even though the economy is difficult, he challenged the district to think \ .I \ 14 '-') Ashland School District No.5, Jackson County, Oregon - The Board of Directors met in regular session January 1 1,2010, at 7:00 p.m. in the Ashland Council Chambers. Present were: Keith Massie Chair Ruth Alexander ) Carol Davis ) Heidi Parker 'J Eva Skuratowicz ) Board Members JuIi Di Chiro, Superintendent Jill Thmer, Business Manager Toni Knox, Certified Representative District Administrators Jeanne Peterson, Administrative Assistant Media Representative L Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 :OOp.m. by Chair Massie. II. Pledge of Allegiance ') m. Roll Check A roll of the board was taken and all members were present. IV. Welcome Visitors and Acknowledgments A. Vision and Mission Statement Board members read the vision and mission statements. B. School Board Leadership Award Juli Di Chiro stated that the Board received a School Board Leadership Award for its past three years of training as Board Members. V. Consent Agenda A. Approve minutes 'of the Food Service Committee Meetings of November 16, November 30 and regular session of December 14, 2009. and the Capital Project AdVisory Committee meeting of January 4, 2010. ) The minutes of the Capital Projects Advisory Committee meeting minutes of January 4, 2010, were corrected to reflect that Karen Clarke was present. The 5 minutes of the regular session of December 14,2009, were reflected to include Oregon State Representative in front of Peter Buckley's name. B . Personnel There were no personnel items. Director Skuratowicz moved thanhe consent agenda be approved as amended. Director Alexander seconded and the motion passed unanimously. VI. Hear Public Requests not a part of the agenda There were no public requests. VII. Reports A. Student and Staff Representative Reports Toni Knox, Certified Representative, reported on Martin Luther King activities being held at Walker Elementary School, student athletic accomplishments, high school music program, and the high school Math Program. B. Ballot Measures 66 and 67 Heidi Parker and Jill Turner gave a PowerPoint presentation on BaIlot Measures 66 and 67 which will be on the January 26 ballot. C. Superintendent Report Juli Di Chiro acknowledged that this is School Board Appreciation Month. ' She read a proclamation for this month. She also reported on the grand opening of the high school gymnasium/music complex and explained that the final Project Management report wiIl be given at the February Capital Projects Advisory committee meeting. She further reported on the status of the Ashland High School Redesign Committee work. VIII. Unfinished Business A. Construction Excise Tax Jill Turner referred the Board to Exhibit A which was included in the agenda addendum that should be attached to the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County. 6 ) ,Ol j J ,'-') ) ,j \ ) / I. Resolution #2009-13 Regarding Adoption of Facilities Plan The following resolution was presented for the Board's consideration. RESOLUTION #2009-13 WHEREAS, the Ashland School District, in 1995-96, working with JGA Architects and the commnnity developed a long-term facilities master plan, and the plan was completed on March 11 1996; and WHEAREAS , the Ashland School District in 2004-05, worked with DOW A Architects and the community updated the long-term facilities master plan and created the Facility and Capacity Assessment Report which was adopted in AUguS12005. WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1036 (2007) allows school districts, by resolution, to impose construction excise taxes on new construction; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1036 (2007) requires school districts to adopt the district long-term facilities plan for capital improvement prior to the imposition of a construction excise tax. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Ashland School District adopts the August 2005 Facility and Capacity long-term facilities plan as their lonj:-term facilities plan for making capital improvements as requirea by Senate Bill 1036 (2007), ' Director Davis moved that the Board adopt Resolution #2009-13 regarding adoption offacilities plan as recommended. Director Skuratowicz seconded and the motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. ll. Resolution #2009-14 Regarding ConstrUction Excise Tax The following resolution was presented for the Board's consideration. RESOLUTION #2009-14 WHEREAS, the Ashland School District has a critical need to build new facilities ,and improve existing school facilities; and WHEREAS, the Oregon Legislative Assembly passed Senate Bill 1036, authorizing school districts to impose construction excise taxes to fund capital improvements to school facilities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5 of Senate Bill J 036 (2007), the Ashland School District will enter into an intergovernmental agreement with The City of Ashland and Jackson County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5 of Senate Bill 1 036 (2007), this intergovernmental agreement establishes: (a) collection duties and responsibilities; (b) the Jackson County School District 5 account into which construction tax revenues are to be deposited and the frequency 7 - of such deposits; and (c) the amount of the administrative fee of up to 4% that the entity collecting the tax may retain to recoup its expenses in collecting the tax. ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: I. The rates of tax, imposed only on improvements to real property that result in a new structure or additional square footage in an: existing structure, with the exemptions outlined in Senate Bill I 036, are: (a) $1 per square foot on structures or portions of structures intended for residential use, including but not limited to single-unit or multiple-unit housing; and (b) $0.50 per square foot on structures or portions of structures intended for nonresidential use, not including multiple-unit housing of any kind. ' 2. In addition, a construction tax imposed on structures intended for nonresidential use will not exceed $25,000 per building permit or $25,000 per structure, whichever is less. 3. For years bcginning on or after June 30, 2010, the tax rates stated in this resolution shall be adjusted for changes in construction costs. The Oregon Department of Revenue will detelmine the adjusted rate limitations and report to the AsWand School District. 4. The construction excise tax shall be assessed and collected pursuant to the provisions of Senate Bill 1036 (2007). 5. TIlis resolution takes effect on July I, 2010. Discussion was held regarding the possibility of phasing in the construction excise tax. Following discussion, Director Massie moved that the school district adopt Resolution 09-14. Director Skuratowicz seconded and the motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. III. Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of AsWand and the Ashland School District for the Collection of Construction Excise Taxes The Intergovernmental Agreement Between the City of Ashland and the Ashland School District for the collection of construction excise taxes was presented to the Board for approval. Director Parker asked that the methodology for establishing exemptions be consistent throughout the school district. Director Alexander moved that the Board approve the Intergoverrunental Agreement Between the City of AsWand and the Ashland School District for the collection of Construction Excise Taxes as reeommended. Director Skuratowicz seconded and the motion passed unanimously. 8 i') OJ ,) -') , -) \ ..../ IV. Intergovernmental Agreement Between Jackson County and the Ashland School District for Collection of Construction Excise Taxes Director Parker moved that the Board approve the Intergovernmental Agreement Between Jackson County and the Ashland School Disl1ict for collection of Construction Excise Taxes as recommended. Director Skuratowicz seconded and the motion passed unanimously. B. Board Policy Revision - First Reading This item was tabled unti! the February board meeting so the superintendent could provide additional infonnation to board members. IX. New Business A. Annual Site Council Goals and Approval of Charters The principals of Ashland Middle School,Bellview, Helman, Walker, and John Muir elementary schools presenied their respective Site Council Goals and Annual Charters and responded to questions. John Muir Site Council members urged the Board to increase the John Muir principals full time equivaiency to be ore aligned with the Ashland Quality Education Model. Director Massie moved that the Board approve the Annual Charters as presented. Director Alexander seconded and the motion passed unanimously. B. Adopt Criteria for Evaluation of Superintendent The Criteria for Evaluation of the Superintendent was amended by the Board. Juti suggested that the Board review the board policy on the timeline for the evaluation of the Superintendent. Director Alexander moved that the Board adopt the amended criteria for the superintendent's evaluation for this year. Director Davis seconded and the motion passed unanimously. X. Board Reports Board members reported on the Food Service Advisory Conunillee, Scrip, AHAA, high school open house, high school Redesign Conunillee, the upcoming election, and appreciation of st3ff members. 9 XI. Announcements and Appointments A. A Capital Projects Advisory Committee Meeting will be held on Monday, February I, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. in the District Board Room. A Board Work Session will follow to hear a report from the District Food Services Advisory Committee. B. OSBA Board Data Training will be held on February 4,2010 from 5:00 to 9:00 p.m. at a location to be detennin~d. C. The next regular session will be held on Monday, February 8, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Ashland Council Chambers. C. The Board scheduled an Executive Session in accordance with ORS 192.600 (2)(a) for February 26, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. in the District Board Room to review executive, administrative, and certified personnel. A Work Session will follow to discuss the evaluation process for the superintendent and to begin setting Board Goals. XII. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Jeanne Peterson, Administrative Assistant. Chair Clerk 10 -) .-') , J 75th ORKGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY.-2009 Regular Session HOUSE AMENDMENTS TO HOUSE BILL 2014 By COMMITTEE ON REVENUE April 29 1 On ~ of the printed bill, line 2, delete "and" and insert a comma. 2 In line 3, after "320.179" insert "and 320.189". 3 Delete line.s 5 through 30 and delete ~ and insert: 4 "SECTION 1. ORS 320.170 is amended to read, 5 "320.170. (1) Construction taxes may be imposed by a school district, as defined in ORB 330.005, 6 in accordance with ORS 320.170 to 320.189. 7 "(2) [Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section,J Construction taxes imposed by a school dis. 8 trict [mayJ must be collected, subject to ORS 320.179, by [anotherJ a local government, local ser- 9 vice district, [orJ special government body, state agency or state official that issues a permit 10 for structural improvements regulated by the state building code [pursuant to a written agree. 11 ment with a school districtJ. 12 "SECTION 2. ORS 320,173 is amended to read: 13 "320.173. Construction taxes may not be imposed on the following: 14 "(1) Private school improvements. 15 "(2) Public improvements as defined in ORS 279A.OI0. 16 "(3) Residential housing that is guaranteed to be affordable, under guidelines established by the 17 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, to households that earn no more 18 than 80 percent of the median household income for the area in which the construction tax is im. 19 posed, for a period of at least 60 years following the date of construction of the residential housing. 20 "(4) Public or private hospital improvements. 21 "(5) Improvements to religious facilities primarily used for worship or education associated with 2'2 worship. 23 "(6) Agricultural buildings, as defined in ORS 455,315 (2)(a). 24 "(7) Facilities that are operated by a not-for-profit corporation and that are: 25 "(a) Long term care facilities, as defined in ORB 442.015; 26 "(b) Residential care facilities, as defined in ORS 443.400; or 27 "(c) Continuing care retirement communities, as defined in ORS 101.020. 28 "SECTION 3. ORS 320,179 is amended to read, 29 "320.179. (1) A school district imposing a construction tax shall impose the tax by a resolution 30 adopted by the district board of the school district. The resolution shall state the rates of tax, sub. 31 ject to ORS 320,176, 32 "(2) Prior to [adopting a resolution under subsection (1) of this sectionJ collecting a construction 33 tax, a school district shall enter into an intergovernmental agreement with each local government, 34 local service district, lorJ special government body, state agency or state official collecting the 35 tax that lestablishesJ includes: LC 3297/HB 2014-4 1 "(a) Collection duties and responsibilities; 2 "(b) The specific school district accounts into which construction tax revenues are to be de- 3 posited and the frequency of such deposits; and 4 "(c) The amount of the administrative fee that the entity or official collecting the tax may lre- 5 tain to recoup its expenses in collecting the tax, not to exceed one percent of tax revenues.] use to 6 recoup expenses incurred in collecting the construction tax, either through retention or re- 7 imbursement. An administrative fee under this paragraph may not exceed four percent of 8 tax revenues and shall be reduced by the amount of the administrative fee, if any, established 9 under subsection (3) of this section. 10 "(3) The Department of Consumer and Business Services may establish by rule aD. ad- 11 ministrative fee of 0.25 percent of tax revenues. The administrative fee shall be collected and 12 remitted to the department by the entity or official collecting the construction tax. 13 "SECTION 4. ORS 320.179, as amended by section 3 of this 2009 Act, is amended to read: 14 "320.179. (1) A school district imposing a construction tax shall impose the tax by a resolution 15 adopted by the district board of the school district. The resolution shall state the rates of tax, sub- 16 ject to ORS 320.176. 17 "(2) Prior to collecting a construction tax, a school district shall enter into an intergovern- 18 mental agreement with each local government, local service district, special government body, state 19 agency or state official collecting the tax that includes: 20 "(a) Collection duties and responsibilities; 21 "(b) The specific school district accounts into which construction tax revenues are to be de- 22 posited and the frequency of such deposits; and 23 "(c) The amount of the administrative fee that the entity or official collecting the tax may use 24 to recoup expenses incurred in collecting the construction tax, either through retention or re- 25 imbursement. An administrative fee under this paragraph may not exceed four percent of tax re- 26 venues land shall be reduced by the amount of the administrative fee, if any, established under 27 subsection (3) of this section]. 28 "l(3) The Department of Consumer and Business Services may establish by rule an administrative 29 fee of 0.25 percent of tax revenues. The administrative fee shall be collected and remitted to the de- 30 partment by the entity or official collecting the construction tax.] 31 "SECTION 5. ORS 320.189 is amended to read: 32 "320.189. Construction taxes lshallJ must be paid by the person undertaking the construction 33 at the time that a permit authorizing the construction or the expansion of square footage of a 34 facility or building is issued. 35 "SECTION 6. The amendments to ORS 320.170, 320.173, 320.179 and 320.189 by sections I, 36 2, 3 and 5 of this 2009 Act apply to the collection of construction taxes on or after the ef- 37 fective date of this 2009 &:t. 38 "SECTION 7. The amendments to OKS 320.179 by section 4 of this 2009 Act apply to the 39 collection of construction taxes on or after June 30, 2011. 40 "SECTION 8. This 2009 Act takes effect on the 91st day after the date on which the 41 regular session of t~_e Seventy-fifth Legislative Assembly adjourns sine die.". 42 HA to HB 2014 Page 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Current Year Financial Report - January through March 2010 Meeting Date: May 5,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg Department: Administrative Se E-Mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent Question: Does Council accept the quarterly report as presented? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council accept the quarterly report as presented Background: The Administrative Services Department submits reports to Council each quarter to report on budget compliance. The report also provides information that can be used to compare current performance with previous years and quarters. This report includes the first nine months of the fiscal year and is an indicator of how the end of year will look. It also is used to validate or adjust much of the information included in the proposed budget for the ensuing year. The reports are intended to present information in formats consistent with the department, fund and business activity presentations included in the adopted FY 2009-2010 budget document andthe upcoming end of year report. Unaudited, detailed balance sheets, revenues and expenditure reports are available for your review in the Administrative Service Department office. Related City Policies: City of Ashland Financial Management Policies, Budget Document Appendix Council Options: Couricil may accept this report as presented, recommend modifications as discussed or defer acceptance (takes no action) awaiting further information or clarification. Potential Motions: This report is on the Consent Agenda and can be approved with other items. Ifremoved from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion one of the following motions may be employed: A. Council moves to accept the financial report as presented. B. Council moves to accept the report as modified by discussion. C. Council takes no action pending further information or clarification. Page 1 of2 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Attachments: Attached is the City of Ashland financial report for the period ended March 31, 2010. This report includes: 1. Financial Narrative 2. Summary of Cash and Investments as of March 31 for the last two years 3. Combined Statement of Financial Position City Wide 4. Schedule of Revenues by Fund 5. Schedule of Budgetary Compliance per Resolution #2009-15 amended by Council action for supplemental budgets and transfers of appropriations 6. Schedule of Expenditures by Fund The numbers presented are unaudited and unadjusted. Page 2 of2 r.l' Financial Narrative Summary of Cash and Investments provides an understanding of changes in the City's cash position across funds and investment types. The city-wide cash balance has increased 16% or $3,077,738 between fiscal years at the end of March. Cash balances improved $45,680 in this quarter. The total cash balance of $22.3 million will probably remain stable through to the end of the fiscal year but there will be significant changes in individual funds as property tax proceeds are heavily drawn upon for operations. For example, last fiscal year the General Fund and Ashland Parks & Recreation funds each declined over $500,000 between March 31 and June 30. Each fund varies for its own reasons but it should be noted that only CDBG, Debt Service and Insurance Services funds have cash balances lower than they were last year. All others, including funds that are capital project oriented (enterprises) are showing increased balances and reserves due to rate adjustments and deferring most capital expenditures. The Capital Improvement Fund cash balance increased the most, almost doubling the prior year balance. This is due to ongoing F&B tax proceeds and intemal charges for projects with very little (11 %) of the budget having been spent to date. This will allow prepayment of the debt on the CDES building in the coming year if approved through the budget process. The distribution of cash and investment balances has changed considerably between years. Besides having $3 million more in total cash, the City RecorderlTreasurer has reduced the amount held in General Banking Accounts by $770,000, added $1.8 million to the Local Govemment Investment Pool and increased the other City Investments by $2.0 million more than a year ago. The Combined Statement of Financial Position is similar to presentations in the annual financial report. It is intended to provide the reader an overall sense of the City's financial position at the present time. Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance (EFB) is $22.5 million, about $2.7 million more than last year at this time. The balance is 44.6% more than the budgeted city-wide EFB of $15.6 million. When budgeted, FY 2010 was expected to have $584,211 less carry forward from FY 2009. Revenues for FY 2010 have been slightly better than projected and departments have held costs where possible. All of these contribute to a larger EFB at the y.. mark than budgeted for the year. This balance should remain stable even through June, depending on tourism, construction and capital project activities to year end. Revenues and Budaetarv Resources at March 31, 2010 total $44,717,308 as compared to total year-to-date requirements of $42,149,116 which results in a $2,568,192 increase to Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance. This is $6.4 PaRe 1 of6 rA' million more (positive variance) in EFB than the City's Adopted budget of a $3.8 million reduction during the year. There are many variances, up and down, contributing to this change but one category that accounts for most of that amount is Capital Outlay at $6.8 million under budget. Capital project timing during the last quarter will impact this variance as will utility sales and tax collections from the various accounts. Other important factors to remember are weather (water and electric revenues) and tourism (transient occupancy and food & beverage tax revenues) that could impact the total by year end. FY 2009-2010 Total Revenue (on a city-wide basis) are up 2.8% over the prior year. General tax receipts are up because of the added property tax rates levied in 2010 for various activities, the increased TOT rate and increased revenue from utility franchise fees. No external borrowing has been done. this year and the $80,000 inter-fund loan was paid back to the Water Fund by the Airport Fund. The $357,089 Transfer In primarily represents amounts paid between funds for debt service. Total ReQuirements are at 62.5% of the annual budget for the first nine months of the year with Personal Services at 72.9% and Materials and Services at 69.8%. These percentages of budget are higher than the prior year percentages indicating a higher use of the budgeted amounts and less "spare room" in departmental appropriations. Debt Service is 67.3% of budget, also indicating "tighter" budgeting on what had to be paid for the year. Since capital projects were reduced, minimizing the need for borrowing, less was appropriated for potential debt service payments, resulting in a higher percentage of actual to budget. As stated above, Capital Outlay is low at 12.1 % of the annual budget and is $1.9 million less than expended in the prior year at this point in time. BudQetarv ReQuirements activity includes the $357,089 Transfer Out mentioned above and $80,000 paid back in internal loans. Contingency has been reduced to $1,507,000 as of March 31 representing a reduction $213,000 (12.4%) for unanticipated expenses. Additional transfers.from Contingency are scheduled for May and will likely occur before the end of June to ensure budget law compliance. The Schedule of Revenues by Fund provides an overview of total resources by fund for the year. Only the General Fund, Electric Fund, Insurance Services Fund and Par1<s and Recreation Fund are above the 75% mar1<. In all four cases the revenue streams for those funds naturally help to exceed the 75% at this point in that they are seasonal (Electric) or rely heavily upon large tax distributions in the first three quarters. PallO 2 of6 rA' More telling information is found later in this report in the individual fund statement narratives to help the reader get a .sense. of how the year is progressing. The Schedule of Budgetary Compliance is intended to present expenditures on a budget basis by fund consistent with the resolution that adopted appropriations for the year. (See the compliance section of the budget document.) Appropriations are as adopted except for those adjusted by the resolutions identified in the heading. The identified resolutions represent supplemental budgets and transfers of appropriations to remain compliant with Oregon Budget Law. To date many departments and funds have been adjusted through a supplemental budget for new revenue streams like grants or loans or unusual expenses that were addressed by a transfer from Contingency. Staff anticipates more adjustments in the last quarter as new revenues are identified or to protect against cost overruns. The Schedule of Expenditures by Fund is a summary report that balances the schedule for revenues on page 3. The totals for this report track closely with revenues but the reader should consider the information provided below for a better understanding of revenues and expenditures to date. An overview by fund is as follows: General Fund - Total revenues are 77.6% and expenditures are 69.4% with $400,000 in Cantingency unused. Charges for Services are 79.0% and taxes are 79.1 % of budget, respectively. The budget includes a $547,292 reduction in ending fund balance but there has been an $800,454 increase this year to date. In the prior year the EFB reduced $100,000 in the last quarter and similar activity in 2010 would result in a $2.8 million carry forward. ,This would require consistent revenue streams, continued reduced expenditures and no use of the contingency. Staff estimated the carry forward at June 30, 2010, to be over $2.1 million and that should be easily met. CDBG Fund - Actual Revenue and Expenditures are well below budget and consistent with activities year to date but additional expenditures and reimbursements are expected in the last quarter of the year as part of the recent Council approval of programs. Reserve Fund - Newly created for FY 2010, the balance is $115,911 with 53.7% of the Transfers In realized. Staff is projecting an EFB of approximately $150,000. Street Fund - A positive cash flow year-to-date has been recorded with $2.3 million in all resources and $2.0 million in operational and capital expenses. Limited capital project expenses have occurred as some projects are delayed and others await the master plan review. No external financing has been done. PaRe3of6 rA' This fund's EFB should exceed the $2.6 million anticipated carry forward budgeted in FY 2011. Airport Fund - Actual Expenditures exceed revenues due to the $80,000 payback of intemal borrowing to the Water Fund. Accruals resulted in a negative cash balance at the March 31 cut off but that shortage was resolved in April. Capital projects for the airport are now included in the CIP Fund. Capital Improvements Fund - Total Revenues are 39.3% in that no Intergovemmental money for projects has been received. Likewise, very litUe in capital project costs have been incurred, resulting in a $339,600 positive cash flow for the year. The EFB is $1.78 million at March 31 and $2.25 million is projected for carry forward. Tax receipts from F&B and reimbursement of qualifying expenses on projects to date will help this fund meet that target. Debt Service Fund - Taxes are at 92.0% of budget, Intemal charges are at 83.4% and payments on debt are 76.9% of budget. Expenditures to date exceed Requirements by over $273,000 and staff anticipates the fund will end the year below the budgeted fund balance of approximately $1.15 million but close to the $743,501 carry forward budgeted to start FY 2011. This fund's EFB needs to be increased over the next few years. Water Fund - Resources and requirements are nearly balanced with a $54,486 negative cash flow, year to date. This is better than the prior year (if you exclude extemal financing done in FY 2009) and was only made possible by the significant water rate increase approved in April, 2009. Increases in the Spring of 2010 will help to restore the EFB but it still falls short of target due to restricted balances. Staff will have to closely monitor. treatment costs and capital expenditures to meet or exceed the $1.8 million EFB needed to start FY 2011. Wastewater Fund - Revenues and Expenses for the year are nearly equal at the end of the third quarter with a $104,826 positive cash flow. This was made possible by caps on expenditures, capital projects being postponed and a significant rate increase last Spring. The fund has a large ending fund balance at this point of $3.8 million with about $1 million unrestricted, even after staff got DEa to lower the reserved cash account to about $875,000. Thus, almost 97% would have been restricted without that change and the $125,000 unrestricted would fall short of all targets for operating EFB. Staff recommends that the City continue to work toward a large unrestricted EFB to guard against negative cash flows when the DEa debt service is made. Electric Fund - Total Revenues and Expenses are nearly equal with a $106,919 negative cash flow. Sales are up $174,000 (2%) but miscellaneous revenues are down. Expenses are up $215,000 (2.25%) over the prior year. However, the Ending Fund Balance carried forward from FY 2009 was $258,000 greater than budgeted for this year. These things combined cause the fund to meet the target Palle 4 of6 r.l' ending fund balance of approximately $1.5 million. Even with underground work related to the 1-5 Exit 14 construction work the fund should meet the $1,779,779 carry forward proposed in the FY 2011 budget. This is facilitated by wholesale power costs to the city being at their lowest in the last quarter of the year due to Spring run off in the Columbia gorge, the source of our power. Telecommunications Fund - Total Revenue is at 73.9'Yo of budget and slightly above last year's amount with greatly reduced interest earnings and no miscellaneous income this year. Expenditures (including this fund's $356,000 portion of the Debt Service on AFN GO bonds) exceed revenues by only $14,548 at the 75% mark. Fund balance is stable at over $915,000 and is expected to remain that high through the end of year to help with FY 2011 debt service. Central Services Fund - Revenues are at $4.3 million (73.7%) with Expenditures at $4.2 million or 70.2% of budget. This results in a positive cash flow of $89,047 or $246,695 better than what was budgeted for the year. All departments are below the 75% mark at March 31 but many are very close and are forecasting added costs in the last quarter. The fund has needed to transfer 20% ofthe $169,000 contingency budgeted for the year and staff expects more requests in the next two months. Despite contingency use the fund should meet the $244,363 carry forward projected in the Proposed FY 2011 budget. Insurance Services Fund - Expenses total $620,683 (68.1 % of budget) representing annual premiums being paid to date, consultant expenses and claims costs. Revenues are $518,755 resulting in a $101,928 reduction to ending fund balance. This is within reason of the $230,933 reduction budgeted this year and the fund should meet the carry forward budgeted for FY 2011. This balance is about half of what staff would recommend and we will have to monitor this fund over the next few years to rebuild reserves needed to protect against large claims. Eauipment Fund - Revenues are 70.9% of the budget and Expenditures are at 50.0% resulting in a $507,476 increase in the fund balance. Equipment replacements have lagged with a majority of the expenses for the year occurring in the 4th quarter. The fund should come close to or exceed the amount budgeted as carry forward in FY 2011. Cemeterv Trust Fund - Revenues are $18,581 to date and Transfers to the General Fund for Interest earned are $5,502. This adds $13,079 to EFB for a total of $801,832. Parks and Recreation Fund - Revenues are ahead of Expenditures at this point by $956,432, primarily due to advanced collections of property taxes. Charges for services are at $619,782 or 81.1 % but $43,000 less than the prior year. Divisional expenses average 69.5% with reductions between years in the Parks Division and Recreation but not in Golf. The $2.3 million ending fund balance will PaRe5of6 ri.' continually drop through June as expenditures funded by property taxes reduce the amount. APRC needs approximately $1.5 million in carry forward to pay for July through October expenses since property taxes are not received in any sizable amount until November. Staff believes Parks will hit the carry forward target. Ashland Youth Activities Levv Fund - The levy ended in FY 2008 so Parks only accounts for prior years' receipts and their distribution to the school district here in subsequent years. The amount budgeted should reduce each year until closing the fund is agreed upon. Parks CapitallmDrovements Fund - Little interest earnings and no transfers in for projects means only $4,734 in revenue. No expenditures were budgeted this year so the EFB has grown to $171,725. Unaudited, detailed balance sheets, revenues and expenditure reports and fund statements are available for your review in the Administrative Services Department office should you require any additional information. PallO 6 of6 r.t. , City of Ashland Summary of Cash and Investments March 31, 2010 Balance Balance Chango From Fund March 31, 2010 March 31, 2009 FY 2009 General Fund $ 3,113.468 $ 2,818.284 S 295.184 Community Block Grant Fund 16,735 50.950 (34.215) Reserve Fund 115.911 115.911 Street Fund 2,736.549 2.304,003 432.546 Airport Fund (368) 84.968 (85.334) CapitallmprovemenlS Fund 1.818.618 919.757 898.861 Debt Service Fund 799.633 1,111.149 (311,516) Water Fund 1,972.560 1.503,849 468,711 Wastewater Fund 3.672.886 3.609,056 63.830 Electric Fund 967.584 610.002 357,582 Telecommunications Fund 797.241 647.409 '149.832 Cen~aI Services Fund 483.111 332,151 150,960 Insurance Services Fund 893,775 977,730 (83.955) Equipment Fund 1,361.808 .1,099.752 262.056 Cemetery Trust Fund 802,898 784.015 18.883 $ 19.552.411 $ 16.853.075 S 2,699,336 ParI<s & Recreation Agency Fund 2.709.899 2.331,497 378,402 2,709.899 2.331.497 378.402 T olal Cash Distrtbution $ 22.262.310 $ 19.184.572 $ 3.077,738 Manner of Investment Pelly Cash $ 3,210 $ 3,560 S (350) General Banking Accounts 697.282 1.468.108 (770.826) Local Government Inv. Pool 12,045,210 10,253.057 1.792.153 City Investments 9.516.808 7.459.847 2.056.761 Total Cash and Investments $ 22.262.310 S 19.184.572 S 3.077,738 Dollar Distribution Cash Balanco Distribution ~.n~ Cbno . '''''' ./ulgn"onls. TI\lSl$8tll,S32. """.- "" S4OO.~.", r '" Insu'~e~ .... I E~'_~(i;i ,,"""- S6.5J6~t:,.,. -.~ -..- """'""'" "" . . -.$12.197,560', OeblReserved, .- " 54% ~.......r $1.674,923.8'.4 .~ .. ou.._. AssetForteiled ,- "" $510.929.2% $140,91",1% ,r_~~3IfY20JOQ 04'1u.'010 City of Ashland Combined Statement of Financial Position City Wide For the mnth month cnded March 31, 2010 / Fiscal Year 2010 Percent Fiscal Year 2009 Year.To-Oate Fiscal Year 2010 Collec1ed I Year.T..Date Resource Summary Ac1uals Amended Expended Balance Ac1uals Revenues Taxes $ 14,500,022 $ 18,157,555 79.9% $ (3,657.534) $ 13,795.535 Licenses and Permits 309.733 612,500 50.6% (302,767) 615,006 Intergovemmenlal Revenues 1,318.437 5,680.116 23.2% (4,361,679) 1.160.044 C/1aJges for Services - Rate & Intemal 26,686,121 35,897,405 74.3% (9,211,284) 25,127,790 Charges for Services - Misc. Service fees 449.091 686,170 67.4% (217,079) 698.246 System Developmenl C/1aJges 219.698 78.450 280.0% 141,248 206,825 Fines and Forfeitures 132,425 142,000 93.3% (9.575) 115,901 Assessment Payments 2,726 18.110 15.1% (15.384) 24,412 Inlerest on Investments 145.987 375,300 38.9% (229.313) 265.125 Miscellaneous Revenues 515.981 465.165 110.9% 50.816 1.071,472 Total Revenues 44,280,219 62,092,nl 71.3% (17,812,551) 43,080,356 BUdgetary Resources, Other Financing Sources 965.600 0.0% (965.600) 448.961 Inle/fund Loans 80.000 80.000 100.0% Transfers In 357.089 513.546 69.5% (156.457) 246,291 T olal BudgetaJy Rl!SOIJltOS 437.089 1.559.146 28.0% (1.122.057) 695.252 Total Resources 44,717,308 63,651,917 70.3% (18,934,608) 43,775,608 Requirements by Classification Personal Services 16.562.936 22,735.023 72.g% 6.172,087 16,870.100 Materials and Services 20,791.736 29.n4.917 69.8% 8,983.181 20.590.245 Debt Service 3.423.416 5.088.701 67.3% 1,665,285 3.181.896 Total OperaUng Expenditures 40,778,088 57,598,641 70.9% 18,820,553 40,642,241 Capilal Construction Capilal OuUay 933,939 7.740.854 12.1% 6,806.915 2.856.820 Interfund LOans 80.000 80.000 100.0% 300.000 Transfers Oul 357,089 513.546 69.5% 156.457 246.291 Contingencies 1,507.000 0.0% 1.507.000 Tolal8udgelaly Requirements 437.089 2.100.546 20.8% 1.663.457 546.291 Total Requirements 42,149,116 67,440.043 62.5"- 25,290,925 44,045,352 Excess (Deficiency) of Resources over Requirements 2.568,192 (3.788,126) 167.8% 6,356,318 (269,744) Worl<ing Capilal Carryover 19.935.264 19.351.053 103.0% 584.211 20.052.793 Unappropriated Ending Fund ealance $ 22,503,456 S 15,562,927 144.6% $ 6.940,529 $ 19,783,049 'rftll'd.l~u.Jlrv2DJO. "".... 2 City of Ashland Schedule of Revenues By Fund Fo.tho ninth month ended March 31, 2010 Fiscal Ve., 2010 Fiscal Year 2009 Vear.To-Date Fiscal Vear Percent to Vear.To-Date Revenues by Fund Actuals 2010 Amended Budget Balance Actuals City General Fund $ 11,221,955 $ 14.467,838 77.6% S (3,245,683) $ 10.873.829 Community IlIocI< Grant Fund 24,586 493,958 5.0% (469.372) 28,143 Reserve Fund 115.911 215.000 53.9% (99.089) SlJeet Fund 2.326,580 5.427,095 42.9% (3.100,515) 2,256,941 Airport Fund 75.303 108,000 69.7% (32,697) 71.541 Capital Improvements Fund 1,126,812 2,870,055 39.3% (1,743.243) 1.455,823 Debt Service Fund 1,565.576 2,086.296 75.0% (520,720) 1.576,593 Water Fund 3,559.005 4,806.295 74.0% (1.247.290) 3.457.703 Wastewater Fund 3.348,149 5.480.125 61.1% (2,131,976) 2,950,569 EJectricFund 9.676.846 12,647.900 76.5% (2,971,054) 9.619,013 Telecommunications Fund 1,375,439 1,861,500 73.9% (486,061) 1.346,500 Central Services Fund 4.281,126 5.811.850 73.7% (1,530.724) 3,867.802 Insurance Services Fund 518,755 680.000 76.3% (161.245) 801.941 Equipment Fund 1.099.263 1,550,200 70.9% (450,937) 976.052 Cemetery Trust Fund 18,561 40,500 45.9% (21.919) 27,529 Tolal City Componenls 40,333,887 58,546,612 68.9% (18,212,725) 39,129,980 Parks and Recreation Component ParI<s and Recreation Fund 4.351.145 4,921.305 68.4% (570,160) 4,576.276 Ashland Youth AdJvities Levy Fund 27,542 100,000 27.5% (72,458) 62,627 Par1<s Capilallmprovement Fund 4,734 84.000 5.6% (79.266) 6,726 T alai Parks Componenls 4,383,421 5,105,305 85.9% (721,884) 4,645,629 T alai City 44,717,308 63,651,917 70.3% (18,934,609) 43,175,608 Working Capllal Carryover 19.935.264 19,351.053 103.0% 584,211 20,052.793 T alai Budget $ &4,652,572 $ 83,002,970 17.9% $ (18,350,398) $ 63,828,401 'r-....wt""-,,,,",JlfY2Qlo.4 """". 3 City of Ashland Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2009-15 As Amended by Resolutions # 2009-23,2009-30,2009-32,2010-02,2010-03 For the ninth month ended March 31, 2010 '~RIIpo1l.b3IFY20lO.lb 04I1U20IO 4 Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2009.15 As Amended by Resolutions # 2009-23,2009-30,2009-32,2010-02,2010-03 For the ninth month ended March 31,2010 Fiscal Vear 2010 Vear-To-Oate Fiscal Vear 2010 Percent Actuals Amended Used Balance Capital Improvement. Fund Personal Services 133,951 181,905 73.6% 47,954 Materials and Services 263,217 361,905 72.7"10 98,688 Capital Outlay 154,451 1,408,690 11.0% 1,254,239 Transfers 235,593 278,046 84.7% 42,453 Contingency 50,000 0.0% 50,000 Total Capital Improvements Fund 787,212 2,280,546 34.5% 1,493,334 ~ Debt Service Fund Debt Service 1,838,927 2,390,535 76.9% 551.608 Total Debt Service Fund 1,838,927 2,390,535 76.9% 551.608 Water Fund Electric - Conservation 129,345 178.292 72.5% 48,947 Public Wor1<s . Forest lands Management Division 133,186 260,420 51.1% 127,234 Public Worl<s . Water Supply 146,237 315,616 46.3% 169.379 PubrlC Worl<s. Water Treatment 722.027 1,120,748 64.4%' 398,721 Public Wor1<s . Water Division 1,797,908 2,436,783 73.8% 638,875 Public Wor1<s . Reimbursement SOC's 6,435 328,750 2.0% 322,315 Public Wor1<s . Improvement SOC's 16,183 266,250 6.1% 250,067 Public Worl<s . Debt SDC's 123,445 123,446 100.0% 1 Contingency 139.000 0.0% 139.000 Total Water Fund 3,613,490 5.602,823 62.3% 2,189,333 WasteWater Fund Public Wor1<s. Wastewater Collection 1,175,564 1,658,499 70.9% 482,935 Public Wor1<s. Wastewater Treatment 1,205.549 2,155,544 55.9% 949,995 Public Wor1<s . Reimbursements SOC's 1,289 127,890 1.0% 126,601 Public Wor1<s - Improvements SOC's 615 550,000 0.1% 549,385 Debt Service 860,306 1,877,557 45.8% 1,017,251 Contingency 150.000 0.0% 150,000 Total Wastewater Fund 3,243,323 6,519,490 49.7% 3,276,167 Electric Fund Electric. ConselVation Division 590,917 744,498 79.4% 153.581 Electric. Supply 4,283,548 5.905,204 72.5% 1,621,658 Electric - Distribution 4,202,190 5,592,581 75.1% 1,390,391 Electric - Transmission 683,630 903,600 ' 75.7% 219.970 Debt Service 23.479 25,106 0.0% 1,629 Contingency 212,000 0.0% 212,000 Total Electric Fund 9,783,764 13.382,991 73.1% 3.599,227 Of'"~~1IbI31fY20lo.da 0111&'2010 5 Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2009-15 As Amended by Resolutions # 2009-23, 2009.30, 2009.32, 2010-02, 2010-03 For the ninth month ended March 31, 2010 Fiscal Vear 2010 Vear-To-Oate Fiscal Vear 2010 Percent Actuals Amended Used Balance TelecommunlcaUons Fund IT - Internet .. 806,889 1,364,228 59.1% 557,339 IT - High Speed Access 227,098 387,834 58.6% 180,736 Debt - To Debt Service Fund ,. 356,000 356,000 100.0% Contingency 100.000 0.0% 100.000 Total- TelecommunlcatJons Fund 1,389,987 2,208.062 63.0% 818,075 .. Note: In Inlemel appropriation Central Services Fund Administration Department 933,763 1,326,566 70.4% 392,803 IT - Computer Services Division 833,534 1,145,133 72.8% 311,599 Administrative Services Department 1,237,908 1,679,890 73.7% 441,982 City Recorder 218,064 298,539 73.0% 80,475 Public WorI<s - Administration and Engineering 968,810 1,383,370 70.0% 414,560 Contingency 136,000 0.0% 138,000 Total Central Services Fund 4,192,079 5.969,498 70.2% 1,777,419 Insurance Services Fund Personal Services 58,770 80,130 73.3% 21,360 Materials and Services 561,913 680,803 82.5% 118,890 Contingency 150,000 0.0% 150.000 Total Insurance Services Fund 620,683 910,933 68.1% 290.250 Equipment Fund Personal Services 215,172 288,120 74.7% 72,948 Materials and Services 346,427 515,009 67.3% 168,582 Capital Outlay 30.188 334,000 9.0% 303,812 Contingency 47,000 0.0% 47,000 Total Equipment Fund 591,787 1,184,129 50.0% 592,342 Cemetery Trust Fund Transfers 5.502 20.000 27.5% 14.498 Total Cemetery Trust Fund 5.502 20,000 27.5% 14,498 .~Rlp:rtl.bllf't20IO_" .....,.. 6 Schedule of Budgetary Compliance Per Resolution #2009-15 As Amended by Resolutions # 2009-23, 2009-30, 2009-32, 2010-02, 2010-03 For the ninth month ended March 31, 2010 Fiscal Year 2010 Vear-To-Date Fiscal Year 2010 Pe",ent Actuals Amended Used Balance Partts and Recreation Fund Parks Division 2,318,531 3,319,100 69.9% 1,000,569 Recreation Division 767,933 1,115,875 68.8% 347,942 Golf Division 308,219 398,420 n.4% 90,201 Contingency 50,000 0.0% 50,000 Total Partts and Recreation Fund 3,394,683 4.683,395 69.5% 1,468,712 Youth Activities Levy Fund Materials and SefVices 37,914 100,000 37.9% 62,086 Total Youth ActlvlUes Levy Fund 37,914 100,000 37.9% 62,086 Pam Capital Improvement Fund Capital Outlay N/A Total Partts Capital Improvement Fund N/A Total Appropriations S 42,149,116 S 67,440,043 62.5% $ 25,290,927 '~RIpcrlIob3IFY20ID'" lWlt.'20IO 7 City of Ashland Schedule of Expenditures By Fund March 31, 2010 Fiscal Year 2010 Fiscal Year 2009 Year.To-Date Fiscal Year Percent Year.To-Date Requirements by Fund Actuals 2010 Amended Expended Balance Actuals City Funds General Fund $ 10,421,501 $ 15,015,130 69.4% $ 4,593,629 $ 10,668,731 Community Block Grant Fund 60,063 493,958 16.2% 413,895 22,868 Reserve Fund N/A Street Fund 1,971,901 6.076,264 32.5% 4,104,363 2,031,594 Airport Fund 176,300 202,287 87.2% 25,987 73,521 Capital Improvements Fund 787,212 2,280,546 34.5% 1,493,334 1,541,981 Debt Service Fund 1,838,927 2,390,535 76.9% 551,608 1,706,155 Waler Fund 3,613,490 5,802,823 62.3% 2,189,333 3,528,453 Wastewater Fund 3,243,323 6,519,490 49.7% 3,276,167 2,964,584 Electric Fund 9,783,764 13,382,991 73.1% 3,599,227 9,568,577 T eleoommunlcations Fund 1,389,987 2,208,062 63.0% 818.075 1,431,231 Central Services Fund 4,192,079 5,969,498 70.2% 1,777,419 4,187,639 Insurance Services Fund 620,683 910,933 68.1% 290,250 1,053,340 Equipment Fund 591,787 1,184,129 50.0% 592,342 1,199,673 Cemetery Trust Fund 5,502 20,000 27.5% 14,498 11,134 T olal City Components 38,716,519 62,456,646 62.0% 23,740,127 39,989,481 Parks and Recreation Component Parks and Recreation Fund 3,394.683 4,683,395 69.5% 1,488,712 3,706,899 Youth Activities Levy Fund 37,914 100,000 37.9% 62.086 190,384 Par1<s Capital Improvements Fund NIA 158,589 Total Parks Components 3,432,597 4,983,395 68.9% 1,550,798 4,055,871 Total Requirements by Fund 42,149,116 67,440,043 62.5% 25,290,925 44,045,352 Ending Fund Balance 22,503,456 15,562,927 144.6% 6,940.529 19.783,049 Total Budget $ 64,652,572 $ 83,002,970 77.9% $ 32,231,454 $ 63,828,401 , or~RlpMu.w]lFY20IO,1\s OCIIt.'2QIO 8 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication A Resolution Transferring Appropriations within the FY 2009-2010 Budget Meeting Date: May 4, 20 I 0 Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg Department: Finance E-Mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent Question: Should Council approve a resolution to adjust budget appropriations for changes in operational expenses to remain in compliance with Oregon Budget Law? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution to transfer appropriations within specified funds for stated reasons. Background: There are three ways in which to change appropriations after the Budget is adopted. I. A transfer of appropriations .decreases an appropriation and increases another. This is the . simplest budget change allowed under Oregon Budget law. This does not increase the overall budget. This is approved by a City Council resolution. 2. A supplemental budget of less than 10 percent of total appropriations within an individual fund follows a process similar to the transfer of appropriations. This process includes a notice in the paper prior to Council taking actio.". 3. A supplemental budget in excess of 10 percent of total appropriations requires a longer process. This process includes a notice in the paper and a public hearing prior to the council taking action. A transfer of appropriations (Item #1 above) is needed to adjust the FY 2009-2010 budget for the following reasons: . A Transfer of $36,500 will be needed from the Capital Improvement Fund Contingency to Transfers Out in the same fund, to provide appropriations for a debt service transfer that was omitted in the FY 2009-2010 budget. . A Transfer of $20,000 will be needed from the Central Services Fund Contingency "to Administrative Services, Personal Services ($17,500) and Materials & Services ($2,500) for bank pay offs, increased over time and increased contractual services costs in the same fund. This is the THIRD transfer of appropriations request for FY 2009-2010. Attached is a resolution for your approval. The recommended changes in the budget are explained after each request and in the accompanying departmental memoranda. Related City Policies: None. Page I of2 r., CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: Council may accept this transfer of appropriations as presented, recommend modifications as discussed or defer acceptance (takes no action) awaiting further information or clarification. Potential Motions: Council moves to adopt the transfer of appropriations resolution, amending the FY 2009-2010 budget. Attachments: Resolution transferring appropriations within the 2009-2010 Budget Memo from Administrative Services Director requesting transfers Page 20f2 ~.l' RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 2009-2010 BUDGET THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Because of the circumstances stated below, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland determine that it is necessary to transfer appropriations as foliows: Caoitallmorovement Fund To: Transfers From: Contingency $36.500 $36,500 To Transfer appropriations from Contingency to the Capital Improvement Fund's Transfer for paying debt service. This was an oversight made during the budget input. Central Services Fund To: Administrative Service Department From: Contingency $20.000 $20,000 To Transfer appropriations from Contingency to Administrative Services Department for payoff of banks for an employee who is retiring, anticipated overtime expense related to the retirement, overtime related to budget preparation and increased contract costs for parking enforcement. TOTAL To: From: Department Appropriations Contingency $56 500 $56 500 SECTION 2. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of May, 2010 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of May, 2010: John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicelio, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 , . CITY Of ASHLAND Memo DATE: April 28, 2010 TO: Martha Bennett FROM: Lee Tuneberg RE: Need for a $36,500 Transfer of Appropriations in Capital Improvements Fund and a $20,000 Transfer of Appropriations in Central Services. Capital Improvement Fund An input error occurred in the FY 2090-20 I 0 budget preparation. The amount budgeted as transfers from the Capital Improvements Fund to Debt Service was $36,500 less than the actual debt payment requirement for the year. A transfer from Contingency to Transfers Out in the CIP Fund will allow the correct amount to be paid to the Debt Service Fund, covering actual costs. Central Service Fund Several conditions for FY 2009-2010 have changed in the Administrative Services Department warranting this request for a transfer from Contingency. Even though the department is doing what it can to absorb these costs, a transfer is the safest way to avoid a budget violation on necessary costs. A division manager has announced her retirement in April 2010. There will be a considerable amount in leave banks to payoff at that time and additional costs in the department as others work extra to meet deadlines and manage workloads. Estimate is $12,500. In addition to bank and overtime costs related to the retirement, we are experiencing unusual overtime costs in another area to meet the workload for budget due to lagging schedules and adjustments to many segments of the proposed and final documents. Estimate is $5,000. Finally, there are added costs relating to parking enforcement including the work to convert out-dated pay machines at the Hargadine parking structure and personnel costs for infrequent, after 5 PM enforcement. The added enforcement does generate additional revenue for other funds but a supplemental is not appropriate at this time. Estimate is $2,500. FINANCE DEPARTMENT O. L. Tuneberg, Director 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 WYM'.ashland.or.us Tel: 541-488.5300 Fax: 541-488-5311 ffi: 800-735-2900 ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Water Master Plan Update- Ashland Water Advisory Committee Member Selection May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught Public Works E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us N/A Secondary Contact: Pieter Smeenk Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Agenda Question: Does tne Council wish to appoint Donald Morris as an "at-large" member ofthe Ashland Water Advisory Committee (A W AC)? Staff Recommendation: Staffrecommends that Council approve the appointment of Donald Morris as an "at-large" member of the Ashland A W AC whose charge is the Water Master Plan update. Background: At the March 16,2010 City Council meeting, the Council approved the Mayor recommendation to appoint Vanya Sloan to one of the three "at-large" members of A WAC. Since that meeting, Vanya Sloan elected to withdraw her name from the A WAC due to scheduling conflicts leaving one "at- large" seat open. The Mayor is now recommending that Donald Morris be appointed to fill the final vacant "at-large" committee member position. Even though there was a vacant position on the new eleven (II) member committee, the first A WAC kick-off meeting was held April 15, 2010. If the Council approves the Mayor's appointment, Mr. Morris will be able to attend the next meeting which is scheduled for May 5th from 7:00 to 9:00 pm at the Ashland High School Commons. (This meeting is an open house in which all members of the Council and the public are invited.) As a reminder, the current A W AC membership list is as follows: I. Donna Mickley, Forest Service 2. Darrell Boldt, SDC Committee 3. Alex Amarotico, Chamber of Commerce 4. John Williams, Forest Lands Commissioner 5. Amy Patton, Environmental Advocate 6. Leslie Adams, Environmental Advocate 7. Pat Acklin, At-Large 8. Donna Rhee, At-Large 9. Kate Jackson, City Council Member 10. Carol Voisin, City Council Member II. , At-Large Page t of2 H:\ShiplctD\Council\Council Communication\2010\lvlay 3 and 4\05041 0 A W AC Committee Appt.CC.doc ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND Council Options: (I) The Council could decide to appoint Donald Morris to the A W AC Committee; (2) The Council could decide not to appoint Donald Morris and leave the post vacant; (3) The Council could decide to appoint ( ) to the A W AC Committee. Potential Motions: (I) Move to appoint Donald Morris to the A W AC Committee; (2) Move not to appoint Donald Morris and leave the post vacant; (3) Move to appoint ( ) to the A W AC Committee. Attachments: None. Page20f2 H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\201 OlJv1ay 3 and 4\050410 A W AC Committee Appt.CC.doc ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Approval of Change Order for Dry Creek Landfill May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Mike Faught Public Works E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us Finance Secondary Contact: David Gies Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent Statement: Will the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve a Change Order for an additional amount of$55,000 (total aggregate cost change of 47%) for disposing ofbiosolids during the remainder of the current fiscal year? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the additional amount be approved. Background: On July 21,2009, the City Council approved a Sole Source Procurement for a term of three (3) years- July 1,2009 to June 30,2012 - to dispose ofbiosolids at Dry Creek Landfill. The amount budgeted for FY 2009-2010 was $115,000.00. After the original Sole Source Procurement was approved by Council, Dry Creek Landfill raised their prices. The additional amount of $55,000.00 will be required for biosolids disposal during the remainder of the current fiscal year. Related City Policies: Section 2.50.020 Pnblic Contracting Officer's Anthority B. Delegation of Authority. The Council, delegates authority to the Public Contracting Officer to execute amendments or change orders to contracts upon the following conditions: 1. The original contract has been approved by Legal Counsel, or is otherwise exempt. 11. If an amendment or change order, the total aggregate cost change does not exceed 35 percent (35%) ofthe original contract amount. Council Options: The City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, can approve or decline to approve the change order (total aggregate cost change of 47%). Potential Motions: The City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, can approve or decline to approve the change order (total aggregate cost change of 47%). Attachments: None Page I of I ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Approval of an Amendment to the Personal Services Contract with Thornton Engineering May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Public Works' E-Mail: Finance Secondary Contact: Martha BeIJnet Estimated Time: James Olson, 541 552-2412 olsonj (a)ashland.or. us Morgan Wayman 552-2414 Consent Question: Will the Council approve a $10,750 contract amendment to the existing contract with Thornton Engineering for the design of the Liberty Street Local Improvement District (LID) project? