Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-0217 Regular Meeting V'f~' Any u..uze.n a.tte.nckng Counul me.e.;t~ngo may ope.ak on any -i..te.m on the agenda., unle6~ -it .u., the M.bjed 06 a public. ne'a.JU.ng wlUc.h hall been c.1.ooed. 16 you wioh to opeak \ pleaLle we aJtd a6tVl. you have. been tr.e.c.ogn.<.ze.d by the. Chabt, g.i.ve. YOuJr. name. IlYld ' addtr.e.1d. The. Cha..ttr. w.iU. the.n a.Uow you to ope.a.k and a.t60 .i.n601Un you a.6 to the. amount 06 time a.U.otte.d to you. The:ti.me g!Ul.Jtted wLU be dependent to 0 orne ex.te.n.:<: on the natuJr.e 06 the -i..te.m undetr. d-Uc.uoo.i.on, the. numbetr. 06 people. who wioh to be he.iVl.d,and the le.ngth 06 the agenda. ~ AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 17, 1987 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:30 P,M" Civic Center Council Chambers II. ROLL CALL III, APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of February 3, 1987 IV. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUEST: County Commissioner Jeff Golden V. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Proposed amendment to Chapter 18,62 of the Land-use Ordinance relative to Physical and Environmental Constraints, VI, COMMUNICATIONS, PETITIONS & REMONSTRANCES: 1. Letter from residents on Susan Lane concerning assessment formula and design characteristics for proposed street improvementso 2. Letter from Sharon & Phillip Thormahlen, regarding temporary closures of Pioneer and Hargadine Street during outdoor performances of Elizabethan theatre. VII. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: 1. Memo from the Traffic Safety Commission concerning recommendations for changes to parking regulations on Maple Street, and on Palm Avenue, 2, Liquor License Renewals for 1987-88. 3, Request by Airport Commission to call for proposals for Airport Lease which expires Augutst 8, 1987, VIII, PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. IX. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS: 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance approving the transfer of CATV system franchise to Cooke Cab1eVision Inc. 2, Second reading by title only of an ordinance authorizing and ordering the improvement of Susan Lane for High Street to end. 3. First reading of an ordinance levying assessments in Local Improvement District No, 57, and declaring an emergency. 4, Resolution relative to the compensation for the Chief Building Inspector. X. ,OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS XI, 'ADJOURNMENT Attachments: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions & Committees 2, Monthly ,departmental Reports - January 1987 ~ . . ~:l . <, ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 3, 1987 Mayor Medaris led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. on the above date in the Council Chambers. Elerath, Reid, Bennett, Acklin, Laws and Arnold were present. Arnold asked that the first sentence on page four of the minutes of the regular meeting of January 20, 1987 be corrected to read "affected" rather than "effected". Bennett moved to approve minutes of the executive session and regular meeting as corrected; Acklin seconded the motion which passed unanimously on voice vote. Golf Course Expansion 'Planning Director Fregonese reviewed the memo from the Golf Course Committee dated January 20, 1987 as included in the agenda. Freg- onese said that the 1% increase in hotel/motel tax would payoff an intra-fund loan to purchase the property for the proposed expans- ion of the golf course at a cost of $320,000. Fregonese reviewed the payoff schedule at 1% increase of the H/M tax noting that the repayment would take place by 1998 if the 1% prevails, and in 1995 should the increase be 3% per year. Fregonese went on to explain the bond costs for a period of 30 years and showing how in 1990 the first full year of course operation when the fees will cover all expenses and bond payment costs. Ken Mickelson, Parks & Recreation Director and member of the Golf Course Committee reported that statistics from the National Golf Foundation included the fact that an eighteen hole golf course needs 25,000 people to support it and that the Rogue Valley has a population of about 150,000 and it doesn't have an eighteen-hole municipal course. Mickelson said in talking to someone in South Dakota who was involv- ed in expansion of a golf course and experienced an increase of 30% play. Mickelson said that 40,000 rounds of play are expected and that more play is anticipated on the 18 hole course because golfers for the most part would prefer to play an l8-hole course than to play two nines. Mickelson said the course is now playing at capacity. ~ckelson said that 99 season's tickets will be available for people who play on a frequent basis and would be reserved for residents of the City and then opened to the public. The public hearing was opened. Fred Wilken, 515 Maple Way, said he has played on golf courses from Shastina to Grants Pass and asked Councilors if they've heard of the financial troubles of municipal courses today as recently reported in the San Francisco Chronicle and said the only ones making money are the property owners. Wilken noted that Arnold Palmer's research showed the play would not be here and decided not to develop a course. Wilken said Cedar Links is a better course and that private individuals should take golf courses over. 2/3/87 p. 1 j "Regular Meeting , . , PUBLIC HEARING Golf Course Expansion Ashlanrl City Council 2/3/87 P, 2 Howard Wagner, Manager of the Flagship Inn, asked what would happen if the proposed hotel/motel tax is defeated and the land could not be acquired and Acklin said the committee would have to go back to the drawing board. On question as to how many golfers are in Ash- land, Wagner was told there are about 12%. Denise Miller, speaking for the League of Women Voters asked about irrigation and how the heavy use of water will affect the users downstream, The City Administrator said there are irrigation rights and that sprinkling will be done rather than flood irriga- tion