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a $10,750 contract amendment to the existing contract with Thornton Engineering for the design ofthe Liberty Street LID project. Background: The original contract with Thornton Engineering for the design of the Liberty Street LID project was issued on April 14,2008 for $36,030.00. It has taken City staff and Thornton Engineering a full two years to complete the engineering due to numerous right of way, utility and property owner access Issues. Many of these issues were unforeseen in the original contract and were identified during the design process. It was necessary to address, redesign and add elements of construction to the project which in turn required that Thornton Engineering staff spend more time than originally anticipated. The additional work by the engineer amounts to $10,750 over the initial contract amount. Since this change is in excess of25% of the original contract amount, Council authorization is required. Design Process The City's design process for street improvement projects involves a high degree ofioteraction with adjacent property owners. The most intense and critical period of owner involvement is in the design phase and begins after an engineering consultant has been selected. The interaction with property owners may result in changes. Even though it is more involved, this process results in a design which both the property owners and the City are happy with. The amount of time spent on the Liberty Street LID process was greater than usual. Easement Acquisition Early in the design process it was discovered that much of the southerly portion of Liberty Street had been developed outside the actual deeded right-of-way. Although the right-of-way in this area is 40 feet wide, the actual traveled and opened portion of the street was shifted to the west resulting in approximately ten feet of traveled-on width located outside of the right-of-way. It was thus necessary to acquire easements from three property owners on the west side of the street. The negotiation process for these easements took nearly a year and resulted in several construction items offered as Page t of2 ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND consideration for the easements, thereby prolonging the engineering design time and adding unanticipated design elements to the proj ect. Extra Work Required As a result of negotiations with property owners, consultation with other City Departments and requests from property owners, the following design work was added to the engineering contract: 1. DEQ 1200C permit application; 2. Alternate alignments to accommodate the right-of-way; 3. Extending the sanitary sewer to the end of the project; 4. Replacing 350 feet of water main; 5. Additional retaining walls; 6. Design utility undergrounding; 7. Modifications to several driveways; 8. Revised road profile to accommodate driveway changes. Contract Amendment The original contract with Thornton Engineering, Inc. was for $36,030, an extremely beneficial contract for the City as staffs original estimate for engineering cost was $60,000. Even with the added amount of$IO,750, the resulting contract of$46,780 is still an excellent value and well within our budget. The City's engineering contracts are almost always based upon time and materials with a "not to exceed" limit. Thornton Engineering is one of the very few consultants that do not habitually use 100% of their contract limit. For that reason, it was necessary to ascertain if additional funds would be needed or if some of the extra work could be absorbed into the original contract amount. The extra work for this protect was unanticipated and resulted in costs that will exceeded the 25% change on contract limitation established by AMC 2.52. Therefore, staff is requesting authorization to fund the additional $10,750 engineering costs to complete this project. Related City Policies: AMC Seytion 2.52.050 requires that the Council approve all contracts amendments in excess of25% of the initial contract. In this instance, the amendment to the Thornton Engineering, Inc. represents a 29.9% increase. Council Options: . The Council may approve Amendment No. I to the Thornton Engineering contract in the amount of$10,750; · The Council may reject Amendment No. I to the Thornton Engineering contract. Potential Motions: · Move to approve Amendment No. I to the existing Thornton Engineering contract in the amount of$10,750; · Move to reject Amendment No. I to the existing Thornton Engineering contract. Attachments: Contract Amendment No. I Request for additional funds Page 2 of2 ~~, ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO.1 Engineering services contract made on the date specified below in Recital A between the City and Engineer as follows: Recitals: A. The following information applies to this contract: CITY: CITY OF ASHLAND ENGINEER: Thornton Engineering, Inc. City Hall PO Box 476 20 E. Main St. Address: Jacksonville OR 97530 Ashland, Oregon 97520 (541) 488-5347 FAX: (541) 488-6006 T ele: 541/899-1489 Fax: 541/899-3419 Date of this agreement: May 4, 2010 B: RFP Date: January 6, 2008 Prooosal Date: February 10, 2008 112.3 City Contfacting Officer: Michael R. Faught, Director of Public Works 112.4. Project: liberty Street Improvement 116.1. Engineer's Representative: Michael P. Thornton PE, President 118.3. Maximum Contract Amount: $36,030.00 B. AMENDMENT NO.1 1. Modification to "Services to be provided" Add services per attached proposal and cost estimate dated Apri/16, 2010 and made a part of this amendment. 2. Modification to "Compensation" A. Add cost of extra work = $10,780.00 B. Adjusted total contract amount = $46,780.00 CONSULTANT CITY BY BY Finance Director Fed. ID # REVEIWED AS TO CONTENT BY City Department Head Date: Coding: (for City use only) G:\pub-wrks\eng\04-21 Liberty Street\A_Admin\Eng Vendor1\Contract Documenls\04-21 Contract Amend Eng 4 2110.doc .re... THORNTON 81 fNGINHRING INC. April 16, 2010 Morgan Wayman, Project Manager City of Ashland, Public Works Engineering 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 Email: waymanm@ashland.or.us Subject: Scope Revision - Contract for Engineering Services Liberty Street Improvements, Ashland, OR Dear Morgan: Please find attached a Revised Scope and Cost of Services for the Liberty Street project. The original contract amount was 36,030.00. The revised Scope includes additional services which cost $10,750.00 for a revised contract amount of $46, 780.00. Please call me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Thornton Engineering, Inc. By:/l1~r'~ Michael P.Thornton, President Enclosures -.\---_...__ll_.._:~:__"_AL.I__.."I:L__. A"-__" :____..~___.._ "01\0\__..:__...1 _____ ,_...__.. I ~ III -'__ om" (541) 899.t489 Fax (541) 899'3419 P.O. 8oX476. 2&0 N. 3rd Street. JaCkSOnville. OR 97530 EXHIBIT A Scope and Cosi a/Services LIBERTY STREET IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON !IEM ACTIVITY Schematic Design 1 Topographic and Boundary Survey 2 Civil Sitework Field and Record Research 3 Attend Planning and Design Meetings (3 Meetings) Design Development/Construction Documents 4 On Site Stann Drainage Design 5 On Site Street Design Plan & Profile 6 All Pavement Section Design 7 Erosion & Sedim ent Control Plan 8 DEQ Application - t200C 9 Respond to Agency Revisions, Redlines and Requests 10 Prepare Final Plans 11 Civil Engineering Coordination and Administration Construction 12 Permits 13 Civil Sitework: Engineer's Const. Cost Estimate/Bid Schedule 14 Attend Pre-Construction Conference 15 Respond to Bid Inquiries 16 Respond to Construction Inquiries 17 Construction Observation 18 On Site Record Drawings CONSULTANT Subcontract with Polaris Surveying Thornton Engineering (TE) - Included TE- Included TE - Included TE. Included TE . Included TE - Included Not Included TE. Included TE - Included TE. Included , Not Included TE. Included TE . Included TE. Included TE . Included Owner's Representative - Not Included TE . Included Revision to Scope - 4/16/20010 19 Prepare Alternate Alignments to Accommodate R/W FIXED FEE TOTAL: 536.030.00 20 Sanitary Sewer Design 21 W.tcr System Design 22 Retaining Wall Design 23 Electrical Utility Design 24 . Driveway Modifications 25 Plan and Profile Revised Alignment Design 26 Additional Coordination & Administration TE . Included lc;' Included TE . Included 1E. Included TE. Included TE - Included IE - Included TE. Included Subtotal Revisions: 510,750.00 REVISED CONTRACT TOTAL: $46,780.00 Z;\PROPOSAl\Munidpal\Ashland\Uberty Street Improvemenls 2008\Revised scope and cost 4-16.10 4/16/2010 CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Intergovernmental Agreement with the Federal Bureau of Investigations for Reimbursement of Expenses Related to Participation in the Southern Oregon High-Tech Crimes Task Force May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Police Department E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Terry Holderness holdernet@ashland.or.us None Consent Question: Does the Council wish to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Federal Bureau of Investigations to participate in the Southern Oregon High-Tech Crimes Task Force (SOHTTF) in order to regionalize investigations related to high-tech and internet crimes? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council authorize the Police Chief to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Federal Bureau ofInvestigations to participate in the Southern Oregon High-Tech Crimes Task Force (SOHTTF) in order to regionalize investigations related to high-tech and internet CDmes Background: The Police Department presently handles all high-tech and internet related crimes occurring in the City of Ashland. Internet and high-tech crimes frequently cross jurisdictional boundaries. When the department finds links to additional crimes happening in another jurisdiction an evaluation of the case is made to determine whether the case is turned over to another jurisdiction, it is investigated jointly or we remain the primary investigating agency. All forensics related to these type of investigations are done by the Southern Oregon High-Tech Crimes Task Force. Due to staffing and funding issues SOHTTF has a back log of evidence that needs to be processed and is unable to do actual investigations related to high-tech crime. SOHTTF has entered into an agreement with the FBI to regionalize these types of investigations for agencies that are interested in participating. The FBI, the City of Central Point and the City of Medford have each agreed to assign one full time investigator to' the SOHTTF. Any agency that agrees to participate by assigning one investigator to work with SOHTTF on high-tech crime investigations for at least 60% of the investigators time will receive the following benefits: · Most high-tech or internet related crimes occurring with participation jurisdiction will be directly investigated by the SOHTTF. This should substantially reduce problems caused when investigating cases that cross jurisdictional lines. · The FBI will supply a vehicle and gas card used by the investigator assigned to the SOHTTF. . The FBI will pay up to $17,000 a year in overtime for the investigator assigned to SOHTTF. · The overtime hours worked by the investigator and funded by the FBI can be included in calculating the investigators 60% of hours worked. This will allow the investigator to still work an average of 20 hours a week on other cases for the participating agency. Page I of2 ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND . Forensic evidence related to cases originating in a participating agency will receive priority processing by SOHTTF. The final IGA for operation of the SOHITTF has not been completed at this time. The first step of the process is to enter into an agreement with the FBI for them to reimburse the City of Ashland for expenses related to our participation in the SOHTTF. The agreement with the FBI will be very similar to our existing IGA with the DEA for regionalizing major narcotics investigations. The investigator assigned to the SOHTTF will work 20 hours each week on general Ashland cases and 20 hours each week at the SOHTTF. Every other week the investigator will work an additional 10 hours of overtime funded by the FBI at SOHTTF. We except to have a final IGA covering the reorganization and operation of the SOHTTF prior to December of 20 I 0 when the Ashland investigator will be assigned to the task force. Related City Policies: None. Council Options: Approve of the Police Chief entering into an IGA with the FBI to participate in the SOHTTF to regionalize high -tech and internet crime investigations. Direct the Police Chief not to enter into an IGA with the FBI and SOHTTF to regionalize high-tech and internet crime investigations. Potential Motions: Move approval of the IGAwith the FBI to participate in the SOHTTF program. Attachments: Cost Reimbursement Agreement Page20f2 ~~, COST'REIMBURSEM ENT AGREEMENT . " BETWEEN tilE FEJ)F:I~Ai.. BUREi\U(fF INVESTIGATION (FBI) AND . , ASHLAND POLlCKllEI'ARTMEI\'T TASK FO.~CE FILE Ii Pursuant to CQngressiolial appropriations. ihe FBI receives uuthoi-ityt(l pay (l\'Crtimc for (X)liee officcrs ussigned to thcfoITllulizcd SotllhemOrcg()n j'ligh'Tech (:rimes Tus~ Forcc as sctlonh below lor expenses nc~cssul')' fordetection. investigmiml' and prosecution of erimcsuguinsi the United.Stmes. It ishercby agreed between the FBI nnd the City of Ashland l'oliceDcpnnmelll l(lcnted nt 1155 Enst Main Street. Ashlnnd.,Oregon 97520 Taxpny'eild.mtitiemion Number: 93- 6002117.)'hone Nunlber:(54\) 488-521Ithal: I. COlllmencing u(X)n exccuti6nofthisngrcCmerll, Ihe FBI wilI, subject to uvailabiliiy of i-Cquin:d'funding, reiniburSe, thengeney for overtinle payments madc to ofiieers assigned litll- time to Ihetask force. j I I 2, Requests lor reimbursement will be made on a mOlllhly basis and should be forwurded to the FBI Hcld oflice us soon as flr:lcticalnfter the ,first ofthemoilth which /ollows .lhelllonth for whieh rcimburscmentis requested. Such req'uests should be forwarded by'a Supen'isor of the agene)'IO the FI3l Task Force Squad Supervisor.und ,Special Agent itrChurg~ for their review. approval, ul\dproeessing, for pliymenL ' 3. Ovenill1e reimbnrsements will be made directly 10 the ugency by the FBI. All o\'enime reimbursement payments arc mlldc ~y~lcclrot1it fund trnnsfcr'(EFT}. An ACH\t~ndorl Miscellaneous l'aymentEnrollm~nt FOITllll1ust.be Oil file with the FQI,IO ibcilit:ne EFT. 4. Overtime reimbursements \\'iltbe calculiJtedut the usuui nite/or whichlhe individual ollicer's lime would be;compcnsut~d in tile uhsence (jfthis agree'njent. Howevcr..snid reimbursement, per oflicer..shall not exceed rilOnthly and/or annual limits established unnuully by the FBI. The limits. eu!cuJated using i'ederal paylables, wiJl be in elTcet for the Federal lisen,l year running from October I" of on~ year through ScplcnlbedOtlJ oflhc lollo\\'iilg year, unless changed during the period. The FBI rcscrvesihe right to change thereimburscmentlimits. upward orduwnwurd. lor suhsequent periOdS based ,on lisea.! priorities and appropriations limits. The FBI willllotiry the ugcneyof the applicable :nlnuallimits prior to October I" of each yenr. 5., The number oragencyomce~sassigned full-time to Ihe wsk/orccandemilled to ovenimerciinbursemcllt hytlie FBI shall be approved by the Fill in advance ofeueh tiseal year, Bused un the needs oi'the tusk force, this number may change periodic'ally. up"itrd or . dO\\ll\vurd>as appr('ived in advance by the FBI. oeco CRA It'nlp/llIe 5/1311)1 -". 6. Prioi,tosubmission ofany'ovcrtimc reimbursemcnt requests. the agency nlllsLpreparc an , official.documcnt setting forth the identity of each officer ilsi;igncd full-tinle tc'-thetask forCe. nlongwith the regular and overtime hourly rotes for each officer. Should any orticerschange during,thc year. nsinli1ar:stntclllcm !llust be prepared regarding thc nc,voflk'ers prior tq subnlittiilg uny overtiiilercimburscmcnt rcquesls.for, th&:otlicerS. The,documel11 should hescnt to the, lield ofi1ee forEB I review nndapprovnl. 7. Ench requcst lor rcimblirsi:melll will include ihename. mnk, ID number. OVCni!lle compensation rale.numberof reimbursable hoursclnimed.,nnd the dales'of those hourS lor eaeh . ". '. .. ., :. .' - - " .-., , . . .: ~ ..... " ' , ',' -'. - -:. - .... otlicer for who111 reimburseinent is sOl'lght. The request must be accornjJllilicd by u certification. signed by an appropriatc Supervisor ofthc agency. that the request has been personnllyreviewed. the information describedint~is pamgraph is accumt&:. llndthc, (lcrsomicl Jor whom rcimbursCmeill is cll!imcd \\'crcassigned full-time to the tusk 'toree. 8., Each request for rcirilb!1rselllent will include an invoice number. ill\'oice date: taxpayer idel11iticntionnumbCr (TIN). and the correet banking information to complete the c1ectronie,!\md transier; The necessary banking infoml!ltion is theDep<lsitllr Account '[ille. I.la'n~ Aecoant Number. Routing Number. und T)'Pc of Aceollllt (eitheri:hceking. savings. or loekbo.x). If the banking infomlUtion changes. [l newACH Vcndor/Miscellaneous Paymcnt EnrollmcntFoml must bc submittcd 10 the FBI.' , 9. Requests lor reimb,urscmcnt must be n..eeivcd by the FBI no, Inter thnn Deccmber 31" of Ihe next fiscal )'enr:fOr\\'hich the rcimburscnleniapplies., For eXllniple. reimbursements tor the fiseal year ending September 3().2005mllsl be rcceived by thc I'm by Deccmber3!' 2005, The Fill is not obligated to xeirnb.ursc any requests rccdvcd atier thai time; 10. This Ilgreementis'cITecii\'c,upon signature of the parties llnd will remain inelTect for the duration of the agency's participatioil in the taskJoree.col1lingcnt upo'nappro\'al of necessary funding. and unless temiinatedin aecoidnllcewith the provisions herein. This agreement mllY be modified at nny tiIl)~ by wrincl\conserJt of the parties: It mllY bClemiinmcd,at any time upon mutual conselll ofthc panics. or miilaierally upon writlen nolice from the tenninlllingpllny to thc other party alleast 30 dllyspriorto the temlinalion datj:. ' FOR TIlE A~I~NCY: FOR TIlE FBI: Date Special Agent inChargc Date Contrncting Oflicer FBI Headqll(lrters Dale OC'COCR,j I<'I/lp/att. 5113104 ACH VENDOR/MISCELLANEOUS EN~OLLMENT FORM OMB 14-:;1. Hi1~COS6 Thls form is used for AUlOrnatedClearihg House (ACH) payments w,itti an addendum record that contains' payment-related information processed through the Vendor Express Program. ReCipients of these payments should brihg this informali.on to the_attention a! the fimiii,cial institution whim presenting'this form for completion, PRIVACY ACTSTII.TEME!'IT The following information is pro.ided to cOmply with the Privacy Aclof1974 (P.l. 93-579), All information collected on thls form is required under the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 3322 imd 31 CFR 210. This information will be usBd by the ireasury Department to transmlt payment data, by electronic means. to vendor's finantial,instltution. Fallure to provide'the requested information may delay or prevent th,e recelpt of payrri,ents through the Aulomaled Clearing House Payment System:' , AGENCY INFORMATION 'E!CEfV,L PROORM.4 "'GEUey; Federal Bureau of Investiqation ....GC}4Cy tDEr~iIFJER: I",GENCY lOCIloTION CODE: ACt; NtA 1502,0001 rORY..AT; CCD+ AOME:SS: 935 Pennsylvania Avenue , CITY; Sr"'TE: liP: Washinglon DC 20535 CO~nA~T PERSON TELE PHOW::: N:4,",E NU:V-SER, RETURN fORM TO. FBI vE~OOf\; PAYEE/COMPANY INFORMATION NA..lJE, City of Ashland ss,".I OR: TA):PAYER 10 JJO 93-6002117 ADDRESS 20 Easl Main Street . CITY; Ashland STATE. OR Izp:. 97520 CON1'.A.;:TPERSON fiAl"l(:: . TELEPHONE NUV.SEA: FINANCtAL INSTITUTION INFORMATION ACH 8A."JK !-lAME: ADOR!SS: CITY, ;5TATE: IZI?: , ACH COOROiNA TOR tJAME: n:tEPi-l.orIE rl\,'iJSS:R 1;INE DIGIT ROUTj!H~ NtJrJSER - - - - - -' - - - [jEPO~I~OR "CC~tlt Nuv.aER. TYPE OF ~CCoyr.'T; 0 CHECKING 0 SAVINGS Sl'G~jATUR,E A,~~O TlTL.E OF AUTHORIZEO OFFiCiAL- ICOUld be thl5! umo I~ 1..... AC H Coc:rnm~orj TElEPHC:-.:E NU\!BER: /. I I SF~3aa' pres.~.hbeQ b;' Oepa.rrment c., Tre3:lU:Y 31 use 3322,:U CFR 210 CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Resolution Establishing Rates for the Ashland Municipal Airport and Repealing Resolution 09-21 Meeting Date: May 4,2010 Primary Staff Contact: Mike Faught Department: Public WorkslEngineering E-Mail: faughtm(a)ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Legal Secondary Contact: Scott Fleury 541 552-2426 Approval: Martha Bennet Estimated Time: 10 Minutes Question: After considering. comments at the public hearing, will Council approve a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Establishing Rates for the Ashland Municipal Airport, and Repealing Resolution 09-21," which increases rates? Staff Recommendation: The Airport Commission recommends approval of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Establishing Rates for the Ashland Municipal Airport, and Repealing Resolution 09-21." Background: One of the Airport Commission's primary goals is to generate sufficient revenues through Airport fees to operate the Airport with minimal or no general fund subsidies. The Ashland Municipal Airport established in 1965 is a City-owned facility consisting of 56 hangars and 120 airplane tie-down spaces. The Airport currently supports approximately 86 aircraft. In addition, the Airport includes fueling, aircraft maintenance and repair facilities operated by Skinner Aviation, the sole Fixed Base Operator (FBO) who is on contract with the City. Airport revenue is generated from hangar rentals, ground leases, fuel flowage fees, tari ffs from freight operations, nightly and monthly tie-downs and Specialized Aviation Service Operator (SASO) agreements. Currently SASO agreements are in place for three companies that perform diverse commercial operations at the Airport. Since 1993, the FBO has been responsible for collecting and monitoring these fees. The City rents 32 hangars on a month-to-month basis and has ground lease agreements with an additional 14 individuals. Revenue from the hangar rentals and leases provides a monthly stream of income, while the income from tie-downs and fuel flowage is cyclical and fluctuates during the tourist season. Each spring, the Airport Commission evaluates the existing rates and makes a recommendation to the City Council to adjust fees as needed. The current rate policy structure includes rates for the following: . aircraft tie-downs . City owned T-hangars without doors* . City owned T -hangars with doors* . City owned Box hangars with doors and amenities . privately built and owned hangars with a ground lease . privately built hangars that are deeded to the City with a ground lease Page I of2 ~~, CITY Of ASHLAND *T-hangars are exactly as the name implies steel buildings in the shape ofT's that are nested together with the building orientation alternating by 180 degrees. Box hangars are square or rectangular steel structures that are stand alone. The City offers two options for hangar construction and ground leasing at the Ashland Airport. One is to build a hangar and keep ownership of the hangar while leasing the ground from the City. The second option is to construct a hangar and deed it to the City and lease the ground for a specified term, typically 20-25 years. The ground lease rates for these options differ by over 50%. Fees and rates are adjusted each year to keep pace with inflation and increased operating.costs. Hangar rentals and leases provide a majority of the revenue making it important to establish the proper balance between need, availability and financial impact to ensure a steady revenue stream to the City. In order to develop the 2010 pricing policy, City staff adjusted the rates by double the January CPI-U and presented the updates to the Airport Commission for review and recommendation. After thorough discussion, they approved staff's recommendation and are now presenting them to the City Council for approval. Related City Policies: The City, through its City Council, is empowered to approve rate increases related to City lease rentals. Council Options: 1. The City Council may decide to approve Resolution No. IO-XX, a "Resolution Establishing Rates for the Ashland Municipal Airport, and Repealing Resolution 09-21" as recommended by the Airport Commission. 2. The City Council may decide to modify the Airport rate structure and direct staff to take the modifications back to the Airport Commission for further action. 3. The City Council may decide to take no action on the proposed Resolution No. 10-XX and continue collecting Airport fees as outlined in Resolution 09-21. Potential Motions: 1. Move to approve Resolution 10-XX a "Resolution Establishing Rates for the Ashland Municipal Airport, and Repealing Resolution 09-21." 2. Move to modify Resolution 10-XX and direct staff to take the modifications back to the Airport Commission for further action. Attachments: . Draft Resolution . Nested T-hangar layout . Resolution No. 09-21 . Airport Commission Minutes of April 6, 2010. Page 2 of2 ~~, RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 09-21 Recitals: A. The Airport Commission reviewed established airport rates and recommended increasing current airport rates. B. The City has determined it is necessary to increase user rates for aircraft hangar rentals, hangar ground leases, freight charges and aircraft tie downs. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Effective July 1, 2010, unless otherwise provided by an agreement or lease, the rates shown on "Exhibit A" are established for facilities at the Ashland Municipal Airport. SECTION 2. Classification of the fees specified in Section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 B of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 3. Resolution No. 09-21 is repealed on the effective date of this Resolution. SECTION 4. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this , 2010, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. day of Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2010. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Page 1 of.1 c .~ '5 .E ~ o ... o N~ ~~ Ill": :I III I:: III III ...., == 1::-_ Or--ll.. Q.CO U .=~~ IllCQ- Gl ... III J::NJ:: - .- ... .! ?fi. .g.!~ IIlIllN Gl '- III -~Ill E l!! == 'CGl,- Gl E III III :I Gl .- III > I:: III ~O:E GlU- '- I:: '- <<JnsJ2 Cl.c Gl I:: '- .- :J III == - :ll .2<('- 'O_U "- ><.= Gl Gl Gl J::'C_ 1-1:: III .- '- c :g "5 . e OOOOI ~C'!O~~ L{)DlriOZ ,............<.0......0 ......NNN~ b9tflY}b9~ u.. o (IJ 10 N rD N c::i '0 ID C ;: o >- 0:: <( 0:: a ll.. w::;< ... C9w co <(I- g> (IJ I- Z ~ co o::~a ~:;; a>U ~~ a (IJ (IJ Zw ~ 00::0:: ~;: aao::~o ~aa<(..J~ aOOC9u:Ji:3 III~I >> 1-1-1-......(lJc - --I- co ~~~o::a:'" (I)(IJ(lJw<(.2 0:: 0:: 0:: I- C9 ~Ul <(<(<(ll..ZID C9C9C9a<(;e ZZZ()Ic <(<(<(::::;x IDE IIIwa ~~~ICO~ c o '~ c Q) "E c E ";:: ";:: :0 c. a. 0) 0 (5 ~.E.E .S en C) Q) ,S .S ~ ~ ~ 0. ~ ~ ~.c.c ~ -- ~I:r: 01-1- -zz IOO 1-::;:::;: z__ 01-1- ::;:lJ..lJ.. -co ti:cnrn aM,.... U)~q lO "! ID tl [E (lJO Gl e tl.c- .- _ ctI tl::: co ID aCCI u 'C t3 Q) Qj '0 C ro '" ro C> c>C c 0 U .~ .2 Q) g E ';;; :c u= ... ro ~ ;: '" Q) _'0 ro "- Q)~ .c ::J '0 0 Q) II '0 _ ro c rn ';:: 0..8- ::J 0 >>.)2 c C> ro c iti~ Q) ::J ICll . . w C9 0:: <( d- o o r-- 10 '" ::J ..J <( ::;< (IJ o C> rD '<t '" . . (IJ Z ~ a o uJ i= >- ..J I I- Z a ::;< o rD W C9 <( I- a a u.. ::;< ::;) ::;< Z ::;< W (IJ <( W ..J o Z ::;) a 0:: C9 o W Z ~ a >- ..J W I- <( > (( ll.. o N ~ rn cr m 1" ~ g; ~ ~ rn cr m 1" ~ cr 'E o e- <( <Xl a. 0: cr $ c E 'C ~ 15. ~ 'C C, C ~ -;;; ~ 3 .6 ~ ~ ~ o o 'C ,;, "~ "0 a. tl <Xl <( 'i: 0) co. ~ 0) 0) co 0) ~ - 0) 0) 0) ",- '" 0) 0) '" --'Ill -00) t::--' ::>-0 o t:: ~ ::> (90 al(5 Cal 0)- ~ t:: ::> 0) u ~ 0) ::> J::: U - 0) >-J::: .0- -0>- 0).0 = "0 ~.~ :;a. E'" ::> <<!,E ~ - o >- . .o~ -0>- 0).0 =-0 g..~ :;a. E'" ~ ::> '" E Ol~ t:: '" "'Ol J::: t:: 0) '" J:::J::: -0) -J::: 0_ 0)- 010 '" 0) -Ol 0", .E- O ~.Q '" 0) ::> ~ !:T'" '" :l O)!:T J::: '" f- 0) J::: - ~ lD ro en l" al ~ --' 0 0 '" 0 8- 0 a ~ a - a <0 C') - co 0 It) :c <I> 'ill 0) " co '" IX '" ~ it: ~ 'C '0; '" f- u lD '" t lD " rn rn e ~ .E 0) 0) i) c..~ E.o 0) ~ -0) ~ t:: ni .Q ~ ~,:~ :=:- n;:;":c"'C 0 ,',<<'le"'C C <"'I J::: wuE WIll::> :F'U;' Q) E 0: 8'x w . '" U)~E :;)<1>'" "j;F rn co .a::.2-O o 0.0 ,,'D.. en CJ) '",IX 0)0) '" m:m~ ~ ~ ,,' ,0.. a.:;; ,,'U) E ,:,:;; 0) i~jif'~ ~ 0 wc;;g g~1- ,> ~ "- TO .g .Q 1X00 ..D..~o I~~ a ~ ~!!'~ ~ ';'00 ,!O! ,,0 gJ ::;; al u o ~ .~ a a. u to << o N W rn '" rn c w g; . w rn '" J!l c w '" 'E o B- '" to a. 0:: '" ~ c E ~ ~ 15. w ~ C, c .!l . ~ ~ .0 o ~ '" 0) > '" J::: >- c .0 EO) AU) ":J - "'- o....~ N" C~ ._ 0) "E 'E "0 "" ". _ C ":":0 .9-c :Eo - c"- "'00 Q)--a.. :nCON en..:! c: 'rogl~ fOIDO) ~c LL 0._ O-U) a...!Q~ N"-,, .~o 5 s: "-- C. N~ .cCO) 'H1ii ",-", 0)00) -c'" "'a", ~.U) co "~O) U)".o ",>- "'" 0 _~c lB.!!!= E.!!1 " :J OJ" ""OJ o~'" "'05n. .~ ID.:Q .c .c .c f-f-f- Nested T-hangar layout T , I - fJ 1- ~~ ro- '/ h t. I. B ~I RESOLUTION NO. 2009-.1 \ A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 99-37 Recitals: A. The City has allowed privately constructed hangars to be built on City property at the Ashland Municipal Airport subject to the tenns of a ground lease; B. The privately constructed hangars then become City property when the ground lease expires; C. The first of these ground leases is expiring this year, which makes it necessary for the City to establish rental rates for these privately built. city owned hangars; and D. In addition, the City is also adjusting other rates and establishing rates for freight operations and helicopter ,hangars. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Effective August 1, 2009. unless otherwise provided by an agreement or lease, the rates shown on "Exhibit A" are established for facilities at the Ashland Municipal Airport. SECTION 2. Classification of the fees specified in Sections 1-4 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 B of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballol Measure 5). SECTION 3. Resolution No. 99-37 is repealed on the effective date of this Resolution. SE TI N 4. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ~/ day of . 2009. and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. .2009. SIGNED and APPROVED this ;!2.. day of " Exhibit "A" Rates for Ashland Airport Facilities August 1,2009 - June 30, 2010 01 o o N ~ to ::> c to t:::l 0.., Q,-.t ...... .co...,: tIl ..... :iN ....!! .ES OlE S~ E I!! "Q tilE III <II ::> .- .. >c eo tIlU ... C tOtO Cl,g c... .- ::I ~- ,gO( 0- ...>< cD cD .s:"Q ~.5 a. Uu ~ cD.s: c~ cD .s: ~ -c- W W I", " . C) C) e: c=-= l:g ~ -2 "E a: 0:: " c.c. :5 :5 U) ~ "08 w Ig J2,s_ 0 0 ~ ~ en '" ~ '2 8:6:6 0 0 ~ ~ ll') ~ ~ ~ . '3 !:s:s ll') ~ >- 0 0 0 0 I€ .DL> ... ... -I 0 0 0 ~ii 0- 0- :I: 0 .n ~ on on 0 0 .n - - ~ .... 0 ll') OJ Z 01-1- .... .... z ~ N ~ 0 -zz - 0 ... ... N ... ::; :r:oo ... ~ ... :J =s ti: I- <!i ::< ' :J 0> V "e z _. ..J ..J ... '<t ~ 01;:1- <( <( 0 , :::; It> 0 ~ ,u, :::; ..... w U) -00 U) ~ C! z ten VJ a ll') <II N OM..... 0 0 to c:i U]C!~ i 0 ~ '" .... ... 0:: U) ~ ILl >-- . - - U ~ ... ;; ::i .s: 00 ,e ~... 0 ~o b .., N C! ~ - " a:e x .. 0'" b to ~ a. ILl <0 o::Z - w ... -::I Cl to <(-, '0 u ~ Q) .;;; <( C' c 0 I- .. zg: ~ Q) 0 0 a; ~ <(0 ~ III 0 ..IN '0 0:: u. :I: - U c 0<( ... co :::; 0 U)..... .: .. C) :J' ... <('lii >- co Z cD 0:: ':; OJ U) W 0<( :::; .. 0::::> ~ .L:J Ole: a: Cl ~ :I: Z to og' c.Q 0<( <( :E f w Q) .- '" l- e ~<( 0 u e: C) ll.. iU " " 0 w u ~ 0- g E Z w c U) w :::; > ~ <( 0 Z en ILl ." ";; :0 u. ~ C) w .0 '" :I: ;tj S ~ w <( ~ 0> u= :::; 0 ~ VI " E ~ z ~ co e ::> ..J 0:: <( e/) z :., '" " ~ w >- 0 L: g" :::; 0 w a: :; <( Z ..J ii: ..J 0 U I- '0 _ '0 ~ .~ w z 0 U) e/) z Q) :3:Ei . I- :J U) W c &; " . :::; <( 0 0 ex: 0:: ~ , en tIl ...I 0 0 a: 0 '0 0 . z ~ 0 > a: ~ I- 0 0 a: ..J z. Q) " e/) ~ ~ C) :J <( u_ Z Z Z 0 0 0 Cl ..J U co C ~ (j 11. 0 w ~ 'C w :I: :I: :I: Z I Ole. 0 0 . I I W II:: :i '" e.- , Z l- I- l- e/) c " 0 0 w w w W I ~ ~ ~ . '" ",2 . f= VI en III ~ e a: a: ~ e: 0> UJ <( ;tj 0<( 0 en en en <( 0 co c f= I- W W W UJ - 8 ti~ >- z a: ex: a: ~ C) 'co I ..J ..J -I ~E >- ~ ..J ~. <( <( <( 0- Z Q) " " ..J e 0 e UJ Cl C) Cl 0 <( :;:: :r:lD :I: Z Z Z ~ 0 eno z z z z U I 'c Q) e I- a: ::l ::> ::l ~ ~ <( <( <( :::; III Z ILl 0 0 0 x E. U L:- . . I I :I: ILl 0 ;::-'" 0 > a: a: cr, a: (j ~ ~ . :t: '" .. l- I aI OalI ::i! 0 C) Cl C) a.. - - c( m U " " ~ ,;. ,Y o 0- U ~ o o N !! ~ a: .. " . $ . . ,. a: .. ". $ " ~ '" '" ~ a: S e: E " 'l' 15 . )l '" e: !J ~ '" ~ J> ~ .!l- i; ,- c: . ii Q) ..; ~ ::I t: c_ I: :J <U c: I: u ~ 0 < ~.~ ':7.w ~ -c: 5a>W}; E'" ... -~61! f!! Q) (/) 'a. Ii: 0 <C ~ omen:; ';~;nE .~~ z (() 0..0 0 ....: a.~ _ >. fOe 1-.0 '~.2 ~ -0 o Q) w.~ ~a::: Q. ;g. ~50"5 -oZ W E "0 U "0 - rn .. . > UJ 00 e:: w~o w ... 0 q rn Z~~ z 0'" I 0 i= .. G) t= <.. U < >~ ~ :; m:urn< W'CD GI C U') CO ell W Wal.. N ~ I <<> _ O:::.....J ..J < &-0 :$ ClccO Z II 5 W < =T.. II.. J:I-Cl f/) oj 10 ~ f!! o 10, 8- o (ij a; ::J 10 ~ a: .. :t: ~ ." 2 .. Q) I- ~r- .Q-o; 0.- E{il Q) ~ (ij ~ "> :::;. "0 ~ 'iii CiI '- :J ::I.~o ~ c:gc: <<l t: co I CI) <..c E ;U~g g LlJCDE CI) LL. 0 'x :& O:::O(Q lIS W.,; E t: ~l)j ~ j 1-"''' Er.2-o o "::g II.. "'- o::cuU) - ~a. <o(/) ii: o.~ (/)E;> ~Q)m ;n!~ m:_E W"'II> oJ;...... >55 0-- ~og l1. C! . wf5g U",~ >fh~ a:: W rn Qj W Q) ..J'" ai .g O~ ,~ <II Q) .!! Q) '" .. Q) ..J -0 " ::J o i5 <II OJ Ol C .. .c Ol -= '0 Q) Ol .. <5 o - Q) ~ .. ::J 0- en II> .c I- (/) <II -' g o ~ ~ ~ - ~ o on !il o o o <D '0 1: .~ ~ "" ~ 'OJ '0 " '" 1" " o '" '" e N ": 10 .. 0; ~ .E ~ .!! .E t! -2 .., " ::!; ~ .E '0 u. Z o ~ a:: W 11. o I- J: Cl iii a:: ... ~ -= -,.~ """ ::J .. o ~ E f,! <<1'[0 .~"'O .c" -" 0'- i~ 'Up -0- <O=> " E .o~ o ~8 =~ " 0 o-e E => 4;; Q.~ g~ ",,, .." 'Og ~'u; ~ .. "", -5<0 :;-g "'" 'B~ ." '0 0"" III .. - ~ Illf,! (ij"n; " .2 ~ :i5Ci '0-' <C. . . ~ " {i- '0 D- c.> III < o ;; N D ~ 1i ~ ~ D -. a: 1i C D ~ e '< III ~ S c E ~ 1l. D l;I '" c !J D 1 ::J S> (; ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION April 6, 2010 MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: ALAN DEBOER, DAVID WOLSKE, LARRY GRAVES. BOB SKINNER, LINCOLN ZEVE, RICHARD HENDRICKSON, TREG SCOTT, ALAN BENDER STAFF: SCOTT FEURY, MIKE FAUGHT MEMBERS ABSENT: BILL SKILLMAN, RUSS SILBIGER Visitors: Gary & Eva Voget, Glen Ward, Chris Adams, Brittany Wise, Michelle Scarlata 1. CALL TO ORDER: 9:33 AM 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 2, motion by Hendrickson for approval, second by Graves, unanimous vote, minutes approved as written. 3. Additional Items: 4. Public Forum: Public Comments below regarding noise 5. OLD BUSINESS: A. AlP Project Engineering Design: Fleury informs Commission that the City has received 50% plans from Reid Middleton for the Design portion of the AlP project. Fleury and City staff will review plans and there is a scheduled meeting with the consultant engineer to discuss red lines. Reid Middleton will then incorporate the 50% revisions and create 100% plans for final review. The final review will take place in May and the project will be open to public bidding late May. The City of Ashland will not know if it is to receive the Discretionary Funds from the FAA to complete the construction project until September 15'h of this year. If the City does not receive the Discretionary Funds this year then the construction phase will slip until Spring or Fall of 2011. Fleury also informs the Commission that he will be presenting the Connect III taxi-way project application to the Local Area Commission on Transportation on April 13th. The Local Area Commission will rank the projects and then forward them on to the Regional Commission on transportation for another set of rankings. Fleury also working on grant applications for the dedicated Five Million for rural airports. B. Airport Website Development: Fleury asks Commission members for aviation and Airport related photos to post on website. Zeve to work towards gaining access into the old website so that a forwarding link can be placed to send people to the new website. The Commission would like to see an icon or tab on the front page of the City website that would send people directly to the Airport section. The only way to find the Airport page is to type Airport into the search field, unless you know the Airport is managed by the Public Works Department and go to that homepage. Fleury to check with Ann Seltzer regarding the addition to the homepage. C. Brim training tower - Lease/Flowage/Noise: Gary and Eva Voget attend meeting to discuss noise as it relates to helicopter operations on site at the Airport. Vogel's would like to understand the current and future use policies as they relate to helicopter training noise on site. They state that the noise pollution and environmental impacts need to be addressed. The Vogel's state that the approved G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\AIRP\MI NUTES\20 1 O\April 6 201 D.doc planning documents show a 65db noise contour around the Airport and that as the noise rises peoples patience will dim and they will take action against the Airport. They also feel that home values will diminish as the noise increases. Skinner states the training is a new addition to the use of the Airport and is acceptable and approved use of the property. The City and Commission are learning the scope of training since this is a new activity. Skinner has spoken with Brim Aviation regarding concerns of noise and safety on site. Brim Aviation has stated they will perform a majority of their training offsite as weather allows. When weather does not allow them to fly offsite they need to perform training requirements as per their contract onsite. Zeve states that he understands the Vogel's frustration as it relates to there homes proximity to the Airport and the noise that is generated. He also states that Brim Aviation is indeed trying to be good neighbors and train as much as possible offsite. Vogets are concerned about the training tower being built at the Airport to support the hover training exercises. Graves states that Brim Aviation has a 90 day training contract with Shanghai Police officers that will end in April and the training tower will not be built. Wolske would like the Commission to be proactive and help generate a comprise solution to the noise issue. Skinner states the Airport receives Federal Funds and it must comply with fair use standards, but at the same time be good neighbors to the community. The Vogel's wrote a letter to the FAA regarding the noise and the FAA stated it is the responsibility of the City to manage noise related issues on site. They would like to see all training performed offsite and recommended the Weed Airport, Montague and private properties to perform requirements of training contracts. Wise states that the majority of there time is spent training at alternate locations and that some situations call for them to train on site. She also states that the FAA prefers them to train on site because safety services are in close proximity in case of accident. Wise states that they have areas all around the Airport where they do not fly in order to minimize impact to the surrounding neighbors. Wise says that she and Michelle sit in the neighborhoods around Oak Knoll while the training is going on to gauge how loud the noise actually is and they also know residences in the same neighborhood that do not have issues with the noise. Wise states that Brim Aviation is looking into sound meters and having an acoustical engineer provide a sound analysis from the training operations. Scott thinks that quantifying the sound would be a good idea by Brim Aviation. Graves states that the Airport Commission is a volunteer Commission that works towards resolving all Airport related issues and that what Brim Aviation is currently doing is legal, but not fully acceptable to the Citizens with residences around the Airport. The City and Commission will work towards a compromise and solution to issue. Zeve states that he would like the City and the Legal Department to recommend a next step for noise mitigation as it relates to future training. The Commission asks all those affected by the noise to bear with them and the City while they work towards a solution. This is the first time a situation like this has occurred and time is needed to develop guidelines for usage on site. Zeve thanks the Vogel's for attending the meeting and voicing there concerns. Discussion turns towards the storage area lease and flowage fees for Brim Aviations operations on site. Fleury states that since the tower will not be built a new lease specifically for the rolling stock storage area will need to be developed by the City and Legal Departments. The issue then lies with land use approval of the area for storage. If Brim does not have or receive land use approval to use the area then he will be required to remove the equipment. Fleury and Faught to research the land use approval area with the Planning Department in order to generate a new lease for the storage area. Wise states that Brim does not have an issue with paying a lease fee for the storage area. DeBoer charges the City with enforcing all rules and G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\AIRP\MINUTES\2010\ApriI6 201 Q,doc 2 fee's associated with usage at the Airport as they apply to Brim Aviation. Faught states that he will work towards development of a new lease and start collecting the required fee's from Brim Aviation. Fleury would like to proceed further with creating an Ashland Airport self fueling permit that permit holders would have to satisfy in order to fuel personal aircraft on site. Fleury states that he contacted the Fire Department regarding Brims fueling from truck on site and they would like to inspect his equipment and make sure it meets local fire code. The City needs to have documents on file that show the spill prevention plan and other safety procedures as they relate to the on site fueling of Brims helicopters. D. Airport Day: Wise and Scarlata on had to discuss plans for Airport Day. Airport Day will be held on Saturday May 22nd from 8am to 4pm. They day will start with a pancake breakfast; there will also be a BBQ lunch around noon. Scarlata states they will have many children friendly activities throughout the day. Kids activites will include a bounce house, weather station construction, sidewalk chalk areas and helicopter rides provided by Brim Aviation. Fleury asks for a brochure from Wise and Scarlata to post on the website .that will give people more information on the activities planned. Zeve would like to see some information placed in the City Source May issue discussing Airport Day. Fleury to contact Administration to have some information placed in the City Source. Fleury states that the Main St. banner was reserved for the week and they should try to get a request in for next year as soon as possible in order to reserve the week and have banner placed. Safety is still a concern for interaction between kids/people and planes. Adams from CAP will work with Wise and Scarlata to develop a marshaling plan. Skinner to also be involved in safety planning issues. E. Security Camera System: Fleury states he is waiting for the Information Technology Department to get back to him regarding pricing and installation Airport. Fleury states that money is tight in the Airport budget until the end of the fiscal year and that once the new fiscal years starts he will push for purchase and installation of two cameras to be placed around the FBO building as a start. As stated at the previous meeting the security camera system the City currently uses at its 90 North Mountain location is fully expandable and all information will be backed up on the Cities servers. F. Educational Curriculum: Graves states that he is still trying to make contact with the director of Science Works to develop a work plan for an aviation curriculum. Scott states that Mark Delarenzo the director has been very busy lately and will make contact with him to discuss a physics' of flight program with components to be based at the Airport. Adams from the CAP states that they have a FLY Teacher program that could be beneficial as an educational program. G. CAP Lease: Adams states he has received the letter from the City to the CAP regarding construction of a new lease document similar to Medfords that has rate reductions for "in-kind" service. He thinks this is an acceptable solution and will work with the City and CAP to develop a list of "in-kind" services. He states that the CAP has not been involved in search and rescue lately as they have been in the, past, but they are working towards a more involved interagency cooperation agreement with the Jackson County Sheriffs Department to be more involved in future 'search and rescue. Adams also states they boat will be removed from the hangar as soon as possible. 6. NEW BUSINESS: A. Rental Rate Establishment: Fleury and Faught discuss rate increases with the Commission. The Airport fund is still projected to be seven thousand behind for the 2011 budget year do to the debt requirements of the above ground fuel storage system and the hangar construction. Faught reminds Commission that one of there G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\AIRP\MINUTES\2010\ApriI6 2010_doc 3 main goals is to be financially self sufficient and they need to raise rates in order to meet this goal. Faught also states that the Airport contingency fund is only five thousand dollars and they really need to generate a surplus to increase the contingency fund in the future. If any major problems were incurred the Airport would need to use an interfund loan to complete any projects, if not covered by the FAA's non-primary entitlement monies. Fleury presents rate increase sheet to the Commission for approval and recommendation to Council'for adoption. Fleury states the January CPI-U was 2.6% and that is the number that was used to increase lease rates and that the rental rates should go up by approximately 5%. DeBeor states that since his lease is up for renewal there will be the addition SASO requirements placed on it and that will add another three thousand dollars of revenue to the Airport fund in addition to his standard yearly lease payment. Commission reviews Fleury's rate increase recommendations. Motion by Graves to accept rates and shown, 2nd by Hendrickson, all approved. DeBoer recluses himself from the vote do to a conflict of interest as an owner of hangars for rent at the Airport. DeBoer would like a copy of the project FY11 budget sent to Commission members for review. Fleury to forward copies of the FY11 budget. B. Neil Creek Riparian Restoration: Fleury goes over planning email with Commission. The Commission would need to schedule a pre-application conference with the Planning Department to discuss plans for riparian improvement along the Neil Creek corridor. In the pre-app stage the Commission would need to provide general drawings of what they would like to accomplish including plantings and how this would be accomplished. Fleury's time is limited currently and will need Commission help to proceed further with this goal. Wolske is interested in help further the goal and will contact SOU to see if they would assist in developing a restoration plan along with performing some baseline research into restoration plans. C. Unicom Frequency License: Fleury and Skinner state that the license for the Unicom Frequency has expired and needs to be renewed. Commission members ask how this information was obtained. Skinner states that he received and email from a company that does the required paperwork to renew the license. Commission members think it might be a scam and do not think the license is needed. Fleury to contact FAA or ODA and determine if a FCC license is truly needed. D. DeBoer Lease: Fleury states the lease for DeBoer's hangars has been written along with the required SASO and asks Commission if they have any comment before the lease is sent to City Council for approval. The lease will be for a ten year extension and uses the current approved lease template. Commission has no comments. Fleury to have lease placed on consent agenda for the first meeting in May. E. Commission Appointments: Fleury states there were two applications received to fill the vacancies from DeBoer and Silbiger. There were an additional two applications received for reappointment. one from Zeve and one from Skillman. The Mayor will make his appointments in June. 7. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION: A. Status of Airport. Financial Report. Review of Safetv Reports: Skinner states that Bob Delsman has an issue with the door pins at his hangar and that Fleury should work with Skinner to find solution. Fleury to meet with Skinner and Peters from facility maintenance to inspect and determine a fix. Skinner also states that he has been working with Brim Aviation to find an acceptable on site area to perform the required hover training and that any safety concerns that occur he immediately deals with. Skinner waiting for activity to pick up as the weather improves. G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\AIRP\MI NUTES\20 1 O\April 6 201 O.doc 4 B. Maintenance Updates - No new updates. Maintenance work will continue as time and weather allow. C. Brown Bag: Graves attended brown bag meeting with Mayor. Graves states that the Mayor would like to hear about all issues on a regular basis in order to be proactive with solutions and that his door is always open. 8. OTHER: The meeting of the JC airport commission is the third Monday of the month at 12:00 PM. 9. NEXT MEETING DATE: May 4th, 9:30 AM ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 11 :34 G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\AIRP\MINUTES\2010\April 62010.doc 5 This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www:win2pdf.com. The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only. This page will not be added after purchasing Win2PDF. \ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication A Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing Appropriations within the 2009-2010 Budget Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Approval: May 4,2010 Administrative Services Administration, Police, Public Works, Electric Martha Benne Lee Tuneberg tuneberl@ashland.or.us Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Estimated Time: 10 Minutes Question: Should Council approve a resolution adjusting the FY 2009-2010 Budget to create appropriations and authorize expenditures for unanticipated expenses during this year? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval ofthe attached resolution. Background: There are three ways in which to change appropriations after the Budget is adopted. I. A transfer of appropriations decreases an appropriation and increases another. This is the simplest budget change allowed under Oregon Budget law. This does not increase the overall budget. This is approved by a City Council resolution. 2. A supplemental budget ofless than 10 percent of total appropriations within an individual fund follows a process similar to the transfer of appropriations. 3. A supplemental budget in excess of 10 percent of total appropriations requires a longer process. This process includes a notice in the paper and a public hearing. A supplemental budget is needed to adjust the FY 2009-2010 budget. This is the FOURTH supplemental budget of this fiscal year. It is.for the items on the attached resolution, described as follows: I. To recognize the receipt of $5,000 in reimbursement charges for court appointed attorneys and increase appropriations in the General Fund, Municipal Court Division accordingly. 2. To recognize $77,314 in anticipated AFR grant monies to be received for work performed in FY 2009-20 I 0 and increase appropriations to cover the approved grant expenditures. Attached is a resolution for your approval. The recommended changes in the budget are explained after each request and a staff member from the department is available to answer questions. Related City Policies: Compliance with Oregon Budget Law Page I of2 ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: ; Council may accept this supplemental budget request as presented, recomm~nd modifications as discussed or defer acceptance (takes no action) awaiting further information or clarification. Potential Motions: I make a motion to approve the attached resolution adopting a supplemental budget for FY 2009-2010 for the purposes specified. Attachments: Resolution adopting a supplemental budget establishing appropriations within the 2009-2010 budget Memo from Administration, Municipal Court on additional revenue and costs warranting a change to the budget Memo from Fire Department on FY 20 I 0 AFR Grant costs and reimbursements warranting a change to the budget Page 2 of2 ~.l' RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATIONS WITHIN THE 2009-2010 BUDGET Recitals: ORS 294.480 permits the governing body of a municipal corporation to make a supplemental budget for the fiscal year for which the regular budget has been prepared under one or more of the following reasons: a. An occurrence or condition which had not been ascertained at the time of the preparation of a budget for the current year which requires a change in financial planning. b. A pressing necessity which was not foreseen at the time of the preparation of the budget fOr the current year which requires prornpt action. c. Funds were made available by another unit of federal, state or local government and the availability of such funds could not have been ascertained at the time of the preparation of the budget for the current year. d. Other reasons identified per the statutes. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. Because of the circumstances stated below, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland determine that it is necessary to adopt a supplemental budget, establishing the following additional appropriations: General Fund Appropriation: Administration - Court Resource: Charges for Services $5.000 ~ $5.000 &QQQ To recognize $5,000 in fees received for court appointed attorneys. This charge was established to help cover costs due to the relatively high number of criminal cases. Water Fund Appropriation: Water Interface $77.314 $77 314 Resource: Intergovernmental Revenues $77.314 $77 314 To recognize AFR grant money to be received reimbursing costs in the current fiscal year. This grant was accepted by Council in March. . TOTAL ALL FUNDS $82314 $82314 Page 1 of 2 SECTION 2. All other provisions of the adopted 2009-2010 BUDGET not specifically amended or revised in this Supplemental Budget remain in full force and effect as stated therein. SECTION 3. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of May, 2010 and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of May, 2010: John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Page 2 of2 CITY OF ASHLAND Memo FROM: RE: April 21, 2010 Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services/Finance Director Cindy Hanks, Accounting Division Manager Tina Gray, Human Resource Manager Supplemental Budget Request - Ashland Municipal Court DATE: TO: The Municipal Court has included an Attorney Fee Reimbursement in all their criminal case Judgment and Sentencing Orders for defendants that are approved for Court Appointed Attorneys. Because the Municipal Court has a relatively high number of criminal cases and a smaller budget this year, the City Attorney's Office has been requiring all defendants who have a source of income to reimburse the City for our costs. The intent of the fee is to help reduce costs related to hiring Legal Counsel. We have been advised by our Auditors that this fee should be treated as revenue. I would like to request that a supplemental budget be submitted to recognize this revenue source in the Municipal Court. ADMINISTRATlONIHUMAN RESOURCES 20 E. Main Street Ashland. Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541488-0002 Fax: 541488.5311 TTY: 800.735-2900 ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Memo TO: FROM: DEPT: RE: DATE: Lee Tuneberg, Finance John Karns, Fire Chief Ashland Fire & Rescue Amended Budget in Forest Interface Division, Water Fund April 29, 2010 The Ashland Forest Resiliency Stewardship Project Master Stewardship Agreement and Supplemental Project Agreement have been signed, giving the City partner status and allowing the City to bill for staff time and supplies associated with project work. The City submitted a proposed budget that was included in the project Supplemental Agreement, detailing costs between April 1 , 2010 and June 30, 2010 in the amount of $77,314. In order to realize the reimbursement of these funds in the current fiscal year, a budget amendment is needed from Council. Ashland Fire & Rescue 455 Siskiyou Blvd. Ashland, Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541482-2770 Fax: 541488-5318 TTY: 800-735-2900 11'.. IF_" CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication First Reading of Ordinances Adopting Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill and Related Ordinance, Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar Department: Community Development E-Mail: molnarb(a")ashland.oLus Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: Maria Harris Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: 90 Minutes Question: Does the City Council approve the first reading of ordinances adopting Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill and related ordinance, Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map amendments? Staff Recommendation: I. Staff recommends that the public hearing be reopened to give participants the opportunity to comment on the transportation analysis update since the update is new information. After the public hearing is completed, staffrecommends closing the public hearing and the pubic record. 2. Staff recommends the Council provide direction on any revisions that Council wishes prior to first reading. 3. Staffrecommends that after the Council holds deliberations, first reading of the ordinance be continued to the May 18, 2010 Council meeting. If extensive revisions are required, delaying first reading until a later date such as June 1,2010 maybe necessary. Background: Comments from April 6. 2010 Public Hearinl! At the April 6, 2010 meeting, the Council held the public hearing, closed the public hearing and left the record open until 5 p.m. on May 4, 2010. A summary of the oral testimony from the April 6 meeting is attached (attachment I). . Three main themes emerged from the oral testimony at the April 6 public hearing including disapproval or disagreement with the guiding principles established with the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008), concerns regarding the Phase II Central Boulevard improvements, and concerns over the degree of the regulation included in the proposed Croman Mill District Standards. Phase II Central Boulevard Improvements Concerns were raised at the April 6 public hearing regarding the original concept which routes Phase II of the Central Boulevard through the ODOT property and two private properties. Additionally, concerns were raised regarding the cost of the infrastructure and the ability of the City or businesses to afford the costs. There are several conceptual options for the Phase II Central Boulevard improvements that can accommodate the traffic projected from the development of the plan area, of which one option is using the existing Mistletoe Road location which would not require the acquisition of the Page I of II ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND ODOT maintenance yard or private properties. The draft Croman Mill District Standards include two conceptual illustrations for the Phase II Central Boulevard (page 2, Exhibit A, Ordinance #3) both of which route the boulevard tlirough the ODOT property. A third option of using the existing Mistletoe Road location for the Phase II Central Boulevard improvements is addressed by the attached transportation analysis update (attachment 3). The option of using the existing Mistletoe Road alignment does not route the boulevard through the ODOT or private properties. The transportation analysis update finds the Mistletoe Road option can accommodate the projected traffic for the next twenty years with the addition of a right hand turn lane when approximately 50% of the plan area is built out, and with a traffic signal at approximately 75% of plan area build out. Additionally, the City's map and aerial photo information indicates sufficient width in the existing Mistletoe Road alignment to accommodate the future Phase II Central Boulevard. The development and analysis ofthe final street configuration and design would occur with the final Phase II Central Boulevard design and engineering. With the exception of the protected bike lane, the proposed design and width ofthe Central Boulevard is in accordance with the existing standard for a Boulevard which has been included in the Ashland Street Standards since 1999. The Central Boulevard includes a protected two- way bike lane on the east side of the street, rather than having two separate on-street bike lanes as required under current standards. The protected bike lane reduces the overall street cross section by two feet in width. Staff believes the on-street parking included on both sides of the Central Boulevard could be removed from the required street improvement in the interest of reducing the street width and thereby reducing street construction costs. While on-street parking is often necessary in a retail and service-oriented area such as the downtown, generally light industrial and office areas such . as the Croman Mill District do not require easily accessible short-term parking at the front of the building. The difference between the Croman Street Standards and the existing Ashland Street Standards is that the Central Boulevard and some of the side streets are required to be "green streets." Green streets are built to include landscape bio-swales in the medians and parkrows to increase stormwater infiltration, reduce and slow the rate of runoff and use bio-filtration to remove pollutants. Additionally, recycled aggregate materials are used in green streets. In terms of additional costs for green streets, the installation ofbio-swales in the street median and parkrows increase the construction costs approximately 6.5 %. Recycled paving materials were found to be readily available and currently used as standard practice in the Rogue Valley. The issue of financing the central boulevard and related utilities was raised at and discussed by the Planning Commission. For subdivision and site review approvals, adequate capacity of transportation, water, sewer, storm drainage, and electricity facilities is required for proposed development. As a result, the developer of the property is responsible for the provision of transportation and public utilities to and through the site. Accordingly, if a development were proposed in the Croman Mill study area, the developer would be responsible for the construction of the central boulevard and the related utilities. Improvements can be proposed and constructed in phases. It is important to note that regardless ofwhether a master plan is adopted for the Croman Mill site, the build out of the Croman Mill site under the current zoning Page 2 of 11 ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND ("No-build scenario) requires a significant investment in public infrastructure to construct the facilities necessary to accommodate future employment in the area. In the case where streets and utility lines that are larger facilities which serve a greater area beyond the development, developers can be awarded system development charge (SDC) credits for a portion of the cost of the qualifying facilities that they construct. For example, when North Mountain Avenue was improved to city standards from North Mountain Park to the city limits, the developer was given credit for a portion of the street improvements that serve the general public beyond the immediate area. As an Avenue (major collector), North Mountain , collects and carries traffic in both a northerly and southerly direction from Ashland's neighborhoods to larger streets. Additionally, this function will expand further at some time in the future when the Nevada Street connection is made. In November 2009, the Public Works Department introduced the concept of developing Advanced Financing districts to the City Council. The purpose of Advanced Financing is to provide a financial mechanism to reimburse publicly or privately funded public improvement projects that have direct benefit to other property owners. Examples of larger public facilities are construction of street extensions to provide required traffic flows, construction of traffic signals, storm water improvements and corresponding detention basins, larger and/or extended water lines that are require for fire flow for several projects, improved sewer lines to provide capacity to an entire area and right-of-way or easement purchases for required public . improvement which may be outside 0 the their property or development boundaries. Advanced .Financing is similar to the formation of a Local Improvement District (UD) in that it . distributes the cost of public improvement projects based on benefited use. With the Advance Financing method, payment is due when the benefited property owner connects to or accesses the public improvement. Another tool for the development and funding of transportation projects is the Capital Improvements Program (CIP). In November 2009, the Council authorized Staffto work with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Oregon Business Development Department to prepare a grant application for an Immediate Opportunity Fund (IOF) grant of up to one million dollars to be used for road construction at the Croman Mill Site. The IOF is a state program, and the state purpose of the [OF is to support primary economic development in Oregon through the construction and improvement of streets and roads and is funded through State gas tax revenue. The Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) includes a work plan for the next steps in implementing the plan. The first two "time-sensitive" items on the list are to create and adopt a Croman Mill District overlay zoning plan and to adopt the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment plan. The following.items on the list include studying the feasibility of an urban renewal district and developing and urban renewal plan, as well as developing a financing plan for structured parking. Tax increment financing is generally a product of an urban renewal district, and is used to finance public infrastructure by using a tax increment to pay debt service on bonds. Degree of Regulation In regards to the degree of regulation, concerns were raised at the April 6 public hearing regarding the overregulation of developmen! and the change in the economic environment. Pagc3 of 11 ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND As proposed, the planning application process for development proposals in the Croman Mill District is relatively unchanged. Under the current E-I and M-I zoning, new buildings, additions or expansions require Site Review approval in accordance with Chapter 18.72. The same Site Review process will be apply to new buildings, additions or expansions in the CM zoning overlays. Currently, new structures or additions that are 20% of an existing building's square footage or 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is less, are processed under the Type I procedure. Buildings larger than the size threshold are processed under the Type II procedure. A Type I procedure involves the Staff Advisor making the decision, public notice and any appeals being heard by the Planning Commission. A Type II procedure involves a public hearing and decision by the Planning Commission, public notice and any appeals being heard by the City Council. Upon submittal of a complete application, Type I applications which are not appealed to the Planning Commission can be processed in 35-45 days while Type II applications with the automatic public hearing requirement typically require 75 days. To address economic concerns, one approach that staffrequests the Council strongly consider would be to revise the Procedures Chapter 18.108 to allow Site Review applications for development proposals in the Croman Mill District to be processed under the Type I procedure. If this change were to be instituted, the Type II procedure would be used for Major Amendments to the Croman Mill District plan, and Conditional Use Permits applications involving new buildings or more than three residential units. The primary difference in the review of the applications in the Croman Mill District will be the applicable Site Design and Use Standards. o Compatible Industrial (CI): New development in the CI zone would be subject to a similar level of review as Basic Site Review. Basic Site Review is the entry level of site review focusing on site layout, building orientation and landscaping requirements, and is currently applied in areas such as Hersey Street, Jefferson Avenue, Benson Way and Applegate Way. o Office Employment (OE), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Mixed Use (MU) and Development Adjacent to the Central Boulevard: New Development in the OE, NC, MU zones and adjacent to the Central Boulevard would be subject to a level of review similar to the Detail Site Review zone. The Detail Site Review Zone is a higher level of site review than Basic Site Review, and includes further requirements for orientation and scale of buildings, streetscape and building materials. The Detail Site Review Zone is currently in place on Ashland's main streets such as Siskiyou Boulevard, Ashland Street, A Street, the downtown and the railroad property (i.e. Clear Creek Drive, Russell Drive). The following is a summary of standards that would be applied to the Croman Mill District that are in addition to or differ from the Basic and Detail Site Review Standards that are currently applied citywide. Page 4 of II ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND o Residential Buffer: The height of buildings in the area across Hamilton Creek from the residential neighborhood adjacent to Tolman Creek Road is limited to 40 feet in height (3 stories), which is the same maximum building height permitted under the existing M-I Industrial zoning. The height of building in the Neighborhood Center zone to the north and east of the existing residential neighborhood is limited to 35 feet in height (2 Y, stories), which is the same maximum building height permitted under the existing R-I Single-Family Residential zoning of the ODOT property and surrounding area. o Automobile Parking Credit: The required off-street automobile parking can be reduced by up to 50% through a series of credits for on-street parking, mixed uses, individual Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plans and shared parking. This is greater than the 35% off-street parking reduction that is permitted citywide. o Minimum Number of Stories and Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A minimum 1 story with a partial second story and FAR of .50 is required for the Compatible Industrial zone. A minimum of two stories and .60 FARis required for the Office Employment, Neighborhood Commercial and Mixed Use zones. Under the existing code requirements, the minimum FAR in the Detail Site Review Zone is .35. However, proposed development can show a phased plan that shows how the development will meet the minimum number of stories and FAR over time. This is intended to encourage building intensity and increase efficient y of land use, ultimately reducing the potential for sprawl on city employment lands. o Freight Rail Spur and Commuter Rail Platform Easements: The Croman Mill District Standards include requirements for dedicating easement areas for the future freight rail spur and commuter rail platform. o Central Park and Transit Plaza: The Croman Mill District Standards include design element requirements for the future central park and transit plaza. The park and plaza requirements include standards for landscaping and design elements to provide guidance to the developer. o Greeu Development Standards: One of the goals included in the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) is to "mandate sustainable and green development codes." Additionally, the plan includes suggested sustainable development guidelines that were incorporated into the Green Development Standards for the Croman Mill District. The Green Development Standards focus on green site improvements such as using recycled content in streets, driveways, parking lots, sidewalks and curbs, and creating green surface parking areas through the use of pervious paving or increasing the tree canopy. In terms of additional costs for green streets, the installation ofbio-swales in the street median and parkrows increase the construction costs approximately 6.5 %. Recycled paving materials were found to be currently used as standard practice in the Rogue Valley and readily available. The total additional cost of providing pervious pavement for green surface parking to comply with this proposed green standard is 5% more than paving an entire lot with non-pervious material. The additional costs for bio-swales and porous paving are up-front construction costs, and do not capture the long-term benefits PageS of 11 J1r.1I ..."1 CITY OF ASHLAND of green streets and paving such as slowing the flow of storm water from developed areas before discharge to streams, filtering pollutants out by the top layers of soil, and allowing infiltrating of storm water into the ground to replenish the groundwater aquifer. o Performance Standard Bonuses: Green building construction measures are not required, but are rather encouraged through a height bonus which grants additional building stories for LEED certified buildings. According to staff research, there is an average 2-4% increase in cost for buildings developed in accordance with LEED standards when compared to conventional site design and construction. Bonuses are also provided in the form of a density bonus for affordable housing, and in the form of a height bonus for underground parking. Transportation Analvsis Update The recently completed transportation analysis update as well as the original analysis and cost report are attached (attachment 2 - a, b and c). Staffrecommends that the public hearing be re-opened to give participants the opportunity to comment on the transportation analysis update since the update is new information. The transportation analysis update includes three items: I) a future year (2030) analysis of an additional land use scenario (Alternative F) addressing the "hybrid" industrial/office land use plan included in the current plan before the City Council, 2) an analysis of an alternative option for Phase II of the Central Boulevard using the existing Mistletoe Road alignment should the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) maintenance yard rernain in place indefinitely, and 3) an analysis of potential change in traffic impacts if a railroad crossing connecting the plan area to Washington Street were established. Hybrid Industrial/Office Scenario (Alternative F) The original transportation analysis included four initial land use scenarios including an office scenario and an industrial scenario. However, the redevelopment plan ultimately resulted in a fifth scenario, or a "hybrid" scenario including a mix of industrial and office land uses. The attached transportation analysis update addresses the hybrid industrial/office land use plan that came after the initial transportation analysis was completed. The hybrid industrial/office scenario, also referred to as Alternative F in the attached update, projects the traffic impacts over the next 20 years of the future development as well as general growth to the surrounding streets and intersections. Many of the mitigation measures needed to reach jurisdictional standards are also necessary even without the redevelopment of the Croman Mill site (No-build scenario). The update identifies additional mitigation measures that may be needed by 2030 for Alternative F including an additional westbound right turn lane at Interchange 14, a northbound right turn lane on Tolman Creek Road at Ashland Street, the signalization of realigned Central Boulevard/Tolman Creek Road intersection, and a traffic signal at Siskiyou Boulevard/Tolman Creek Road. The original transportation analysis looked at the build out of the Croman Mill site and surrounding area over the next 20 years under the current zoning and street network. The analysis projects future traffic impacts of the future development as well as historical growth to Page 6 of I] .... IF_ "1 CITY OF ASHLAND surrounding streets and intersections. This base line analysis is called the "No-Build" scenario, and identified five locations which would need additional capacity improvements by the year 2030 - Interchange 14 northbound ramps, Interchange 14 southbound ramps, Ashland Street/Washington Street intersection, AsWand Street/Tolman Creek Road intersection and Siskiyou Boulevard/Tolman Creek Road. The transportation analysis suggests possible mitigation measures to address the future capacity issues such as making Washington Street right-in, right-out only onto Ashland Street, or adding another westbound left turn lane on Ashland Street. It is important to note that regardless of whether a master plan is adopted for the Croman Mill site, the build out of the Croman Mill site under the current zoning requires a significant investment in public infrastructure to construct the facilities necessary to accommodate future employment in the area. Mistletoe Road Alignment The transportation analysis update includes an option for Phase II of the Central Boulevard using the existing Mistletoe Road location. This option is included to address the phasing of the Central Boulevard should the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) maintenance yard remain in place indefinitely, and as a result, the original Phase.I1 concept not be feasible. The analysis finds that the existing Mistletoe Road alignment could be used for the Phase II extension of the Central Boulevard rather than the original concept oflocating the road through the ODOT property. The analysis identified the need to widen Mistletoe Road to include an additional right turn lane at the intersection with Tolman Creek .Road at approximately 50% of the plan area build out, and the need to provide a signal at the Mistletoe Road/Tolman Creek Road intersection at approximately 75% of the plan area build out. Additionally, the update finds that the original Phase II of the Central Boulevard is not required from a traffic operations perspective. The original Phase II concept for the Central Boulevard involves the realignment of the new street with Tolman Creek Road, and the Central Boulevard bisecting the ODOT maintenance yard site. The purpose of the original Phase II concept was to create a gateway into the Croman Mill District which would contribute to the identity of the employment area, to continue the boulevard street design used on Siskiyou Boulevard and Ashland Street, and to connect the existing boulevards and create a loop through the property. Additionally, the realignment of Tolman Creek Road was intended to address residents concerns regarding traffic impacts to the residential neighborhood by discouraging non-local traffic through the Tolman Creek neighborhood and in the Bellview School area. Concerns have been raised by ODOT regarding their ability to find a new location for the maintenance yard. Additionally, concerns have been raised by the owners of 695 and 697 Mistletoe Road because the concept for the original Phase II Central Boulevard locates the street through their properties. As a result, the option of using the 'existing location of Mistletoe Road for Phase II of the Central Boulevard was included in the transportation analysis update. Washington Street Connection The option of making a connection from the Croman Mill site to Washington Street across the railroad right-of-way was analyzed to determine if providing a second connection to the north would disperse the traffic so that less mitigation would be needed a the Tolman Creek Page 7 of II ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Road! Ashland Street intersection. The analysis finds that the impacts to the intersection of Tolman Creek Road/Ashland Street would be reduced by a Washington Street Connection if a signal were to be provided at the W ashington Street/Ashland Street intersection. In contrast" the Washington Street connection does not significantly reduce the impact to the Tolman and Ashland Street intersection if Washington Street is limited to right-inlright-out only at Ashland Street. ODOrs draft access management plan for the reconstruction ofInterchange 14 includes the control of Washington Street to right-inlright-out. The analysis identifies the signal at Ashland Street/Washington Street providing better operations, but points out that the signal does not meet ODOT access spacing standards and would require a design exception and approval from the state traffic engineer. Other considerations which would need to be reviewed are the ability to gain approval for a crossing of the railroad right-of-way, the type and cost of an additional crossing and the impact of an overhead crossing on the planned street network and Central Park. City Council Deliberation Outline Staff has prepared responses to the questions submitted by the Councilors prior to the May 4 meeting (attachment 3). If Councilors are interested in information according to the chronology of the project, the project web site, www.ashland.or.us/croman. includes the project materials by meeting date beginning with the 2008 planning process up to the current Council meetings, under the "Project' Materials" link (hltp://ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=1 0780). Staffrecommends the Council use the deliberation process to provide direction on any revisions that Council wishes prior to first reading. Staff recommends that after the Council holds deliberations, first reading of the ordinance be continued to the May 18,2010 Council meeting. If extensive revisions are required, delaying first reading until a later date such as June 1,2010 may be necessary. The outline below was developed in an effort to assist in the process of deliberations by addressing the primary components ofthe Croman Mill District Implementation Plan. A summary question and some of the key issues are included under each component. The key issues include carry over items from the Plaruning Commission recommendation as well as some of the potential revisions to address issues raised at the public hearing on April 6. The key issues are meant to be a starting point to help facilitate the discussion, and are not intended to be a comprehensive list of Council concerns. 1. Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment Should the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map be amended to implement the Croman Mill' Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) with recommended revisions by the Planning Commission? This would involve: I) revising the Comprehensive Plan Map designations ofIndustrial, Employment and Single-Family Residential to the Croman Mill District, and 2) revising the Zoning Map designations ofM-1 Industrial, E-I Employment and R-I Single-Family Residential to CM Croman Mill including the Compatible Industrial (CI), Mixed Use (MU), Neighborhood Center (Ne), Office Employment (OE) and Open Space (OS) zoning overlays. Key Issues: . Mixed Use (MU): Should the Mixed Use zoning overlay (CM-MU) be included in the Zoning Map amendment? (Planning Commission recommendation) Page 8 of II ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND . 650-750 Mistletoe Road: Should the properties at 650-750 Mistletoe Road (mini-storage site) retain the M-l Industrial zoning, have the Comprehensive Plan designation amended from Industrial to Croman Mill, and include the portion of the site adjacent to the street in the Detail Site Review Zone? (Planning Commission recommendation) Ordinances: I, 5 and 5a 2. Add Accompany land Use Regulations and Standards for the Croman Mill District Should ordinances be adopted and revised to accompany the Croman Mill District and implement the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) (i.e. Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill, Section VIII - Croman Mill District Standards and miscellaneous Chapter 18 revisions)? Key Issues: . Major and Minor Amendments: Is there adequate flexibility in the major and minor amendment process to allow applications to propose alternate approaches to the Croman Mill District Standards? . Streamlining Site Review Approval Process: Should all Site Review applications in the Croman Mill District be processed under the Type I procedure rather than the existing system of requiring a Type II process with a public hearing for Site Review applications involving new structures or additions that are 20% of an existing building's square footage or 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is less? If this change were to be instituted, the Type II process would be used for Major Amendments to the Croman Mill District plan, and Conditional Use Permits applications involving new buildings or more than three residential units. . Street Orientation: Should the street orientation follow the original street framework, or should the streets and zoning overlays be adjusted to the East-West street orientation as shown on the East-West Alignment Alternative Map included in the April 6, 2010 City Council packet? . Central Boulevard Design: Should on-street parking be removed from the design of the Central Boulevard? . Phase II of the Central Boulevard: Should using the existing Mistletoe Road location be included as a third conceptual option for Phase II ofthe Central Boulevard? . Washington Street Connection: Should a connection from the Croman Mill site be incorporated into the plan prior to adoption? Ordinances: 2, 3, 4 and 6 Related City Policies: Ashland Comprehensive Plan - Chapter II: Introductions and Definitions, Chapter III: Citizen Participation, Chapter IV: Environmental Resources, Chapter VII: The Economy, Chapter VIII: Parks, Page 9 of II ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Open Spaces and Aesthetics, Chapter X: Transportation, Chapter XI: Energy, Air and Water Conservation, Chapter XII: Urbanization Chapter 18.108 Procedures Council Options: The Council may approve, approve with modifications, or deny the .first reading of ordinances adopting Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill and related ordinance, Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments. Potential Motions: I. Move to approve first reading ofthe following ordinances and request that the ordinances be brought back for second reading on June 15,2010. . . Ordinance #1: An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to add a new Croman Mill District designation to Chapter II [Introduction and Definitions] to add the Croman Mill Plan Designation on the adopted Land Use Map Legend and adopt the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan and Economic Opportunities Analysis as support documents to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Exhibit A: Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (December 2008) Exhibit B: City of Ashland: Economic Opportunity Analysis Exhibit C: Comprehensive Plan Map Legend Exhibit D: Comprehensive Plan Appendix A: Technical Reports & Supporting Documents . Ordinance #2: An Ordinance amending the Ashland Land Use Ordinance creating a new Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill Exhibit A: Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill . Ordinance #3: An ordinance amending AMC 18.72.080.C Site Design Review Standards to add new Site Design and Use Standards for the Croman Mill District Exhibit A: Section VIII Croman Mill District Standards . Ordinance #4: An ordinance amending AMC 18.08.190, 18.08.341, 18.08.342, 18.08.343, 18.08.845, 18.12.020, 18.61.042, 18.68.020, 18.68.050, 18.72.030, 18.72.110, 18.72.120, 18.72.140,18.72.180,18.84.100,18.88.070, 18.88.080, 18.92.020, 18.96.090, 18.104.020, 18.106.030, 18.108.0174 of the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance for consistency with new Chapter 18.53 Croman Mill . Ordinance #5: An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to change the land use map designation of approximately 99 acres of land within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary from Industrial, Employment, Single-Family Residential and Rural Residential (Jackson County) to the newly created Croman Mill Plan Designation; amending the City of Ashland Zoning and Land Use Control Maps to rezone approximately 78 acres of land within the City Limits from M-l, E-I, and R-I-5 Districts to the newly created Croman Mill Zone; and imposing five Croman Mill Overlay Districts on the Croman mill zoned properties, including Compatible Industrial, CM-CI, Office Employment, CM-OE, Mixed Use, CM-MU, Open Space, CM-OS, Neighborhood Center, CM-NC Exhibit A: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation Exhibit B: Proposed Croman Mill District Zone (CM) Exhibit C: Proposed Zoning Map Changes . Ordinance #5a: An Ordinance Extending the City of Ashland Detail Site Review Zone Exhibit A: Croman Mill District Detail Site Review Update Page 10 of 11 ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND . Ordinance #6: An Ordinance amending AMC Chapter 15 to create LEED Certified Building Priority 2. Move to approve first reading with proposed amendments as noted after each ordinance, and request that the ordinanc~s be brought back for second reading on June 15,2010. (see list of ordinances above) Attachments: 1. Summary of comments of April 6, 2010 City Council public hearing 2. Transportation Analysis Information a. Supplemental Traffic Analysis Report b. Baseline Transportation and Development Transportation Report c. Transportation Cost Report 3. Staff memo addressing questions from City Council 4. Letter from Ashland Chamber of Commerce 5. Letter from Mike Morris Pagellofll ~.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Public Testimony Summary RE: Croman Mill District Master Plan Public Hearing 04/06/2010 Pam Marsh, Planning Commission Chair: Explained the Commission's discussion process of review and recommendations. and she noted her four primary observations I) The Master plan was evaluated by the Planning Commission based on the guiding principles, keeping them in the forefront of the planning process. As a result of those goals this Plan aims high in attempting to create a unique neighborhood with a specific identity that could support a significant number of family wage jobs. That level of employment density could in turn support innovative infrastructure, transportation alternatives and high standard of environmentally sensitive development 2) The Master Plan does not open up any areas of the City to development rather it is an attempt to focus and organize development that is already allowed. The Croman plan area is already in the City Limits and could develop at any time. The Master plan provides a template to organize its development. 3) The plan is conceptuaL The important thing is to look at the concept as the plan details can be amended through implementation. 4) The plan is internally integrated. Changes in one element would have implications on the rest of the plan. Ms. Marsh in response to a question from Councilor Voisin explained the Planning Commission did not accept the "Minority Report" prepared by Commissioners Mindlin and Dawkins because it went beyond specific planning decisions, incorporated testimony not part of the public record and was considered inappropriate to include as part of the official Planning Commission documentation. Mike Montero, Representative for the Croman Mill Property owners Expressed support for the master plan, stating it retains sufficient flexibility to meet a variety of demands. On behalf of the owners they urge adoption of the plan. He noted that Plexis Healthcare Systems Inc [a medical software company interested in developing a portion of the property} is pleased at this point and looks forward to being sited there and having their future tied to that property and the City of Ashland. John Kruese, owner 690 Mistletoe Rd. Stated for the record that he is opposed to the proposaL He cited concerns regarding the timing of Phase I and Phase II Central Blvd. improvements. Stated that this was the first he's heard of the option of Mistletoe Road being used for the Central Blvd. Noted that the proposed Central Blvd [not using Mistletoe Rd.) would go through his building. He stated that the alternative of using the existing Mistletoe Rd for the Central blvd does not sufficient right of way available with only 34'. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 TTY: 800-735-2900 ~.l' Paul Steinle, Southern Oregon University and Croman Advisory Committee: Read a letter into the record provided by SOU Provost Jim Klien that stated the university is very supportive of expansions in economic opportunities in Ashland, and that a variety of employers will provide more opportunities for SOU graduates. Kathy Kennedy Hamlin, co-owner 690 Mistletoe Rd: Identified their two taxlots which are both developed as light industrial. Stated that the proposed Central Blvd bisects both buildings and the plan if approved would impact the economic viability of these buildings. Noting that she is not accepting of Phase II showing their buildings being dissected at this point has an economic impact and could constitute takings of value given challenges in securing new lease agreements from prospective tenants. Does not know how the City will resolve the issue of acquiring the right of way. Graham Lewis, Ad hoc Croman Advisory Committee: Stated from his prior experience with the Chamber of Commerce's Economic Sustainability and Rapid Response committee that he's come to the conclusion that for Ashland to have a sustainable economy we must"have space. He stated this Master Plan is important for a sustainable economy in providing a place for existing Ashland businesses to expand and for new businesses to start-up or relocate here. "A vote for this plan is a vote for economic sustainability." Mark Dirienzo, 700 Mistletoe Rd. Supported a plan to turn the Croman Mill Site into a vibrant flexible dynamic economic center that encourages the growth of existing and new companies. He stated its his belief the plan will have unintended consequences that will stifle business development. He stated that the result of two years of discussions is a plan that is complicated, confusing and costly. He posed the following questions that need to be answered: . How much will the proposed infrastructure cost? He stated he believes it is more than the businesses or City can afford based on his estimates. . Can real life businesses adhere to the plans use restrictions regulating allowable percentages for office, warehouse, or production, and how does the plan address changes in use over time? . Why have lot size and minimum building size restrictions that would make it difficult for small businesses? . Why is his lot being thrown into the plan? He asserted that a change on their zoning overlay will have a detrimental impact to his property He requested the plan not be approved, but sent back for simplification and flexibility. He Suggested revising to add an incremental approach to infrastructure, including a thorough analysis by development professionals for an economic analysis, Tom Bradley Stated he was impressed with the thought and creativity that has gone into the transportation and utility infrastructure noting that he considers those two services to be most effectively provided by the government. He expressed his concern that we could be over regulating development. He stated that the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541.488.5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 TTY: 800-735.2900 ~.l' economic environment is not likely to be the same in 10 years and that perhaps the criteria could be simplified to have more latitude in the future as conditions change. Zach Brombacher, Tolmau Property resident and Business owner: He is not against it perse, but is discouraged with how it has been going. Stated he has been involved with the process [Croman hearings], and is concerned that the City is pushing this proposal for a private developer and he stated that he feels the City has ignored the concerns of adjacent property owners. He is extremely concerned about the infrastructure and capacity. He stated he does not want to pay for someone else's development and that the City should consider those that are already in the area. Melanie Mindlin Noted her prepared statement was presented in writing in the form of the "minority report". She expressed that the main issue was varying views of what ought to be done with economic development. She stated that at the planning commission they had discussed only wanting businesses there with 100 employees. She stated that the Planning Commission spent the sessions discussing the details of implementing the plan, and she felt they did not discuss the substantive issues underlying the plan which was a frustration. She questioned whether a second high density employment area is what is needed. She questioned as to whether the edge of town was more appropriate for light industrial that needs a lot of space. She stated that the design standards proposed would be difficult for lower capitalized businesses in terms of afford ability. She personally would recommend "getting rid of all of that complex and very expensive design standards, and look at perhaps just a few environmental resource focused standards...". Michael Dawkins Cited a March 15th statement by Pam Marsh which was in the minority report regarding. the scope of the PC review. He recalled a meeting in which the prior Mayor had indicated that the area should be high density employment. He felt the M-I property by its nature is inexpensive. He questioned the high density employment objective in relation to the location of the site, rather than promoted Plexis to be located close to downtown. He felt the PC fe"fell down" by not looking at larger issues. Cate Hartzell Written request to leave the public record open John Fields Questioned where the plan got "off-track" and he felt the focus on the office park approach was not where Ashland is or is going. Cited a difficult in relocating high tech industries and employees to Ashland. Expressed that a plan is a "bridge" into the future and when he looks at this plan he sees the details are not fully understood in terms of an incremental development of infrastructure and the economies of scale necessary to fund their development. He stated that he does not think the plan is done and does not provide a lot of room to grow. Colin Swales Written letter read into the record. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 20 E. Main Street Ashland. Oregon 97510 WNW.ashland.or.us Tel: 541.488.5305 Fax: 541.551.1050 TTY: 800.735-2900 ~.l' DKS Associates TRANSPOR'TAT10N SOLUTIONS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Maria Harris, City of Ashland Bill Monlar, City of Ashland , FROM: Alan Snook, AICP . Mat Dolata, EIT DATE: April 29, 2019 SUBJECT: Croman Mill Property Supplemental Traffic Analysis Report PlOOO48-O()()...()()() The purpose of this memorandum is to provide supplemental traffic analysis related to the proposed Croman Mill property project located in the City of Ashland, OR. The traffic analysis should be considered an addendum to the Baseline Transportation and Development Transportation Report from January 2009'. The supplemental analysis includes: future year (2030) analysis of a fourth conceptual development land use scenario, the impacts of a proposed Washington Street connection from the project site north to Highway 66 (Ashland Street), the impacts of Misteltoe Road connectivity alternatives at Tolman Creek Road, and the need to improve Mistletoe Road connecting to the west. Executive Summary Based on this analysis, there are a number of improvements necessary by 2030 under the Alternative F land use scenario. However, many of the mitigations needed to reach jurisdictional standards are also necessary in the No-build condition (even without the redevelopment of the Croman Mill site), and the mitigations are fewer than what was identified for the more intense previous land use identified in Alternative D. Additional mitigations identified for Alternative F that were not included in the No-Build include: . A westbound right turn lane at the Highway 66 / 1-5 Northbound Ramp intersection . A northbound right turn lane at the Highway 66 / Tolman Creek Road intersection . Signalization of the "Central Boulevard" roadway with Tolman Road. . A traffic signal at the Highway 99 / Tolman Creek Road intersection Additional mitigations identified for Alternative D that are not included in Alternative F: I Croman Mill Property Baseline Transportation and Development Transportation Report, DKS Associates, January 2nd,2009 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOlUTfONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29, 2010. Palle 2 of 14 . Southbound right aud westbound right turn lanes at the Highway 66 / Tolman Creek Road intersection . An additional turn lane at the Tolman Creek Road / Mistletoe Road intersection Analysis of the proposed realignment of Tolman Creek Road at Mistletoe Road indicates that it is not needed from an operational perspective, but does provide a more direct route of travel for trips to/from the proposed development. Retaining the existing Mistletoe Road alignment could work with the proposed land uses, it would just slightly modify the improvements at the intersection of Mistletoe Road/Tolman Creek Road. Both options (realignment or retain existing alignment) would require a signal at the intersection and a neW tUrn pocket to meet operational standards. Regardless of the realignment, Mistletoe Road would need'to be improved to a three lane facility when volumes from the proposed development reached a critical point. Mistletoe Road south of the intersection (or east ifno realignment occu~d)would likely need to be widened to a three lane facility at approximately 85% of the proposed Alternative F development. Tolman Creek Road to the north of the intersection would likely, need to be widened to three. lanes at approximately 60% of the proposed development.-Incomparison, two-lane fa~ilities would be adequate for No-Build, while a four or fiv~ lane facility was previously identified under Alternative D land.uses. '--" , '--- \ ...." , An extension of Washington Street south to thede~elopment are~'would reduce mitigations necessary at the intersection of Highway 66 / :rom;m CreekRoad, but only if a signal was provided. If an extension,.was prrivided with. Right"inlRight-Out access at Highway 66 / Washington Street, additional mitigation would be necessary'at.the Highway 66 / Tolman Creek Road intersection. While a signal at the intersection of Highway 66 / Washington Street provides better operatioris(~nd better connectivity, ~i.th a Washington Street Extension), the signal does not meerODOT"access spacing standards and would require a design exception and approval from the state. traffic engineer to install>, " , -', '. ',,, '---'J .~ ' ".', " '. ,,'\ "'" Background " '\ ' , ".' ," The Croman Mill redevelopment' project has proposed a set of land uses with revised transportation ihrra.Sl!Ucture. Avariety ofland use options have been analyzed through previous alternatives, and a: set 'of potential mitigation strategies have been outlined based on these land uses. This report includ~\ a~alysi~ 'of a new land use scenario referred to as Alternative F2. Assumptions and Methodology This section describes the assumptions and methodologies used for the proposed land use scenario and associated trip generation and distribution. Unless otherwise noted, assumptions from the previous transportation analysis are catried forward including study area, intersections, future horizon year, and analysis methodology. 2 The scenario is called Alternative F in reference to Alternatives A-D, which were included in the previous T ransportatiOD Report. as well as an interim Alternative E used for internal analysis. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATIO'I SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29, 2010 Pap;e 3 of 14 Proposed Zoning Figure I illustrates the proposed land uses and sub division of the Croman Mill property and surrounding properties for Alternative F. The proposed land uses include compatible industrial (CI), mixed use (MU), neighborhood center (Ne), office employment (DE), open space / conservation (OS), and manufacturing (M-I) zoning. Table 1 summarizes the proposed land use, acreage and potential associated square footage for the new land use scenario compared to the existing zoning (Alternative A). Table 1 Future land Use Assumptions and Calculated Square Footage Land UselFloor Area Existing Zoning . Acres , .. .1 000 . fI... N/A / ~ N/A N/(I' ' N/A 63.14 688 "- 4.58 '., 100 . N/A ", N/A " . 19.01 125 du 'NA NA ..8&.73' .".. Notes: \ \ '.... "'< FAR=Floor-to-arearatio-~ - -'- \ \, du = dwelling units ' \, \ -,./ ( sq_ ft. = square feet . ',", \', \,-//, . Assumed to be evenly split between Commercial/Office and Residential land uses. **This area estimate is'exclusive ofland to be dedic3t~d'as public right of way SOURCE: City of Ashland . " ',- \' \ .~" "" ( '''~ '-~" \ ') Trip Generation', "'-" v , " " ,_ "' '-. ~ J With different zoning replacing the currently allowed uses, there may be different motor vehicle trips expected.. Using the hind use for the proposed alternatives, motor vehicle trips were estimated for Alternative F UShlg the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (1h EditionJ). These trips were calculated for the AM and PM peak hours, as well as daily trips. Table 2 presents the potential trips that could be made to/from the study area during peak hours of the day (of the entire day). Table 2 also lists the total acreage for each land use and the assumed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to convert acreage to usable square footage. Residential units were calCUlated at 17 units per I acre. This would consist of a high density type of residential land use. As with previous Alternatives 8-D, the proposed Alternative includes a park-and-ride in the northwest portion of the study area that would service a potential commuter rail station near the intersection of Tolman Creek Road and the existing City ofPrineville Land Use Type Mixed Use Open Space Industrial/ Manufacturing OfficelConunerdal Reta~ Residential Parlt and Ride ". Acres 13.47 .'7.68 , 26.64 19.57' N/A 2.56 1.16 71.07'* , J Alternative F 1,000 . fl. 147/166 duO N/A 580 512 N/A 44du 220 s ces , While there is an Sib Edition available, the 71b edition was used for consistency with the previous analysis. It is estimated that the difference between the 71b and Sib editions for expected trip generation is for PM peak hour trips is S (AM peak hour trip difference is 19 and daily trip difference is II), or less than I % different. In each case, the 71b edition represents a slightly higher trip generation resnIt and is therefore reflects the larger estimate oftrip generation impacts. ::-i1,1 ~'... J .: . , I I I .,' -1 ! -. , .' ~ =)l ;'J" " ' _ I" ...... . --'-' ':"1.: .,.> ::],\. ,.1 ~ c, " ~ " :'\ \1, o '.- (, . . . i'.../ @) :! ..- c @ LEGEND N Information Sources: City of Ashland ~ PROPOSED LAND USE BY LOCATION MAP NOT TO SCAlE DKS Associates TRANSPO'RTATIQN SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM . April 29, 2010 PaRe 5 of 14 Railway (COPR) heavy rail tracks. This alternative also includes a parking garage centrally located in the study area within the Office Employment Area. Table 2 Zoning, Acreage and Potential Square Footage of Study Area AM Peak Hour Trips In Out Total 470 64 534 959 118 1.077 26 62 88 1 0/ 1 196 39 236 1,651 ,285 1,936 Notes: / FAR = Floor-lo-area ratio ',- /.~ "'. ',- ", du = dwelling units / ''\ '" / " "- sq. ft. = square feet /." _ ... "- · Includes estimated share of Mixed Use acreage ahd 1.49 acres reserved for a parking garage.. .. Includes estimated share of Mixed Use acreage", '", " , " , Although the AM peak hour has higher trip generatioll'thmfth,ePM peak hour in'Alternative F, the PM peak hour remains the criti~time period for analysis of traffic operations. The study area roadways have significantly higher traffic volumes during the PM peak hour. For example, the Highway 66 / Tolman Creek Road intersection: traffic cOunt~ show approximately 50% more traffic in the PM peak hour compared toth~AM Peak hour, representing a difference of several hundred vehicles. In ,comparison, flte 55 vehicle differ~n~ebetween.the AM and PM peak hour trip generation represents less than .a 3% change. / .... "<, , ". -', \ " .,/ " ' '. \. \ Table 3 summarizes and compares the number of in, out and total trips for each scenario during the AM, PM; and daily trip periods..Included in thi~ trip generation calculation was a small reductionin potential trip making based on,the:potential for pass-by trips associated with the retail Iandrises for each alternative (wJlere appliqt.!>le). . -" , ',,,, '''" ", '\ ""\" '-" '-.. '" '-. Table 3 \, \ Trip Ge~~ration Comparison land Use Acres FAR Unils Industrial 26.6 0.50 580 K sq. ft Office Employment 26.3' 0.60 659 K sq. fi. Residential 9.3" 1700 160du Open Space 7.7 N/A 8 acres Parll and Ride 1.2 N/A 220 SIlllces TOTALS 11.1 PM Peak Hour Trips In Out Total 68 500 569 130 799 929 55 42 107 1 1 2 157 118 275 422 1,460 1,881 Oaily Trips 4.044 7.070 1.075 35 552 12,776 " , Exlstina Zonina Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D Alternative F AM Peak Hour In , 735 .: 1,055 1.115 1,975 1.651 , , Trips Out'. ,1.65 330 325 430 285 -.~ ./ Total ' 900 1.385 1.440 2.405 1,936. PM Peak Hour In '.'180 645 575 690 422 Trips Out 775 1.165 1,160 1,810 1.460 Total 950 1.810 1,735 2,500 1.881 Daily Trips SOURCE:DKSA$~m~s 10,135 14,010 12,944 18,933 12,776 From Table 3, it can be seen that, of the four scenarios, Alternative D generates the highest traffic volumes, while Alternative C represents the closest match to Alternative F for daily trip OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOlUTl'ONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29. 2010 . PaM" 6of14 generation. The difference in the number of trips generated comes from the different proportioning of land use between the scenarios. Roadway Network As was assumed for Alternatives B-D, this alternative includes Tolman Creek Road being realigned to "tee" into the realigned Mistletoe Road occurring just south of the COPR heavy rail alignment. This option is being considered to have Tolman Creek Road perform as more of a neighborhood collector to help reduce the amount of traffic utilizing the roadway. Currently Tolman Creek Road is classified as an Avenue, which is a higher classification than a Neighborhood Collector, indicating the potential for higher volunies. This alternative would include the reclassification of Tolman Creek Road as a Neighborhood Collector and assumes a slightly lower posted speed limit to encourage lower vehicle traffic. I -' " \ / Future Findings //';" , .. ... The following section evaluates the future PM,)ieak' hour traffic operations associated with Alternative F. Where study area intersections'do rrot meetjurisdiction~l St8ndards, mitigation measures will be identified to meet those stan~ds.The methodology and assumptions used in the previous transportation report, including analysis period, futtire year, and trip distribution are maintained for this analysis. " . , '-.. , ' " "- Unmitigated Operations " \' .,.:-, "" Table 4 identifies 2030 PM peak hour operi1tio~'assl.lining lanQuSe and associated trip generation estimated for AI~rDative F and n6roadway mitigations., : / /--~'" \ '\ / /"..- , / 'v . . , , T~ble,4. Alternative F - 2030 PM Peak HO\lr Unmitigated Traffic Operations , . PM Peak Hour Intersection' " . Mobility Standaid Delay LOS Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5Northllound Ramps , 'VIe 0.85 .. > BO.O F Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Southbound Ramps ',VlCO.85 > 80.0 F Hwy 66 (As,hland St)/WashingtOll S1' . ". VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F Hwy 66 (AshlandSt)tTolman Creek Rd "., " V/C 0.90 60.3 E Tolman Creek RdlMisdeloe Road ,".\ ".) LOS D > 8D.D F Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)tT a1man Creek Rd VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)lMiSlletoe MiD Rd VlC 0.90 51.8 F Hwy 99 (Siskiyou 81vd)/CrowSon Rd . VlC O.BO 11.4 B SOURCE: DKSAssoc/Btes"'/ , I I -Indicates an inle<section.tIiat does not meet jurisdictional standard VIC >to.;. . ; J~t;~ >'~"-l"io-":b-'" . t.-.... 0.68 > 1.0' . I 0.50 0.11 Based on the findings in Table 4, six total intersections fail to meet jurisdictional standards by the year 2030 during the PM peak hour, and would require some form of mitigation to meet the outlined standard. Five of the intersections are also forecasted to not meet jurisdictional standards in the No-build condition. In addition, the realigned intersection of Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road does not meet jurisdictional standard in Alternative F. OKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29, 2010 PaMe 7 of14 'TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Mitigations The following summarizes potential mitigation strategies to address deficiencies expected for the Alternative F land use scenario. . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 northbound - As in the No-build scenario, this intersection has a deficient V /C ratio for the stop controlled side street. The northbound left turning vehicles incur a large amount of delay associated with multiple conflicting heavy vehicle movements at this intersection. Similar mitigation as under the No-build condition (traffic signal) would be necessary; however signalization alone would not meet the jurisdictional standard. In addition, a separate eastbound left turn pocket would be necessary in order to meet the jurisdictional stand3rd, This would provide a protected left turn for the large number of vehicles accessirig Interstate 5. This improvement would require tbe reconstruction of the existirig overPass to allow for a three lane cross-section (currently it is a two lane structure). As in Alternatives B'::.D, a westbound right turn pocket would also be necessary with AIU;mati~e F land use., ' , , , . , , The intersection does not meet peak hour. signal warrants during thePM peak hour. Since this intersection does not meet signal Warrlmts3yarianc.e would need to'be sought to install a traffic signal and the justification of the. traffic signal would need to be documented and then reviewed by ODOT and the State Traffic Engineer for potential , ' ',,- approval. \ \.. '--,,--- '",- \ \. "'-.. -', , '... ,,,- . Hwv 66 (AshlandStreet)/Interstate 5\southbOundramo - The'stop controlled off-ramp intersection haS southbowia.movemenis that are' over capaciiY. Similar mitigation that was outlined forthe No-build scenari;;~~~.ld/still be 'necessary under this alternative. This includes a traffic signal at the intersection and an additional southbound right turn pocket (for dual right turns). The intersectiori currently meets signal warrants, and would coritinueto do so in the futuie. ,,"~ \ " /' ','" -', '. ....."' ..., \....- '" ',", ,"- .'H~ 66 (Ashl~dStreet)lw~hiDlrton streit - This intersection has stop control in the nc>rthbound direction and heaVy volumes east/west on Ashland Street which create a dela:ya~d capacity coi.strilint fo~ th~;northbound left movement. This intersection has similar lni,tigl!tion as woul~ be necessary under the No-build scenario. This includes a traffic sigrial with an additional westbound left turn pocket (for dual left turns). "', / I "- " /' The intersection meets t,he peak hour signal warrant, however is spaced approximately 350 feet away from the Interstate 5 southbound off-ramp. Because a signal at this location would violate spacing standards, a variance would need to be granted to allow its construction. Additional options related to this intersection are discussed later in this report, including creating a Right-lnlRight-Out traffic control. The proposed Right- InlRight-Out traffic control would operate within jurisdictional standards without requiring any additional mitigations (such as additional turn lanes or a traffic signal), but would have impacts to other nearby intersections and limit circulation and access to Wasbington Street land uses. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATlON'SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29, 2010 Pall. 8 of 14 . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)(folman Creek Road - Similar to the No-build scenario, an additional (second) westbound left turn at this intersection would help to mitigate the intersection operations. The creation of dual westbound left turns would require two receiving lanes southbound on Tolman Creek Road. The additional receiving lane could taper and merge to one lane further south of this intersection. However, the left turn alone is not enough mitigation to meet the jurisdictional standard. In addition to adding a westbound left turn, a separate northbound right turn would be needed to achieve the jurisdictional standard for vie ratio. The need for additional southbound right and westbound right turn lanes were identified for Alternative D, but are not necessary in Alternative F. // " / /~ . Tolman Creek Road/Mistletoe Road (realigned) L The realigned intersection does not meet jurisdictional standard as an unsignalized intefseetioth Signalizing the intersection allows for adequate intersection operations:TIui intersection meets peak hour signal warrants under this alternative in the futili-e. The need for aD'additional eastbound turn lane to separate right and left turns was idehtified for Alternati:Ve D;,but is not necessary in Alternative F. ''-'-'>'' / '. ',- .. ," / . , '--, / / " . Hwv 99 (Siskivou Boulevard)!Tolman Creek Road c-,Under Alternative F this intersection is beyond the jurisdictional standardilven with expected changes to the peak hour factor through TDM measures outlined in theN()"build scenario; additional mitigation is necessary to meet the juriSdictional standl\l-d>The northbound left turn movement has delay ahdcapacity\:onstraints due to the ~top'controlled movement and the uncontrolled (free flow) ~ovement\~n Siskiyou Boulevard. Adding turn lanes to this approach does not alleviate the delay amI/or, capacity constraints. A signal at this location ~, . " " ., ',,- would allow for. adequate traffic operations; however the intersection does not meet a peak hour .signal w~t. If a signal were'tp be implemented at this location a variance ~ould need to be gra:nt~. ,.'- -." ........... \ ~ , '-, ". '" ....... ,/ ..... " ., '. -....... ...... " ' , -.......) Mitigated Operations '., ", "" ~ , " '. \ ',', Based on the mitigation measures outlined above, Table 5 summarizes the future operations of ""'.':'..::,: \.,.,:...." study area in~~tions in the ~030 PM peak hour with Alternative F land use. All intersections meet jurisdictional standard with the proposed mitigations. It should be noted that some of the proposed mitigati6iis ."would requite additional review and approval, especially the implementation of new, signals. at iDtersections if they do not meet a signal warrant. Meeting a signal warrant is one crite~on for implementing a signal, but there are many other criteria that should be evaluated and reviewed before deciding on installing a signal. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS' FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29, 2010 PaRe 9 of 14 Table 5 Alternative F - 2030 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Operations PM Peak Hour LOS C B A o C B F B Intersection Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n.5 Northbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Southbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington Sf Hwy 66 (Ashland St)ff olman Creek Rd Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road (realigned) Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)ff olman Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)lMistletoe MiD Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)lCrowson Rd SOURCE:DKSA"~res Mobility Standard VlC 0.85 VlC 0.85 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 LOS 0 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.80 Delay 22.7 18.1 7.5 37.0 22.4 19.1 51.8. " '11.4 ' Vie 0.74 0.61 0.51 0.88 0.83 0.70 0.50 0.11 Mitigation Triggers /',., The timetTame for full development of a property"c~be uncertain.'Tlible 6 lists progressive mitigation measures for each intersection and Ii trigger point that identifies the approximate level of development (as a percentage of full build-Out of Alternative F land uses) where the mitigation would be needed to address PM peak'hoJti- deficienCies. Table 6also identifies which of these measures are included in theN<?-Build scerim:io; No-BUIld mitigatio~s are identified as having a development trigger poinfof 50%, because tJie No"Build trip generation is equal to approximately 50% of the proposed NuirnarlveF trip geriemtion. This analysis makes some simplifying assumptions including uniforln deveil>pment oftheproperty across all land use types, but can be used as a rough guide for lnitigation priority and bmeline for intersection . ,/" \ '\; "- ' Improvements. . ~. .... \ / / '.j /' //- '" \ /" r- (( \ \V " " " Table.6 ',' Alternative F - Mi.tig~tion Triggers " \ \ ~ ~ .' - -'"' , '\' Inte"""'!foil'., '....' . .._~Itlgatlon~cription //, "" " ""," "- '~- '; . ". -.. ... ". T raffle signal . ~ Hwy 66 (Ashlarid St)n.5 NOrthbou~dRamps 'EBL'tum lane (with above) , " \... WBR turn Lane (with above) Hwy 66 (Ashland St)JI-5 Southbound Ramps T raffle signal with SBR tum lane Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washingion Sf T raffle signal with WBL tum lane '" . WBL tum lane Hwy 66 (Ashland St)ffolman C,reek Rd N8R turn lane (with above) Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road'-" / Roadway realignment & E8R tum lane' Roadway realignment & trafflc signal T raffle signal ... Included in No-Build x X X X X Development Trigger Point 50% 50% 50.55% 50% 50% 50% 90-95% 60-65% 75.80% 50-55% Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)ff olman Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)/Mistletoe Mill Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd SOURCE: DKS Associares Note: Twn lane abbreviations represent cardinal direction (north, soulb, east, west) and relative movement (left, right, tbrough) e.g. (EBL = eastbmmd left and NBR = northbound right). *EBR turn lane is not included in mitigation for full (100%) of Alternative F development, but provides an operational benefit that may serve as an interim solution prior to full build-<>ut. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29, 2010 PaMe 10 of14 Roadway Circulation Anematives In addition to the land use alternatives being considered, there are some roadway circulation changes worthy of further examination. Three changes from the existing roadway network are analyzed below: , . Realignment of Tolman Creek Road at Mistletoe Road . Extension of Washington Street (connecting to the proposed development across the existing railroad) . Right-In-Right-Out operations at the Washington Stree! /Ashland Street intersection / ./ Mistletoe Road Connection Sensitivity " The proposed realignment of Tolman Creek Road would "tee~ mto Mistletoe Road and would be classified as a Neighborhood Collector, thus reducingthepotential"for through trips along Tolman Creek Road. The more "through" route would'be created along Mistletoe Road with a new roadway extending from Mistletoe Roadt6 t4e 'southeast and c~nnecting to Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard) farther east of the existing Mistletoe Road. This roadway has the potential to be a three lane. The current plans assume an alignment to thewest that is placed within an existing Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT) maintenance yard. Ifthis'property were not available for the proposed realignment of MistletOe Road, something similar to the current alignment would be retained, with a MistletOe Road "te~"into Tolman Creek Road. \....... .....,- "" , \ '---" "'-., ','.... The proposed realignment of Tolman Creek Road~'the pote'D.tial to divert existing and future trips due to a less direcrnorthlsouth route to ~onnect'to/from HwY 9.9'(Siskiyou Boulevard) and Hwy 66 (Ashland Street):The regional travel,demilnd rriOdel,was. used to help estimate the potential for diverted trips. These diverted trips were rerouted in/the future forecasts for analysis. Table 5 from the previ~us transportation reportid~ntified the potential for diverted trips from Tolman C~eek Road basedo~'the regioniltravel d~triand model as approximately 50 peak hour vehicles for alternatiyes ~ ana.<( and 50-100j'eak ~our vehicles for Alternative D. "., ~' In terms of intersection ~pe~tion~; th~'only inters:ction significantly impacted by the proposed alignment would be the Toi~ri..~reei{'~oa~ / Mistletoe Road intersection itself. Table 7 summarizes the operations and,required lnitigations for the intersection with the existing configuration of Mistletoe Road (east/west) intersecting with Toman Creek Road (north/south). '''" ~, >' ,.' ...." '-...,/' Table 7 Operations Summary - Existing Mistletoe Road Connection '- / Alternallve F Mobility Mitigated Operation Standard Delay LOS VIC Intersection Mlllgation Description Included In No- Build Development Trigger Point Talman Creek RdlMislle\oe Road LOSD 35.5 D 0.92 WBR turn lane Traffic signal 50-55% 75,80% SOURCE:DKSAMoc~res Table 7 indicates very similar mitigations and operations for the current configuration as were identified for the realigned intersection in Table 5. In both cases an additional turn lane can DKS Associates TRAN$PORTATIOfl SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29. 2010 Pa~e 11 of14 provide a temporary mitigation. However, before full build-out of Alternative F, a traffic signal would be required to meet jurisdictional standards. The realigned route would make for more direct travel for the proposed development area between Highways 66 and 99, while the current configuration provides more direct travel north and south between the two highways. The overall balance of traffic volumes between approaches is relatively even in either scenario. As a result, traffic operations are similar in each scenario. The overall traffic volume expected for Mistletoe Road and the realigned Tolman Creek Road may necessitate widening the existing two-lane roadways to three-lane or even four-lane facilities. Typically, 700 vehicles per hour in a single lane is c6nsidered a threshold for widening to three lanes and 1200 vehicles per hour would indicate aplltential need for four or five lanes. In the Alternative F scenario, portions of Tolman Creek ROa,d(north of the realigned intersection with Mistletoe Road) are forecasted to have over 1000: vehicles ill a single lane and portions of Mistletoe Road are projected to have over 800 vehiCles 'in a single hine, indicating the need for three lanes of roadway. The need for three lan,es~s triggered at appro~imately 60% of Alternative F development on Tolman Creek Road'(north of the Mistletoe Road intersection) and 85% of Alternative F development on Mistlet~e ~oad (south of the Tolman Creek Road intersection.) The No-Build scenario would likelyha\oe an approximate lane volume maximum of 650. indicating that a two lane section would be adequate., The higher traffic volumes generated from Alternative D are estimated to be at a maximum of approximately 1200 vehicles on Tolman Creek Road (north of the Mistletoe Road intersection), which may trigger the need for a four or five laDe facility if such a iand,us'esceiiario is PIus!1ed. \ \ "., , ., ~ ". \'" , Washington Street Co';~7ctioni;en.sitiVitY \ \ /, . ,. ' '-..../ , .". \ ,/ / ,,'l A proposed extension.of~ashington Street sol,lth ~ould create an additional access point into the study area and would potentially divert traffic demand from Tolman Creek Road and its intersectionsat,the Highway66 arid Mistletoe R~ad'iJJ.tersections. This is a key intersection because of the high level of lnitigation' identified irisome alternatives, particularly Alternative D whichsnggested the'need'for an additional linn l'line 'o~ each approach. However, two potential , .. ".', '.', "I difficulti,esexist for the W!lshington Street extenSion. The first is the proposed roadway would , need to cross the railroad that borderS the north/west portion of the study area. The second issues is that the Washington Street I.Highway'66:intersection has been identified by for potential Right-InlRight'Outoperations,'given its proximity to the 1-5 / Highway 66 interchange ramps. \ , \ " '''-, "., , Right-lnlRight-Out ciperations would alleviate the left turn delay/capacity constraint, however due to physical constraiilts \vhhthe heavy rail alignment to the south, Washington Street provides the only full cOllllection to access multiple parcels within this area. If a right-in/right- out access were pursued, additional connectivity would need to be provided potentially to Tolman Creek Road to allow for additional ingress/egress for that area. A right-in/right out access may also impact connectivity for land uses located to the north of Ashland Street (primarily retail uses). While both options would allow for adequate traffic operations, a signal may be the preferred mitigation to allow for full access to surrounding land uses. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SD'lUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM April 29. 2,010 Pa~e 12 of 14 To analyze the impacts of the proposed Washington Street extension and potential Right- lnlRight-Out operations at the Washington Street extension, four separate scenarios were identified: . Washington Street Extension & Right-lnlRight-Out operations at Highway 66 . Washington Street Extension & all turns permitted at Highway 66 . No Washington Street Extension & Right-InlRight-Out operations at Highway 66 . No Washington Street Extension & all turns permitted at Highway 66 All four scenarios are analyzed with Alternative F assumed tobe)'ully built. Figure 2 includes a schematic illustration of each scenario and also identifies 203()}PM peak hour traffic operations for the three study intersections impacted by the alternatives. The following section discusses the operations and mitigations for each of the four s.C!l~os. ',' '_, '-, " Figure 2 shows the traffic operations expected ,~ithout a Washington Street extension and with all turns permitted at Washington Street / Highway 66 (similar to the preyious Alternative F configuration.) The results match those previousl:Videntified in Jable 5. The'mitigations identified include two additional turn lanes at the Tolman CteekRd / Highway 66.intersection. .~ '... .. ,c .. , . . -'- -'- / Figure 2 also shows the traffic opemtionsexpected with a Washington Street extension constructed and with all turns permitted at Washington StielwlHighway 66. The extension removes the need for any mitigations at'th~.Tolman '('reek RdVHighway 66 intersection and also improves operations at the Tolman CreekRd/ Mistletoe Road interSection. However, traffic operations at Washington,Street iHighwaYI\6'are,d~gradedifrom vlc '0.51 to 0.74, but still meet the jurisdictional stall(lafd. \ '. \ / /. "~) . , \,,\ '-', " \, \' The Right-In/Right-Out'tuffi restriction, at Washington Street / Highway 66 removes the need for constructing:'a!riiffic.signal attheWashingronStreet I Highway 66 intersection. However, traffic operatiorl's at Tolman Creek Rd/Highway 66 ~redegnided and require additional mitigations ~.':'~:" "-, "," - .. " , .. .... - " (southbound left and eastbOund righfturn lanes) compared to the base scenario for Alternative F. With the~gh.t-InlRight-Outiestriclion'at Washington Street / Highway 66, the mitigations for the TolmariCreek Rd / Highway. 66 inks"ection match what was identified for Alternative D. ',', -,-t." \ -,\ ',,~/' \'-,-<:."" '. ,:.'~ \ The traffic openiti()~s,expected ~itp a Washington Street extension constructed and Right- lnlRight-Out operali~ns at Wa~hington Street / Highway 66 are also identified in Figure 2. Traffic operations at TO~nlan.C~k RdI Highway 66 benefit from outbound study area traffic turning right onto Highway' 6~:from Washington Street extension (instead of from Tolman Creek Road). However, with the tUrDs being restricted, the impacts are relatively small and the mitigation required remains at four additional turn lanes for the Tolman Creed Rd / Higway 66 intersection. As in the previous scenario, the Right-InlRight-Out turn restriction does remove the need for adding a signal at the Washington Street / Highway 66 intersection. o . s ,~ ~ ~ :; ~E -II) II)z ZII.I ~II) ~~ ...- II.I~ 11.1(:1 ~- ...... 11)- zl!!! 011) ...z (:12 ~5 11)11.1 ~~ '" '" c " ~ 5 '" c Jl . ~ Sl = z i~ ;: ~~ ~ c E 0 0 '. . c c> .. . . w Ii " ~ 0 i g c .go c 0 , '" ;;; u . c 0 ,Q> 8. a: '" . ~ e . .. z z .. '" lZZl '. i ~ 0 ,lj ;;; 8 . C 0. C a .'l j u; '" Q go go go ~ ~ ~ Z . . . W ;jj ;jj ;jj Cl ~ 0 W = ....I DKS Associates TRANSPOR'TAIION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM ,April 29, 2010 Pa~e 14 of 14 In summary, the proposed Right-InlRight-Out operations at Washington Street / Highway 66 remove the need to locate a traffic signal at the intersection. However, the Right-InlRight-Out restriction places more demand on the Tolman Creek Road / Highway 66 intersection and will necessitate additional mitigations at that intersection. In addition, the proposed signal at Washington Street is spaced approximately 350 feet away from the Interstate 5 southbound off- ramp. A signal in this location would not meet spacing standards. If a signal were pursued at this location a variance would need to be granted. ~ The proposed Washington Street extension would reduce demind on Tolman Creek Road intersections. However, the mitigations are only significantly afftcted if there are no turn , i' restrictions at Washington Street / Highway 66. Combhliiig ~he.Washington Street Extension with Right-InlRight-Out operations at the Highway 66)nterseCtionwould provide little benefit from an operational perspective, although the extenSiOli would improve circulation and access for both the study area and land uses located al,oog Yte existing Wai;hi,ngt!ln Street alignment. The improvements identified at Tolman Creek, RoadlHighway 66 are no~ im,mediately needed and have been identified to be needed at approximately 50% of the proposed'development if access is restricted to right-in/right-out at WashingwnStreetlHighway 66 andnoextension of Washington Street in place. If the Washington Street extension and/or a signal at Washington StreetlHighway 66 were to be pursued by the pty based on the potential need for improvements on the surrounding roadway network and the.implications those improvements may have, there is " -, ',-.. "." time based on the sensitivity analysis to' weigh the llenefit-cost aiialysis of that improvement to other improvements identified-iI! the surrounding ;:QadwllY network>" ,/ ,--" ".' \ \/ /'-, "', '-./ , / -..' , /..... (, \ '\ \ \ ........J' /' ~. ''"'.,<,..",./ '---, \\ \\ / --..... "," /-......'~' \, // -', "" ~ '. " '....) ,/ ~// ''''-, '-,,,,," ", ',- " '-. ",', "'." " " "--.... '" ""', '. \',,\ --...., "'-<, '"" \ \ -"J '---.... '" \ \ ".., I ~"\ / ; ~// DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pall. 1 of24 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Jason Graff, Crandall Arambula PC Bill Monlar, City of Ashland Alan Snook, AICP Michael Tomasini, ElT FROM: ' DATE: January 2, 2009 SUBJECT: Task 3.3 and 3.4a: Croman Mill Property Baseline Transportation and Development Transportation Report P0617lxOOOxOOO The purpose of this memorandum is to document the technical assistance related to the transportation analysis associated with the proposed Croman Mill property project located in the City of Ashland, OR. The transportation analysis includes a review of existing conditions, documentation of assumptions/methodology for analysis, and a future year (2030) analysis with three con~eptualland use and circulation plans. Study Area The study area for this project is located in southeast Ashland Oregon and is comprised of approximately 90 acres of land zoned primarily industrial, residential, or employment. The study area is bordered by Ashland Street (Hwy 66) to the north, Siskiyou Boulevard (Hwy 99) to the south, 1-5 to the east, and Tolman Creek Road to the west. The following study area intersections were identified for detailed analysis, and Figure I identifies these intersections with their traffic control and lane geometries: . Ashland Street (Hwy 66) /1-5 Northbound Ramps . Ashland Street (Hwy 66)/1-5 Southbound Ramps . Ashland Street (Hwy 66)lWashington Street . Ashland Street (Hwy 66)/Tolman Creek Road . Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road . Siskiyou Boulevard (Hwy 99)/Tolman Creek Road . Siskiyou Boulevard (Hwy 99)/Mistletoe Mill Road . Siskiyou Boulevard (Hwy 99)/Crowson Road .... ~ .' ...... .' .' .' ............ .' .... .' ,~ ... ... ~ ..,. . .. . .. ...... o LEGEND o - Study Nea Intersection II . -In_. Traffic Control .. -Intersection GeomelJy * - Projed S;o. Location ... ....~... .' .t. .4 4". '. '. '. ". '. '. '. '. '. '. ...... 00 ..... -0. ". o. ". o. 00 .....<:::......... \ '\ s ~J \ '" ~ ~ 3" " ~ () iil .. ~ ;;l] 0. ". /..... '. '. '. '. ...... '" ...... '. '. ..,~.t. .4 e~l .4 DKSAsrociates N Infannation Sources: City of Ashland Oregon Department of Transportation GrandaU Arambula ~ CROMAN MILL PRO.JECT STUDY AREA MAP NOT TO SCALE DKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pa~e 3 of 24 . TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Existing Conditions The following summarizes the existing traffic conditions analysis for the study area intersections previously identified. The primary purpose of this analysis is to identify the key roadway characteristics servicing the study area, and evaluate the existing traffic conditions at study area intersections. Roadway System There are a number of key roadways that service the study area. Each of the roadways serves a certain functionality based on the classification of that roadway and design standard of that roadway. These characteristics help to stratify higher mobility roads (roads that service the mobility ofvehicles potentially over other modes) versus multi-modal corridors (those roadways used by many modes of travel). The key roadways in the area are Interstate 5, Hwy 66 (Ashland Street), Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard), Tolman Creek Road, Mistletoe Road, Crowson Road, and Washington Street. The following summarizes the key characteristics of each of these roads based on their function. . Interstate 5 is classified by OOOT as an Interstate. The interstate is part of the National Highway System and is considered a freight route along its entire length in Oregon. The main purpose of an interstate is to connect regional centers. Primary consideration is given to motor vehicles and freight. An interstate does not include pedestrian, bicycle, or transit facilities. . Highwav 66 (Ashland Street) and Highwav 99 (Siskivou Boulevard) are classified by OOOT as Principal Arterials. These roadways are also classified by the City of Ashland as Boulevards. According to the City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan a boulevard is meant to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motor vehicles to major urban centers. A boulevard should be designed with attractive walkways with amenities, well marked bike lanes, and safe transit waiting areas. The main purpose of a boulevard is to provide access within an urban area. For traffic not destined within the urban area, use of a regional traffic way is encouraged instead of a boulevard. Typical average daily volumes on a boulevard can range from 8,000 to 30,000 vehicles per day. · Tolman Creek Road. Crowson Road. and Mistletoe Road are all classified by the City of Ashland as A venues. A venues have a lower motor vehicle volume than boulevards and according to Ashland's Comprehensive Plan are meant to be designed similar to boulevards but on a smaller scale. This designation means that Avenues should be expected to safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as motor vehicles. Again, walkways with amenities and separate bike lanes are recommended. Transit service mayor may not be available on Avenues. . Washington Street is classified as a Neighborhood Collector by the City of Ashland. A neighborhood collector has a lower motor vehicle volume than and Avenue and should be designed to safely accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists and motor vehicles. Similar to Boulevards and Avenues, sidewalks should be provided with amenities where feasible and crosswalks provided at a minimum of every three blocks. Where average daily DKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pa~e 4 of 24 'TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS traffic is greater than 3,000 or actual travel speeds are greater than 25 mph, a bike lane should be separated from the motor vehicle lane using an eight inch solid white line. A neighborhood collector does not typically include transit service. Traffic Operations Motor vehicle turn movement count data was collected at the study area intersections by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the City of Ashland. These counts were done at various times during the year, and conducted for the AM and PM peak hours (traditionally 7 AM-9AM and 4PM-6PM). Using procedures defined in the Analysis Procedures Manual J from ODOT's Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU), the peak hour turn movement counts were converted to 30 highest hourly volumes (30HV). Three Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) stations were used to calculate the 30HV by applying a seasonal factor to each of the study area intersections2. Figure 2 shows these volumes atthe study area intersections that were used for operational analysis. There are multiple measures of effectiveness for traffic operations at intersections, volume-to- capacity (V Ie) ratio and level-of-service (LOS). The City of Ashland uses LOS (based on average delay at an intersection) and ODOT uses the VIC ratio for their standard. The VIC ratio is a measure of an intersection's capacity (number of vehicles an intersection can accommodate) compared to the actual number of vehicles that utilize the intersection during the peak hOUT. ODOT's mobility requirements for District Highways varies based on the facility and can range from 0.80 to 0.90 based on the posted speed of the roadway. The concept of LOS is similar to a "report card" rating with level-of-service A, B and C the free flowing conditions where the traffic can flow smoothly without significant stops and delays. Level-of-service 0 and E are worse and there is a significant queue and delay experienced by the traffic under these conditions. Accepted engineering techniques used to measure LOS for signalized and unsignalized intersections have been developed and published in the Highway Capacity Manuaf. The acceptable level-of-service standard set by the city of Ashland is LOS "c" for an Interstate facility (1-5), and LOS "0" for District facilities (Hwy 66 and Hwy 99)4. It should be noted that the governing jurisdiction standard is the standard to meet for an intersections operations. Within the study area Interstate 5, Hwy 66 (Ashland Street), and Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard) are all under state jurisdiction and would use a V IC ratio standard. All other study area intersections would use LOS as the jurisdictional standard. The operational analysis results are summarized in Table I for the AM and PM existing peak hours. All intersections are under ODOT jurisdiction with the exception of the intersection of Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Mill Road, which is under the City of Ashland jurisdiction. All I ODOT TPAU, Analysis Procedures Manual. April 2006. Cbapter 4 2 ATR #'s 15-001, 15-007, and 15-014 32000 Highway Capacity Manual, Institnte ofTransportation Engineers, 6" Edition. 4 City of Asbland Transportation System Plan, April, 1998, Table 3-3, page 3-13. " " ...... ", ". .'. " ...... ., ...... ... ... .... ... .. .. . '. .. .. '. , , . .. ... ..... .' ....... .' .".",.,',.., ...... .,. .' LEGEND 0- Study. Area Intersection j - lntersection Movement AM (PM) - Peak Hour Intersection Volumes * - Project Sile Location '8 3" " ~ o iil' .. ,.. ~ ~.t ~ g " Co / ~ )\ " ". .... '. .. ,..."."........." ., N Infonnation Sources: City of Ashland Oregon Department of Transportation DKSAsrociates ~ MAP NOT TO SCALE EXISTING 30TH HIGHEST PEAK HOUR VOLUMES DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION' SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January.2, 2009 PaRe 60f24 study area intersections currently meet the governing jurisdictional standard (either V Ie ratio or LOS standard). Table 1 Study Intersection Mobility Standard and Existing Operations intersection Name Jurisdiction Mobility Operations Standard AM Peak PM Peak Delav LOS VlC Delav LOS V/C Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Northbound Ramps OooT V/C 0.85 59.2 F 0.34 >80 F 0.82 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/I-5 Southbound Ramps OOOT V/C 0.85 29.1 C 0.63 >80 F 0.66 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington SI OooT VlC 0.90 43.2 0 0.24 45.4 0 0.46 Hwy 66 (Ashland SI)fT alman Creek Rd OOOT VlC 0.90 22.7 C 0.35 26.6 C 0.52 Talman Creek RdlMisUetoe Road City 01 Ashland LOS 0 9.8 A 0.06 10.3 B 0.07 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)fT alman Creek Rd OooT VlC 0.90 21.2 C 0.16 30.7 0 0.26 Hwy 9~ ~~::::~ B~~~iSlleloe MiD Rd OOOT VlC 0.90 9.8 A 0.02 9.4 A 0.04 Hwv 99 SI . u BIv ICrowson Rd OOOT VlC 0.80 9.2 A 0.03 9,7 A 0.05 SOURCE: DKSAsooaares While all intersections meet the jurisdictional standard, it should be noted that during the AM and PM peak hour there is a heavy delay occurring at the intersection ofInterstate 5/Hwy 66 (Ashland Street) for the exiting vehicles from Interstate 5 stopping in the northbound direction. This high delay is due to the number of eastbound vehicles both making a left to access Interstate 5 and traveling east through the intersection. In addition, there is some delay experienced during the PM peak hour for southbound right turns at the intersection ofHwy 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 southbound off-ramp due to uncontrolled volume flow along Hwy 66. The uncontrolled traffic movement in the eastbound and westbound direction on Hwy 66 makes vehicles exiting Interstate 5 heading west experience some additional delay. Signal Wanants Existing peak hour signal warrants were conducted on the unsignalized study area intersections to determine if any of them met a peak hour warrant. S While meeting a peak hour warrant does not mean a signal must be installed, it can indicate the potential to implement a signal if movements at an intersection are experiencing heavy delay, even if there is available capacity for the movements. Table 2 summarizes the peak hour signal warrant analysis. , Peak boor signal warmnl was conducted using \be Manual of Uniform Control Devices (MUTCD) 2003 edition, Figure 4C-3, DKS Associates TRANSPORTATioN SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Palle 7 of 24 Table 2 Existing Peak Hour Signal Warrant Analysis Intersection Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Northbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland Sl)n-5 Southbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland Sl)lWashington St Talman Creek RdlMislletoe Road Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)rr a1man Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)1Mistletoe MiD Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd SOURCE: DKS Associates Major Volume 1,383 1,011 1,377 539 455 274 247 Minor Volume 55 572 197 50 221 53 60 Warrant Mat? No Yes No No No No No Based on the peak hour signal warrant analysis, the intersection of Hwy 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 meets the peak hour signal warrant. Operations at this intersection indicate that during the PM peak hour the southbound left turn movement does experience delay up to one minute (and potentially longer). Other movements at study area intersections also have long delay, however the side street approach volumes area low enough to not meet the threshold for the peak hour signal warrant. Assumptions and Methodologies This section describes the assumptions and methodologies used to generate the future land use scenarios and associated trip generation and distribution. The modeling, future forecasting methodologies and assumptions are also described in this section. Existing Comprehensive Plan Zoning The study area is comprised of a variety of existing zoning. This is an important assumption to outline because if new (different) zoning, or different land uses, are implemented that replace the currently planned uses, there could be different trips associated with the current zoning. These trips would need to be taken out of the future forecasting and replaced with the new land use/zoning. Table 3 summarizes the existing zoning, acreage and potential associated square footage for the study area. Land Use Single Family (R.1-5) Employment (E-1) Industrial (M-1) Rural Residential (RR-5) TOTALS Table 3 Currently Planned Zoning, Acreage and Potential Square Footage of StUdy Area AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips In Out T alai In Out Total 20 65 85 75 45 115 150 20 175 20 130 150 560 75 635 80 595 675 < 5 < 5 5 5 5 10 735 165 900 180 175 950 Acres 13.00 4.58 63.14 6.01 86.73 FAR 8.70 0.50 0.25 0.50 Units 11300 99.75K sq. ft. 687.5K sq. ft. 12du Daily Trips 1,085 1,140 7,850 60 10,135 Notes: FAR = Floor-to-area ratio do = dwelling units sq. ft. = square feet DKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pa~e 80f24 'TRANSPORTATION SOLUTION'S The trips in Table 3 represent the potential trips that could be made to/from the study area during peak hours of the day (or the entire day). This information is not based on existing land uses that currently exist today, but rather what the area could develop to under current zoning. It is important to determine what these trips may be because the proposed alternatives would replace these trips, so they must be removed from the surrounding network in the future and replaced with the new proposed alternatives trips. This meth,od allows for not double counting trips previously assumed with current zoning. . Redevelopment Alternatives Three land use scenarios were evaluated for the Croman Mills site. These scenarios were defined as Alternatives B, C, and 0 and include a mix of uses including light industrial, retail, office, and residential uses. Figures 3, 4 and 5 show the proposed land uses and sub division of the Croman Mills property and surrounding properties. Table 4 lists the total acreage for each land use by Alternative, and the assumed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to convert acreage to usable square footage. Residential units were calculated at 17 units per I acre. This would consist of a high density type of residential land use. land Use Floor Area land UselFloor Area Ratio Alternative B Alternative C Alternative 0 Acres 1 000 so. fl. Acres 1 000 so. fl. Acres 1 000 so. fl. Light Industrial 0.25 46.3 504 52.6 573 17.98 196 CommerdaVOfflCe 0.5 9.6 209 10.48 228 45.13 983 Retail 0.5 5.95 130 3.75 82 3.75 82 Residential N1A 22.83 N/A 15.81 N1A 15.81 N/A Park and Ride N1A 1.97 N1A 1.97 N1A 1.97 N/A TOTALS 86.65 84.61 84.64 Table 4 Future land Use Assumptions and Calculated Square Footage SOURCE: CrandallArambula As can be seen in Table 4, the acreage of potential redevelopment development varies slightly, but all three alternatives are proposing to redevelop approximately 90 acres. All alternatives contain a park-and-ride in tbe northwest portion of the study area that would service a potential commuter rail station near the intersection of Tolman Creek Road and the existing City of Prineville Railway (COPR) heavy rail tracks. In addition to the land use alternatives being considered, there are some roadway circulation changes being considered. The two primary changes from the existing roadway network is that Tolman Creek Road would "tee" into Mistletoe Road and would be classified as a Neighborhood Street, thus reducing the potential for through trips along Tolman Creek Road. The more "through" route would be created along Mistletoe Road with a new roadway extending from Mistletoe Road to the southeast and connecting to Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard) farther east of the existing Mistletoe Road. This roadway has the potential to be a three lane or a five lane facility. Figures 2, 3 and 4 show this potential alignment. . #, ,.,../ ~ ~ ~'< ..... ...'-j'.~,! w.:Jt ,,' .... ..----.- c: U \'. . 4U':'~."...-/ _ C :t ~ \" . .. CD .. ,;---- /~ "'i" t::::.~ ~'\""', ......~~ .a: ~ .' \~ C') _ ' .\' .-::/ II) ~ . ~ 0.... '."'"'. ~ C".; /'.~.;"5.2 ~~-:~..:.."'/It '.. ....... tI 00 ' '. .U,I , Z 4( ~~.j~ '.:,_ .. E .. --;:,. ""' _~ .. /.. ,c .."., -if ...., / \..~ ~ / - ... .~ '4 ""t;), .. ./ .: 00' I.. ./ ~.a /.... -"-'--,c ,... J.. ~ './ · Z .,:1) I : ../ ,'/ : ;.~ , . " ". l; 1 Ie :!! I' .c ; .... . k...~~,.~. ...- . I. I . ~ . .. - ~.. - .. '5 .:. - .!! g>>!:! ~~. ' ,. il,. C _ CD #//11:\,~'.,:.,,~~ CD ; E: ~:; /'" ....-- - "....... 0 0 E', "-" . /..0: it lit ... I t ::z:: .iII.....'"'. .... I .,i;"~',' ":~~~;'" 0 jit.~ ~I:: \.;"'. ......,<:.40". 0 ~ U ,....,~ ... ~;~'\t. ....~ 0 tit ~ ui'" / .,p.:/\..: '. . &; C 0 ,../ ~t11 ... Gl:) ua. 8~ o ... .,~ ~..~~~ '-"' '" ... ,c,clllC=-. I, ~ Q_..._ \ \,-":'- -] ..,.~- - VI CD -, ~-- ,4);:>.- ,/ {( Z 0 .''7. / ~ /12. I ..j', /l'- -,:..-; ... ll~; ~~==,,,:!~' .... ~..~ , 'llj... J' , """"....... ~) I" ,/~> "'. ~:'!!i · i: ...~_I/f@0,., '~~~Jii~ _ -2 -. . ~-- ij- . -~. .'''11" 'liI"..I:,;; -;?- ~I' I' I ~ ~ C ,\~ " 1i ;f:::;'::I'_11 .21 :) " WI 0 I:'" ~';r.~! '~.I. _ .... "D I I, , . I, 'S 'l::' Gl.. " ., I, . , C -., ....1. I "';;,', E g i', ~ '0 ~1 ;:.~:: L'~r, _ \.~.......-. . I /'~' ..... _._ ~ - ~'., ,.. E II) - tI IIlC .. - A. 0- o~ . E E ~ " 1;! e o ". \" . . .. :- ,.. I " ~ B <J) 1; = . E .e c z c Z III " III ..J z o 5 ::;) U II: U IDa IIIZ >ca: ~III zln 11:::;) ilia ~j ~~ .;: i~ 1l~ .' .. .... ~. ,/-,\,. '''''' \ ..#J,~/II""~"!~~~""::~\' t/ / I {Ifit -: 'trj~"".\ // ,.'! ,'" \,:~""."...'. . ", ,,'" ....,'~<Ilr . '"_.... ...... t. "" ',,, ....",! L__ - , .",,/-' .... ...- :;a , . . I..f'./' '/ . . ...~- I I, - .. '~' , ./ / ,/ . ..~.! Ij'~ ~'.. i '--\.'.. ~..' !.,,;. l__ CD .... .~ .. C ~ ...:.,~~... .. .~^...-.. "',., o U ~-:i~."~\~' .r~'#',,,,,, '" .... :. . , '''''\.,.... ,..... (".--\,~<. . ...;; ,"... .. '~,"""f :.",:-<!~-.-....; II) t:::. '" ...~~~, !f~""U.:.t~> I- 0 .... ............ . --- ". _ __..,t O ~ "" -. - .... -~--.-..,~ ~ ',. 4>> 'fI.Ji. 8 c(,.'lI ,~" "S = /\-~/ ~ , ~,Jr~' E 0 / . - ,-... / E AI: --' ~' I -- 0 u GI c O.lll "tI "'u- '::10 &1)-> .2t:::.,S! (')0::1 ~ "S 0 ~e(lIll GI Z ~- \~ ' . #. ,... . ~, )~~- "~,,.sJc',-/, ~\.:V' e~{, _..t'~' .., '1.- I ..~.. 1 0..... · ."~.. ... ,"'/. i.!~ .,...-. /./ -<:.....~ .~/---- ....--:'. ,/ .////..., /-/ ..! , . . .. ,U.I , ..";;-";:.- .-% li ~ C"tl 00 E~ - - 00 ....0 ~ 01 'i z .. I . . . .. , - ... .,. ,~ GI CO>~ U ~__~'t 0..- ..c:.;; ~""a.' !P ::I .2 4, ~.,.. . "'"tI U ~/ 0 C -'. //'. c:: ... ~~ ~ GJ \ _~ ~ -..... .~/~, Q.;~,~ ~ :~. 0 '~~..:..:'.; ~.......... \.."1 ../... ~_- ~. I '. ~..I,.: ..~. .'l... .....- ..... ... GI ::I .. U Q. 'iN 8~ U .,. ,l/! C - ... ---.J j ~ z 0 - S :) U .!'l III: - il UU E . i! IllICa " >z I! e _4 () =CIII " ~ Zln ~ 111::) c IllICa 0 ~j ~ . E s .E ..~ z ill lie c Z III C) III ..J ~' ./*'-/ ~ ,/ . GI .'_' C M ..~.Cu GI' .. ,,'/.. ....- .'''.;.'.r- -t u ~:E \\" i.. //~ 11):> 0 C '. \',' . .../'" ...--/" 0 t:::.... > CD~) \.~. ,/:' ~ .! E /~"',\ .....":/' . CW) 0 :) .." .."\ //./" 'S 0 --.. .....y/' ~ c( lID ";;;- ~r,..~;%:: v/ GI ~' . \ '1:'., ; Z . . 'b..-....~/ -~.)~....,. /.....- .. <:... .. . . . CD ....':::: c~,~,:.~",!.., '.~A"'"". ,..... D u ..jiio.......\~.~ ~...; 1'" . ...... :) ,~ ,.\." \: ........ <....,;,9,_-, . ....,.,' .." """1:".'''iU.-~' II) t:::. ..i;j..... "'"~' .,.. .,; ,_.~, .. ,,<-,_. "'" .';o,,"....t .... 0 ,". ......., ~,... r.4<<:..--/t O ~ ~, ,t. ...... ." "~, -::'_"1" Q ~ " CD f~..:- o c(ll, .).... "5 = / \-~ ,< -:J:J">; E c ,/. ,;(.. / E 1IlC.-', ", , .' '''t/ 'I _- .\" 8 I.. .' ,/ .. --'J" " .....~ - . I ../- .. . hi. ~l /-"i;:- l ~ ~ ..:!'i. · .. ....'/;'"t.. ~.... r ~ .,;,//. ~ :l! '" '. ~~.'/ a.. .1 . .' ~ ~ . I ,~/ ",P." . , "I' .~';. 'I." . ..' '.~ c." ;". :... ,I .-.r';n: ,..p,",,1 r': .::,iU1" :1111 " ':'/. ....'.. ..... .,.. ..... . ~Ir # .j".. ...., ,.... '.'. . 'I," _ _. i~": :..~_I!' ~~'!i ....."'.~~ !::"::i~h: <" ...- . I. I':! . .:::..,....' .~..: - . .... - ". - --..--- ~ -~.!~~.1 ,I'''~. - .., ~\;, . .--:--, .' "! ;. . ....".... \"i ~f. ..IIII'!~..!I.,.......-... .. ,. .~JlIJ..~--,..". j',.,!..'-:,t: ~.. - , .. . D .,-#,,:, (.w.... .i g>>~ .,.. .... ._/'A,'\~"._ c:- CIJ.' ':--,.. ~ . #'''/'' /,....)..:-c'I!'._...:::_.:;.'\, QJ ; E "1,,; ~<./ I~~/ ~,~ ~,'(:.to~;..'~,< U 0 E ,.\./,~'fF Q)u ,-' JI _ .' "'.... _ % V"'-.Al~ r _ , '. rJ ~"'. ..,,~.. ' "" 0 "~"~f~ ~ , ,t,~....~)-""'....-tt;;~ g ~u ;~~~-- 0 _~ - /\ t. ';;-.c .,.:=:::-,.."f ''-1;1, .) ~~~;: O' ~ :2 ~.~ /.. , \ \.~ ~~fj~_/ ~ ~ ~ /:.':'., \. -....' 'J !!~/- m _ .. -- ---: - +.'~ .- --QJ .'~ /' ..- CIJ % > .'~ / ,-"~f~:_ __~ .....'.j..y. ,.-_...... h~.' / t:~:~ .1~1..!l1II.j"- , ~ _. .... . ..', . ~,~~.. ~ . ' .' ---J! , of lfi' .=-l~...._ ..1 '/I1i".,,~'. I\'.-~:' ~~l ...-. , fI - !_~I:_ _ -${I .." ~ fit ;) c, E c o GI - U ...... c.' c,' ~CI). o c: #'. /": L lit. \oo-//~. - \.z- C, "'.~ 0"'.... (:!'. v/ "'$.~( /' ~ '. .,'" .... "/.. . '.- 1 ........ .II! .. J ~ z 0 - S =>> u " III: il aU iB ~ ilia ;;; >z 'Ii! e _C 0 =:111 ;; ~ zln ~ III:=>> 0 ilia 0 ~j ~ . E .e .E b~ 2 2M ~e Q Z W C!) W ..J DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 PaRe 12 of24 The realignment of Tolman Creek Road has the potential to divert existing and future trips due to a less direct north/south route to connect to/from Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard) and Hwy 66 (Ashland Street). The regional travel demand model was used to help estimate the potential for diverted trips. These diverted trips were rerouted in the future forecasts for analysis. Table 5 summarizes the potential for diverted trips from Tolman Creek Road based on the regional travel demand model. Table 5 PM Peak Diversion Potential due to Tolman Creek Road Realignment No-build Attemative B Attemative C Attemative D Percentage of Potential Diversion 0% 24% 24% 24% Range of Future PM Peak Diverted Trips o Approximately 50 vehicles Approximately 50 vehicles Approximately 50 - 100 vehicles SOURCE: RVCOG Regional Travel Demand Model Based on these potential for diversion, it is expected that the average daily traffic on Tolman Creek Road south of the realignment would shift daily traffic volumes from approximately 8,000 under the No-build condition to approximately 6,500 under Alternatives Band C, and approximately 7,000 under Alternative D. Alternative 0 has a slightly higher volume than Alternatives B and C due to the potential for higher project trips due to land use. Trip generation Using the land use for the proposed alternatives, motor vehicle trips were generated for each alternative using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (7'h Edition). These trips were calculated for the AM and PM peak hours, as well as the daily trips. Table 6 summarizes and compares the number of in, out and total trips for each scenario for the AM, PM, and daily trip periods. Included in this trip generation calculation was a small reduction in potential trip making based on the potential for pass-by trips associated with the retail land uses for each alternative. ISng,onng ative ternal e AM Peak Hour Trips In 735 1,055 1.115 1,975 Out 165 330 325 430 Tolal 900 1.385 1,440 2.405 PM Peak Hour Trips In 180 645 575 690 Out 775 1,165 1,160 1,810 Total 950 1,810 1,735 2,500 Daily Trips 10,135 14,070 12,944 18,933 Table 6 Trip Generation Table Ex' Ii Z I Altern. B Alternative C AI Iv D SOURCE: OKS Associates DKS Associates TRAN'SPORTATlON SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 PaRe 13 of24 From Table 6, it can be seen that of the three scenarios, Scenario D generates the highest traffic volumes, followed by Scenario B and then Scenario C. The difference in the number of trips generated comes from the different proportioning of land use between the scenarios. Similar to the existing zoning, all three alternatives have higher trip making potential during the PM peak hour. Alternative B has approximately 860 additional net new trips that would access the study area network in comparison to the existing zoning, while alternative C has approximately 735 net new trips, and Alternative D has approximately 1,550 net new trips. Analysis Period Comparison of the existing AM and PM peak hour volumes collected indicate that the PM peak hour has the higher level of trip activity at study area intersections. This corresponds to the higher trip making potential for the current zoning as well as proposed alternatives (see Table 5). For this reason the PM peak hour has been selected for the analysis period for future conditions analysis. Selecting this time period for analysis also corresponds to the available regional travel demand model which has a PM peak hour trip matrix for land uses. The future planning analysis horizon year has been selected to be 2030 which would represent slightly over a 20 year planning horizon for analysis purposes. Future Forecasting The base and future year travel demand models were used to help forecast future volumes at study area intersections. The base year model was for 2002, while the future planning horizon is 2030. Future volume forecasts were created through a method of post processing which involves calibrating the base year model by comparing output to existing base year counts (2007). The future model is then compared to the calibrated base year model to determine the growth due to land use changes. This growth is applied to existing counts to determine future year volumes. Small adjustments for growth are made due to the fact that the base model and existing counts are not the same year. The growth in comparison of base year to future year model contains potential growth in volumes that has already been captured through the existing volume data collection occurring five years after the base year model. Trip Distribution The regional travel demand model was used to help determine trip distribution and assignment within the study area base on the mix of land uses being proposed. It is expected that net new trips to the study area roadway would follow this pattern of trip distribution. Figure 5 shows the assumed trip distribution for the study area. Future Findings The following section evaluates the future traffic operations associated with each of the proposed alternatives as well as a "no-build" alternative utilizing existing comprehensive plan zoning for comparative purposes. Where study area intersections do not meet jurisdictional standards mitigation measures will be pursued to meet those standards. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOlutiONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pa~e 14 of24 No-Build Alternative The No-build Alternative assumes the current comprehensive plan zoning and roadway network for future conditions. Table 7 summarizes the future PM peak hour traffic operations for the study area intersections. Intersection Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Northbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Southbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington St Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/T olman Creek Rd Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)/T olman Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvdVMistletoe Mill Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd Table 7 No-Build 2030 PM Peak Hour Unmitigated Traffic Operations PM Peak Hour LOS F F F D C F B B Mobility Standard V/C 0.B5 VlC 0.85 V/C 0.90 VlC 0.90 LOSD VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.80 Delay >80.0 72.7 >80.0 47.6 23.7 >80.0 14.5 11.1 VlC ; ~'~110"'k :':'<;?'li~ .;:u "i""~"'10 Ii. ,'B'~_~:I;i ;:;~~ ,~':' "".-"O;96._~,,1< 0.25 0.96~ .' 0.23 0.06 SOURCE: DKS Associates I","*'r'.' 1 -Indicates an intersection that does not meet jurisdictional standard Based on the findings in Table 7, five intersections fail to meet jurisdictional standards by the year 2030 during the PM peak hour, and would require some fonn of mitigation to meet the outlined standard. All of these intersections fall on OOOT facilities and have deficiencies due to lack of capacity from growth in traffic by 2030. The following summarizes potential mitigation strategies to address deficiencies in the future. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 northbound - This intersection has a deficient V/C ratio for the stop controlled side street. The northbound left turning vehicles incur a large amounl of delay associated with multiple conflicting heavy vehicle movements at this intersection. The intersection does not meet peak hour signal warrants in during the PM peak hour. The least expensive' mitigation at this intersection that still retains all movements would be to construct a signal to reduce delay and improve the capacity at the intersection. Since this intersection does not meet signal warrants a variance would need to be sought to install a traffic signal and the justification of the traffic signal would need to be documents and then reviewed by ODOT and the State Traffic Engineer for potential approval. The signal alone does not meet the ODOT V/C standard and an additional mitigation measure would be necessary. Additional capacity at the intersection could be added by constructing a separate eastbound left turn pocket to store the large number of vehicles accessing Interstate 5, and allow a protected turn. This improvement would require the reconstruction of the existing overpass to allow for a three lane cross-section (currently it is a two lane structure). While this is a potentially expensive mitigation measure it allows for adequate operations and future capacity at the intersection. Other more expensive improvements would require significant right-of-way takes such as a loop ramp for northbound to westbound vehicles and/or eastbound to southbound DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOlU1'lONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009, Pa~e 15 of24 vehicles (which there currently is not enough right-of-way to achieve), or a flyover ramp which would require an additional lane on Hwy 66 (Ashland Street) for receiving the flyover ramp. Both of these options would require a significant cost, as well as right-of- way to implement and therefore were deemed infeasible. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)nnterstate 5 southbound ramD - The stop controlled off-ramp intersection has southbound movements that are over capacity. One potential mitigation would be to signalize this intersection and implement dual southbound right turn pockets to create additional capacity for the heavy southbound right turn movement. The intersection currently meets signal warrants and would continue to do so in the future. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)/Washintrton Street - This intersection has stop control in the northbound direction and heavy volumes east/west on Ashland Street. These heavy volumes create a delay and capacity constraint for the northbound left movement. The intersection meets the peak hour signal warrant, however is spaced approximately 350 feet away from the Interstate 5 southbound off-ramp. A signal in this location would not meet access spacing standards. If a signal were pursued at this location a variance would need to be granted. Another option would be to create a right-inlright-out traffic control at this intersection. That would alleviate the left turn delay/capacity constraint, however due to physical constraints with the heavy rail alignment to the south, Washington Street provides the only full connection to access multiple parcels within this area. If a right- inlright-out access were pursued, additional connectivity would need to be provided potentially to Tolman Creek Road to allow for additional ingress/egress for that area. A right-inlright out access may also impact connectivity for land uses located to the north of Ashland Street (primarily retail uses). The right-inlright-out option would also shift left turns to the intersections of Tolman Creek Road/Hwy 66 (Ashland Street) and Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road. These shifted trips would create an additional need for , mitigation at the unsignalized intersection of Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road. This intersection would meet initial peak hour signal warrants, and therefore appropriate mitigation may be a signal under a scenario where Hwy 66 (Ashland Street)/Washington Street is converted to right-jnlright-out operation. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)ffolman Creek Road - This signalized intersection has heavy volumes in the westbound left turns during the PM peak hour. Potential mitigation includes adding another westbound left turn (creating dual westbound left turns). The creation of dual westbound left turns would require two receiving lanes southbound on Tolman Creek Road. The additional receiving lane could taper and merge to one lane further south of this intersection. This mitigation would also allow for adequate operations under a scenario where Hwy 66 (Ashland Street)/Washington Street is converted to right-inlright-out operation. . Hwv 99 {Siskivou Boulevard)ffolman Creek Road - The northbound left turn at this intersection is experiencing heavy delay and capacity constraints due to the uncontrolled traffic flow along Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard). The intersection does not meet a peak hour signal warrant. It could be expected that implementation of transportation demand OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pal\e 16 of24 management practices such as the commuter rail servicing the study area, a mix of land uses, and other measures outlined in the City of Ashland Transportation System Plan could spread peak hour trips in the future and may provide for a higher peak hour factor at this intersection. By changing the peak hour factor from 0.81 to 0.92 in the future the intersection meets jurisdictional standard. Based on these outlined mitigation measures, Table 8 summarizes the future operations of the study area intersections by 2030 during the PM peak hour under the currently adopted land use zomng. Intersectlon Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Nonhbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland Sl)n-5 Southbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington St . Hwy 66 (Ashland St)fT olman Creek Rd Tolman Creek RdlMisdetoe Road Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)fT o/man Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Mistletoe Mill Rd Hwy 99 (Siskivou Bivd)/CrowsO/1 Rd SOURCE: DKSA~ares . If this inrersection were signalized due /0 a right-in/right-<Jut operation at Washington StreeVHwy 66, operations would be at LOS C (32.4 seconds of delay) and a V/C ratio of 0.82 during the PM peak hour. Table 8 No-build 2030 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Operations PM Peak Hour LOS C C A D C F B B Mobility Standard V/C 0.85 V/C 0.B5 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 LOSD V/C 0.90 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.80 Delay 29.4 21.7 7.5 39.0 23.7 76.7 14.5 11.1 VIC 0.B5 O.Bl 0.45 0.B7 0.25 0.52 0.23 0.06 It should be noted that while all intersections meet jurisdictional standard, there may still be some side street movements that experience delay due to larger through volumes on the main street. This is particularly the case at the intersection of Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard)/Tolman Creek Road. Alternative B This alternative as described in the assumptions section has slightly smaller development parcels (in comparison to the other alternatives), and creates a new, local circulation roadway to the northeast of the proposed extension of Mistletoe Road. The new local circulation road would allow for access to the smaller parcels to the northeast. In addition, this alternative includes Tolman Creek Road being realigned to "tee" into the realigned Mistletoe Road occurring just south of the CaPR heavy rail alignment. This option is being considered to have Tolman Creek Road perform as more of a neighborhood collector to help reduce the amount of traffic utilizing the roadway. Currently Tolman Creek Road is classified as an Avenue, which is a higher classification than a Neighborhood Collector, indicating the potential for higher volumes. This alternative would include the reclassification of Tolman Creek Road as a Neighborhood Collector and assumes a slightly lower posted speed limit to encourage lower vehicle traffic. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Palle 170[24 Based on the projected land uses and trips during the PM peak hour, Table 9 sununarized the operations at the study area intersections. Table 9 Alternative B - 2030 PM Peak Hour Unmitigated Traffic Operations PM Peak Hour LOS F F F E F F F B Intersection Hwy 66 (Ashland Sl)n.5 Northbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland S1)n-5 Southbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland Sl)lWashington St Hwy 66 (Ashland St)fT a1man Creek Rd Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road (reatigned) Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BlvdjfT otman Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Misdetoe MiD Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd SOURCE: DKSA~8~S 11l-o",,~1 - Indicates an intersection Ihat does nOl meet jurisdictional standard , Mobility Standard VlC 0.85 VlC 0.85 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 LOSD VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.80 Delay >80.0 >80.0 > 80.0 61.9 >80.0 >80.0 50.7 11.1 Based on the findings in Table 9, the same five intersections as in the No-build condition fail to meet jurisdictional standards by the year 2030 during the PM peak hour, and would require some form of mitigation to meet the outlined standard. In addition, the realigned intersection of Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road does not meet jurisdictional standard. The following summarizes potential mitigation strategies to address deficiencies. . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/lnterstate 5 northbound - Similar to the No-build condition, this intersection has a deficient V IC ratio for the stop controlled side street. Similar mitigation as under the No-build condition (signalization) would be necessary; however signalization alone would not meet the jurisdictional standard. In addition, a separate westbound right turn pocket would be necessary in order to meet the jurisdictional standard. · Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 southbound ramD - Similar mitigation that was outlined for the No-build condition would still be necessary under this alternative. This consisted of signalization and an additional southbound right turn pocket (dual right turns). The intersection currently meets signal warrants and would continue to do so in the future. . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/WashiDlrton Street - This intersection has similar mitigation as would be necessary under the No-build condition. The intersection continues to meet the peak hour signal warrant under this alternative and similar to the No-build condition, a signal in this location would not meet access spacing standards. If a signal were pursued at this location a variance would need to be granted. As an alternative, a right-inlright- out operation could be pursued and would allow for adequate operations at this intersection. . Hwv 66 (Ashland StreetVTolman Creek Road - Similar to the No-build condition, an additional westbound left turn at this intersection would help to mitigate the intersection. DKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pa~e 18 of24 TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS However, the left turn alone is not enough mitigation to meet the jurisdictional standard. In addition to adding a westbound left turn, a separate northbound right turn would be needed to achieve the jurisdictional standard for VIC ratio. This mitigation does not allow for adequate jurisdictional operations ifHwy 66 (Ashland Street)/Washington Street is converted to a right-in/right-out operation. The conversion shifts volumes at the intersection to affect capacity enough that the intersection would operate with a V IC ration of 0.92 during the PM peak hour (standard is 0.90). An additional mitigation of an eastbound right turn pocket would be necessary to meet jurisdictional standard and would allow for a VIC ration of 0.83 during the PM peak hour. . Tolman Creek Road/Mistletoe Road (realigned) - The realigned intersection does not meet jurisdictional standard as an unsignalized intersection. Signalizing the intersection allows for adequate intersection operations. The intersection meets peak hour signal warrants under this alternative in the future. This mitigation is the same if H wy 66 (Ashland Street)/Washington Street is retained as a full access intersection, or as a right- in/right-out operation. . Hwv 99 {Siskivou Boulevard)/Tolman Creek Road - Under this alternative this . intersection is beyond the jurisdictional standard even with expected changes to the peak hour factor through TDM measures as outlined in the No-build condition, and additional mitigation is necessary to meet standard. The northbound left turn movement has delay and capacity constraints due to the stop controlled movement and the uncontrolled (free flow) movement on Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Boulevard). Adding lane geometry to this approach does not alleviate the delay and/or capacity constraints. A signal at this location would allow for adequate traffic operations; however the intersection does not meet a peak hour signal warrant. If a signal were to be implemented at this location a variance would need to be granted. Based on these outlined mitigation measures, Table 10 summarizes the future operations of the study area intersections by 2030 during the PM peak hour under the alternatives land use and mitigation. Table 10 Alternative B - 2030 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Operations PM Peak Hour Intersection Mobility Standard Delay LOS VIC Hwy 66 (Ashland Son.5 Northbound Ramps VlC 0.85 21.5 C 0.71 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n.5 Southbound Ramps VlC 0.85 26.9 C 0.85 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington 51 VlC 0.90 8.0 A 0.50 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)fTolman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 34.9 C 0.83 Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road LOS D 23.8 C 0.77 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)fTolman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 16.6 B 0.58 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Mistletoe Mill Rd VlC 0.90 50.7 F 0.55 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)/Crowson Rd VlC 0.80 11.1 B 0.08 SOURCE: DKS Associates DKS Associates TRANSPORT'AlION SOLUTIONS FlNAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 PaRe 19 of24 All intersections meet jurisdictional standard with the proposed mitigation. It should be noted that some of the proposed mitigation would require additional review and approval, especially the implementation of new signals at intersections if they do not meet a signal warrant. Meeting a signal warrant is one criterion for implementing a signal, but there are many other criteria that should be evaluated and reviewed before deciding on installing a signal. Alternative C This alternative is very similar to Alternative B for the roadway circulation with the exception that there is no local circulation roadway to the northeast of the proposed extension of Mistletoe Road. The removal of the local circulation road allows for larger parcels to be constructed within the study area. This alternative still has a central roadway running through the middle of the study area and is focused primarily on light industrial land uses with some office campus and high density housing. Tolman Creek Road is still realigned with Mistletoe Road to create a "tee" intersection allowing Mistletoe Road to be a more throughput roadway and Tolman Creek Road to be more of a neighborhood route. Based on the projected land uses and trips during the PM peak hour, Table II sununarized the operations at the study area intersections. Intersection Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/l-5 Northbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Southbound Ramps Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington St Hwy 66 (Ashland St)fT olman Creek Rd T ulman Creek RdlMisUeloe Road (realigned) Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)fT olman Creek Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Mistleloe Mill Rd Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd SOURCE: OKS Associates l;r!)i2~ I -Indicates an intersection that does not meet jurisdictional standard Table 11 Alternative C - 2030 PM Peak Hour Unmitigated Traffic Operations PM Peak Hour LOS F F F E F F D B Mobility Standard VlC 0.85 VlC 0.85 VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 lOSD VlC 0.90 VlC 0.90 V/C 0.80 Delay >80.0 >80.0 >80.0 58.0 >80.0 >80.0 33,8 11.1 VlC .', ",~.l\O~,', ':':::"04;~JfiOf~:" '\f~~~1W1~1; _,,_>..l.O~. . . ,'~:;_~!~~!~~;I~~:; 0.43 0.08 Based on the findings in Table II, the same five intersections as in the No-build condition fail to meet jurisdictional standards by the year 2030 during the PM peak hour, and would require some form of mitigation to meet the outlined standard. In addition, the realigned intersection of Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road does not meet jurisdictional standard. Many of the same mitigation strategies are necessary under this alternative as were proposed under Alternative B. The following summarizes the potential mitigation strategies to address deficiencies. . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 northbound - Similar mitigation as proposed in Alternative B. This consisted of signalization and adding a separate eastbound left and westbound right turn pockets. . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 southbound ramD - Similar mitigation as under Alternative B. This consisted of signalization and an additional southbound right turn pocket (dual right turns). The intersection currently meets.signal warrants and would continue to do so in the future. DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Page 20 of24 . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)/WashiDltlon Street - Similar mitigation as under Alternative B. This consisted of signalization. The intersection would meet the peak hour signal warrant in the future, but does not meet ODOT's access spacing standards. As an alternative, a right-inlright-out operation could be pursued and would allow for adequate operations at this intersection. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)/Tolrnan Creek Road - Similar mitigation as under Alternative B. This consisted of an additional westbound left turn and a separate northbound right turn. No additional mitigation beyond the additional westbound left turn and separate northbound right turn would necessary ifHwy 66 {Ashland Street)/Washington Street were converted to a right-inlright-out opemtion. . Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road (realigned) - Similar mitigation as under Alternative B. This consisted of signalization. The intersection would meet peak hour signal warrants in the future. . Hwv 99 {Siskivou Boulevard)/Tolman Creek Road - Similar mitigation as under Alternative B. This consisted of implementing a signal to allow for better side street delay and capacity; however the intersection does not meet a peak hour signal warrant. Based on these outlined mitigation measures, Table 12 summarizes the future opemtions of the study area intersections by 2030 during the PM peak: hour under the alternatives proposed land use and mitigation. Table 12 Alternative C - 2030 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Operations PM Peak Hour Intersection Mobility Standard Delay LOS V/c Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Nonhbound Ramps VIC 0.85 28.9 C 0.87 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Southbound Ramps V/C 0.85 26.3 C 0.88 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)lWashington 51 VlC 0.90 8.9 A 0.51 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)fTolman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 33.9 C 0.81 Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road LOS 0 24.0 C 0.76 Hwy 99 (SislUyou BIvd)fTolman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 18.9 B 0.67 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Mistleloe Mill Rd VlC 0.90 33.8 D 0.43 Hwy 99 (SislUyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd VlC 0.80 11.1 . B 0.08 SOURCE: DKSAs~mres Similar to Alternative B, the proposed mitigation measures allow for adequate intersection opemtions by 2030 during the PM peak hour. Some of the proposed mitigation strategies, such as new signals at intersections where peak hour warrants or access spacing standards are not met, will need to have further review and analysis before implementing. Meeting a signal warrant is one criterion for implementing a signal, but there are many other criteria that should be evaluated and reviewed before deciding on installing a signal. OKS Associates TRANSPORTAtION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 PaRe 21 of24 Alternative 0 This alternative has a similar roadway configuration as Alternative C, with an extension of Mistletoe Road and Tolman Creek Road being realigned to "tee" into Mistletoe Road. The land uses are primarily office campus with a small amount of mixed uses near the realigned "tee" intersection. Tolman Creek Road is being considered a Neighborhood Collector under this alternative, and the extension of Mistletoe Road would be considered an Avenue (by the City of Ashland standards). Based on the projected land uses and trips during the PM peak hour, Table 13 summarized the operations at the study area intersections. Table 13 Alternative D - 2030 PM Peak Hour Unmitigated Traffic Operations PM Peak Hour Intersection Mobility Standard Delay LOS Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Northbound Ramps VlC 0.85 > 80.0 F Hwy 66 (Ashland St)n-5 Southbound Ramps VlC 0.85 > 80.0 F Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington St VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F Hwy 66 (Ashland St)ffolrnan Creek Rd VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F Tolman Creek RdlMistletoe Road (realigned) LOS D > 80.0 F Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)ffolman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)/Misdetoe MiD Rd VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F 0.72 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Crowson Rd VlC 0.80 11.5 B 0.08 SOURCE: DKSA~ares k...lu. ..' I . Indicates an intersection !hat does not meet jurisdictional standard Based on the fmdings in Table 13, the same intersections as in previous alternatives fail to meet jurisdictional standards by the year 2030 during the PM peak hour, and would require some form of mitigation to meet the outlined standard. Many of the same mitigation strategies are necessary under this alternative as were proposed under Alternatives B and C. The following summarizes the potential mitigation strategies to address deficiencies. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 northbound - Similar mitigation as proposed in previous alternatives. This consisted of signalization and adding a separate westbound right turn pocket. . Hwv 66 {Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 southbound ramD - Similar mitigation as under previous alternatives do not allow for adequate jurisdictional operations. In addition to the signalization and an additional southbound right turn pocket (dual right turns), an eastbound through lane would be necessary to allow for additional capacity at this intersection. This would require two through travel lanes through the intersection where currently only one travel lane exists. This would require the widening of the existing overpass to accommodate the additional travel lane. The two travel lanes could transition to the east approach geometry at the intersection ofHwy 66 (Ashland Street)/Interstate 5 northbound by containing a separate left turn and one through lane. This condition would require adequate signage to allow users in the inner travel lane prior to the intersection know they were in a left turn only lane approaching the Interstate 5 northbound on-ramp. DKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Pa~e 22 of24 . TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)/Washington Street - Similar mitigation as previous alternatives. This consisted of signalization. The intersection would meet the peak hour signal warrant in the future, but does not meet ODOT's access spacing standards. As an alternative, a right-inlright-out operation could be pursued and would allow for adequate operations at this intersection. . Hwv 66 (Ashland Street)(folman Creek Road - Similar mitigation measures as listed in previous alternatives do not allow for adequate intersection operations. Additional mitigation measures are necessary under this alternative. In addition to the previously identified westbound left and northbound right turn pockets, a new northbound left (dual lefts), eastbound right turn pocket, and southbound left turn pocket would be necessary to meet jurisdictional standard. This would require some additional right-of-way to implement. This same mitigation would allow for adequate operations under a scenario where Hwy 66 (Ashland Street)fWashington Street were converted to a right-inlright-out operation. . Tolman Creek Road/Mistletoe Road (realigned) - Similar mitigation as under previous alternatives, but in addition to the signalization a separate eastbound left turn pocket would be necessary. . 'Hwv 99 (Siskivou Boulevard)(folman Creek Road - Similar mitigation as under previous alternatives. This consisted of implementing a signal to allow for better side street delay and capacity; however the intersection does not meet a peak hour signal warrant. . Based on these outlined mitigation measures, Table 14 summarizes the future operations of the study area intersections by 2030 during the PM peak hour under the alternatives proposed land use and mitigation. Table 14 Alternative D - 2030 PM Peak Hour Mitigated Operations PM Peak Hour Intersection MobUily Standard Delay LOS V/c Hwy 66 (Ashland SQn-5 Nonhbound Ramps VlC 0.85 24.5 C 0.19 Hwy 66 (Ashland SI)n-5 Southbound Ramps VlC 0.85 18.9 C 0.65 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Washington St VlC 0.90 7.7 A 0.55 Hwy 66 (Ashland St)/Toiman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 45.8 0 0.90 Tolman Creek RdlMistJetoe Road LOS 0 30.1 C 0.96 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou Blvd)/Tolman Creek Rd VlC 0.90 23.4 C 0.86 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)/Mistletoe Mill Rd VlC 0.90 > 80.0 F 0.72 Hwy 99 (Siskiyou BIvd)ICrowson Rd VlC 0.80 11.5 B 0.08 SOURCE: DKSA~mres Similar to previous alternatives, the proposed mitigation measures allow for adequate intersection operations by 2030 during the PM peak hour. Some of the proposed mitigation strategies, such as new signals at intersections where peak hour warrants or access spacing standards are not met, will need to have further review and analysis before impleplenting: DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS FINAL MEMORANDUM January 2, 2009 Palle 23 of 24 Meeting a signal warrant is one criterion for implementing a signal, but there are many other criteria that should be evaluated and reviewed before deciding on installing a signal. Summary Based on this analysis, there are a number of improvements necessary by 2030 under the No- build condition even without the redevelopment of the Croman Mill site. However, the addition of the redevelopment does bring some additional mitigation measures forward. The mitigation necessary to reach adequate intersection operations is similar in Alternatives B and C because the net new trips that utilize the network are similar. Alternative D has a higher trip generation for net new trips and requires some additional mitigation strategies to reach jurisdictional standards. The most significant mitigations under Alternative D is the reconstruction of the existing Interstate 5 overpass at Hwy 66 (Ashland Street) to allow for additional capacity along Hwy 66. Figure 6 summarizes the mitigation measures outlined in this memorandum for the No-build and Build Alternatives. "\ 1:> J!l '" Q,g> ~ = .- .. III C .. GI .. - .ce <:II' ~ :. _Of ....... '1\t ~... . ';~t ~ ,. ~ ~ H'-~ . ""i't. <l. ... ..~ I.\!;;, f" ~ "ltt~ ~ ~ . "'( .( .,~ ..." .c~. l. + ~ J ~ 1:> e e e J!l ~ HI. ~ ..~.. -; '" .. " ~ eT .. .,~ .. .!2> "" tt. ,.. ... +C l.+ E .. l. t,. J "ltt. :5 ~ v ~ (9 8 ~ <:Ill :; ~ <l. ~ ~... H'-~ ..~'-\!;;. ... "l: _.. f" ,,( '" ~...'" . . . .......!.. 1&1 Co) .!2> "';t .41 ""i't. J "ltt. > S1 ~ ,. .( l. + v ~ - = ~ !;i .- z .. III ...-.--.....-... ................... ...--............. .................. .................. ................. Ill: C 1&1 .. ~ GI e e .. 1:> e cC - J!l ~ HI. ~ <i- ce '" .. " ~ ..~'- f" eT .. .,~ .. >- .!2> "" ..,.. +C l. + III E .. l. t,. tt. J "ltt. ... Z :5 ~ v ~ 0 (9 (9 ~ . ell .. i - ... - . :IE Ul ~ ~ <l. '" ICIl ~ 0 I <:Ill ~- f" ..~'-\!;;. ... ~ .,~ -.. 1&1 " HI. f" " '" .. ,,( ~ 8 m .!2> ""~ .<:...=< . ..,.. .c,..!I_ S1 l.tt> tt. J "ltt. l. + , '1\t .( s II. = ~ v ~ 8 0 ~ . Ill: .- ~ 1; ~ II. C ................ ................... .................. ....--............ ................-- ............-.... .. b~ GI 1:> e e z : z .. - J!l ~ HI. ~ <i- e ie ce .~ .. " ~ ..~'- f" eT .. .,~ .. "" ~ .. l. t,. tt. J "ltt. ... +C l. + ~ v ~ 0 (9 1:> ~ ~...... ~ <i- e J!l 1~" H '-!!e f" ..~'-\!;;. f" eT .. .,~ .. '" ~ ...~. . . '1\t l.'""t "".t. J "ltt. ... +C l. + " ~ ~ ,. v ~ - ~ (9 .- ::lI m ................ ................... ............---... -----..........-.- -.--...........-.- ................. 0 Z 1:> e e J!l .. ~ ~ HI. ~ <i- e '" " ..~ '-_L.. f" eT .. .,~ .. ,g> 'S .. l. t,. tt. J "ltt. ... +S l. + '"" :5 os ~ V ~ e, (9 (9 ~ . c ~ ~ .", .", "0 .", ell c c: c: .. . ::l 0 . ::l 0:: c 0 .8 .", .. ij "" Q; ell -'" Ui ~ € .J:: & '" ~ ~ "S ~ ~ 0 0 ii5 -'" <..) & & c: U) '" e e I.t) I.t) c: ~ c: 0.. 0.. .9 .", ell .Sl '" C> <..) ell E .l!l ~ 0 8 c: c: 0:: ~ II;; f!! 'w ell .Sl .Sl .J:: E '" ~ ~ .9 "E ~ c: c: .!!1 ;:.,. ;:.,. ell in > e - - Q; Q; '" 0 '" '" :E . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " - 0 . C - ii5 .", en en en Cll c ell ~ 0 .", .", .", .", & ::l ~ .- c: c: c: c: 0 .. ell ell ell ell -'" >- ~ :c :c :c .J:: :;;: c '" ~ . U) U) U) $ l!! U) . ~ ~ ~ !:[ ,", c 2! <..) Ul ~ <D <D <D <D c: C> Q .. .. <D <D <D <D ell C> c c GI ~ lii' ~ f. ~ I E ~ Z ,~ '. .. ~ w w w C :I: :I: :I: ell - w = ... ..J DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS' FINAL MEMORANDUM January 22, 2009 PaRe I of2 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Jason Graf, Crandall Arambula PC Bill Molnar, City of Ashland FROM: Alan Snook, AICP Michael Tomasini, EIT DATE: January 22, 2009 ( SUBJECT: Task 3.4b: Croman MiD Property Transportation Cost Report POS085xOOOxOOO The purpose of this memorandum is to document the planning level cost estimates associated with mitigation measures developed for the future No-build condition as well as the proposed Croman Mill property project. Prior transportation technical analysis has been conducted to determine the mitigation measures that would allow for adequate jurisdictional intersection operations for the No-build and Alternatives. This technical work was the primary input into developing these cost estimates. Summary There are a number of improvements outlines to meet jurisdictional standards by 2030 for study area intersections. Many of the improvements outlined to meet standard occur under the No- build condition. These improvements would be in place with or without the project, and carry forward into the proposed alternatives, but would not count against the total project cost. Table I summarizes the total cost for improvements by alternative as well as the cost associated with the project. Table 1 2030 Mitigation Cost Summary by Alternative Alternative No-Build Alternative B Alternative C Alternative D SOURCE: DKSA~res Total Cost for Miti2ation $13.72 Million $26.27 Million $24.62 Million $29.16 Million Cost Associated with Project $0 $12.54 Million $10.98 Million $14.62 Million OKS Associates FINAL MEMORANDUM January 22, 2009 PaRe 2 of2 TRANSPORTATI'ON SOLUTIONS In addition to developing overall cost assumptions, individual intersection costs were developed for mitigation. The individual intersection cost breakdown can be found at the end of this memorandum. It is useful to determine the proportionate share of cost based on the vehicle traffic at the intersection based on existing traffic, future growth in traffic (non-project related), and project related traffic. Table 2 sununarizes this information by intersection and alternative. Table 2 Proposed Cost of Mitigation by Alternative at Intersections Alternative B Alternative C Alternative 0 Intersection Percentaqe Dollar Percentaqe Dollar l'efcentaqe Dollar Hwy 66/1.5 NOI1hbound 4% $21.200.00 4% $20.400.00 10% $54.800.00 Hwy 66/1-5 Southbound 8% $0.00 7% $3.500.00 13% $6.500.00 Hwy 66/Washington St 9% SO.OO 8% SO.OO 15% SO.OO Hwy 66fT olman Creek Rd 16% $70,600.00 14% $60,100.00 25% $236,000,00 Tolman Creek RdlMislletoe Rd 38% $114,000.00 36% $108,200.00 52% $260,800.00 Hwy 99fT oIman Creek Rd 17% $52,000.00 19% $56.800.00 29% $88.300.00 Hwy 99/Milstletoe Rd 31% $0.00 29% $0.00 45% $0.00 Hwy 99/Crowson Rd 8% $0.00 8% SO.OO 13% $0.00 TOTALS $257,800.00 $249,000.00 $646,400.00 SOURCE: DKS Associates It can be seen that the higher percentage of traffic contribution, and therefore the higher cost for project related improvements are at the intersections of Hwy 99IMistletoe Road and Tolman Creek RoadlMistletoe Road due to the fact that these are the primary intersections that access/egress the study area. Cromail Mill Planning Level Cost Assumptions Gener.ol ""sun..",,ns fZbot.... No ROW~..MWroecMy ., bot,...... ....- No Build Scenario ,- New 105 OVerpass Ashland Street (Hwy 66) 11-5 Northbound Ramps Ashland Street (Hwy 66)/1-5 Southbound Ramps Ashland Street (Hwy 66)IWashingtDn Street Ashland Slleet (Hwy 66yrotman Creek Road Descri_ 1-5 OVerpass Si;nalizeintersection Southbotmd right turn lane Signalize intersection Signalize intersection Weslbound left turn lane ReoeMng Lane on southern leg for WBl Adjustment for westam leg for added WBl Assumption. 400 foot structure Coo $12,210,000 $300,000 $199,800 S3OO,OOO $300,000 $135,173 $216,276 562,438 $13,n3,688 2OlJfooIIane 125 foot lane 200 foot lane 6 foot of pavement for 75 feet Total __8 . Ashland Street (Hwy 66) 11-5 Northbound Ramps 1-5 OVerpass 400 foot structure $12,210,000 Westbound right turn lane 2OlJfooIIane $471,576 Signatizeinl9fsection $300.000 Ashland Street (Hwy 66)11-5 Southbound Ramps SBR Turn lanes 2OlJfooI_ $199,800 Signalize intersection $300,000 Ashland Street (Hwy 66)IWashington Street Signalize intersection $300.000 New Roadway-3lane Mistletoe extenstion from Totman to Hwy 99 4,000 feet new 3 lane roadway $6,660,000 New Roadway-2lane L.ocaI cin::ulation road for Mistletoe 2,500 f8e1 new 2 lane roadway $2,497,500 Rehabilitate existing Mistletoe Road Repave and add sidewaJks 2,100 feel of length $1,864,800 Ashland Street (Hwy66yrolman Creek Roa:I Weslbound left turn lane 125 foot lane $189,242 5 lane southern leg Expanded 5-lane Southern leg 5651,690 Adjustment to westam leg for added WBl 6 foot of pavement for 75 feet $25,983 Toman Creek RoadIMistIetoe MiD Road Si;nalizentersection $300,000 Slskiyou Boulevard (Hwy 99YTolman Creek Road Signalize intersection $300.000 Total $26,270,591 .....-e I Descri Ass . Coo Ashland Street (Hwy 66) 11-5 Northbound Ramps ~5 o-pass 400 foot stJucture $12,210,000 Westbound righl turn lane 200 foot lane $471,576 Signalize intersection S3OO,OOO Ashland Street (Hwy 66)11-5 Sotrlhbound Ramps SBR Turn lanes 250 foot lane $249,750 Signalize intersection $300.000 Ashland Street (Hwy 66)IWashington Street Signalizeinlersection S3OO,OOO New Roadway-3 lane Mistletoe extenstion from Tolman to Hwy 99 4,500 teet new 3 lane roadway $7,492,500 Rehabilitate existing Mistletoe Road Repave and add sidewalks 2,100 feet of length $1,664,800 Ashland Street (Hwy 66yrolman Creek Road Westbound teft turn lane 150 foot lane $162,207 5 lane soolhem leg E><panded ...... Sou1hem leg $651,690 Adjustment to western leg for added WBl 6 foot of pavement for 75 feet $16,650 T ofman Creek RoadIMisUetoe MiD Road Signalize intersection $300,000 Siskiyou Boulevard (Hwy 99yrolman Creek Road Signalize intersection $300,000 Total $24619,113 Ashland Street (Hwy 66) 11-5 Northbound Ramps __0 Ashland Street (Hwy 66)11-5 Southbound Ramps Ashland Street (Hwy 66)IWashington Street New Ro8dway-5lane Rehabilitate existing Mistletoe Road . Ashland Street (Hwy 66)fTolman Creek Road Tolman Creek RoadIMisUetoe Mill Road s_ _ (Hwy 99)/ToIman en.e. Road Descd 1-5 Overpass Westbound ri;ht b.lm lane Signalize intersection SBR Turn Lanes Signalize intersection Si;nalizeintersec:tion Mistletoe extenstion from Tolman to Hwy 99 Repave and add sidewalks Westbound laft turn lane Eastbound right turn lane 5 lane_leg Northbound r1ght turn lane (3-I8ne section) 4 lane norUlem leg Signalize intersedion EastbOtJnd left turn lane Adjusbnent to W9St8m leg for added WBl Signaize intersedion Ass 400 foot structure 225 foot lane Coo $12,210,000 $530.523 $300.000 $249,750 S3OO,OOO $300.000 $11,238,750 $1,884,800 $216,216 S203,810 1651,690 $162,201 $123,758 $300.000 $179,529 $25,983 $300.000 250 foot lane 4,500 feet new 5 lane roadway 2,100 feet of length 150 foot lane Expanded 5-lane Southern leg 400 foot lane 400 foot southbound left turn lane 350 foot lane 6 fool of pavement for 75 feet 529,157,077 Total CITY OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: April 29, 2010 TO: Mayor and'City Council FROM: Maria Harris, Planning Manager Bmndon Goldman, Senior Planner RE: Council Questions about the Croman Mill District Implementation Plan After the April 6 City Council meeting, Councilors submitted the following questions and information. The questions are divided into five categories - planning process, map changes, implementing ordinances and standards, transportation framework and delibemtion issues, Staff has provided information following each question. Items under the deliberations issues category are questions that are difficult to address with factual information or analysis, and as a result, these items do not necessarily include a staff response. The original question submittals from Councilors are included as attachments to this memo. Plannina Process . Have existing land owners along Mistletoe Rd been involved in the planning process and if so how? All property owners of sites within the plan area as well as properties within 200 feet of the plan area were invited to participate in the redevelopment planning process by being invited to the three public workshops and two joint study sessions in 2008. Additionally, a series of smaller "key participant" group meetings were held during the plan development process in January and March of2008. Separate key participant meetings were held with the owners and representatives of the Croman Mill site, the adjacent property owners in the plan area, federal, state and local agencies, and a neighborhood group. Many of the issues identified in the key participant meetings were incorporated into the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008). For example, improving truck access to the plan area was a concern raised by property owners in the plan area" and is addressed with the design of the Central Boulevard and new connection provided to Siskiyou Boulevard. Approximately 250 written notices were mailed to property owners within the plan area as well as surrounding the plan area and participants from the Croman Site redevelopment planning process for the Planning Commission and Council public hearings that began on January 12,2010. · What role will these land owners have in the future planning process as the project moves forward? If the Croman Mill zoning district and standards are adopted, new development will be required to go through the Site Review planning approval process. Neighboring property owners would be noticed of planning applications through the land use public review process. .2- . Do aU Type II reviews go to Planning Commission for approval? Do special permitted uses also go to the Planning Commission? What proportion of E-l and M-l planning actions become type II planning actions? Are all buildings greater than 10,000 square feet subject to a type II? In accordance with Chapter 18.108 Procedures, all Type II planning actions include a public hearing at the Planning Commission. This procedure applies to planning actions city wide, not just to the proposed Croman Mill District. As proposed, the planning application process for development proposals in the Croman Mill District uses the established Site Review process. Under the current E-I and M-I zoning, new buildings, additions or expansions require Site Review approval in accordance with Chapter 18,72 Site Design Review. The same Site Review process will be apply to new buildings, additions or expansions in the CM zoning overlays. Building size determines whether a planning application is processed under the Type I or Type II procedure in accordance with Chapter 18.108 Procedures. Currently, new structures or additions that are 20% of an existing building's square footage or 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is less, are processed under the Type I procedure. Buildings larger than the size threshold are processed under the Type II procedure. Special permitted uses do not determine whether a planning application is processed under the Type I or Type II procedure. A Type I procedure involves the Staff Advisor making the decision, public notice and any appeals being heard by the Planning Commission. A Type II procedure involves a public hearing and decision by the Planning Commission, public notice and any appeals being heard by the City Council. . I absolutely believe in green building standards. however, council and staff have separately (goal setting) suggested that the City use such standards when they become available through the state as building codes. What are tbe pros and cons of adopting specific items now as part of the planning code? The Green Development Standards for the Croman Mill District focus on green site improvements such as using recycled content in streets, creating green surface parking areas through the use of porous paving and reducing potable water use for landscaping. "Mandate sustainable and green development codes" was identified as a project objective in the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008). Green building codes focus on building construction, While the green building codes may include green site improvements as recommended measures, these are not typically required elements of the green building codes, . Green street standards: street design details, like curbs, storm water, buried utilities, are managed by public works. what reasons suggest we should adopt tbese in the planning code for Croman? would it be preferable to adopt standards for all new streets and for substantial rebuilds of existing streets? do public works street standards even get adopted, as opposed to simply being required at the time of engineering review? DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT Tel: 54H88-5305 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541,552-2050 =a:~ni:,u;752O TTY 800.7352900 rA' ,3- The most recent version of the Ashland Street Standards was adopted in 1999, and is in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Chapter 18 of AMC). Street standards for different street types describing function, required elements and dimensions, and right-of-way widths are an integral part of planning a development and are typically located in land use codes. The actual specifications for construction of the streets is included in the Engineering Design Standards for Public Improvements, and are addressed after the planning approval in the final engineering for a project. . Ordinance #6: priority processing for LEED standard building permits. can we adopt this ordinance independently of the Croman ordinances? is it meant to apply throughout the City? It is meant to apply through the City. However, this approach can be modified. CemDrehensive Plan and Zenina MaD Chanaes . Wby are we going with the bybrid scenario of mixed industriaVoffice land uses? The hybrid scenario of mixed industrial and office land uses is included in the land use framework in the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008). The alteration made in the revised plan forwarded by the Planning Commission is locating the industrial area (CI) to the south and the office area (OE) to the north, rather than the original concept of locating the industrial area to the west of the Central Boulevard and the office are to the east of the Central Boulevard. This change was made by the Planning Commission to provide the potential for freight rail access to the industrial zone (CI). . The three lots on the east side of Mistletoe are being specially handled by separate ordinance (Ordinance #5a, applying detailed site review). I am not convinced it makes sense to leave those properties M-l, when we are proposing a long term plan and it would seem preferable to eventually have these properties match the zoning of Croman District. How can we create a transition so those lots become Compatible Industrial, or ?, in the long term? Could we handle these lots as we are the lots outside the city limits, imposing a future zoning that is changed by a land use zone change application? Lots outside the city limits and inside the Ashland Urban Growth Boundary are required to conform to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan designation upon annexation. Since the lots at 650 - 750 Mistletoe Road are currently in the city limits and are assigned to a city zoning district, annexation is not required and the zone change can not be imposed in the same manner. The Planning Commission recommendation is to retain the current M-I Industrial zoning, include the portion of the lots adjacent to the street in the Detail Site Review Zone, and include the properties in the Croman Mill District Comprehensive Plan Designation. By including the properties in the Croman Mill District Comprehensive Plan Designation, the property owner could request a zone change to one of the Croman Mill District zoning overlays. However, this would be upon the property owner initiating the zone change, and would not automatically impose Croman Mill District zonmg. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10 E. Main SIreet Ashland. Oregon 97510 WNW.ashland.or.us Tel: 541,488-5305 Fax: 541,551-1050 TTY: 800-735-1900 r~' ,4- ' I :~ ~ ~ f" i<! ~ ~ . What are the disadvantages of leaving those lots in the M-l zone until such time as the property owner wishes to change the zoning? did the planning commission consider applying CI zoning instead of OE zoning to these lots? what are the pros and cons of that choice? The disadvantage of leaving the lots located at 650 - 750 Mistletoe Road in the M-Ilndustrial Zone is that the uses and buildings could develop in a manner that is inconsistent and incompatible with surrounding redevelopment adjacent to the Central Boulevard in the Croman Mill District. Uses that are allowed in the M-I Industrial zone (e.g. mini-warehouses, building material sales yards.junkyard and auto wrecking yards) that have been excluded from the Croman Mill District zoning overlays could be built on the site. Development in the M-l Industrial zoning district is subject to the Basic Site Review process, while the properties abutting the Central Boulevard are subject to standards' that are similar to the Detail Site Review process. The properties at 650 - 750 Mistletoe are located on the main street (i.e. Central Boulevard) coming into and through the property. The site physically connects the neighborhood center to the central employment area, and the properties are could provide some continuity as people coming into the site travel along the Centml Boulevard. The Central Boulevard was intended to create a gateway into the Croman Mill District which would contribute to the identity of the employment area, to continue the boulevard street design used on Siskiyou Boulevard and Ashland Street, and to connect the existing boulevards and create a loop through the property, Development adjacent to the Central Boulevard would be subject to further requirements for orientation and scale of buildings, streetscape and building materials, as is currently in place on Ashland's main streets such as Siskiyou Boulevard, Ashland Street, A Street, the downtown and the milroad property (i.e. Clear Creek Drive, Russell Drive). DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main Slreel Ashland. Oregoo 97520 www.ashlaoo.or.us Tel: 541-488-5305Fax: 541,551.2050 m:fIOO.735-1llOO r.l' -5- In terms of context, there are several factors regarding the 650 - 750 Mistletoe Road site that are worth noting, First, more than half of the site acreage is developed with the mini-storage and existing two-story office building - of the total acreage of 5.6 acres in size, just over two acres of land remains undeveloped. The vacant two acres on the mini-storage site represents two percent of the overall land area included in the Croman Mill District plan. The Planning Commission did consider the option of placing the properties at 650 - 750 Mistletoe Road in the Compatible Industrial (CI) zoning overlay. Ultimately, the Planning Commission recommended retaining the M-I Industrial zoning, placing the area adjacent to the Central Boulevard in the Detail Site Review Zone and including the properties in the Croman Mill District Comprehensive Plan designation for several reasons. The majority ofthe developable land in the Croman Mill District is situated in a planned street network in a manner that allows the division into lots which will meet the dimensional, parking and access requirements ofthe proposed standards. In contrast, the mini-storage site, which was divided and planned prior to the proposed requirements, includes three lots that are configured in such away that the lots are considerably wider than deep. This shallow lot orientation predisposes the buildable areas to also being wide and not deep, and. focuses more of the parking and access to the sides of the buildings. Additionally, the mini-storage site is somewhat physically isolated because a lack of side streets adjacent to the property. This puts the mini-storage site at a disadvantage because it can not utilize side streets fro shared access points. The Planning Commission recognized that there are pre-existing uses and current planning approvals in place on the site, and the recommendation to include the properties adjacent to the Central Boulevard in the Detail Site Review Zone was an effort to address the property owner's concerns regarding the change in zoning, but to insure a level of site and building development commensurate with the remainder of the Central Boulevard, Additionally, the inclusion in the Croman Mill District Comprehensive Plan designation would allow future requests for the rezoning the property to be included in the district. . are there other examples in town of applying a higher standard of detailed site review on an ' employment area in a spot zone like is proposed here? The annexation on Crowson Road and Benson Way included a similar area facing Crowson Road that is included in the Detail Site Review Zone. ImDlementina Ordinances and Standards . Could we keep the zoning as Mland use tbe proposal as an overlay to guide future construction? The Compatible Industrial (CI) zoning allows many of the uses permitted in the M-Ilndustrial district such as manufacturing, assembly, fabrication, packaging, manufacture of food products, offices and limited outdoor storage. As recommended in the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008), the land-intensive uses with low employment densities were not included in the Croman Mill District to address concerns regarding creating family wage jobs, using land efficiently to achieving higher job densities, and creating a unique and distinctive indentify by locating complementary employers with a focus on clean industries and an emphasis on creativity, craft and innovation. Similarly, the service-oriented uses such as shops and restaurants are intended to be of aineighborhood scale to provide manufacturing and industrial uses the opportunity to have direct sales OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main SIreel Ashland. Oregon 97520 WNW.ashland.or.us T 01: 541-488.5305 Fax: 541,552.2050 TTY: IlOO-735,2900 r.l' ,6- areas, as well as providing opportunities for small restaurants/shops (e.g. coffee shop) that would be within easy walking distance of nearby employers. In the proposed Croman Mill District, professional offices are targeted for the OE Office Employment zone and manufacturing and assembly is the focus of the CI Compatible Industrial zone, with provisions to allow for some cross-over manufacturing and offices associated with the primary use of the zone. Stores. restaurants and shops of a neighborhood scale are located in the NC Neighborhood, and allowed throughout the OE Office Employment and CI Compatible Industrial zones at a more limited scale. The MU Mixed Use areas allow both the office and manufacturing and assembly uses. With the exception of the residential uses allowed in the NC Neighborhood Commercial and MU Mixed Use zoning overlays, the uses included in the Croman Mill District are allowed under the current M-I Industrial and E-I Employment zoning. It is important to note that with the exception of the ODOT maintenance yard property on Tolman Creek Road, the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map changes are not a wholesale change of the plan and zone designations (e.g, a change from an industrial to a residential designation). Instead, the proposed map amendments are a redistribution of the uses allowed under the current M- I Industrial zoning. The title of the M-I Industrial zoning is somewhat misleading because the zoning district allows a wide range of commercial and employment uses including offices, retail, personal services, restaurants, nightclubs and bars, theaters, and hotels and motels in addition to those uses typically associated with industrial areas such as manufacturing, processing, assembling, mini-warehouses, outside storage of merchandise and raw materials;junkyard and auto wrecking yards. and concrete or asphalt batch or mixing plants. In short, the M-I Industrial zoning district includes the uses that are allowed in the C-I Commercial and E-I Employment zoning districts. . Why attach these ordinances to a particular site? Generally. ordinances are a tool that is used to implement a master plan so that the future development is in a form, shape and character as envisioned in the master plan. · What is meant by "family wages"? Related to this is what is the projected employment density targets? How will this be measured and assessed? "Provide for a large number of family wage jobs" is a guiding principle of the emman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008). In regards to the Office Employment (OE) zoning overlay, the plan goes on to say the following. "This district will encourage family-wage jobs, accommodate Plexis or a similar type user, and should be marketed toward retaining and expanding existing firms that target industry clusters of professional, scientific and technical services, including software design, engineering, and research." The recommended employment densities are 60 employees per acre in the Office Employment (OE) overlay, 25 employees per acre in the Compatible Industrial (CI) and Mixed Use (MU) overlays, and 20 employees per acre in the Neighborhood Center (NC) overlay. This is one of the Croman Mill District Standards (vm-C-14, page 21), and while it is a recommendation, future development OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 10 E. Main SIreel Fax: 5-41,552.1050 AshIarxl. Oregon 97510 nY: 800-735,2900 www.ashland.Of.US rA1 -7- applications in the Croman Mill District would be required to describe their proposed use in relation to the recommendation. . Are (green development) standards requirements or recommendations? As currently proposed. the green development standards are requirements. . Why not have zero-net for buildings in order to protect citizens' potable water and electricity? While the City can provide incentives to constructing energy-saving buildings, there are legal limitations in mandating measures that exceed the state building code, . Have these standards and the site design standards including green requirements been evaluated by local design professionals for feasibility and relative cost given all the other requirements imposed by the standards and the existing planning code, such as landscaping, parking area, FAR and other lot size and building orientation requirements? The majority of the Site Design Standards included in the Croman Mill District are existing code requirements that have been been applied to commercial developments throughout Ashland since the early 1990's, As noted, the Green standards are newly proposed as are reductions in parking, minimum floor areas, and dimensional standards specific to the Croman Mill District. To determine how these additional standards could be incorporated into a development Staff evaluated recent commercial developments within Ashland as comparative examples. In this evaluation staff found that these comparative examples could have been developed in conformance with the proposed Site Design Standards with minor alterations. A full cost feasibility analysis was not conducted as part of this endeavor to compare the cost of green improvements to more traditional building practices. There also has not been a cost analysis completed to determine to what degree upfront expenditures could be offset by energy or water savings in a building that implements the green development practices as proposed. Staffhas obtained cost comparison estimates to determine the added up-front cost associated with the use of recycled and pervious paving materials. Recycled paving materials were found to be readily available and their use 'is increasingly a conunon practice. The total additional cost of providing pervious pavement was approximately 10% higher than traditional non-pervious pavement. As only half of a parking lot would need to be paved with pervious materials as one option to meet the specific standard (VIII-C-4(2)c) this correlates to an additional 5% upfront cost to comply with this proposed green standard when compared to paving an entire lot with noon-pervious material. City Staff has previously presented to the Planning commission information regarding an average 2- 4% increase in cost for buildings developed in accordance with LEED certification standards when compared to conventional site design and construction. · how does the proposed alternate alignment of the main boulevard impact the cost of botb the roadways and the private lot deveiopments? DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541,488-5305 20 E. Main Street . Fax: 541-552-2050 =~~:,:~7520 m: 800-735-2900 l'A ., '.- The alternative East-West alignment as provided to Council for consideration, and as recommended by the Planning Commission, provides for equivalent land areas dedicated to each overlay zone. In comparing the approximate linear feet of each road type it shows that under the original proposal there is approximately 225' less of total driving surface then is proposed in the E-W alternative. However, the distribution of road types differs substantially as illustrated in the table below: Central Blvd 4075' Local Commercial Streets 9000' Accessways Total Original Street Framework East-West Alternative All figures are approximate linear feet. 6150; 19225 4000' 8050' 7500' 19550 No engineering for either street network alternative has been undertaken to allow for a true cost comparison ofthe needed public facility improvements. Regarding the development potential of the individual blocks created staff has noted that in the East West alternative the proposed block sizes are typically smaller than those proposed in the Croman Mill Plan. As such staff has recommended that in the event Council adopts the East-west alternative that the minimum lot size be reduced to allow for more uniform partitioning of the blocks. The costs associated with private lot developments are highly variable both in terms of the type of development as well as the site conditions and therefore Staff can not provide an assessment of how the alternative alignment would impact private lot development costs, · please describe the basic procedural differences between conditional use permits and special permitted use application review? Special permitted uses do not determine whether a planning application is processed under the Type lor Type II procedure. Building size determines whether a planning application is processed under the Type I or Type II procedure in accordance with Chapter 18.108 Procedures. Currently, new structures or additions that are 20% of an existing building's square footage or 10,000 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is less, are processed under the Type I procedure. Buildings larger than the size threshold are processed under the Type II procedure. A Special Permitted Use is more closely identified with a Permitted Use in that it is approved concurrent to a standard Site Review Application, or administratively for conversion of space within a building. Special Permitted Use provisions are explicit in the code as clear standards with no discretionary aspects. A Special Permitted Use is processed in consort with a Planning Application for Site Review approval and has no additional application fee. A Conditional Use permit is somewhat discretionary in which a determination must be made that the use has no greater adverse effect on the impact area when compared to the target use of the zone. A Conditional Use requires specific findings addressing the applicable criteria, including a separate DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 54H88-5305 20 E. Main SIr... Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: BOO.735,2900 www.ashlaoo.Dr.us rA' -9- application fee. The approval authority may impose "conditions" to alter the proposal to mitigate impacts upon the impact area. . after a building is constructed and occupied, how does the City track changes in uses within the buildings? this pertains to the likelihood that owners and occupants may well change over time. I am wondering bow the code applies at that time. if a use qualifies as a special permitted use (is within the limited square footage, etc.), why is there an added procedural requirement? In terms of procedure, the review process for an outright permitted use and for a special permitted use is identical. The City Planning Department reviews all building permits currently to evaluate if a building is converting from a less intensive use to a more intensive use to ensure adequate facilities exist (i.e. parking). In the event the facilities are found to be inadequate for the change of occupancy, the applicant would need to obtain Site Review approval as a Type I planning action prior to the conversion. As part of a review of a proposed change City staff would ensure the maximum floor area dedicated to a special permitted use is not exceeded. . pages numbers refer to chapter 18.53, draft 4.6.10 page 3, Use Regulations -where does a firm like Adroit locate? if not, will it forever be a non-conforming use? can it expand? . How much land is there with the city limits that can support light industry? Without land reserves, we reaDy need to be careful about the use of Croman. Is this site for employment or industrial uses? As existing, the single story Adroit building would not conform to the proposed CM-CI dimensional standards requiring a second story of at least 20% the gross floor area, and as such would be nonconforming in that regard. Any existing non-conforming building within the district may continue operation indefinitely. Non-conforming buildings within the district may be expanded or reconstructed provided the expansion is in conformance with the zone. In terms of use, the Adroit building is used primarily as an office on a single tax lot with outdoor storage located on adjoining tax lots. The lots used as outdoor storage are currently outside the City Limits and as such would be unaffected until such time as the property owner requested annexation to develop them under the proposed zoning overlay. Under the proposed zoning CM-CI overlay, an office use would have to be limited to 50% of the ground floor area were the property developed from the ground up under the proposed code, whereas the remainder could be used as for assembly, fabrication or other industrial uses within the compatible industrial zone. As a non-conforming use it may be changed to one of the same or more restrictive nature through obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. If the use were to change to one permitted in the zone, no CUP would be required. Under the CM-CI Designation as proposed for the Adroit Site there is a limitation on outdoor storage not to exceed 2500 feet in this zoning overlay. Any new development proposed would be evaluated to be in conformance with these provisions. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY OEVElOPMENT 20 E. Main SlreeI: Ash~nd, Oregon 97510 W'NW.ashland,of.lJS T of: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541.552.2050 m: 800-735,2900 r.l' ,10- As presented in the power point presentation provided on April 6th the City retains approximately 58 acres of buildable land designated with Employment or Industrial designations outside of the Croman Mill District suitable for firms similar to Adroit. In addition to these areas the CM-DE zone would allow professional office uses outright. . MU and OE allow medical offices along with professional, finance and business as permitted uses. does this introduce medical services into an otherwise non-retail area? is this a question of traffic and parking demand or a question about conflicting uses? Yes. This is consistent with our existing C-I, E-I, and M-I zones where medical uses are permitted. Additionally within the City we have a Health Care Zone (He) in which medical offices are permitted within what are non-retail areas. The cumulative transportation impacts and parking demands would be evaluated as part of a Site Review application for any mix of uses proposed, including medical, and adequate parking would have to be accommodated on-site, or through the use of parking credits or a parking management strategy. . retail uses in MU are limited to 3000 square feet, for what reasons? In the MU mixed use overlay the floor area dedicated to retail is limited to 1500 sq. ft. and has to be associated with a permitted use. This ensures the primary use is either office or industrial, and the area is not developed exclusively as stores, shops and restaurants In the NC neighborhood center zone, the 3000 square foot limitation for retail is to provide opportunities for neighborhood serving businesses such as restaurants, salons. and general retail. The NC zone is in immediate proximity to existing residential districts and this limitation also functions to promote compatible development as opposed to a large destination retail development center. . under industrial uses, are the manufacturing uses allowed unrestricted office space? are office uses prohibited in CI? No. In the CI zone the area dedicated to office can not exceed more than 50% of the ground floor area as proposed (18.53,040B4). . does allowing food production as a special permitted use in CI but only at up to 50% actually work for Dagoba and Organic Nation? what is the purpose oftbe 50% limit? Within the CI zone the manufacturing, assembly, fabrication or packaging including manufacturing of food products can occupy 100% of the building and is permitted outright. The 50% limit referenced applies to manufacturing uses within the DE zone as a special permitted use. The 50% allowance was added to the DE zone to allow flexibility within the district to permit some manufacturing in support of the operations of a permitted use on site such as a software programming company that also manufactures and distributes the software. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main Slreel Fax: 541.552.1050 =~:~752O TTY 800-735.2900 rA1 -11- In reviewing the proposed plans for Organic Nations building approximately 60% is proposed to be industrial with the remaining dedicated office use. Staff has not evaluated the internal use distribution within the Dagoba Chocolates building. . what is the purpose of restricting warehouses and similar storage facilities to special permitted uses? what criteria will be applied to approve these as special permitted? A guiding principle of the plan was to "provide for a large number of family wage jobs". Warehouse, or similar land intensive uses, provide a very low number of jobs per acre and as such the area limitation on such uses has been proposed to ensure the plan area develops in a manner consistent with the goaL Through the regular Site Review approval process a new development would he evaluated and any special permitted use component of warehouse or similar storage facility would be held to the limitations explicitly stated in 18,53.04.BIO as proposed. . how do we assure that upstairs residential uses are adequately buffered from the manufacturing downstairs and CI across the street? The allowance of residential in this area was evaluated through Planning Commission discussions and proposed as a means of providing a transition of compatible uses from the existing residential neighborhoods on Tolman Creek Road to the higher intensity district core. The "Residential Buffer" overlay along the Hamilton Creek and Neighborhood Center areas was proposed to institute height limitations as to buffer the existing adjacent residential neighborhoods from larger scale developments within the district. As it is impossible to fully insulate a residence from all impacts associated with a adjoining industrial use, residential uses within the plan area would be required to execute hold harmless covenant and agreement stating they shall not protest impacts from commercial and industrial uses within the district. (18.53.040B(I)). . #3. stores and restaurants on same parcel: by cumulative do you mean that only lO%of the ground floor area may be in ANYone limited use? or could tbere be several limited uses? If there were several limited stores, restaurants or shops within one project, their total combined floor area could not exceed 1500 sq. ft. For example one 1000sq.ft. retail store and one 500sq.ft. cafe could be developed on the same parcel (either in the same building or a group of buildings) with a combined square footage of 1500sq.ft. . can the uses be on upper floors? How would we know? The 1500 square foot allowance for limited stores, restaurants, imd shops, can be located on any floor of the building. \ DEPT. OF COMMUNITY OEVElOPMENT 20 E. Main Street Ashland. Oregon 97520 VIlWW.ashIarx:l.or.us Tel: 541-488.5305 Fax: 541-552.2050 TTY: 800-735,2900 r~' ,12. . what is the expected relationship between ancillary uses and special permitted uses (#3, 4 and 5)? for example ancillary uses include cafeteria, child care, fitness for large company employees. what if a large company owns a building and leases space to a private operator for each of those three functions; does the 2,500 sq ft apply to the total or to each ancillary function? The 2500 square feet of allowable' Ancillary Employee Services' applies to the total of all ancillary uses combined (those listed in 18.53.040B6), For example a building with a ground floor area in excess of 25000 square feet could have a cafeteria for the exclusive use of employees of 1500 feet in size, and a fitness area for the exclusive use of employees 1000 feet in size for a combined total of 2,500sq.ft, The various special permitted uses are all additive, Therefore one could see a single large building contain 1500 sq. ft, of 'stores, restaurants and shops' in accordance with 18.53.040B3, a 1500 sq,ft. publically accessible daycare in accordance with 18.53.040B5 , and an additional 2500 sq.f.t dedicated to 'Ancillary Employee Services' per 18,53.040B6 for a cumulative total of5500 sq.ft. in floor area dedicated to these various uses in this hypothetical example. . as another example, #4 allows professional offices up to 50% of ground floor area. The Special Permitted Uses relating to Office uses in the CM-CI (18.53.040B4), manufacturing in the CM-OE (l8.53.040B8), or warehouses in the CM-OE & CM-MU (I 8.53,040B 10), each allow a maximum area of up to 50% of the ground floor area to be utilized as indicated provided the use is in conjunction with a permitted use on the property. This 50% allowance is again independent of other floor area dedicated to other special permitted uses. . Is #6 saying that such supportive services as contract finance professionals as an ancillary use is limited 2,500 sq ft or 10%? If "contract finance professionals" is intended to indicate contract employees working to support the operations of a permitted use on-site, than this use would fall into the allowance for 50% of the ground floor area to be used as professional offices in the CM-CI overlay, and would not be considered an Ancillary Employee Service. Through the site review process staff reviews general floor plans and when a specific ancillary employee serving use is delineated (i.e. dedicated fitness center) it is that area that would be subject to the limitation in floor area. The maximum floor area dedicated to an ancillary employee service use is a cumulative 2,500 square feet, or ten percent (10%) of the ground floor area, whichever is less. For buildings with a ground floor less than 25,000 square feet in size the limitation would be 10"10 of the ground floor area. For buildings with a ground floor area in excess 25,000 the limitation would be capped at 2,500 square feet. . can it be above the ground floor? Yes. The floor it is on is not regulated. OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT 10 E. Main Slreet Ashland. Oregoo 97510 WNW.ashIand.or.us Tel: 541-488.5305 Fax: 541,552.2050 TlY: IlOO-735,2900 r.l' - 13- . #8 prohibits any manufacturing use that requires a DEQ air permit. do we not anticipate small to medium size fabrication activities desiring to locate in Ashland? What specifically are we concerned about, when an air permit provides strict regulation of emissions? if air permits are not available from DEQ, why does Ashland also prohibit businesses that may need air permits? if circumstances change, and permits become available, do we want to have prohibited the uses outright in our land use code? -are we intentionally prohibiting research laboratories? the wildlife lab? The initial concern regarding air quality was intended to address limitations on such uses as an Asphalt Batch Plant which is currently a conditional use in the M-I zone, As Restricting any use that require a DEQ "Air Contaminant Discharge Permit" covers a large group of industries that produce similar air contaminants. However some specific uses also fall into these categories that may be suitable for the plan area including larger scale coffee roasters and commercial bakeries. Subsequent to the Planning Commission review but prior to the Council's initial hearing Staff contacted a local coffee roaster to determine whether they were currently of a scale that would trigger such a permit. Although the specific roaster was not yet producing over 30 tons' per year, they anticipated that they could reach that scale if their expansion continued at the present rate. Further it was found that the use of "after burners" could effectively reduce or nearly eliminate air contaminants for businesses required to obtain a DEQ Air Contaminant Discharge Permit. As such Staff had intended to recommend removal of section 18.053.04.B(8)c to ensure such businesses are permitted in the plan area, . page 6, chapter 18.53 in NC, manufacturing and assembly is limited to 1,000 sq ft or 10%, associated with a retail use. how is this derived? what is the purpose? The Neighborhood Center was intended for to provide the greatest opportunity to support pedestrian scaled uses that serve nearby employees, neighborhoods, and future transit commuters. The first iterations of the proposed code had no provisions for manufacturing in this zoning overlay. In Planning Commission discussions it was expressed that a retail business may have a need to have a limited amount of manufacturing associated with that business and as such section 18.53.040B9 was added to provide for this opportunity. The limitation on the floor area dedicated to this use was established to ensure that the overlay remained primarily a neighborhood center with retail, restaurants, shops and not become primarily an industrial employment area. . if warehouses are allowed in Ct, how do we know that outdoor storage is not also required? what about large equipment, such as construc~on firms own? such as ~arehouses use? The Ordinance as proposed does not prohibit outdoor storage in the CI zone. Exclusive of warehouse space, 18.53.040B(II) allows up to 2500 sq.ft, of outdoor storage provided it is located to the side or rear of the building and screened from view. The topic of outdoor storage in relation to intended employment density was a topic of discussion at the Planning Commission, Although the initial draft of the ordinance did not contain any allowance for outdoor storage, Planning Commissioners recommended the allowance. The criteria (18,53.040B(II)d was added to address the balance between employment densitY and the use of property for outdoor storage. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENT Tel: 541~lI8-5305 20 E. Main Slreet Fax: 541.552.1050 :,a~;n~752O m: 800,7351900 rA' -14- . #10c. why bother prohibiting mini-storage? can we treat mini storage separately from the undesirable 'land intensive uses like concrete batch and junk yards'? During Planning Commission meetings the potential use of property as mini-storage facilities was addressed in light of addressing the goal of providing family wage jobs. Such a use is land intensive and produces few jobs per acre and as such it was explicitly prohibited from the CM zone. . what zoning districts in town do allow mini-storage? Mini-storage facilities are a permitted use in M-I, and a conditional use in the E-I zone. . what is meant by 'storage materials shall be contained within the refuse area'? This sentence is an inadvertent remnant of other code language sourced for this standard, as such it should be removed from the code. . how do we apply the minimum employment density targets as noted in d.? An applicant seeking to provide outdoor storage would have to demonstrate that their business would employ a minimum of 50% of the target employment density as described in Section VIII-C- 14 at the point of application. It is important to note that this assessment of employment density would occur only at initial application when the use (outdoor storage) is proposed. Employment density often is used as a methods to estimate needs for vacant industrial land and is used in a number of Oregon communities to regulate the intensity of industrial development as a land use requirement. In the absence of a business plan or other evidence provided by an applicant demonstrating the number of employees expected, other resources available to determine employment densities include the state Department of Land Conservation and Development book titled "Industrial & Other Employment Lands Analysis Guidebook", and the state's Economic and Community Development Department also has extensive records regarding employment densities for the types and sizes of industries that have developed, or are looking for new sites, in any given region. . page 7, chapter 18.53 minimum lot sizes what is the area of a typical block in the street design standards, along the open space park? along the blocks surrounded by the local streets or accessways? -what became of the 2 to 5 acre minimums recommended by SOREDI and other business managers seeking to preserve expansion capacity for local Ashland start-ups? What acreage area do these blocks represent? What happened to the notion that at least some areas larger than 2 acres be kept available for a larger development? even 5 acres? As proposed the block sizes average 1.63 acres in size the OE zone, and range between 1.1 acres to 5.08 acres in the undeveloped areas of the CI overlay zone. These acreages are for the full blocks exclusive of land dedicated to future street right of ways. These acreages also assume lot divisions DEPT. OF COMMUNITY OEVElOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main Slreel Fax: 541-552.2050 =:'=~752O TTY: 800-735,2900 rA' ,15- which include full size accessways, however a property owner could acquire multiple blocks which are divided by accessways, and the accessways could be limited as pedestrian or delivery connections to create a larger development site. Specific block areas are indicated in the attached map entitled Croman District Block Acreage. . is it realistic to condition added stories with a specific standard such as LEED? Whether or not allowances for additional stories should be tied to performance measures is a deliberative question. Background: Bonus incentives for achieving LEED certification are increasingly provided by jurisdictions around the country. LEED has increasingly become the dominate mting system for energy efficient building and site design. In the event an applicant voluntarily requests a height bonus in exchange for achieving LEED certification a number of code provisions as proposed in section VIII-C-13(I) would ensure the building is designed and built to achieve this goal. . on the one hand, how soon will LEED and similar sustainabiIity standards become available through the state and using building codes? if these are imminent, and will provide regional if not statewide consistency, what are the pros and cons of Ashland requiring them in order to build taller than 2 stories? on the other hand, standards are likely to evolve, particularly over the term of this master plan. is it sensible to adopt a specific standard at this time? what are the pros and cons of encouraging taller buildings by simply allowing taller maximum heights rather than imposing higher standards? How do we know that LEED will remain the appropriate standard for energy and resource conservation design? can we describe performance standards instead? Although many of the above questions are deliberative in nature it is important to note that as proposed the definition ofLEED Green Building System (18.08.343) relates to the "most recently published version" which will ensure that a project is evaluated against the most current LEED standards available on the date of application for approval. Four levels of LEED certification exist - certified, silver, gold, and platinum which are reached by obtaining increasing "points" indicating sustainability measures have been provided in the development. Certain points are realized at no additional cost due to the high level construction performance that tOdaY's contractors insist upon as standard practice. A number of points are allocated based on components such as site selection, sight design, water saving landscaping, provision of bike parking, finish material selection, and other sustainability measures which go beyond minimum building codes which primarily address the physical structure being constructed. As State or local building codes change to more directly regnlate energy efficiency in the future, LEED as the dominant rating system nationwide will also update the various certification levels to provide new targets for environmental design. . is it permissible to install carport roofs over outdoor parking if they include solar panels? OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main Street Ash~nd. Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tot 541-488-5305 Fax: 541.551-1050 TTY: 800-735-1900. r.t. , .16. Yes. . page 8, chapter 18.53 can you provide some examples of local built out FAR, and some examples from other areas? I'd like to better understand lot area, vs. FAR achieved with multiple floors. The Following Examples were previously examined and used to illustrate FARSon existing and proposed developments in Ashland. Modern Fan Washington Ave (as existing and approved)- 35,9l2sq.ft. BLDG/1.83 ACRES = .45 FAR Bauer Reels 585 Clover Lane: 10667sq.ft.BLDG/0.6l Acres =.40 FAR 545 A Street: 2350 sq. ft. BLDG/O.13 Acres = .40FAR Organic Nation building was approved at ,36 FAR Note that only Minimum floor areas are proposed for the Croman Mill zone with no maximum, whereas commercial developments in Ashland have been historically restricted by a maximum floor area as well. . does the amount of parking required by square footage of built space affect the footprint of the building? do we have a sense of when this would push property owners to build underground parking? A Maximum of25% of the project area can be dedicated to surface parking (VIlI-C-4(I)) and only 50% of the required parking may be located on-site as surface parking after a district parking management strategy is implemented (VIII-B-3(2)). As such the buildings footprint and landscaping would take up the remaining 75% of the site and thus the footprint itself should not be impacted by added parking demands, Credits for parking including a one-for-one on-street credit, mixed use credit, transportation demand management, and off-site shared parking credit. When in combination these credits do not prove sufficient there will be pressure to develop either underground parking, structured parking on-site, or coordinate in the development of an off-site shared parking structure. . Ordinance #3 Site design standards for croman mill Part A, Street Standards if this is where we adopt the street grid for the area, can this be separated from the private property development standards, so that a street network can be adopted and move forward for engineering design? Yes. This method was done with the Railroad Master Plan in which the street network was separated from the design standards and approved by council independent of the Plan. . I like the concept of the central blvd. I see a grid of local side streets. I like the accessway streets: do these most closely resemble the commercial neighborhood coUector streets in the existing street standards? Local side streets within the Plan are divided into two types; DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 10 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-2050 A5I1Iand. oregon 91510 nY: 8IJO.135-2900 www.ashIand.CI".us r.l1 -17- Local Commercial Streets provide district circulation to and from employment uses. As proposed in the CMD plan these streets are comparable in design and right of way (64') to the Commercial neighborhood Collector Street type in the Street Standards Handbook). However there are two segments of the local commercial streets that are identified to have a protected bike path, which would be an alteration from the standard design by including an additional 10' ofR-o-W for the designated Bike path. Accessways are a flexible street type intended to provide a gridded form and maintain circulation network for pedestrians, cyclists, and provide opportunities for vehicular access to parking, deliveries, or full street connectivity. Therefore the size and design of these streets can range from that of a multiuse path to that of a full local commercial street . can accessways remain on private property if someone wants to retain a larger lot size, if an easement is created that allows public use of the paths? Yes. As noted a public easement for use of paths or drives would be necessary. In some circumstances such Accessways may also be needed for fire apparatus access. . could accessway vehicular use be restricted to deliveries? Yes. It is also expected that Accessways would serve to reach interior parking lots. · I appreciate green street standards and stormwater management. are canopy trees along the sidewalks too water intensive? are we contradicting our stated desire for water efficient landscaping? The existing Street Tree Standards that apply City wide are unchanged by this plan. In the event that the Green Street Standards, as developed through the Transportation System Plan (see question below), have requirements for specific tree types and water efficient landscape, by reference these requirements would be applicable to the Croman Mill District Green Streets. Further if the Street Tree Standards are changed the Croman Mill District standards could also be changed at that time to address any new requirements. · stormwater management is not part of the existing street standards handbook: are we proposing these for Croman only or do we want to use these ideas throughout town? If the latter, why specify these kinds of engineering design criteria in our planning documents? The Site Design Standards for the Croman Mill District delineates which streets within the plan area are to be classified as Green Streets, Section VTII-C-3(1) establishes that Green Streets shall be developed in a manner consistent with the Ashland Green Streets Standards by reference. This document will be maintained by the Engineering Department as a standard that can be applicable anywhere in town where Green Streets are proposed. The Transportation System Plan currently being developed includes as a specific task the establishment of these Green Street Standards. OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main Street Ashland. Oregon 97520 www.ashland.Of.us Tel: 541-488.5305 Fax: 541,551.2050 ffi:1IOO-735,1!IOO rA' -18- . item 4, page 4: local commercial streets: what if the southern-most local street has a serious grade access problem connecting to mistletoe? (this based on the site visit where I observed significant cut slopes at the south portion of tbe existing site). One local street was initially proposed in the Crandall Arambula Plan a local street connecting the proposed Central Blvd. to Mistletoe Rd along the City Limits at the south of the Croman Mill site was eliminated from the current plan for this very reason. The proposed street that remains is located at the northern end of that curt bank and should be able to connect to mistletoe and retain an appropriate grade. In the event topographic constraints necessitate relocation of the street in question (or any street) allows the location to be shifted by more than 25' though an administrative Minor Amendment process as explicitly listed in 18.53.020BI(b)(I). . page 6: the illustration is a street and a separate bike path, the legend is for an accessway. I am confused about the amount of vehicular right of way shown, compared to accessway full street option on page 7. As indicated on the Croman Mill District Street Framework map there is an Accessway that runs along the entire eastern boundary of the plan area adjacent to the railroad tracts. In this location it is anticipated that the design of the Accessway would incorporate the Central Bike Path which is also proposed for this area. Therefore in lieu of having a sidewalk alone on one side of the improvement, a combiried sidewalk and bike path is proposed on the east side which increases the total right of way. Consistent with the cross section for a full street Accessway the vehicular area is a 34' curb to curb width. . page 9 Site Design Standards, Part 2, for buildings on private property I would make this a separate ordinance from the street network, so that the street standards can be adopted separately and first, for design and engineering purposes. does section VIII-B-l, orientation and scale, apply to CI as well as NC, DE and MU? Yes. Items 1-5 apply to the entire Croman Mill District. Items 6-8 only apply to CM-CI for buildings located adjacent to an "Active Edge Street", meaning for those fronting on the Central Blvd. CM-CI developments not fronting on the Central Blvd would not be subject to standards 6-8. . can surface parking areas install roofs to hold solar panels and shade the parking? Yes, . How does this interact witb the shade tree requirement? Although Staff has not seen this scenario presented elsewhere in the City, the plan contains sufficient flexibility to accommodate altemative proposals, including deviations from site layout and landscaping requirements, provided the alternative results in a development design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose and objectives of the district plan (18.53.020B(3), The intent of shading parking with trees (I per seven spaces) would certainly be met by solar panel covered carports and a landscape plan that is considerate of the proposed carports. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541 ~B8-5305 20 E. Main SCree! Fax: 541-552-2050 :::-:-Z~7520 TTY 800-7352900 rAl -19- . VIO-D-l, 8a. speaks of walls within 30 feet of public space: how does this match with tbe maximum 10 foot sidewalk setback (does 18.53 apply to all street frontage not just active edge streets?)? does it mean building walls must have windows? Yes. This provision is currently within Ashland's Detail Site Review standards (II-C-2a(3). Provided walls are within 30' of the any street, and the property is in a NC, MU, or OE overlay, at least 20% of the wall shall be windows or doorways. There is an allowance to exempt up to 40% of the building perimeter from this standard to accommodate loading or service areas. On the Active Edge Street (Central Blvd and the streets surrounding the central park) the percentage of display area, widow, and doorways required increases to 50% of the first floor fa~e. . does this apply to CI? No, except in cases where the building is adjacent to the Central Blvd in which case 50% of the first floor fa~ade (facing the "Active Edge" street) shall be comprised of transparent openings (windows, glass doors). . and to CI uses in OE? Yes, all properties in the OE overlay are held to this standard regardless of the interior use, . VIO-B-4 continues the city's usual street tree spacing requirement. have we considered the watering demand and drought survivability of this much tree cover? As an existing City Standard applied to the Croman Mill District unchanged, no re-evaluation of this standard was undertaken. The Green Street Standards which are to be developed through the TSP process would be applicable to the designated green streets within the district. As such, if the Green Street Standards include changes in median or parkrow landscaping requirements, these streets would be developed consistent with that new standard. . VIO-D-5: we prohibit glass material in the building skin. is this consistent with sustainability and recycled content design? wbat is our objection to the material? is it related to our historic districts and a desire to retain compatible architecture styles? Is this relevant in this part of town? . The limitation regarding glass material as the majority of the building skin is a section of code that has been taken from Ashland's existing Detail Site Review Standards (II-C-2f) . The Detail Site Review Zone is currently in place on Ashland's main streets such as Siskiyou Boulevard, Ashland Street, A Street, The commercial areas of Tolman Creek Road, and the downtown and railroad property (i.e. Clear Creek Drive, Russell Drive), and is therefore this provision is not exclusively attributable to historic districts and historic compatibility issues, DEPT. OF COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main Slreet Ashland. Oregon 97520 www.ashlaOO.Dr.us Tel: 541-488.5305 Fax: 541-552.2050 TTY: 800-735.2900 r.t. , ,20- . A limitation on such building materials as the primary material involves providing for a form, rhythm, and texture of the architecture that is pedestrian scaled and adds interest to the streetscape. Glass and steel buildings are also subject to produce significant glare which has been a topic of community discussion on numerous individual developments. Questioning the value of using glass the majority of a building fa~ade in relation to sustainability and streetscape implications is deliberative and has not previously been discussed by the Planning Commission. . I have a related question about plastic in construction materials: if the content is recycled, why prohibit it? Recycled construction materials are not prohibited, nor is plastic prohibited as a building material. . VIII-B-ll does the rail spur make use of the existing rail spur (where the tracks were just puUed up) which would seem, from the site visit, to be partly in the DE zoning? to what map is this paragraph referring to? The existing rail spur area extends approximately 1500 feet and approximately 500' is located in within the lands identified as DE zoned. The proposed rail spur easement area is shown as 1000' feet long and only located in lands designated as CM-Cl zoned. The standard (V-lll-B-ll) establishes a minimum length of 500' best aside or developed as a rail siding, however there is no prohibition against extending it the full easement length. The Croman Mill District Transit Framework map shows future locations of the proposed bus route, bus stops, commuter rail line, Transit Centers and the area reserved for a future rail spur. This map has been provided in the materials and a small version is embedded in the plan under section VIII-B- 10. . does the rail spur belong on the street network map? it would seem to be in the same general location as the Central Bike Path? The rail spur has been included on Croman Mill District Transit Framework map. The facilities identified in each map (transit, street, pedestrian and bicycle) are applied to future development and thus development in the area of the proposed rail spur would have to design the site to accommodate an Accessway, rail spur, and the Central Bike Path. . VIII-B-13: is the specification of both porous surface material and low solar reflective index consistent with current practice? is the better left as a performance standard related to stormwater runofl? In section Vlll-C-4 porous sold surfacing, high solar reflectance pavement, or 50% canopy of tree shading of the parking area, are provided as options in which an applicant selects one of the three. These provisions are new to the Croman Mill District and not currently applied elsewhere in the City. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT 20 E. MainSlreet Ashland. Oregon 97520 www.ashIand.or.US Tel: 541~B8-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 ID: 8lJO.735-2900 rA1 .'21. One of the goals included in the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) is to "mandate sustainable and green development codes." The total additional cost of providing pervious pavement for green surface parking to comply with this proposed green standard is 5% more than paving an entire lot with non-pervious material. . VIII-B-14: where and how does this short paragraph on compact development apply? The employment densities noted in VIII-C-14 are provided as recommendations to guide applicants as to what sort of employment generation is desired in the District. In this sense the section is largely aspirational in nature. However, this section would be used as the reference when determining whether a site was meeting at least 50% the intended employment density is applying for a Special Permitted Use for outdoor storage within the CM-CI zone as described previously. . PART C green standards C-2 diverse neighborhoods: we are both constraining number of units with height restrictions, and requiring affordable units. do we have an assessment of how feasible it is to construct in the NC and MU zones given the cost of development? No development cost analysis has been undertaken. Of note in this area as the property is not presently for sale, determining the residual land cost as a factor of total development costs can not determined without appraisal services. . C-5 rain runoff is rain water capture and use for irrigation an option? Yes, Section VIII-C-8 lists use of recaptured rainwater as one of six methods of reducing potable water use on irrigation an applicant could select. . C-8 potable water use reduction very important to reduce use of potable water for purposes not requiring that level of treatment. bow is the 50% target chosen? Through the application of the six methods outlined for accomplishing reductions in potable water use our conservation staff indicated a 50% reduction was a readily achievable target. Other communities around the Country have mandated a 50% reduction into Green building codes Additionally a 50% reduction in potable water for landscaping one minimum standard to achieve LEED Silver Certification ((LEED WE 1.1). . c-9 to allow solar orientation of buildings, wbat kind of permit process is available to get a variance from the design standards that reqnire buildings to be adjacent to and oriented to the street? (I am recalling the awkwardness oftbe situation in Verde Village). A variance would not be required. The plan as proposed contains sufficient flexibility through a Minor Amendment process (administtative) to accommodate alternative proposals, including OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E, Main SIreet Fax: 541.552-2050 =sht~=~7520 TTY: 800-735,2900 l'A' -22- deviations from site layout, building design, and landscaping requirements, provided the alternative results in a development design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose and objectives of the district plan (18,53.020B(3). . C-l to C-ll: to what extent are these green standards things that are required by LEED or other systems? if we are not requiring LEED unless added height is desired and granted, what is the purpose of including each of these standards applied to all development? or conversely, what incentive remains for added height? One of the goals included in the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) is to "mandate sustainable and green development codes." In combination the mandated Green Standards will add a number of points toward achieving LEED certification should an applicant choose to proceed with certification and request a height bonus. For example as stated above in relation to potable water use on landscaping reduction this 50% reduction provision does further an applicants ability to meet LEED standards. A development within the district that does not desire additional height would not likely undergo the LEED certification process, and may only provide those minimum green standards as required in the local code. For those desiring additional height, by achieving a number of points by adhering to the mandated green standards proposed, they will be better able to quantify the costs associated with those additional measures necessary to achieve certification (Silver or Gold)and obtain the desired perfonnance bonus. . affordable housing bonus allows up to a doubling of housing density. do we have evidence that this incentive produces built units? The affordable housing bonus proposed in section VIII-C-13 allowing for a increase in density equivalent to the percentage of affordable housing units provided is currently an allowed density bonus in Ashland's residential districts, Historically this is primarily utilized by affordable housing developers and those required to build affordable housing to increase density to offset the cost of land or construction costs relating to the affordable units. It has not functioned as an incentive to create affordable units, Recent examples of the application of an affordable housing density bonus include the HAJC project currently underway, Verde Village RVCDC units and ACLTs 6 unit development on Garfield. . do we give additional height in order to achieve the maximum number of units, without some other requirement stopping it such as parking requirements or FAR or other detailed specifics? Not explicitly for the increase in units provided as affordable, however were a project to also obtain LEED certification an additional Y:z story bonus is allowable within the Residential Buffer overlay area. . ordinance #4, section 19 amc 18.104.020 CUP definitions target use, are the FAR standards minimums or maximums? DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main SlreeI Ash~nd. oregon 9T52O www.ashlaOO.or.us Tel: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541,552,2050 TTY: IlOO-735.2900 rA' -23- The FAR's provided in 18,104,020 under target use are provided as a baseline of comparison for evaluating the impact of a proposed conditional use. An applicant would have to demonstrate through a CUP application that their proposed use was comparable (or less intensive) than a project developed with the target floor areas identified by zone, DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT 20 E. Main Slreel Ashland. Oregon 97520 WNW.ashland.or.us Tel: 541..88-5305 Fax: 541.552-2050 TTY: 800.735-2900 r., l' l.' l'ILJ'~, t ". r, .. ~i :0 .. . ).-.: . cr " ' ""0>'1 (~.. f ,-. ,. '0> ---0 ~: c: ,24- DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main SCreet Ashland. oregon 97520 W'lNW.ashlaoo.or.us Tel: 541~B8-5305 Fax: 541.552-1050 TTY: 800.735,2900 rA1 ,25- Transportation Framework . What is the viability of using the existing Mistletoe Road as the signature street and connecting with Washington Street? It seems like doing so would save us time and money, but it was not given much focus during the presentation. My concern is that we spend money on the grade A signature street, when we could use the existing streets in a more economic and efficient way. The transportation analysis update included in the May 4, 2010 studies an option for Phase II of the Central Boulevard using the existing Mistletoe Road location. Phase II of the Central Boulevard is approximately the northern third of the main street. This option is included to address the phasing of the Central Boulevard should the Oregon Department of Transportation (OooT) maintenance yard remain in place indefinitely, and as a result. the original Phase II concept not be feasible. The analysis finds that the existing Mistletoe Road alignment could be used for the Phase II extension of the Central Boulevard rather than the original concept of locating the road through the ODOT property, The unusual alignment of Mistletoe Road and the intersection with Siskiyou Boulevard and the affect on maneuverability and safety are issues in terms of using Mistltoe Road as the primary southern entrance to the plan area. In 200 I there was an application to rezone the property largely for residential purposes, which the City ultimately denied. During the course of the 200 I application and the transportation impact analysis, ODOT raised concerns regarding the intersection of Mistletoe Road and Siskiyou Boulevard. These same concerns were raised again during the planning process for the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) by OooT, property owners and business owners. Specifically, property and business owners identified truck access at the Mistletoe Road/Siskiyou Boulevard intersection as problematic. Creating a new southern entrance to the property addresses truck access and safety issues, as well as others. Using the entire length of Mistletoe Road for the main street through the property is problematic in laying out the street network. Because the middle and southern portion of Mistletoe Road is located on the westernmost edge of the plan area, locating the Central Boulevard in the Mistletoe 'Road location would create longer travel distances for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians traveling to the middle or eastern portion of the plan area. Locating the less intense local street on Mistletoe Road and the more intense Central Boulevard with more traffic in the center of the plan area is generally considered an appropriate technique in buffering adjacent residential neighborhoods (i.e. the Tolman Creek Road residential neighborhood across Hamilton Creek from plan area). o Why is this project not dependent on the Transportation master plan that is due in two years or the economic plan that is due in a year? How can we vote on a site that is so dependent on plans that haven't yet been competed'? The project includes a transportation analysis which evaluates transportation projects which would be necessary under build out of the plan area under current zoning and additional transportation projects given the redevelopment plan. As part ofthe Transportation System Plan (TSP) update project, the projects identified in the transportation analysis will need to be considered and potentially included in the TSP project list. Since transportation analysis methodology is inherently vehicle oriented, it assumes vehicle travel will continue at the same rate of growth in the future. As a result, the Croman transportation analysis presents essentially a worst-case scenario from a DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 54'~5305 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-1050 =:,~zn~7520 TTY: 800.7352900 rA' . -26- vehicular standpoint. As part of the TSP update, the City could consider alternative approaches to remedy future automobile capacity issues rather than standard vehicle-oriented upgrades such as revised capacity methodology and decreasing vehicular travel to lessen demand on street facilities. . Who is doing the TA? What are their assumptions? DKS Associates performed the original transportation analysis and the most recent update. Both documents are included in the May 4,2010 Council packet. The assumptions are described on pages 7-14 of the original transportation analysis (dated January 2, 2009) and pages 2-6 of the update (dated April 29, 2010). . Given Odot's 2/112010 letter; when win the TA be completed? The transportation analysis was completed as part of the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008). The recent update was completed on April 29, 2010. · Does the analysis go to the Transportation Commission? Why or why not? The Transportation Analysis was reviewed by the Transportation Commission on January 21, 2010. . With high employment density, what demands win be put on the city's infrastructure? The transportation analysis and transportation analysis update detail the demands that will be put on the transportation framework. Regardless of whether a master plan is adopted for the Croman Mill site, the build out of the Croman Mill site under the current zoning requires a significant investment in transportation infrastructure to construct the facilities necessary to accommodate future employment in the area. . Why can't it be true east-west? In a true east-west street orientation, some streets would be at acute angles to the Central Boulevard which would result in skewed intersections. This would also create irregularly shaped parcels. . Why are irregularly shaped blocks or parcels considered less desirable? Square or rectangular parcels are generally easier to develop because it is easier to fit square and rectangular buildings and parking areas on these lots. · How will the width for right of way for the central boulevard be acquired where it overlaps the existing Mistletoe Way? does it matter to know that now, if this is a long term future? is it essential to include the right of way width in the Plan to preserve the future option for change? The City's map and aerial photo information indicates sufficient width in the existing Mistletoe Road alignment to accommodate the future Phase II Central Boulevard. The design of the street may need to be modified to in areas to accommodate existing development constraints (e,g. modify OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT 1OE.MainSlreel Ash~ro. Oregon 97510 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541,552,1050 TTY: 800-735,2900 r.l1 -27- the parkrow and sidewalk design and widths). At least two thirds of the Central Boulevard will be unconstrained by existing buildings and development, and the street standard for the Central Boulevard will determine the build out of this street. · How will the buildout of the central boulevard and the side streets be managed: each block at a time as construction is imminent, or do we have a minimum that must be installed prior to surveying and subdividing into private lots? The applicant can propose to phase the installation of the side streets as part of the subdivision process. The construction of the side streets would be required at the point when access is needed to adjacent development. · Driveway access is prohibited between streets along the central boulevard. How long are those blocks? Is it practical to do this? Does creating alleys along the back result in added paved area that could otherwise be in landscaping or building footprint? Driveway curb cuts through the sidewalk are prohibited on the Central Boulevard and around the Central Park. The majority of the blocks are approximately 300 feet in length, A consolidated driveway access or alley would essentially reallocate the land area which would have been used for individual driveways. · Can we provide a built-in exception to this driveway prohibition for the shallow lots presently developing along the east side of Mistletoe? What about the lots on the west side? (This is a question about how the transition occurs over the long term to bring Mistletoe 'into' the Croman Area as the lots redevelop in more intense uses in the future.) Is the distance from the Croman property boundary along this frontage comparable in length to the blocks anticipated in the Croman area or is it shorter or longer? The standards could be modified to allow driveway access across the sidewalk on the Central Boulevard for particular properties. · The alternate street layout for better east west orientation was introduced just this year. Have we consulted with experts in green design about whether this amount of difference will be effective or even necessary? Staff research shows that generally an east-west street alignment is used in residential development to encourage energy efficiency by creating optimum conditions for the use of passive and active solar strategies. The primary solar issues for commercial buildings in the Southern Oregon climate are avoiding overheating in the warm months, providing opportunities for allowing day light into buildings and maximizing the roof area available for solar energy devices, The benefit of the east- west street alignment appears to be providing the opportunity to position the short walls of future buildings facing to the east and west so that there is less exposure to the intense summer sun, which thereby reduces overheating. Additionally, the layout of rectangular solar collection devices on building roofs may be more efficient. Staff consulted several LEED-certified design professionals and local building contractors. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 20 E. Main Slree! Ashland. Oregon 97520 WNW.ashland.or.US Tel: 541-4118-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 TTY: IlOO-735.2900 rA1 -28- . General Questions . If ownership changes, how does this effect the plan? Changes in property ownership will not effect the Croman Mill District or implementing ordinances. In general, development of property is initiated by the property owner. As a result, development of the plan area is dependent on the property owners within the plan area moving forward, which is in turn effected by a variety off actors (e.g, market factors, financing), . What is the projected cost to the city? The issue of financing the central boulevard and related utilities was raised at and discussed by the Planning Commission. For subdivision and site review approvals, adequate capacity of transportation, water, sewer, storm drainage, and electricity facilities is required for proposed development. As a result, the developer of the property is responsible for the provision of , transportation and public utilities to and through the site. Accordingly, if a development were proposed in the Croman Mill study area, the developer would be responsible for the construction of the central boulevard and the related utilities. Improvements can be proposed and constructed in phases. In the case where streets and utility lines that are larger facilities which serve a greater area beyond the development, developers can be awarded system development charge (SDC) credits for a portion of the cost of the qualifying facilities that they construct. For example, when North Mountain Avenue was improved to city standards from North Mountain Park to the city limits, the developer was given credit for a portion of the street improvements that serve the general public beyond the , immediate area. As an Avenue (major collector), North Mountain collects and carries traffic in both a northerly and southerly direction from Ashland's neighborhoods to larger streets. Additionally, this function will expand further at some time in the future when the Nevada Street connection is made. The Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) includes a work plan for the next steps in implementing the plan. The work plan includes studying the feasibility of an urban renewal district and developing and urban renewal plan. Tax increment financing is generally a product of an urban renewal district, and is used to finance public infrastructure by using a tax increment to pay debt service on bonds. . What is the relation between these two (parking management and financing strategy)? The parking management plan could look at a variety of factors including a development time line for public parking, parking space time allowances, signage and ways to reduce parking demand. The financing strategy would analyze the feasibility of building public parking areas and a parking structure, and potentially develop system for collecting in-lieu of parking fees from development in the plan area and funding the parking structure. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT 20 E. Main SIreeI Ash~nd. Oregon 97520 V'MW.ashland,or.us Tel: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541,552-2050 TTY: 1lOO-735.2900 rA1 , -29- Deliberation Issues . Why is this project not dependent 011 the Transportation master plan that is dlle ill two years or the economic plan that is dlle in a year? How can we vote on a site that is so dependent on plans that haven't yet been competed? . With the possibility of 2500 employees in this area, why aren't we taking parking seriously? . Do we really mean to extend the detailed review of a type II planning action on the majority of our remaining employment lands? . Do we really mean to include all larger developments that will help increase the density of employment use and help increase the FAR and help meet the FARs (especially on smaller lots) to go through the planning commission? this is the major delay and uncertainty that we hear is hampering and even seriously discouraging to the business community. . page 1: is 25 feet adequate for adjustments to the road alignments? Background: The 25' limit was derived by looking at the threshold established in the North Mountain Master Plan. Within the Croman Mill District changes in a road location of greater than 25' are subject to the minor amendment process identified in the proposed ordinance. A minor amendment process as proposed is to be an administrative review and approval. . I look to increasing the flexibility of cross-over uses between CI and OE, otherwise why not go back to a revised M-l that deletes the uses we have removed but does not segregate into office and light industry? . would it not be clearer to put the 4 acres MU along Hamilton Creek back in CI and remove the residential overlay? . page 4-5, chapter 18.53 2 units of temporary housing per acre seems very strict when the minimum lot size in OE is less than one acre. is this realistic? what if it was 4 or 5? will they be subject to TOT? , Background: As proposed the temporary employee housing would be limited in use to only people employed by the business operating on the premises. A covenant to this effect would be required. As Hotel/Motel uses are not permitted in the zone the covenant would reflect this limitation. . won't that use be replaced with more high value land uses in the future when economics become more profitable? and in the meantime, small firms can purchase the amount of warehouse storage they need with the flexibility to increase and decrease their space as business fluctuates? . what if a bldg exceeds 30,000 sq ft, then the 2500 is less than 10%? what if we go with 'whichever is greater? OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2U E. Main S1reet Ashland. oregon 9752U www.ashland.Clr.US Tel: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541.552-2050 ffi: 800-735-2900 r.l' -30- . #5 is 1,500 sq ft an appropriate size for a commercial day care facility? . I view tbe widtb of tbe rigbt of way as a given for wbatever type of roadway and transportation comes along in tbe future. if street car is a possibility, does it make sense to plants trees in tbe center median? . C-3 street standards do street design standards belong in tbe planning code or as public works design criteria? I bave a copy oftbe 1999 street standards bandbook. Rigbt of way widtbs, lane widtbs, etc. and turning radii are identified, but stormwater design is not. From a code applicability standpoint provided the standards are adopted by ordinance, regardless of their location, they would still apply to future development. . C-4 can tbe desired result of tbe parking surface goal be stated as a performance standard tbat tbe designer can determine bow to meet? . would a performance standard, perbaps derived from tbe water quality stormwater regulations, be a way to state tbe goal and allow projects to determine bow to meet tbe goal? . ordinance #S adopting tbe land use map designations Tbe tbree lots on tbe east side of Mistletoe are being specially bandied by separate ordinance (Ordinance #5a, applying detailed site review). I am not convinced it makes sense to leave those properties M-l, when we are proposing a long term plan and it would seem preferable to eventually have these properties match the zoning of Croman District. · VIll-C-12 dark sky outdoor lighting: do we want to adopt dark sky for all new and replacement lighting in tbe City instead of singling out the Croman Mill area? · what if you bave a 4 story building with a couple of hundred employees: is 1500 sq ft enough to serve lunch to that many people? Background: Ancillary Employee Services allocation of floor area that could include a cafeteria would be additional floor area that could be dedicated specifically to serve employees within a building. · #11, this seems very strict, particularly in CI: 2500 sq ft on a 40,000 sq ft minimum lot size. have we received examples of practical ratios from other jurisdictions or experienced property managers? From the record the original Crandall Arambula Plan recommended no outdoor storage OEPT. OF COMMUNITY OEVElOPMENT 20 E, Main Street Ash~nd. Oregon 97520 WWIN.ashfand.OI'.us Tel: 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552.2050 TTY: 800-735-2900 r.l1 May 4, 2010 Chamber of Commerce S- Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council, As President of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, I ask you on their behalfto support the goal of providing necessary land for new job development that will help to enhance the economic health of our community for the future. Creating opportunities for business expansion and employment of young people in Ashland requires foresight and business risk taking. I would like to share with you a bit of history and why we are so interested in the development of the old Croman Mill site. Five years ago during a Business Retention and Expansion survey done by the Chamber through an economic development grant from City, we determined some important needs of businesses in the traded-sector area of our economy that generate new dollars flowing into our community. The primary goals of the survey were to identify business issues that were obstacles for growth, assess the area's business climate and build community capacity in order to better address business issues through greater collaboration between government and business. Based on the survey findings, the Chamber met with a number of businesses to assist them with key issues with one of the most important being lack of available land for expansion. At that time, we discovered the expansion challenges of Plexis and began to work with them, the owners of the land and the City on how we could keep them from moving their business out of Ashland. Thus started the Master Plan discussion and brought us to where we are now - many years later, many meetings of public involvement and years of community process. As has been stated in the past by the City, for master planning to be effective, it must reflect an accurate picture of the current conditions and present a challenging but achievable pattern for future development with the rationale behind the plan grounded in the City's comprehensive plan. We believe this is especially important for this site as it is our only large track of land left in Ashland to serve future generations of businesses and their employees. For businesses to expand and grow in Ashland they need a clear understandable process for development creating certainty and a reasonable timeframe. Through our many meetings with our Rapid Response Team not only is this obvious but so is the continual need for larger pieces of land to develop. 110 East Main St. . PO Box 1360 . Ashland OR 97520 . (541) 482-3486 . Fax: (541) 482-2350 www.ashlandchamber.com In review of the Croman Master Plan, there are a number of elements we believe are important to the plan. We believe that it is important to have these new zones with the Croman overlay and especially like that the plan has built in flexibility in its recommended employment density and zoning criteria. We feel that this flexibility allows businesses to plant themselves in Ashland and grow and change as the economic climate does. We also like that the plan is set up to create incentives for businesses taking a greener path so that lEED certification is not mandated but encouraged. We recommend that you remove lots 1000, 1100 and 1200 at the North end of the plan area from the Detailed Site Review overlay leaving the M-1 zoning so that restrictions would not constrain currently proposed plans. We believe in the original goals of the project to provide for family wage jobs, allow for light industrial and manufacturing, to support new businesses, existing business expansion and the preservation of rail access. We encourage you to move forward and approve the Croman Master Plan as an effort to acknowledge the bigger picture in business and development in Ashland. More delay would be discouraging and hindering to the economic process for the City of Ashland creating unnecessary uncertainty for businesses wishing to expand. Remember, it will be the owners of the land taking the risk and the businesses sited there who will be the ones that will be providing needed jobs and a future for our citizens. They need your timeliness. Thank you, ~w~Q~ Meiwen Richards, President 2009-10 Ashland Chamber of Commerce RECEIVED APR 2 lJ, 2010 April 28, 2010 To: Mayor and Council REPLY TO THE MINORITY OPINION City 01 Ashland Community Development This is not the opinion of the planning commission, an effort to try to explain the thoughts of M, Dawkins, or M, Midlan, or an attempt to address the larger issues of the Croman Mill Master plan, they have already been aired in the process. This is a dissertation to address some of the statements in the minority opinion that I feel are misleading, inaccurate and are not reflected in the record or what took place at the planning commission meetings. The opinions stressed by Mike Dawkins at the meetings have merit but are more philosophy issues about visions of the future and in this instance are out of the pervue of the planning commission due to the policy that was set by council. I personally feel the minority opinion is nothing other than another "Shotgun Approach" at stalling a planning item like we have seen so much of in the past. Where the fear of doing anything leads to doing nothing at all. The Minority Opinion does not accurately reflect the issues and discussions that took place during the commission meetings or the entire 4-year process, Item 1) Croman Mill District Plan (CMDP), Goals and Principles Not Met. The Goals listed in the Minority Opinion were not addressed as goals because they never were goals, The "Project Goals", (Addendum 1, "Evaluation of Goals, Objectives and principles"), as stated in the minority opinion were items taken from a 2008 "City Source" newsletter that arrives in the utility bill and from the initial public workshop flyer. In any case, they were only listed as "Issues that will be examined" in advertising for the public process. These "issues" are far from "Goals" and have never been part of the planning action or staff report as goals, nor did the council in their vote to continue with the master planning process mention them. To state they were goals would question if the author, after two years of hearings, even understood the real goals of the project. The actual goals used in the Croman Mill Plan were gathered from public input at . the initial neighborhood meetings and'these goals were addressed repeatedly, throughout the process and forwarded by the council. Guiding Principles: In the Crandall Arambula Plan there were 20 guiding principals. Contrary to the Minority Opinion all were addressed. Three principals specifically listed in the Minority Opinion as not being "adequately" addressed are covered below; "Create parcels with the flexibility to support local new and small business, existing business expansion and large employers". Several meetings addressed this issue, along with the competing issues of "Provide for a large number of family wage jobs", and to promote "transit supportive" development. Nowhere in the plan, and as far as I could find, nowhere in the presentation, did the 100 employee minimum that was stated in the minority opinion come up, and the standards do not support the 100 employee minimum theory, The author, herself, in item 9, calls density a goal of the plan and not a requirement. The only mention of density is in the draft site design and use standards for Croman Mill, Sect. VIII-C-14, and even there they are only recommended employment densities and they are, depending on the overlay, from 20 to 60 employees per acre and given the minimum lot sizes are less than one acre, (a recommendation from the 2007 EOA), the minority statement has no basis. Nowhere is there a statement regarding minimum employees per employer. Given that one of the main goals was to: "Provide for a large number of family wage jobs", eliminating these guidelines would be in conflict with this and several other goals of the plan, "Consider a range of housing options" Housing options were considered and discussed often during the process, from the initial meetings through to the end, With the primary goals of the project being job retention and creation, housing should not be a primary focus. The inclusion of housing in employment and commercial zones are always a subject of contention in Ashland land use actions. Compatibility with the target use must be the standard when looking at other uses in the zone. The standards are correct in allowing housing in only two overlays and then only as special permitted uses, "Do not create uses that compete with downtown". This issue was constantly addressed, It is the reason for many of the limitations of size, quantity, and types of uses are controlled in all the zoning overlays. What would be considered as typical downtown uses are severely restricted in the Croman Mill District plan. The current M-1 zoning would allow uses that would compete with downtown more than the allowed uses in this plan would. ITEM 2) "The CMOP is inconsistent with the 2007 EOA This accusation is false. Several of the Goals for the CMDP were derived from the 2007 EOA. Again the densities stated in the opinion, (requiring businesses of over 100 employees), are not supported by the recommended densities in Croman Site Design Standards, As explained above, the densities per acre are recommendations and not specific criteria for employers. From the EOA, pg. 6-2; ". Plan for industrial uses that are compatible with the City's economic development objectives, The Croman site is presently zone M-1; the M-1 zone permits a broad range of industrial activities-some of which, in our opinion, are not compatible with the site and surrounding uses. The City should consider preparing a master plan for the site that evaluates appropriate uses and incorporates sustainable development concepts, One option is to develop an "eco-industrial park.". From the EOA, pg. 6-2; ". The City should designate at least one site for a master planned industrial park. The Croman Mill Site is the largest industrial site in Ashland, The site is largely vacant and is getting pressure for housing and associated retail uses. The employment forecast, however, is for 600 to 700 industrial jobs. Most of these will be in specialty manufacturing and other light industries, Ashland will have difficulty accommodating this employment if it does not have an industrial land base. The Croman site is approximately 70 acres; it is unlikely that any individual user would require more than five acres, Many will need less than one acre." These two paragraphs from the EOA state that the majority of the required "industrial" jobs would be in specialty manufacturing and other light industries and that some of the current M-1 activities would not be compatible with the area. It also states the 5 acre lot size would be the maximum for the area. The current plan allows for not only the lot size flexibility but also restricts the uses to those of a more compatible nature for the site and restricts the residential and retail pressures as recommended in the EOA. As a side note; the last time true M-1 uses were on site, complaints were common from the citizenry and the surrounding areas. The proposed developments in the M-1 zone at the north end of the property are more like our current E-1 standards. From the 2007 EOC; Pg. B-4; "PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES This section discusses public services that are important for economic development, including public policy, tax policy, water, and wastewater." "PUBLIC POLICY Public policy support for economic development includes policies that local governments have to support economic activity, such as economic development policies and local tax policies. Ashland's comprehensive plan includes the following goals: " ". Guidelines that govern land use decisions, such as: land division and development within employment and manufacturing districts, ensuring that development densities are appropriate to the area, and providing mixed use zoning where appropriate," . ". Developing and implementing an economic development program which will attempt to increase the number, variety and size of retail, service, and light industrial activity employers within the urban area, with particular emphasis on employers who pay wages at or above the median County wage and employ from 5 to 100 people, or who are locally owned...." The table below, from the 2007 EOC, Pg. A-9, shows the county median as described in the above paragraph, The current guidelines go a long way towards meeting this goal by appropriating land more appropriate for the higher paying employment sectors, 2007 REOA (Pg A-9), Table A-3. Median household income by oge ond medion fomily income, Oregon, Jackson County, and Ashland, 1999 Jackson County Ashland $36,461 $32,670 $21,327 $13,796 $34,169 $21,559 $41,534 $38,250 $49,437 $46,742 $41,760 $47,531 $31,111 $44,563 $24,169 $24,385 $43,675 $49,647 Median household Income Householder under 25 years Householder 25 to 34 years Householder 35 to 44 years Householder 45 to 54 years Householder 55 to 64 years Householder 65 to 74 years Householder 75 years and over Median family income Oregon :ti4U,916 $22,636 $40,325 $48,538 $53,916 $46,535 $31,518 $23,783 $48,680 Source: U.S. Census 2000. Item 3) "The CMDP should not precede the Economic Develop plan", To quote the 2007 EOA; "The results show that Ashland needs to provide between 131 and 173 sites to accommodate employment growth between 2006 and 2026, About one-third of these sites will need to be industrial sites; the remainder will be used for retail, services, government, and institutional uses. " The above numbers translate to six to eight new sites per year although with the current economy there is some adjustment to these numbers. We are already 4 years into the period for the EOC and to wait for another economic plan could take who knows how long. From the 2007 EOC; Pg. B-4; PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES This section discusses public services that are important for economic development, including public policy, tax policy, water, and wastewater, PUBLIC POLICY Public policy support for economic development includes policies that local governments have to support economic activity, such as economic development policies and local tax policies, Ashland's comprehensive plan includes the following goals: . Ensuring that the City provides sufficient quantity of lands for commercial and industrial uses to provide for the employment needs of its residents and a portion of rural residents consistent with the population projection for the urban area. . Ensuring that economic development can occur in a timely and efficient manner. . Encouraging economic development of the local resources and enhance employment opportunities for existing residents to enhance the community's economic health. . Working with Southern Oregon University to encourage the growth of research and graduate programs, especially on programs that. provide a bridge to the international marketplace. . Discouraging businesses that are clearly unsuitable for Ashland from coming to the City, These businesses include: ' . Businesses, which use large amounts of water. . Businesses that emit significant amounts of air pollution. . Businesses that create toxic wastes that require specialized disposal techniques not available locally, Many of the guidelines in the 2007 EOA are taken from the Comprehensive Plan, including those on the previous 3 pages. It is unlikely that a new economic development plan would drastically change these sections of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan, Also from the 2007 EOA Pg. B-5 ECO conducted a number of interviews with Ashland stakeholders, including business people, developers, and real estate agents, One of the problems identified in these interviews is with Ashland's planning process, including the following issues: the complexity of the planning system, slowness of the planning process, anti-growth attitudes among residents and city staff, and lack of available land. Some stakeholders indicated that these problems were significant enough that they or their clients preferred to do business in nearby cities, such as Medford or White City. and from those interviews: Pg. A-21 " ...They anticipate expanding their facilities in the next few years, although do not own land or have building space available at this time. Prohibitions on the construction of parking lots, lack of enforcement of existing parking regulations, lack of affordable housing, and inactive city leadership has made doing business difficult." "...is planning to relocate one of their two Ashland dealerships to Medford because of infrastructure issues (they are very concerned with the lack of City water available to their facilities), lack of affordable housing for employees, and the lack of support for the business community in Ashland. They plan to move the dealership within 18 months; 60 employees will staff the remaining Ashland dealership, From these quotes, (by the first & third largest private employers in Ashland), it is apparent that the slowness and complexity of the process is a hindrance for any economic sustainability or growth, The Croman Mill Development Plan process was started in 2004 and to state that it needs to wait for a'nother study would definitely confirm what the EOC has found in their interviews, as well as going against established policies of Ashland and of the State guidelines. Postponing this study would put the Croman Mill Site Plan in the company of the Railroad District Master Plan, Two or three downtown plans and the 2007 EOA. None of which have been formally adopted, Having this site master planned would at least establish guidelines for prospective and expanding employers to address for suitability to Ashland's values and long-term economic goals. Master planning generally allows development to proceed in a more efficient and cost effective manner for both the city and the landowner while achieving the goals of both. For business to establish and grow in Ashland they need certainty in the process and they need to know the standards they need to meet. This plan helps to meet these goals, Item 4) "The CMDP is not integrated with city-wide transportation and land use", The arguments in this section make almost no sense other than the authors want to see low density, non manufacturing uses on this land. But then the report goes on to say it should be higher density/ mixed use. It states that the other areas designated for "edge of town uses" have poor transportation and shouldn't be used for those, but then the report goes on to say this site has worse transportation connections, and finally say that this is being "fast tracked" The details of the site are as follows: The Croman site is less than 1/3 mile across, (east to west), and approximately 1/2 mile long, (north to south), The Signature Street will be approximately ,8 miles long. The total area is approximately .11 Sq. Miles. To say it is not a "multi-use node" shows a lack of familiarity with the sight and the surrounding area. There are more services within biking and walking distance of this site than in many areas of town. The plan looked at rail, bike, pedestrian and auto connections, It incorporated the 1-5 interchange concepts, and some possible scenarios for future traffic generation. The plan also made recommendations for key projects and actions that needed to take place. Included in these were property acquisitions for phase" access. The phase" layouts have changed little since the beginning, To say the process was not integrated with an overall transportation plan is ignoring the reality of what was covered in the process and to say this is a fast track development, after four years of public process probably means the author just doesn't like the results of the process. Item 5) "The CMDP has insufficient planning for annex-able lands, The annex-able portions, contrary to what was stated in the report, have been part of the study since the 2008 draft, (one of the properties is part of the Croman property To state "Hundreds of people who were involved in the original charrettes hold the assumption that this area is not included in the plan" cannot be supported by the record and looking at the actual attendance numbers, this statement is not true. The properties are currently designated as future E-1 in the camp plan. They are critical to the connectivity, of the project, Lack of which was one of the key complaints in item 4. The parcels are also critical to the expansion of the greenway and the existing riparian area. Item 7) The CMDP places a burden on the whole community for Tier 2 power needs. Tier 2 was never discussed and cannot be addressed at this level of planning. The concept of Zero Net Energy was discussed as well as other options for energy efficiency but they were deemed not practical beyond what is incorporated in ttiis plan. If Tier 2 is that important it should be required for all developments in town, including those of the author. Item 7 through 9) These items were discussed during the process but deemed not part of the process. There was discussion early on about the amount of developable land that was being pulled for non-economic uses, The costs of this development are just that. As a commission we have never before looked at who was paying, how much the infrastructure would cost or whether the development would pencil. That is a task for the development and not the commission. When master planning, we should be overlaying the city's values on the development of the property and leave it at that. If an item is too onerous the development should address this, not the commission. The commission does not want to be the landowner's agent for deciding if a project is feasible. Item 10) Confusion in relationship between commission and council. Item 11) The CMDP had poor public process. The council motion was "Will the council direct staff to begin the process of adopting the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan and to prepare the necessary accompanying Ashland Land Use Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Amendments?", The roll call vote was unanimous for proceeding. The confusion seems to stem from the dissenting commissioners wanting their opinions to be in the majority ruling forwarded to the council and to be able to change the plan completely. The author of the minority opinion in one meeting, tried to get the entire site back to the old M-1, (no restrictions), zoning. When that failed, she attempted to get part of the property designated as an "urban food zone", (zoning which doesn't currently exist and would be completely opposite of M-1), After that failed, added the more stringent restrictions on the existing M-1 properties to the north, which she is now citing as a reason to not adopt the plan - poor public process in adding these requirements. Summary) The amount of flat land suitable for large outdoor storage and ''yard'' type applications is very limited in Ashland, Currently, only the City and OOOT can afford to hold land for this type of use. If Ashland wants to compete for those uses, they will need to annex flat land and provide the improvements. In The Croman site, the flattest land has been reserved for a future Railroad siding. The small amount of flat land here is not enough for the "edge of town" uses as described in the opinion and any large parcels would require extensive grading, The competition for that land arid those uses is limited and when one looks around the region, the majority of that is in White City, the county's industrial site, Ashland cannot and probably should not try to compete for those uses. They have the infrastructure, the buildings, the roads and railroads already in place to support this. This is where the Croman Company has relocated its operations. This type of land is not what Ashland should be planning for. The market here is small, the land cost is high and very limited, and we haven't existing services to support it. The direction of this plan is the best shot at ensuring the future viability of Ashland. If we want young people to stay and families to remain we need the businesses that would be suitable on this planned site. What this will provide and that is not the warehouse, sorting yard, or low employee per acre uses that some would like to see, This site needs to be for future uses and not the uses of the 40's and 50's, Sincerely: ~ QJ". Mike Morris CITY OF ASHLAND Coun.cil Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Approval of Fund Exchange Agreement and Engineering Contract for the Laurel Street Sidewalk Project May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Public WorksfEngineering E-Mail: Community Devel ment Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: James Olson, 541 552-2412 olsonj 0lashland.or. us Michael Faught 15 minutes Question: Will the Council approve a fund exchange agreement with ODOT to fund the Laurel Street Sidewalk project and an engineering services contract with Thornton Engineering for design? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approve a fund exchange agreement with ODOT and an engineering services contract with Thornton Engineering to fund and design the Laurel Street Sidewalk Improvement Project. Background: . Fund Exchange Agreement The Laurel Street Sidewalk Improvement Project has been developed to provide a safe route to school for Helman Elementary School students. This project includes construction of sidewalks on the east side of Laurel Street from Hersey Street to Randy Street and the improvement of the Hersey/Laurel Street at-grade rail crossing. After several failed attempts to fund this project through grants, it was accepted as a funding priority through the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) under the fund exchange program. A fund exchange is where federal dollars are exchanged for state dollars at a 94% exchange rate. Fund Exchange Agreement No. 26612 will exchange $730,000 Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds for $686,200 in state funds for this project. . Engineering Contract In response to a Request for Proposal (RFP) issued in November 2009, the City received 12 responses from local engineering firms to provide design services for the proj ect. Thornton Engineering, Inc. was selected to provide engineering for the sidewalk project at a cost of $22,865.00. It was necessary to officially secure project funding before awarding this contract. The railroad crossing improvement portion of the project has already been designed under a current contract with OBEC Consulting' Engineers. Sidewalk Improvement Proiect The construction of sidewalk on Laurel Street is a project which has been on the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for nearly ten years. Public Works staff have struggled to secure adequate funding for the project and have applied for grants under the Transportation Enhancement Grant Program, Bicycle and Pedestrian Grant Program, various ARRA funding options and have even considered the project as a Local Improvement District (LID). The project has also been on the regional STP list which is administered through the MPO, however, it was not on the priority list. We have recently been successful in revising the priority list and have identified funds that are available immediately. Funds allocated though the MPO are Federal STP dollars exchanged through ODOT for , Page 1 on ~~, CITY OF ASHLAND state dollars at a 94% exchange rate. Under Agreement No. 26612, $730,000 in federal STP funds will be exchanged for $686,200 in state funds for this project. Rail Crossing Improvement In November of 2005, the Council approved a contract with OBEC Consulting Engineers to develop plans for the improvement of the following five at-grade railroad crossings within Ashland's city limits: I. East Main Street 2. Hersey I Laurel Streets 3. Oak Street 4. Walker Avenue 5. Glenn Street The $154,316 contract would provide for each of the above crossings over a period of up to five years. The first of these crossings, East Main Street, was completed two years ago. The Oak Street crossing has been designed and will be funded by ODOT through its Rail Division. The Hersey / Laurel crossing has been designed (95%) and authorization for improvement has been received from the ODOT Rail Division. Both of the remaining crossings, Walker Avenue and Glenn Street have been placed on the unfunded list on the CIP and will await identification of specific funding sources. Rail Crossing Funding The Hersey I Laurel Crossing Improvement Project is critical to provide a truly complete and safe route to Helman Elementary School. This project will provide safe, smooth crossings separate from the vehicular travel ways and will be completely ADA assessable. The project is funded at approximately $400,000. By comparison, the East Main Street Rail Crossing Project cost $324, I 00.95. That project was funded in part through a Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Grant from ODOT. The engineering services contract with OBEC (approved by the Council in 2005) is still in effect as it was approved as a multi-year contract and was anticipated to take a full five years to complete. Although the authorizing purchase order has been closed out, it could be reauthorized under a new purchase order and under the original terms of the contract. Other contracts needed to complete the rail crossing project include an agreement with the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad (Rail America) to place the crossing panels and ultimately a construction contract for the remaining portions of the project. Estimated costs are as follows: Engineering - $26,000 CORP Costs - $154,000 Construction - $220,000 TOTAL $400,000 Because of the complexity of the rail crossing project and the need to work under the railroad's time schedule in installing the crossing panels, it is not possible to combine the Laurel Street sidewaik project with the Hersey / Laurel rail crossing improvement project even though both are funded from the same source under the same grant. Page 2 on JI'.. r_~ CITY OF ASHLAND Fund Exchange Agreement . Of all the grant programs, the fund exchange program provides the greatest degree of flexibility and local control. The project is designed by the City (or its contractors) to City standards which can differ from ODOT or federal (AASHTO) standards. The project is bid, administered and constructed by the City (or its contractors). Fund exchange grants are a reimbursable-type grant under which the City's expenses are,reimbursed through ODOT on a quarterly basis. Funds are immediately available and the agreement specifies that the project be completed by May 31,2012. Related City Policies: By the authority granted in Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 190.110; 366.572 and 366.576, the City and State may enter into cooperative agreements for the performance and funding of work on certain types of improvement projects with the allocation of costs to be mutually agreed upon. Council Options: . The Council may approve both the fund exchange agreement with ODOT and the personal services contract with Thornton Engineering; . The Council may reject both the fund exchange agreement with ODOT and the personal services contract with Thornton Engineering; . The Council may elect to approve the fund exchange agreement and/or the personal services contract with amendments or changes. Potential Motions: . Move to approve both the fund exchange agreement with ODOT and the personal services contract with Thornton Engineering; . Move to reject both the fund exchange agreement with ODOT and the personal services contract with Thornton Engineering; . Move to approve the fund exchange with amendments or changes; . Move to approve the personal services contract with amendments or changes. Attachments: Vicinity Map Maps Fund Exchange Agreement Page3 of3 ~~, " Q 0 " ~ ~.'&. ''q..' % IY/"~<".~ , , It> U. "~~;:',,~ " " '.',~-::: ,)~ .. . z.~.. . - ~..i""'I" :Z" Ii' Pt~cg.~i~t~YiiU'1 1 . I. .f}'~~:F ~ 'L;.,.~., ',",,' .... ~ ~L" "11 ""{"~ ~~. ~ L'1i ~:.~ ' ~~> ,j L:.::~~;L., -=1 rvt:;:;' :, t'.:....", " , , .", . . Ii ;""1 * ,.-1:' '" ' pi,;'" -, l.lC U~' f1 ',f/~, j'" <-+:", "-, ,'.,Q" L :' "" I~('Y' " r-::....~ '.' -+, o~.. IT .;;:LJ- ,,; -, i) '; I} .1:7.';. ,:" ~ ~ .... 7/ ", ,,' ,.)", '", 'I' '"~,, ~~ ""-'-'-' , ,I .p r I't'" .l "'~" ." =:::,I.:::::z,,.. NIYlHll<l!' r-. I" ",::~."'l ' ,.kiJ1 {- .~ '-n, '~.. " I~~U ~-Wr;1J. "-+-.J ~, 'I'P 'Jti "" . I, \JJ:6 !lb' "2:l/iI ~~' ~~<;f" .. "" ',j; ~rio I @Yli7J> .LL "':'.;, ,/ ... ~- "'<""'" /: .m",P-- '~ >.-T ff-<:~~... :ztlc_ ~jO< ' . ~ ~........ t,;']<' ....._~"''''', ;,c"~'~'~ _ <IT /7;l:L4, Lk ~ ~~;! ~ _, ~ . eJ I~'~ JA,\ ";:,.' . ~ . J , . ff~JfJ%.cG.:t~L' q /"'" '1 D. w:~,.. '~'" ,,;, 0. '~', ' ':O:'~: ( L", ,,~ '.' ,.i '''~'' ;::::._ /. ' '1.. -' ~ Li:\j~.; ~ ' "' ~r ..:r::::. "" I' . ,~ ;tJ -\. "':.C,,' //4>~ -. f "" 00 'Zs. , " ('01 110, , 0..".., , ~. " ~'~, >- ..J... . "E'< ,'"':t' ",,' :., 'z . . jioioiII IJ 'rJ). g ~> dr,..' ....C) ~,~ ~Q ~~, SQ..: Cl)Z, ,;.0 f-i..... Cl)r,.. -"'U H:=> ~ ~'. 'r,.. ~.,~'. HQ Qq: ~ .- ; "",' ., '~',~ ~.O CI):~ ~,.~ ',. ~'.~O CI)CI) ~ i 'CI) 0 >-4, 'O.~ . ;;;J~~ pu'r,.. ~.H Z H....... El ,.,...,~~ >'l,,~.~ .v ;/ y. ( , /' o . " Z~ ~'~ .,-J, ~t~~ :j::!:_e~', :~~'~~: ,~~;'~- ~~6~ ;fJ,Kffi '" r-- Qi ci .!! o o '" N '" II. .d iJ ,5 - ;;"" ~. \ .;u \ \" 5< \, - ~_~~:'. ~ \..~]O /\/-J ,~j' \.(\ '!cJ -;\: //-:::::::- \ 3nN3AV 3DN\I'~O , , ~ .~...."S , , o =~!": L-J~: OD'. D -' --:- 'J $11 ~ :: ld Dj",~ :<, " 1 ~ __ <i' @ fi!0 ~ . L33~.LS --- : 3 _II~__ OIHQ -~=~ -- ;-- J ~D 13]~l!S A]S~3H l~ \ ,. ., o o ( '\:,,~ ~~ \ " Lu ---1 <e- U (!1 3nN3A'" '", _ .;l..JNVl:fO .__;;,__~l;;:;,1;".T.~~"'.1:I;O' fi~------'_.'---- ...:~1?~~~ ---r-T---"':f~ z 0 D ~ C > 0 0 0 c 0 0 z U '" .c: w Y- O) w z 'I U) a '" " Ul z <( w Q '" 0 0 D '" . !:: " ~ i! i .ij~~i if) 0 't- ~ '" z ~-~ ~ +- ~~!~~ 0 or +- +- ~ 0 if) V) 0 ~~~~el " Q) s~~~;:! .~c :,; .~ 71 J '" 0 . w L L ~ +- " ::J "- ~ ~ a u . - ~ --' =~-'> 0 =~~~.. U ~ z dt:....,LiI 133~lS ~ OIHQ w 0 c W I- 0 .D CJI.- ~c~ 01 W,- +-U"l0'~ V)OWCl +- . om co - ~ C >"0 (1)+<.DIT: >UUI- OWQlO L'-,C.O ge.~o '- 0. U) ^ CJIL~.l::l .~ ~ 01 ~ If.l C c.~ 2 :J.- > LUVQ) UQ).QL +- "1- U u- q) O:J+U OLe C L+ I!):J ,_ ~ L OOLU o::ua5 A3S~3H @ ~ "-u ow 11 ~~ z 0 1l1ltH i..QI."1l 1..1J0. l.J~ D ~ ~ " ,- ,;,.,~~"!;~~~..;".,,::~~ " c 0 !<1 0 C 0 u 0 ,;; z U '" :L 00 w ~ 11 .c w 1f' z 0 I '" '" U) 3 '" " " u 0 z Q Q) <f '" 0 U ~~~;g .:. ::;: 0 ~ " V1 -%% " (lJ z ~~gli,"," '1- ~ +- c:S~~a::I~ d ~ +- +- ==<..f",,<=> 0 '" 0 g~~~; ~ 'W 0 en en " (lJ =~;-:~ .... u .~ I]) 0 " ~ :>. ~ '- '- ~ on 0.. t~~ +- ::J ::J ""cr.. D- O :ili .. 13llilS ,~ ---' .w 0 E5-..Ji >- z D- W 0 N 0 if) + r- w, E w ---' <( U S V1 co ..- I ::,LCD --.-10 <( 5: . Z Wo 0 Oz ~ ~ f- If) . U ---:J W .0 If) f-cr:: If)D- --.-1 <( --.-1Z U Wo ~ cr:: ~ D- :=Jf- >- <(u f- --.-1cr:: :=J . f- Zlf) Z 0 U 5: '----- cr:: <l> U _________________ .- Y; ~- o - . 10 0> U LLu "- "" 0> V"> '" o U o.c o 0 LU a. '" '" ~ East Side ~ o n '" ~ .'.:CD"t; OJ x. C__ LOx 0--' 0> "- ro " m<DtJ > C._ 00 X L--'o> ,- 0> C L 0> +- C 0> U IDQ)+- " >C'" o O'X ~....Jq) ro ro <> ~ ,C: lD~ Y. C._ LOX 0--' ID "- o ,n ap!s +S8M 5: '----- '----------------------------------------------------- ------ cr:: - . ",0 L u,. 0> L ",0 00. 0. 00> LU a. .- '" UL CO> O+- U+- :J 00 C "- "" +- "'Ll "- L X:J wu Misc. Contracts & Agreements No, 26612 2010 FUND EXCHANGE AGREEMENT Laurel StreeVHersey Street Project City of Ashland THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "Slate"; and the City of Ashland, acting by and through its elected officials, hereinafter referred to as "Agency," hereinafter individually referred to as the "Party" and collectively referred to as the "Parties," RECITALS 1. By the authority granted in Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 190.110, 366.572 arid 360376-;-State may enter into cooperative agreements with counties, cities and units of local governments for the performance of work on certain types of improvement projects with the allocation of costs on terms and conditions mutually agreeable to the contracting parties, ' NOW THEREFORE, the premises being in general as stated in the foregoing Recitals, it is agreed by and between the Parties hereto as follows: TERMS OF AGREEMENT 1, Agency has submitted a completed and signed Part 1 of the Project Prospectus, or a similar document agreed to by State, outlining the schedule and costs associated with all phases of the Laurel StreeVHersey Street Project" hereinafter referred to as "Project." 2. State has reviewed Agency's prospectus and considered Agency's request for the Fund Exchange. State has determined that Agency's Project is eligible for the exchange of funds, 3. To assist in funding the Project, Agency has requested State to exchange 2010 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Federal Funds, which have been allocated to Agency, for state funds based on the following ratio: , $94 state for $100 federal 4. Based on this ratio, Agency wishes to trade $730,000 STP Federal Funds for $686,200 in state funds. Key No. Agency/State Agreement No. 26612 5. The term of this Agreement will begin upon execution and will terminate on May 31, 2012, unless extended by an executed amendment. 6, The Parties agree that the exchange is subject to the following conditions: a. The federal funds transferred to State may be used by State at its discretion. b. State dollars transferred to Agency must be used for the Project. This Fund Exchange will provide funding for specific roadway projects and may also be used for the following maintenance purposes: i. Purchase or Production of Aggregate. Agency shall ensure the purchase or production of aggregate will be highway related and used exclusively for highway work. ii. Purchase of Equipment. Agency shill I clearly describe how it plans to use said equipment on highways. Agency shall demonstrate that the equipment will only be used for highway purposes, c. State funds may be used for all phases of the Project, including preliminary engineering, right of way, utility relocations and construction, Said use shall be consistent with the Oregon Constitution and statutes (Section 3a of Article IX Oregon Constitution). Agency shall be responsible to' account for expenditure of state funds. d, This Fund Exchange shall be on a reimbursement basis, with state funds.limited to a maximum amount of $686,200, All costs incurred in excess of the Fund Exchange amount will be the sole responsibility of Agency. . e. State certifies, at the time this Agreement is executed, that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this Agreement within State's current appropriation or limitation of the current biennial budget. f, Agency (and any contractors) shall perform the work as an independent contractor and will be exclusively responsible for all costs and expenses related to its employment of individuals to perform the work including, but not limited to, retirement contributions, workers compensation, unemployment taxes, and state and federal income tax withholdings. 2 Agency/State Agreement No, 26612 g. Agency shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this Agreement, including, without limitation, the provisions of ORS 279C,505, 279C.515, 279C.520, 279C.530 and 279B.270 incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Agency expressly agrees to comply with (I) Title VI of Civil Riahts Act of 1964; (i1) Title V and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973: (iii) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659A.142; (iv) all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (v) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. h, Agency, or its consultant, shall conduct the necessary preliminary engineering and design work required to produce final plans, specifications and cost estimates; purchase all necessary right of way in accordance with current state and federal laws and regulations; obtain all required permits; be responSible for all utility relocations; advertise for bid proposals; award all contracts; perform all construction engineering; and make all contractor payments required to complete the Project. i. Agency shall submit invoices to State on a quarterly basis, for actual costs incurred by Agency on behalf, of the Project directly to State's Project Manager for review and approval. Such invoices will be in a form identifying the Project, the ,agreement number, the. invoice number or account number or both, and will itemize all expenses for which reimbursement is claimed, Under no conditions shall State's obligations exceed $686,200, including all expenses. Travel expenses will not be reimbursed. j. Agency shall, at its own expense, maintain and operate the Project upon completion at a minimum level that is consistent with normal depreciation and service demand, k. All employers, including Agency, that employ subject workers in the State of Oregon shall comply with ORS 656.017 and provide the required Workers' Compensation coverage unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. Agency shall ensure that each of its subcontractors complies with these requirements, I. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days' notice, in writing and delivered by certified mail or in person. 3 Agency/State Agreement No. 26612 1. State may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to Agency, or at such later date as may be, established by State, under any of the following conditions: A. If Agency fails to provide services called for by this Agreement within the time specified herein or any extension thereof. B. If Agency fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement, or so fails to' pursue the work as to endanger performance of this Agreement in, accordance with its terms, and after receipt of written notice from State fails to correct such failures within ten (10) days or such longer period as State may authorize. 2. Either Party may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to the other Party, or at such later date as may be established by the terminating Party, under any of the following conditions: A. If either Party fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow either Party, in the exercise of their reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for performance of this Agreement. B. If federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that either the work under this Agreement is prohibited or either Party is prohibited from paying for such work from the planned funding source. 3. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations accrued to the Parties prior to termination. m. State and Agency hereto agree that if any term or provision of this Agreement is declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, unenforceable, illegal or in conflict with any law, the validity of the remaining terms and provisions shall not be, affected, and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular term or provision held to be invalid. 7. Agency acknowledges and agrees that State, the Oregon Secretary of State's Office, the federal government, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, documents, papers, and 4 Agency/State Agreement No. 26612 records of Agency which are directly pertinent to this Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts for a period of six (6) years after final payment. Copies of applicable records shall be made available upon request. Payment for costs of copies is reimbursable by State. 8. Agency certifies and represents that the individual(s) signing this Agreement has been authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of Agency, under the direction or approval of its governing body, commission, board, officers, members or representatives, and to legally . bind Agency. 9. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all of which when taken together shall constitute one agreement binding on all Parties, notwithstanding that all Parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. Each copy of this Agreement so executed shall , constitute an original. 10. This Agreement and attached exhibits constitute the entire agreement between the Parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. No waiver, consent, modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either Party unless in writing and signed by both Parties and all necessary approvals have been obtained, Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The failure of State to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by State of that or any other provision. 11. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all of which when together shall constitute one agreement binding on all parties, notwithstanding that all parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. Each copy of this Agreement so executed shall constitute an original. THE PARTIES, by execution of this Agreement, hereby acknowledge that each Party has read this Agreement, understands it, and agrees to be bound by, its terms and conditions. The funding for this Fund Exchange program was approved by the Oregon Transportation Commission on November 14, 2007, as a part of the 2008-2011 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 5 Agency/State Agreement No. 26612 The Program and Funding Services Manager approved the Fund Exchange on April 15, 2010. The Oregon Transportation Commission on December 29, 2008, approved Delegation Order No.2, which authorizes the Director to approve and execute agreements for day- to-day operations, Day-to-day operations include those activities required to implement the biennial budget approved by the Legislature, including activities to execute a project in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program. On September 15, 2006, the Director of the Oregon Department of Transportation approved Subdelegation Order No, 2, Paragraph 1, in which authority is delegated to the Deputy Director, Highways. to approve and sign agreements over $75,000 when the work is related to a project included in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program or in other system plans approved by the Oregon Transportation Commission ,such as the Oregon Traffic Safety Performance Plan, or in a line item in the biennial budget approved by the Director, The Director may also delegate to other Administrators the authority to execute intergovernmental agreements over $75,000 for specific programs such as transportation safety, growth management and public transit. -SIGNA TURE PAGE TO FOLLOW--- 6 Agency/State Agreement No. 26612 City of Ashland, by and Ihrough its elected officials . By Date By Date By Date APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By Counsel Date Agency Contact: Morgan Wayman, Project Manager City of Ashland Public Works 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 Office: 541-552-2414 waymanm@ashland_or,us STATE OF OREGON, by and through its Department of Transportation By Deputy Director, Highways Date APPROVAL RECOMMENDED By Technical Services Mgr./Chief Engineer Date By Region Manager Date APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By Assistant Attorney General Date: 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) Review May 4, 20 I 0 Primary Staff Contact: Public Works E-Mail: N/A Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Michael R. Faught faughtm@ashland.or.us N/A 15 Minutes Question: Does the Council wish to direct staff to submit written comments on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to submit written comments on the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement~ and Staff recommends the draft letter for Council consideration. Background: The Record of Decision (ROD) for the Mount Ashland Ski Area (MASA) Expansion was issued in September 2004. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently remanded the case to the district court with instructions to enjoin the MAS A expansion project until the Forest Service corrected the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) violations found in Opinion CV-05-03004-PA. The NFMS was violated by failing to appropriately designate Riparian Reserves and Restricted Watershed terrain. The Forest Service prepared a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) in response to the violations and the 45 day comment period began March 26, 2010 and ends May 10, 2010. At the April 19, 2010 Council Study Session, the Council heard a presentation from Ethan Rosenthal, Ecologist from David Evans and Associates, Inc., a sub consultant of Carollo Engineers. Mr. Rosenthal presented a review of Draft Supplemental EIS (DSEIS) in relation to Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion project. Mr. Rosenthal summarized his presentation by recommending that the City submit written comments on the DSEIS that focused on the City's overall concerns about water quality (i.e. Reeder Reservoir sediment TMDL) issues, the need for close coordination during implementation, and seeking clarifications as to how the Ski Lodgemeets bonding requirements set out in the 2004 Record of Decision (ROD). The specific issues Mr. Rosenthal's recommends be included in a comment letter are as follows: . Establish a coordination committee between Forest Service, City, and Mt. Ashland Association to discuss the project on an on-going basis (e.g. monthly during pre- and post-construction periods, and weekly during construction); . City should have the opportunity to review and comment on project design plans (e.g. storm water system design, erosion control plans, grading and clearing plans, etc.); Page 1 of2 ri.' CITY OF ASHLAND . City should have opportunity to visit project area during and post-construction; . City and Forest Service should clarify the required bond from MASA. E.g. How will the original required $200,000 bond amount be increased "proportionally" due to expansion? How will original required bond amount be increased to meet current day or future projected costs? The City should request that the bond be posted prior to Forest Service authorization of expansion project. Following the presentation, the Council directed staff to remove the following paragraph from the draft Comment Letter from Evans and Associates: "Based on the City's DEIS we believe that the Forest Service has addressed and rectified the issues addressed by the Court of Appeals noted above, incorporating the new areas into their proper management units. The City understands that the analysis work did not result in modifications to the proposed project described in the FEIS, as it was determined that proposed actions still fell within the management restrictions of the various management units. Generally speaking, between the FEIS, DSEIS, and supporting documentation, it appears that considerable effort has gone into analyzing and documenting potential impacts to watershed resources and outlining the methods with which to address them, particularly at a planning level of design." In addition, the Council indicated that they would send any additional comments regarding the comment letter prior to the May 4,2010 Council meeting. Councilor Navickas was the only councilor to submit additional comments (see attached.) Some of Councilor Navickas' suggestions are included in the recommended draft. The Council also requested information on where staff might propose to install two additional monitoring stations (see attached map) and a map identifying the locations of the soil types identified in the DSIS (attached map). - Council Options: I. The City Council could decide to direct staff to send the draft DSEIS comment letter as drafted to the Forest Service; 2. The City Council could decide to modify ( ) the draft DSEIS comment letter and then direct staff to send the modified DSEIS letter to the Forest Service; 3. The City Council could decide not to send a comment letter on the DSEIS. Potential Motions: I. Move to direct staff to send the draft DSEIS comment letter as drafted to the Forest Service; 2. Move to modify L-) the draft DSEIS comment letter and direct staff to send the modified comment letter to the Forest Service; 3. Move not to send a comment letter on the DSEIS. Attachments: Link to Draft SEIS: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/rogue-siskivou/proiects/mtashlandski/dseis.pdf Draft Comment Letter Proposed Monitoring Sites Map Revised Soil Landtypes Map E-Mail from Eric Navickas Page 2 of2 r~' " , , (~ I I ,~ . . . . . -f/j ./" 1~ ''''-. '--., /)2 / / / "- '-- ,- ' Proposed V; MOnitOring~, Stallon I I' I ) I / r }-~ 7 / / I ( Propo.. '0 ~Monitorini ',- Stallon I'" I , " ! , , / '- I " I )\ MT AB,HLAND SKI lAEA \ \/1::, ( / '- , , I I MT ASHLAND SKI LODGIl ssw Elet \. ROGUE RIVER" SISKIYOU NATIONAL. FOREST / / // r- I , , 'y/ KLA.'MATH NATID~AL <F,DRI!ST c..sr:.~~."a " ",:::\o.:.\f;Zfa.., ~*, , Scale' il;f4,~ ! . <II - .~ -" - . ))' r'IMu{,.4tZ/;;;'O- il ' "1~ Id 3; .... .~.5 >.. .~4j~ .."" ,ij.!rl ~ . i ~!!~ ~f = saj! {l ~o s.. ,,~s h~ H: ." 3 H! ~]~j ,i li~r : f~f !Ja~~ .l~~ h:~ 'I :1 f ~ ~ i}~ ~'~Ie; ",.~ 1 n [ z~ -~ co co c: 'lJ."'C m .~ QJ g ::: '" ~ ~al~~.gco~ ~ "D "g.",:'2 i III ~{'J fljlillil:;alU~~ coEUl '" ~ QJ5101101 ~till~~ 10 ~~ tll tll tll ii5~ ~ I 01111 f ...J l o o :;! ~I 0, ~J May 4,2010 CITY OF ASHLAND Steve Johnson Ashland Ranger Station U.S. Forest Service 645 Washington Street Ashland, OR 97520 RE: COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL E IMPACT STATEMENT, MT. ASHLAND SKI A To Mr. Steve Johnson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Supplemental'ronmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area (MAS A) Expansion Project. Glur comments focus on how the MA'SA Expansion Project could potentially affect the City's watsr supply and ability to comply with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) established in 2007. The Court of Appeals found that the Fo ervice failed to properly evaluate the impact of the proposed expansion on the Pacific Fishe'vio a 'bn 0 both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Forest Manag ~) and that it violated the NFMA by failing to appropriately designate Riparl es and~tricted Watershed terrain. The Forest Service prepared the DSEIS in respo these violations. With respect to the DSEIS, the City is primarily concerned with Ripa Reserve and Restricted Watershed terrain designations as these most relate to the City wate ply. ems about the potential for the proposed MASA Expansion Project to adverse~ . 's water supply at Reeder Reservoir, particularly the City's ability to meet obligation o~he' sediment TMDL. As you are aware, the sediment TMDL is partIcularly strict regardI~anv increases in sediment load to the system. The TMDL specifies a loadi~ city "set to n'&l background or an erosion rate of 3.62 cubic yards per day total for the wa shed. No signi IC t increased delivery of sediment to Reeder Reservoir over that which woul r naturall llowed," In an effort to~rt i' L compliance and protection of the City's water supply, the City requests that the Forest'Service continue close coordination with the City if the MASA '" Expansion Project proceeds from the planning phases to the more detailed engineering design, construction, and post-construction monitoring phases. Additionally, the City recommends close coordination between the Forest Service and the City regarding monitoring efforts associated with the MASA Expansion Project and monitoring efforts associated with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL. In an effort to foster good communications pending implementation, the City recommends the following actions: . Establish a coordination committee consisting of the Forest Service, the Mt. Ashland Engineering 20 East Main Street Ashland, 0"'90n 97520 WWN.ashland,or.us Tel: 541-488-5347 Fax: 541-488-6006 TTY: 600-735-2900 r.t. , Association (MAA), and the City to discuss project implementation on an on-going as needed basis (e.g. monthly during pre- and post-construction periods, and weekly during construction). . The City would like to have the opportunity to review and comment on project design plans, including but not limited to the following: storm water system design, grading, clearing, and revegetation plans, erosion control plans and l200-C permit application, and watershed restoration project plans within the Reeder Reservoir Watershed, . The City would like to have the opportunity to visit project areas as desired during and post-construction. . The City is also seeking clarification of statements made in the 2004 ROD pertaining to the need for the MAA to post bond money to cover the cost of ski area restoration in the case of bankruptcy and subsequent decision to abandon the ski area. Specifically, the City seeks clarification of the following: ~ o The ROD states that, "the bond or setS available amount under the SUP will be proportionally adjusted to accWl for the increase in developed area...." What is meant by proportionan ow is the ount determined? o The ROD states that, ",..and tJi seque creased need for funding for reclamation (above the current am nt U 200,000 based on April 1992 Decision Notice]) in the event of ski are~i:~sure." How is the increased amount . determined (e.g. $200,000 factoring for In .' on, based on assessment of actual current day costs, etc.)? o What is the total new dollar amount required to o When will be required to post the new II bond amount? The City request ew full bond amount be posted prior to or at the time of the Fores ice aut (zing the MASA expansion project. ity has concerns abut the current status of the requisite - " ... he recession that began in 2007 has affected the struction PTo}'@s. The City requests that the Forest Service onomic shifts affect the 2004 economic feasibility analysis of original EIS. In summary, the City is pleased t see the proper designation of riparian and watershed mana:gement units per the DSEIS. However, the City continues to have concerns regarding assurances that we will be involved through project implementation and that the City of Ashland is protected from unnecessary liability resulting from the project. This City's interest is in compliance with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL; if the project is approved, proper implementation and close coordination will be critical. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comment. If you need further clarification, please contact me at (541) 488-5587 or via email atfaughtm(@ashland.or.us. Sincerely, Michael R. Faught Public Works Director Engineering 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 www.ashland.or.us Tel: 541-488-5347 Fax: 541-488-6006 TTY: 600-735-2900 r.t. , Page 1 of3 Martha Bennett - Comments on MT. Ashland expansion From: To: Date: Subject: Eric Navickas Martha Bennett <bennettm@ash1and.or.us> 4/27/20104:49 PM Comments on MT, Ashland expansion Council, , This is the language [ would like to see in our comment letter to the Forest Service on the Mt. Ashland SDEIS, I underlined sections I'd like to see removed, wrote those in red I'd like to see added, and removed the paragraph we agreed to at the Study Session, Basically, the additional changes included any statements that were similar in nature to the paragraph we agreed to remove - statements making judgment toward the adequacy of the analysis or endorsementS of the project. My concerns should be fairly clear after reading the suggested changes. I have tried to state our concerns without making statements of bias in any direction or assumptions that the decision-maker will proceed. Additionally, I added a paragraph requesting further economic analysis in the Final SEIS, Under NEP A, the agency (Forest Service) is required to submit an economic analysis which was done in 2004, Six years later, after a major recession, it is difficult to believe this analysis is current. I believe this is a reasonable request and prudent considering the circumstances. Respectfully, Eric Navickas To Mr, Steve Johnson, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area (MASA) Expansion Project. The City acknowledges and appreciates the U.S. Forest Service's (Forest Service) detailed environmental assessment conducted for the Mt. Ashland Ski Area Expansion Project to date. On behalf of the City of Ashland, [ am submitting the following comments to be included in the public record. The comments focus on City concerns about how the MASA Expansion Project could potentially affect the City's water supply and ability to comply with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), which was established in 2007. The Court of Appeals found that the Forest Service failed to properly evaluate the impact of the proposed expansion on the Pacific fisher; in violation of both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) and that it violated the NFMA by failing to appropriately designate Riparian Reserves and Restricted Watershed terrain. The Forest Service prepared the DSEIS in response to these violations. With respect to the DSEIS, the City is primarily concerned with Riparian Reserve and Restricted Watershed terrain designations, as these most relate to the City water supply, file://C:\Documents and Settings\bennettm\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BD7l5A8As... 4/29/2010 Page 2 00 The City has concerns about the potential for the proposed MASA Expansion Project to adversely affect the City's water supply at Reeder Reservoir, particularly the City's ability to meet' our obligations of the sediment TMDL. The sediment TMDL is particularly strict regarding any increases in sediment load to the system. The TMDL specifies a loading capacity "set to natural backgroWld or an erosion rate of 3.62 cubic yards per day total for the watershed. No significant increased delivery of sediment to Reeder Reservoir over that which would occur naturally is allowed." Although the City appreciates the thorough work conducted by the Forest Service to date. it is now ultimately the quality of proiect implementation that will determine the expansion project's resulting level of sedimentation. In an effort to support TMDL compliance and protection of the City's water supply, the City requests that the Forest Service continue close coordination with the City as if the MASA Expansion Project proceeds from the planning phases to the more detailed engineering design, construction, and post-construction monitoring phases, Additionally, the City recommends close coordination between the Forest Service and the City regarding monitoring efforts associated with the MASA Expansion Project and monitoring efforts associated with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL. In an effort to foster good commWlications and successful proiect pending implementation, the City recommends the following actions: . Establish a coordination committee between the Forest Service, the Mt. Ashland Association (MAA), and the City to discuss project implementation on an on-going basis as needed (e.g. monthly during pre- and post-construction periods, and weekly during construction). . The City would like to have the opportunity to review and comment on project design plans, including but not limited to the following: storm water system design, grading, clearing, and revegetation plans, erosion control plans and 1200-C permit application, and watershed restoration project plans within the Reeder Reservoir Watershed. . The City would like to have the opportunity to visit project areas during and post-construction. In addition to the above items. The City is also seeking clarification of statements made in the 2004 ROD pertaining to the need for the MAA to post bond money to cover the cost of ski area restoration in the case of bankruptcy and subsequent decision to abandon the ski area, Specifically, the City seeks clarification of the following: . The ROD states that, "the bond or assets available amount under the SUP will be proportionally adjusted to accoWlt for the increase in developed area...." What is meant by proportional? Or, how is the amount determined? . The ROD states that, "..,and the subsequently increased need for funding for reclamation (above the current amount [i,e, $200,000 based on April 1992 Decision Notice]) in the event of ski area closure." How is the increased amoWlt determined (e,g, $200,000 factoring for inflation, based on assessment of actual current day costs, etc.)? . . What is the total new dollar amount required to be bonded? . When will MAA be required to post the new full bond amount? The City requests that the new full bond amoWlt be posted prior to or at the time of the Forest Service authorizing the MASA expansion project. file://C:\Documents and Settings\bennettm\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BD715A8As.., 4/29/2010 Page 3 of3 In addition to the above items, the City has concerns about the current status of the requisite economic analysis included in the 2004 FEIS. The City requests an updated economic analysis to be inCluded in the Final SEIS. It is evident that economic conditions have changed significantly since 2004. As a stakeholder, we feel it is is imperative that the decision-maker move forward with full knowledge and current analysis of the economic risks associated with the proposed project. In summary. the proper designation of riparian and watershed management units per the DSEIS and the proposed impact avoidance. minimization. monitoring strategies. and watershed restoration proiects ~ the FEIS should. in combination. allow for successful development of the Mt. Ashland Ski Area in an environmentally sound manner that allows for compliance with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL. However. proper implementation and close coordination will be critical. In summary, we are pleased to see the proper designation of riparian and watershed management units per the DSEIS. However, we continue to have concerns regarding assurances that the City will be involved through project implemation and protected from unnecessary liability. Our interest is in compliance with the Reeder Reservoir Sediment TMDL; if the decision-maker moves to proceed, proper implementation and close coordination will be critical. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comment. If you need further clarification, please contact me at (541) 488-5587 or via email atfaughtm@ashland.or.us. Sincerely, Mike Faught Public Works Director file://C:\Documents and Settings\bennettm\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BD7l5A8As,.. 4/29/20 I 0 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Ordinance Amendin~ AMC Chapter 14.06 relatin~ to Water Curtailment Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught Department: Public Works E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: NI A Secondary Contact: Richard Appicello Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: 15 minutes Question: Should the City Council conduct and approve the Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance relating to Water Curtailment, Definitions, Exhibits, Determination of Water Shortage, Water Curtailment Stages, Exemptions and Appeals, and Amending Sections 14.06,010 through 14.06.060"? . Staff Recommendation: Staffrecommends Council approve the Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance. Background: This item was originally scheduled for Second Reading for the April 20, 20 I 0 council meeting but was automatically continued to May 4,2010 by operation of AMC 2.04.030.E. At the April 6, 2010 City Council meeting, the Council approved First Reading with proposed changes. The changes are incorporated into the attached Ordinance and identified by highlighting. During the staff presentation, the City Council identified the following areas of concern regarding the proposed Water Curtailment Ordinance: 1. The Water Allocation Table provides customers who have both residential and irrigation meters an extra allotment of water than those customers with just a residential meter. As an example, stage 1 of curtailment allots a customer with both residential (3,600 cf) and irrigation meters (1,800 cf) equaling a total of 5,400 cf, as compared to a customer with a residential meter only who is allocated 3,600 cf. As staff reviewed the rationale for approving an additional irrigation meter for the existing 79 ,customers who have both residential and irrigation meters, it was determined that most of the approved irrigation meters were recommended by the conservation staff following an on-site evaluation where staff agreed that the customers need (size oflotlpervious area) warranted the additional water allocation during the effected stages of curtailment. Given that the cost to install the additional irrigation meter is substantial and the need was evaluated by the conservation staff, staff is recommending that the additional irrigation meter allocations for those customers not change. This is consistent with the water conservation staffs recommendation to evaluate water budgeting in the future. Page 1 of4 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND However, if the Council decides to reduce the amount of water used by those customers with both irrigation and residential meters, staff recommends adding the following language to the bottom of the Allocation Table in AMC 14.06.015 Water Allocation Table: * for those residential customers that have both irril!:ation and residential meters, the total monthly water allotment shall not exceed the residential allocation for each of the curtailment stal!:es. 2. The Water Curtailment Code includes a restriction on wasting water (AMC 14,06.010) and concerns were expressed as to why a resident restricted to xxx cf per month could not make his or her own decision as to how to use the allotted water at each stage of curtailment The recommendation to remove "waste" restrictions from the water curtailment ordinance has both positive and negative impacts. The positive side ofremoving the "waste" restriction is that water customers would be able to manage their water allotment based on their own needs and priorities. The negative side of removing "waste" restrictions is as follows: . It removes the option of the City Administrator to declare a prohibition of water waste prior to implementing stage 1 of the curtailment ordinance. . It could impact the City's water conservation efforts where staff promotes the "right water for the right use," such as the most efficient irrigation use (not watering during the hottest temperatures of the day, water runoff into street, sidewalk alley or adjacent property, or washing vehicles without shutoff nozzle). . The current restriction on both water allotment and "waste" has a positive track record resulting in immediate reductions in water use, In addition, the City has never been required to implement a stage 2 or higher curtailment. If customers are allowed to use their full allotment, including currently prohibited waste activity, it is possible that the City might have to move to higher curtailment stages, If the Council decides to remove "waste" restrictions from the Water Curtailment Ordinance, sections 14.06.010 Definitions, 14.06.020 Determination of water shortage, and 14.06.030 Water Curtailment stages, should be amended to remove all reference to waste. The specific amendments are as follows: J. "~Iaste" means: 1. To use City water to irrieate outside plants: a. Between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. May throu!:h July or between 10:00 a.m. and 7:00 P.m. Au!:ust thrilu!:h Oetober, except that drip irri!:ation systems may be used durin!: these times. b. in such a manner as to result in runoff an a street, sidewall" alley or adiacent property far more than five minutes. Page 2 of4 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND 2. To use City water to wash sidewall.s, wall.wavs, streets, driYeways, parkin!: lots, open !:round or other hard surfaced areas except where necessary for pub lie health or safety. 3. To allow City water to eseape from breaks within a plumbin!: system for more than 24 hours after the person who owns or is in eontrol of the system is notified or diseo'/ers the break. 4. To use City water to wash cars, boats, trailers, aireraft, or other vehicles b'l hose without usin!: a shutoff nozzle except to wash such vehicles at commereial or fleet vehicle wash in!: facilities usin!: water recyclin!: equipment. S. To serve City water for drinldn!: at a restaurant. hotel, cafe, cafeteria or other public place where feod is sold, serYed or offered for sale, to anv person unless expressly requested lw such person. 6. To use City water to elean, fill or maintain decoratin fountains, lal.es or ponds unless all sueh '^'ater is recirculated. 7. Except fer purposcs of buildinlt construetion, to use City water for eonstruction, eompaction, dust control. cleanin!: or wettin!: or for buildin!: washdown (except in preparation for paintinlt). 8. To use City water fer fillin!: swimmin!: pools or fer fillin!: to'I. plav or other pools with a capacity in excess of 100 Itallons. provided, however, that water may he added to swimmin!: pools to replace volume los due to evaporation. 14.06.020 U.) prohibit waste as defined in section 14.060.010 14.06.020 (D) terminate waste prohibitions or 14.06.030 Water Curtailment Sta!:es Durinlt any sta!:e, no person shall waste City water. 3. Whether or not it is appropriate to use potable water for residential gardens or increase the allocation by 25%. If the City Council determines that they do not want to provide an additional 25% allotment for customers, staff recommends removing the proposed language "6. For residential eardens where water supply reductions will result in loss of food production crops, residential water curtailment rates identified in the. Water Allocation Table can be increased UP to 25% after confirmation by the City that the account has instituted all applicable water efficiency improvements." in AMC 14.06.060 Exemptions and Appeals Related City Policies: Ashland City Charter Article X, Ordinance Adoption Procedures Page 3 of4 r.t. , Council Options: 1. Move to approve Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance. 2, Council can postpone Second Reading. Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct Second Reading of the ordinance by title only.] Council: Motion to approve Second Reading and adopt the Ordinance. Attachments: . Amended Ordinance Page4of4 CITY OF ASHLAND r.t. , ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO WATER CURTAILMENT, DEFINITIONS, EXHIBITS, DETERMINATION OF WATER SHORTAGE, WATER CURTAILMENT STAGES, EXEMPTIONS AND APPEALS, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 14.06.010 THROUGH 14.06.060 Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold"'" _L and additions are bold underlined, WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers h~reinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession; WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities, City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefiqhters, Local 1660, Beaverton Shop. 20 Or. App. 293, 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the water curtailment ordinance. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Sections 14,06,010 [Definitions] through 14,06,060 [Exemptions and Appeals] are hereby amended to read as follows: 14.06.010 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 meaningi~ intended. A. "Billing period" means that period used by the City for the reading of water meters consisting of approximately 30 calendar days, B. "City water" means water sold or delivered by the City of Ashland and includes Talent Irrigation District water delivered through the City's water system. C. "cr' means cubic feet. D, "Customer" means that person or persons designated in City records to receive bills for water service, E. "Multi-family dwelling" means a building containing two or more residential units, F. "Outside plants" means grass, lawns, ground-cover, shrubbery, gardens, crops, vegetation and trees not located within a fully enclosed building, G. "Permanent resident" means a person who resides at the dwelling at least five Page 1 of? days a week, nine months a year. H. "Temporary or Drop-In Guest" means a person who resides at the dwelling less than 3 consecutive months per year, I. "Water Allocation Table" means that table of meter types and sizes and maximum volumes of water set forth in AMC 14.06.015. Exl'libit "/'." attashed'to tl'lis Ordinanse.(See sestion 14.116.11111 Exl'libits for '..:ater table) J, ''Waste'' means: f To use City water to irrigate outside plants: a. Between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p,m, May through July or between 10:00 a.m, and 7:00 p,m. August through October, except that drip irrigation systems may be used durif1g these times. b. in such a manner as to result in runoff on a street, sidewalk, alley or adjacent property for more than five minutes, 2, To use City water to wash sidewalks, walkways, streets, driveways, parking lots, open ground or other hard surfaced areas except where necessary for public health'or safety. 3. To allow City water to escape from breaks within a plumbing system for more than 24 hours after the person who owns or is in control of the system is notified or discovers the break. 4. To use City water to wash cars, boats, trailers, aircraft, or other vehicles by hose without using a shutoff nozzle except to wash such vehicles at commercial or fleet vehicle washing facilities using water recycling equipment. 5, To serve City water for drinking at a restaurant, hotel, cafe, cafeteria or other public place where food is sold, served or offered for sale, to any person unless expressly requested by such person, 6. To use City water to clean, fill or maintain decorative fountains, lakes or ponds unless all such water is re-circulated. 7. Except for purposes of building construction, to use City water for construction, compaction, dust control, cleaning or wetting or for building washdown (except in preparation for painting), 8, To use City water for filling swlmming pools or for filling toy, play or other pools with a capacity in excess of 100 gallons, provided, however, that water may be added to swimming pools to replace volume loss due to evaporation. . K. "HOA" means Home Owners Association 14.06.015 14.116.11111A Water Allocation Table Exhibits. The Water AlleGation Table set forth below is substituted for the Water AlloGation Table adopted as Exhibit ^ ami defined in seGtilm 14.116.11111.1. WATER ALLOCATION TABLE (IN CUBIC FEET) CATEGORY METER METER STAGE 1 STAGE 2 STAGE 3 STAGE 4 TYPE SIZE Res Irria A 0.75 1800 600 100 0 Res Irriq 8 1.00 1800 600 100 0 Res Irriq C 1,50 1800 600 100 0 Page 2 of 7 Res Irrkl I) 2,00 1800 600 100 0 Com Irria A 0.75 3200 1100 100 0 Com Irrlo B 1.00 6100 2100 200 0 Com Irria C 1,50 10400 3700 400 0 Com Irria I) 2.00 . 15200 5300 500 0 Com Irrio Ii 3.00 30400 10600 , 1100 0 Gov Irria A 0.75 3200 1100 100 0 Gov Irrio B 1,00 6100 2100 200 0 Gov Irria C 1,50 10400 3700 400 0 Gov Irria I) 2,00 15200 5300 500 0 Gov Irria Ii 3.00 30400 10600 1100 0 Gov Irrio F- 4,00 48100 16800 1700 0 TID Irria F- 4,00 48100 16800 1700 0 Comm=1 A 0,75 6400 4800 3200 1600 , CATEGORY METER METER STAGE 1 STAGE 2 STAGE 3 STAGE 4 TYPE SIZE Comm=1 B 1,00 12200 9200 6100 3100 Comm=1 C 1.50 20900 15600 10400 5200 Comm=1 I) 2,00 30400 22800 15200 7600 Comm=1 Ii 3.00 60800 45600 30400 15200 Comm=1 F- 4,00 96200 72200 48100 24100 Comm=1 G 6,00 186400 139800 93200 . 46600 Comm=1 H 8.00 304400 228300 152200 76100 Condo/Multi AU All 2700 2000 1300 700 Familv- . Resid=1 A 0,75 3600 2500 1800 900 Resid=1 B 1.00 3600 2500 1800 900 Resid=1 C 1.50 3600 2500 1800 900 14.06.020 Determination of water shortage. A. The City Administrator is authorized to prohibit waste as defined in section 14,060.010 or implement water curtailment stages upon determination that a water shortage emergency conditions exists, Such determination shall be based on an analysis of the demand for water in the City, the volume of water in Reeder Reservoir, the standard drawdown curve for Reeder Reservoir, the projected curtailment date for Talent Irrigation District water and flows in the east and west Page 3 of 7 forks of Ashland Creek. The determination of the City Administrator under this section shall be effective until the next council meeting following such determination at which time the council shall either ratify or invalidate the determination, 8, The City Administrator is authorized to terminate waste prohibitions or water curtailment stages upon determination that a water shortage emergency condition no longer exists. Such determination shall be based upon factors listed in section 14.06,020 and the billinQ cycle. The termination shall be effective until the next council meeting following the determination of the City Administrator at which time the council shall either ratify or invalidate the determination. 14.06.030 Water curtailment stages. Depending on the severity of the potential water shortage, the City Administrator may implement the following water curtailment stages. During any stage, no person shall waste City water. Stage1, The following restrictions are effective during water curtailment Stage 1: 1. No customer shall receive through the water meter assigned to such customer more than the maximum volume of water for such meter indicated for Stage 1 in the Water Allocation Table. ' 2. Government agencies and HOA's, including but not limited to parks, schools. colleges and municipalities may have separate account allotments combined into one "agency" allotment and are exempt from Stage 1 restrictions if their water consumption is otherwise reduced by 20% from the volume of water delivered in the same billing period for the first previous non-water curtailment year. Stage2.Thefollowing restrictions are effective during water curtailment Stage 2: 1. No customer shall receive through the water meter assigned to such customer more than the maximum volume of water for such meter indicated for Stage 2 in the Water Allocation Table. 2, Government agencies and HOA's, including but not limited to parks, schools, colleges and municipalities may have separate account allotments combined into one "agency" allotment and are exempt from Stage 2 restrictions if their water consumption is otherwise reduced by 30% from the volume of water determined under Stage 1, Stage3,The following restrictions are effective during water curtailment Stage 3: 1, No customer shall receive through the water meter assigned to such customer more than the maximum volume of water for such meter indicated for Stage 3 in the Water Allocation Table, 2. Government agencies and HOA's, including but not limited to parks, schools, colleges and municipalities may have separate account allotments combined into one "agency" allotment and are exempt from 3 restrictions if their water consumption is otherwise reduced by 40% from the volume of water determined under Stage 2, Page 4 of 7 Stage4,The following restrictions are effective during water curtailment Stage 4: 1. No customer shall receive through the water meter assigned to such customer more than the maximum volume of water for such meter indicated for Stage 4 in the Water Allocation Table. 2, Government agencies and HOA's, including but not limited to parks, schools, colleges and municipalities may have separate account allotments combined into one "agency" allotment and are exempt from Stage 4 restrictions if their water consumption is otherwise reduced by 50% from the volume of water determined under Stage 3, 3, No City water shall be used to irrigate outside plants, except for trees, shrubs and food plants. If the customer has an irrigation meter, the irrigation meter shall not be used. The watering of trees, shrubs and food plants shall be through the non-irrigation meter and the total allocation shall not exceed the amount allowed for the non-irrigation meter. 14.06.060 Exemptions and Appeals. A. Any person who wishes to be exempted from a restriction imposed by any water curtailment stage shall request an exemption in writing on forms provided by the City and file the request for exemption in writing with the Utility Billing Office, B, Requests will be reviewed after a water audit is conducted by the City and a determination made by the utility billing aGGount representative Conservation Analvst as to the validity of the request for an exemption. No exemptions will be considered until the City has conducted a water audit. C. Exemptions may be granted for the following: 1. Any person with substantial medical requirements as prescribed in writing by a physician, Examples would be hydrotherapy pools or life support systems, 2. Residential connections with more than four permanent residents in a single family residence or three permanent residents per unit in a multi-family dwelling can receive up to 350 cf per month per additional permanent resident. A census may be conducted to determine the actual number of permanent residents per living unit. Temporary or drop-in guests will not be considered for additional allocations. 3, For commercial or industrial accounts where water supply reductions will result in unemployment or decrease production, after confirmation by the City that the account has instituted all applicable water efficiency improvements. 4, For any other reason upon showing of good cause and where necessary for public health or safety, 5, For commercial accounts where water meter is undersized (as determined under the Uniform Plumbing Code) for the current occupancy, the allocation for such accounts may be increased up to the allocation for the water meter size designated for such occupancy in the Uniform Plumbing Code. 6. For residential Qardens where water supplv reductions will result in loss of food production crops, residential water curtailment rates identified in the Water Allocation Table can be increased up to 25% after confirmation bv Page 5 of 7 the City that the account has instituted all applicable water efficiency improvements. D, Exemptions will not be allowed for steam cleaning or similar uses of water, The amount allocated for any given customer will include such uses and no additional allocation will be allowed. E, The utility billing account representati\<e Conservation Analyst shall report to the Director of Public Works the findings and conclusions resulting from the review, The Director shall approve or deny the request for exemptions and may impose conditions, Such conditions may include the amount volume restrictions may be exceeded and that all applicable plumbing fixtures or irrigation systems be replaced or modified for maximum water conservation, If the Director and the applicant are unable to reach accord on the exemption, or if the applicant is dissatisfied with the decision, the applicant may appeal to the City Administrator in writing who will make the final determination. F, Except for an exemption granted under section 14,06.060,C,1, C.2 and C.5, the water consumption surcharge specified in section 14.06.080 shall apply to all exemptions, SECTION 2. Section 14.06.090 [Penalties and enforcement] is hereby amended to read as follows: 14.06.090 Penalties and enforcement. The penalties for violations of this chapter shall be cumulative in that they may be in addition to, not in lieu of, other penalties, remedies or surcharges established by this chapter. A, A person shall not violate or procure, aid or abet in the violation of any provision of this chapter. A violation of any provision of this chapter is a Class B violation an infraction and shall be punished as set forth in section 1.08.020 of the Municipal Code. B, If a customer exceeds the maximum volume for more than one billing period, the City may install a flow restricting device at the service meter which reduces water flow and pressure. For services up to one and one-half inch size the City may install a flow restricting device of two gallon-per-minute capacity, and for larger services, comparatively sized restricting devices for larger services, for a period of seven days, Before normal service will be restored, a flow restrictor installation and removal charge of $100 shall be paid by the person who subscribes for the water service. C, Service may be terminated to any customer who knowingly and willfully violates any provision of this chapter, Page 6 of 7 SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable, The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. SavinQs, Notwithstanding this amendmenUrepeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative, This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed, 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", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered; or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 3- 4) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any 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 ,2010, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2010, Barbara M, Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2010. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Page 7 of 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Ordinance Revising the Public Contracting Code and Personal Services Code Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Primary Staff Contact: Megan Thornton Department: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: .thorntm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Public Works/Fin e Secondary Contact: FaughtlTuneberg Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time': 15 minutes Question: Should'the City Council approve the First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to Public Contracting and Personal Service Contracts and Repealing Chapters 2.50 and 2.52"? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approve the First Reading by title only and set the matter for Second Reading on May 18,2010. Background: The basic purpose of the public contracting and personal services revisions is to simplify the procurement process by relying on the comprehensive set of statutes and regulations adopted by State law. The proposed ordinance uses essentially the same process as State law for the procurement of goods, services, public improvements, and personal services. The amendment ensures that there are no conflicts between the City's public contracting code, personal services code, and the state's regulations, which makes it easier for staff to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. I. Some of the changes that are being proposed that aim at simplifying the code and following state law are listed below, A. Adopts the Oregon Public Contracting Code and the Attorney General's Model Rules for public contracting and states that those rules apply when the local rules do not address a particular situation. >- BENEFIT: Much of the City's current public contracting code is a restatement of state law. By adopting the state public contracting code instead of restating select portions of state law it is clear that the City's intention is to follow all state procedures. This reduces the City's public contracting code and personal services code from approximately 30 pages to 9 pages. B. Eliminate 2.50.075 [Sole Source], 2.50.080 [Emergency Contracts], 2.50.085 [Special Procurements], 2.50.090 [Procedure for Requests of Proposals for Goods and Services and Public Improvements], 2.50.095 [Prequalification], 2.50.100 [Protests of Procurement Process], 2.50.105 [Correction and Withdrawal of Bids], 2.50.115 [Transfer, Sale or Disposal of Personal Property], 2.50.126 [Exhibit A], and 2,50,127 [Exhibit B]. >- BENEFITS . Eliminates redWldancy between city code and the state public contracting code. The city is required to comply with state law and eliminating these duplicative. code sections eliminates the possibility of contradictions between local and state law, Page I of4 r.t. , CITY OF 'ASHLAND . Eliminates the contract provisions in Exhibit A from the city code, which allows the city attorney's office the ability to change the contract when necessary to comply with changes in state regulations and case law. . Replaces Exhibit B with a new AMC Chapter 2.54 for the Disposal of Surplus and Abandoned Property. )> DECISIONS FOR THE COUNCIL. Adoption of the Model Rules includes authorized informal processes for buying goods and services- that is, the state law exemptions to formal competitive bidding and solicitation, The COWlcil can further limit by Ordinance such informal processes and require formal competitive bidding and solicitation at a lower level. . Small Procurements: ORS 279B.065 states that a procurement for goods or services not exceeding $5,000 may be awarded in any manner that is practical. .:. Does the COWlcil wish to adopt the state small procurement amount of $5,000? o In a March study session the Council agreed to use the small procurement process for goods and services up to $5,000, . Intermediate Procurements: ORS 279B.070 states that a procurement for more than $5,000 but less than $150,000 generally requires the contracting agency to receive three quotes or competitive proposals. OAR 137-049-0160 states that intermediate procurement limit for public improvement contracts is $100,000. .:. Does the Council wish to adopt the state intermediate procurement amount of$150,000? ' o In a March study session the Council agreed to use the intermediate procurement process for goods and services up to $100,000. .:. Does the Council wish to adopt the state intermediate procurement amount for public improvement contracts of $1 OO,OOO? o 'In a March study session the Council agreed to use the intermediate procurement process for public improvements up to $100,000. C. Repeal of AMC 2.52 [Personal Services Contracts] and adoption of the state procurement procedures for personal services contracts. )> BENEFITS . With a few exceptions, the City would use the same procedures to award a personal services contract that it would use to award a goods and services contract or public improvement contract, which will simplify procurement procedures for staff. . The average cost to the City of preparing an RFP for a contract is $7,000; utilizing the small and intermediate procurement procedures will reduce the . costs of preparing these RFPs. )> DECISIONS FOR THE COUNCIL . OAR 137-48-0200 allows direct appointment of personal services contracts for architectural, engineering, and surveying contracts. .:. Does the Council wish to adopt the state personal services exemption of $50,000? o In a March study session the Council agreed to allow direct appointment of certain types of personal services up to $75,000. Page 2 of 4 ~~, CITY OF ASHLAND Direct appointment for all other types of personal services is capped at $35,000. II. The following changes are being proposed to promote competition and fairness by providing additional safeguards to the procurement process. A. AMC 2.50.020 establishes that the purpose of this chapter is to utilize procurement practices that promote open competition and efficient use of public resources, and AMC 2.50.100 states that even if a contract is exempt from the formal procurement process the Local Contract Review Board, Public Contracting Officer, or City Attorney may require a formal procurement process to ensure fairness. >- BENEFIT: This establishes a broad exemption allowing the formal procurement process to be implemented whenever it would further, the purposes of the public contracting code. B. In addition to the state regulations for competitive sealed bids, AMC 2.50.080 requires the Finance Director to verify that funds are available and requires the City Attorney to approve the contract and review all formal competitive solicitations. >- BENEFIT: The safeguards ensure that the requirements for competitive bids and proposals and the associated contracts meet statutory requirements before the bid.or proposal is advertised. C. In addition to the state regulations for exempt procurements, AMC 2.50.100 requires the Public Contracting Officer to write findings documenting the exemption, get authorization from the Finance Director that there is adequate funding, and get approval from the City Attorney that the contract is in appropriate form. >- BENEFIT: The safeguards ensure that exemptions from the RFP process are appropriate and that there are funds for the proj ect. III. The following changes are aimed at making the process more efficient. A. AMC 2.50.040 updates the definitions and defines "Public Contracting Officer" as the City Administrator or his/her designee. B. AMC 2.50.060 states that the Local Contract Review Board (City Council) is given all of the duties and authority of a contracting agency under state law with the power to delegate its powers. C. AMC 2.50.070 gives the Public Contracting Officer authority to purchase and enter into contracts for things that have been appropriated funds by the City Council up to $150,000 and to perform any act that may be delegated by the Local Contract Review Board according to Oregon law. >- BENEFIT: The C.ity can take full advantage of exemptions to competitive bidding as provided by state law through the delegation to the Public Contracting Officer, while maintaining the ability to review formal solicitations and any exempt procurements at its discretion. IV. The public contracting chapter needs to be updated to incorporate new provisions of state law. A. A provision was drafted to respond to House Bill 2867, which requires cost comparisons for service contracts over $250,000. ~ BENEFIT: The additional provision sets the profit margin at 10% for all cost comparison calculations to make it easier for staff to comply with the new requirements. Pagc3 of 4 r.t. , CITY OF ASHLAND Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions Council Options: 1) Move to approve the First Reading and set the matter for a Second Reading. 2) Postpone consideration of the proposed ordinance, Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct First Reading of the ordinance by title only.] Council: Motion to approve First Reading and set the matter for Second Reading. Attachments: . Proposed ordinance Page4of4 ~~, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PUBLIC CONTRACTING AND PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS, AND REPEALING CHAPTERS 2.50 AND 2.52 Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold "---' .. .. and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the Citv 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, Citv of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefiqhters. Local 1660, Beaverton Shop. 20 Or. App, 293, 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); and THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Sections 2,50,010 [Short Title] through 2.50.140 [Protests of Procurement Process & Solicitation Award] are hereby added to the Ashland Municipal Code read as follows: 2.50.010 Short Title. The provisions of this chapter and all rules adopted hereunder may be cited as the Ashland Public Contracting Code, 2.50.020 Purpose. The purpose of the Ashland Public Contracting Code is to utilize public contracting practices and methods that maximize the efficient use of public resources and the purchasing power of public funds by: . A. Promoting open and impartial competition; B. Using solicitation materials that are complete and contain a clear statement of contract specifications and requirements; C. Taking full advantage of evolving procurement methods that suit the contracting needs of the City; and D, Providing direction to city staff regarding purchasing practices and purchasing authority that results in a systematic and uniform administration of public contracts. Ordinance No. Page 1 of9 2.50.030 Adoption of State Law. Except as specifically provided herein, or by subsequent ordinance or resolution, the Model Rules, Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 137, Divisions 46, 47, and 49, adopted by the Attorney General under ORS Chapters 279A, 279B, and 279C, as they now exist, are hereby adopted as the City of Ashland's Public Contracting Code. A copy of the Oregon Public Contracting Code and Model Rules shall be maintained in the City Recorders Office. Words and phrases used in these rules that are defined in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapters 279A, 279B, 279C, and in the Model Rules shall have the same meaning as in those statutes and rules, except as may be provided for herein. In the event that the rules adopted by the local contract review board do not address a particular situation, the Model Rules apply. 2.50.040 Definitions. Words and phrases that are used and defined in the Model Rules and the Oregon Public Contracting Code shall have the same meaning as in those statutes and rules, except for the following: A. "City Attorney" shall mean the Ashland City Attorney or hislher designee as specified by written order. B. "Department" shall mean City of Ashland instead of Oregon Department of Administrative Services, C. "Director" shall mean Public Contracting Officer as defined in this section instead of the Director of Administrative Services. D. "Firidings" are the statements of fact that provide justification for a determination. Findings may include, but are not limited to, information regarding operation, budget and financial data; public benefits; cost savings; competition in public contracts; quality arid aesthetic considerations; value engineering; specialized expertise needed; public safety; market conditions; technical complexity; availability; performance and funding sources, E. "Finance Director" shall mean the Ashland Finance Director or hislher designee as specified by written order. F. "Local Contract Review Board" shall mean the Ashland City Council. G. "Public Contracting Officer" means the City Administrator or his/her designee as specified by written order. H. "Model Rules" means the public contracting rules adopted by the Attorney General under ORS 279A.065 and adopted by AMC 2.50,030. I. "Oregon Public Contracting Code" means ORS Chapters 279A, 279B and 279C. J. "Personal services contract" means a contract with an independent contractor predominantly for services that require special training or certification, skill, technical, creative, professional or communication skills or talents, unique and specialized knowledge, or the exercise of judgment skills, and for which the quality of the service depends on attributes that are unique to the service provider. Such services include, but are not limited to, the services of architects, engineers, land surveyors, attorneys, auditors and other licensed professionals, artists, designers, computer programmers, performers, consultants and property managers, The Public Contracting Officer shall have discretion to determine Ordinance No. Page 2 of9 whether additional types of services not specifically mentioned in this paragraph fit within the definition of personal services. 2.50.050 Applicability. The Ashland Public Contracting Code shall apply to procurements by all City departments and divisions, including Ashland Parks and Recreation, 2.50.060 Local Contract Review Board Authority. The Local Contract Review Board shall have all the duties and authority of a contracting agency that are granted under state and local law. The Local Contract Review Board may delegate its powers and responsibilities by ordinance, resolution, or board order consistent with the Model Rules and the Oregon Public Contracting Code. 2.50.070 Public Contracting Officer Authority. A. Except as otherwise provided by this code, the Public Contracting Officer shall have authority to: 1. Purchase and contract for all materials, supplies, equipment, services and public improvements for which funds have been appropriated by the City Council and the contract price does not exceed $100,000; 2, Contract for all personal services as long as the contract price does not exceed $75,000; and 3. Sell or dispose of all personal property of the city in accordance with AMC 2,54. Contracts approved under this section require no further approvals by the Local Contract Review Board. . B. Except when this Chapter, or the Oregon Public Contracting Code and Model Rules, specifically requires the Local Contract Review Board to take action or exercise its discretion and delegation is not allowed, any act required or permitted to be performed by an "agency," "head of a contracting agency," / "local contract review board" or the "director" under the Model Rules or Oregon Public Contracting Code shall be performed by the Public Contracting Officer. C. The Public Contracting Officer may develop such forms that are convenient to the administration of the City's contracts and may promulgate procedures reasonably necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Chapter, the Model Rules, and the Oregon Public Contracting Code. The City Attorney may promulgate standard forms for use by the Public Contracting Officer. 2.50.080 Formal Processes - Competitive Sealed Bidding and Proposals. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, in addition to the requirements of the Model Rules and the Oregon Public Contracting Code: A. The Finance Director must sign off that there are appropriate funds for the project before the project is put out for bids. B. The City Attorney must determine that the contract is appropriate as to form before the project is put out for bids. Ordinance No. Page 3 of9 C. The Local Contract Review Board shall authorize solicitations of competitive sealed bids and competitive sealed proposals, D. The City Attorney shall review all formal competitive solicitations or formal competitive bids to ensure that the appropriate process is being followed. E, Electronic Solicitation. Competitive sealed bids and competitive sealed proposals may be available online, but applicants will NOT be able to submit their proposals and/or responses online. Bids and proposals must be delivered in hard copy form to the City in accordance with the requirements for the competitive solicitation. Individuals that obtain the solicitation materials electronically are responsible for regularly checking for instructions, addenda, and related materials, . 2.50.090 Exemptions from Formal Competitive Selection Procedures All Public Contracts shall be based upon Competitive Sealed Bidding (Invitation to Bid) or Competitive Sealed Proposals (Request for Proposal) pursuant to ORS 279A - 279C and the Model Rules except for the following: A. Contracts listed in ORS 279A.025(2). B. Purchases through federal programs as set forth in ORS 279A.180, C. Public Improvement Contracts that qualify for exemption as set forth in 279C.335. D. Small Procurements - a public contract not exceeding $5,000. 1. Small Procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 279B.065, OAR 137-047-0800, OAR 137-047-0265 and all other applicable provisions of law. E. Intermediate Procurements - a public contract for goods and services greater than $5,000 and less than $100,000. 1. Intermediate Procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 2798.070, OAR 137-047-0800, OAR 137-047-0270 and other applicable provisions of law. F, Sole Source Procurements - a public contract in which the Department Head find.s in writing that there is only one' provider of a product or service of the quality and type required available, 1, Sole-source procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 279B;075 and all other applicable provisions of law. G, Special Procurements - a public contract for a class special procurement, a contract specific procurement or both, based upon a contracting procedure that differs from procedures described in ORS 279B,055, 2798.060, 279B.065, 2798.070. The contracting approach may be custom designed to meet the procurement needs. 1. Special procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 279B,085 and all other applicable provisions of law. H. Emergency Procurements - a public contract that is necessary because an emergency exists meaning there are circumstances creating a substantial risk of loss, damage, interruption of services or threat to public health, safety, welfare, or property that could not have been reasonably foreseen and requires prompt execution of a public contract to remedy the condition. Ordinance No. Page 4 of9 . 1. Emergency procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 279B,080 and all other applicable provisions of law. I. The following classes of contracts are hereby specifically exempted from the Oregon Public Contracting Code and Model Rules pursuant to ORS 279A.025(t): 1. Contracts for the purchase of materials where competitive bids for the same materials have been obtained by other public agencies or the federal government whose processes for bid and award are substantially equivalent to those set forth herein, and the contract is to be awarded to the party to whom the original contract was awarded so long as the price of the materials is the same or lower than that in the original contract. 2, Contracts for licenses and maintenance of computer hardware, computer software, and telecommunications products (including cable, video and television products). 3. Purchase of items or services of an artistic nature, including, but not limited to public art, 4. Contracts for removal, cleanup or transport of hazardous materials. As used in this Subsection, "hazardous materials" include any material or substance which may pose a present or future threat to human health or the environment, including Hazardous Waste as that term is used in the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (42 USC 6901 et seq,). 5. Contracts for purchase of used motor vehicles, defined as any motor vehicle that is at least one year old. 6, Contracts for the purchase of used heavy construction equipment. 7. Contracts for the purchase of copyrighted materials where there is only one supplier available within a reasonable purchase area for such goods, 8. Contracts for the purchase of advertising, including legal advertising intended for the purpose of giving public notice. . 9. Contracts for the purchase or sale of all utilities including, but not limited to, electric power, gas, water, sewage, internet, cemetery lots, cable and telecommunication services, and the sale of telecommunication materials or products or other services, materials or products traditionally provided by the City, 10, Contracts for the purchase of goods or services where the rate or price for the goods or services being purchased is established by federal, state or local regulating authority. 2.50.095 Additional Requirements for Exemptions Pursuant to 2.20.090(1) Any contract exempted under 2.20,090(1) shall additionally satisfy these criteria: A. The performance bond requirements of ORS 279C.375 and 279C.380, unless an emergency exemption exists in accordance with the Oregon Public Contracting Code and Model Rules. B, The construction and landscape contractor registration and requirements of ORS Chapter 671.630 et seq. and Chapter 701; C. Any other law applicable to such a contract; and, Ordinance No. Page 5 of9 D. To the extent that BOll applies, the City and the contractor shall comply with the prevailing wage provisions of ORS 279C.800 - 279C.870. 2.50.100 Informal Process - Process for Exempt Procurements The following process shall apply to all contracts that are exempt from formal competitive selection procedures in AMC 2,50.090. A. The Public Contracting Officer is responsible for determining whether a project is subject to an exemption pursuant to AMC 2,50.090 that will allow a process other than a formal solicitation. Except for small procurements and emergency procurements, it is the responsibility of the Public Contracting Officer to evaluate whether an exemption exists and write findings consistent with Oregon law to document the exemption. A copy of the written findings shall be given to the City Attorney. If an exemption is approved all applicable provisions of the Oregon Public Contracting Code and the Model Rules must be followed, Notwithstanding the exemptions, the City Attorney, the Public Contracting Officer, or Local Contract Review Board may require a formal competitive solicitation to ensure the purposes of this Chapter. B. Except for small procurements and emergency procurements, any informal procurement process, listed in AMC 2.50,090 shall require the Public Contracting Officer to obtain written authorization from the Finance Director to ensure that adequate funds are available for the project. C. For intermediate procurements of any amount the contracting agency shall use a written solicitation to obtain quotes, bids, or proposals. D, For all contracts over $5,000 the City Attorney must determine that the contract is appropriate as to form before the contract is awarded. Use of a City standard form contract negates the need for legal sign off on all informal contracting processes, E. After the procurement process is complete, the Public Contracting Officer must execute the procurement contract, and the Finance Director must endorse the amount of the contract. F. The Public Contracting Officer must execute any change orders or amendments to the contract that are authorized under the Oregon Public Contracting Code or the Model Rules. 2.50.110 Electronic Advertisement of Public Contracts The City may publish the advertisement for Offers by posting it on the website of the city, or if applicable, another governmental entity as long as the content required by the Model Rules and Oregon Public Contracting Code is available. Individuals that obtain the solicitation materials electronically are responsible for regularly checking for instructions, addenda, and related materials. 2.50.120 Personal Services Contracts A. A personal service contract that does not exceed $35,000 may be awarded by direct appointment. Personal Services Contracts that are for contract amounts greater than $35,000, but less than $75,000 shall follow the process for Intermediate Procurements as outlined above, However, the City Attorney, the Ordinance No. Page 6 of9 Public Contracting Officer, or Local Contract Review Board, can require a formal solicitation for bids to ensure that the purposes of this chapter are upheld. 1, Class Exemptions - Professional Services. A personal services contract that does not exceed $50,000 may be directly awarded to the following classes of personal services contracts: a, Engineers; b, Surveyors; c. Architects; and e. Financial Analysts, 2. Class Exemption - Attorney Services. Personal service contracts for legal counsel, legal services, expert witnesses, court-appointed attorneys, stenographers and other legal services are exempt from the competitive procurement requirements of this section and may be entered into based upon the judgment of the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall obtain City Council approval of any expenditure for legal services paid to a single legal services provider that is expected to exceed $50,000 prior to entering into the contract. In addition, except for legal counsel hired by the City to provide legal services to indigent criminal defendants prosecuted by the City, the City Attorney shall select and retain all outside legal counsel hired by the City subject to the approval of the City Council. 3. Pre-qualified Pool Exemption, The City may directly award a personal services contract that does not exceed $100,000 to a provider that has been selected to be on a list of: a. The City's current list of qualified providers through a formal process; or b. From another public contracting agency's current list of qualified providers as long as the public contracting agency uses a process substantially similar to the City's to derive the list. 4. Continuation of Work Exemption. Personal service contracts of not more than $100,000 for the continuation of work by a contractor who preformed preliminary studies, analysis or planning for the work under a prior contract may be awarded without competition if the prior contract was awarded under a competitive process and the Public Contracting Officer determines that use of the original contractor will significantly reduce the costs of, or risks associated with, the work. B,The Local Contract Review Board is hereby opting out of OAR 137-048 regarding architectural, engineering, and land surveying services. C, The standard procurement rules adopted above shall apply to such contracts, as well as the following personal services selection criteria: 1, Specialized experience'in the type of work to be performed; 2. Capacity and capability to perform the work, including any specialized services within the time limitations for the work; 3, Educational and professional record, including past record of performance on contracts with governmental agencies and private parties with respect to cost control, quality of work, ability to meet schedules, and contract administration where applicable; 4, Availability to perform the assignment and familiarity with the area in which the specific work is located, including knowledge of designing or techniques peculiar to it, where applicable; Ordinance No. Page 70f9 5, Cost of the services; and 6, Any other factors relevant to the particular contract. - 2.50.125 Cost and Feasibility Determinations The Public Contracting Officer shall make written cost or feasibility findings pursuant to ORS 279B, 030, If the Public Contracting Officer is performing a cost analysis pursuant to ORS 279B.033, the Public Contracting Officer shall add a profit margin of ten percent (10%) of the cost of the project when estimating the total cost of hiring a contractor. 2.50.130 Record Keeping To facilitate contract file record keeping and reduce accounting and auditing difficulties in having dispersed contract files, each city department will maintain a complete file on all contracts executed on behalf of that department. I nformation to be included in the file shall include, at a minimum: A. Any and all invitation for bids, requests for proposals, and any advertisements; B. Council consent authorizing contract execution when applicable; C, Copies of the signed contract, any required insurance certificates, bonds, or other bid security; D. Any approved Local Contract Review Board waivers; and E. List of who the solicitation documents were sent out to or the list of plan holders. The City Recorder's Office shall retain the original executed contract as well as original copies of any required insurance certificates, performance bonds, and payment bonds or other bid security. The department which is responsible for the procurement shall continually monitor insurance certificates to ensure the City remains an additional insured and that the other party has sufficient coverage, 2.50.140 Protests of Procurement Process & Solicitation Award A. The Uniform Administrative Appeals Process outlined in AMC 2.30 shall apply to all protests of the procurement process and award of public contracts except that the timelines of this section shall govern when determining whether an appeal is filed timely. B. Timelines for Submitting Protests. 1. Protests regarding the process or specification shall be received no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to bid closing. 2. Protests regarding the award of the contract shall be received within seven (7) calendar days from the notice of intent to award the public contract. C, Failure to strictly comply with the applicable protest requirements, including but not limited to the required elements for the written protest required by the Model Rules and the Oregon Public Contracting Code, payment of the applicable appeal fee pursuant to AMC 2.30, and time for filing as specified in this section, shall constitute jurisdictional defects resulting in the summary dismissal of the appeal. Ordinance No. Page 8 of9 SECTION 2. Repeal. The existing Ashland Municipal Code Chapters 2,50 [Rules of Procedure for Public Contracting] and 2.52 [Rules of Procedure for Personal Service Contracts] are hereby repealed in their entirety. Any municipal code provisions in conflict with the provisions contained herein are also hereby repealed. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. SavinQs. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative, This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed, 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", "chapter" 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 2- 5) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any 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 , 2010 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2010, Barbara M, Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2010. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 9 of9