used in the past. Acklin said the stream quality will improve with sprinkling as flood irrigation leaches all chemicals etc. into the stream. Miller asked if Bancroft Bonding could be used outside the City and Almquist noted that the law provides for such a course of action with approval from Jackson County. On a question as to whether those arrangements have been made, Almquist said that first the election results should be in and then proceed from there. Sharon Thormahlen, 80 Hargadine, said she had collected signatures for the Hotel/Motel tax referendum and that she would hope the ballot title will not have an ambiguous option for voting. Thorma- hlen also noted that the 12,000 rounds of golf during a distressed economy could be repeated in the near future. Sherman Gardner had questions as to how the proposal would affect the citizens of Ashland relative to property taxes and was told that the 6% limitation he had referred to is not related to Bancroft bonding. Al Wills tatter asked if the projections given are valid and wondered if the South Dakota golf course mentioned is close to other courses and asked for more information on how the course is managed. Gary Jones, 345 Kent Street, said he was involved in the Jackson Road Golf Course planned for Billings ranch property and that a feasibility study had been done showing that the community could support three l8-hole golf courses and people would come to Oak Knoll from allover the valley and Northern California. Jones said the problem with putting the Billings course together was the timing (1980-82) and the fact that they were asking $3,500 for memberships along with an additional $60 per month and at that time that was too much money to ask. Elerath asked Jones if he had heard of other courses being planned and he said he had heard talk but nothing concrete. Miller asked what would happen if the conservative estimates/worst scenario took place and was told by the City Administrator that the fees would be raised. Laws noted that if nothing else worked, the taxpayers could be asked for funds. Fregonese said that if no growth occurred at all there would be enough money for bonding payback but also that maintenance budget could be cut. Peter Zukis said that the course is overbooked now and to expand it would be a money-maker for the City. Craft agreed saying that he plays several times a week and the City would bring in revenue. 2/3/87 Po 2 r tegular Meeting , . , Golf Course Expansion continued Ashland City ~oupcil 2/3/87 P;1 At this point the Mayor closed the public hearing and said that this Council is responsible for furnishing recreation for its citizens and that a swimming pool, tennis courts, ball parks and bike paths have been made available at no cost to the people in tax monies.. Acklin said the golf course committee has worked for four years on various proposals and feels this plan to fulfill the commission by Council as to what it asked it to do. Arnold said he is in favor and campaigned inrt~~~ of the land acquisition and that he wants a feasibi1ity~ecause of the City's posture in the proposal. Laws said he is pleased there will be a vote by the people on the proposal and that since the state of the economy at any given time cannot be determined, he said the advantages and disadvantages must be considered and then a decision reached. Laws said he is in favor of the proposal. Bennett said she is basic1y in favor and the City's past experi- ence points to successful results and she feels this will be the same.. Reid said she is waiting for conclusion of negotiations with Lessee Buddy Sullivan. E1erath said he is in favor of making the facility available. The Mayor said that the final decision will. be made at the next regular meeting on February 17. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Susan Lane Impr. cont. The City Administrator noted he had just received a long letter from Ron Kramer et a1 relative to the street design of the proposed improvements of Susan Lane. It was decided that the matter should be placed ;:on the next agenda to give Council sufficient time to study the five page letter. Reid had questions on the monthly financial commentary as submitted by Director of Finance Nelson and it was suggested that she con- tact Nelson for explanation. Financial Commentary MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS PUBLIC FORUM Budget Committee Medaris appointed Steve Lunt to the Hospital Board and David Bern- ard to the Planning Commission. Bennett moved to approve appoint- ments; Acklin seconded the motion which passed unanimously on voice vote. Vicki Van Bravo, 855 B Street asked that Council reconsider recent appointments to the Budget Committee saying that the composition of the Budget Committee is out of balance because of only one business person represented at this time and ask that one appointment be rescinded to replace with business person. Laws said it would be embarrassing to reverse such a decision and said the next opening on the Comm1ttee would lend such opportunity for that balance. The Public Forum closed at this point. '" '''' ,,, - -. Regular Meeting . . , ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS CONTRACTS State Rev. Sharing Susan Lane Improve. McCaw Cablevision transfer of ownership Resolution calling for Special Election Senior Program Grant Reeder Hydro OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT AShiana C1ty COunC1i L./ .5/ tj I .t'. q & Second reading by title only was given an Ordinance electing to receive State Revenue Sharing and Arnold moved to adopt; Laws seconded the motion which passed unanimously on roll call vote. (Ref. Ord. 2413) Postponed to study new infolTIation. First reading was given an ordinance transfering ownership and assignment of rights to Cooke CableVision. Arnold moved to delete the second paragraph; Bennett seconded the motion and Council agreed. Arnold moved to second reading; Bennett seconded the motion which passed unanimously on roll call vote. Postponed for conclusion of negotiations regarding with Lessee. a....(.. equipment ~ r~ A resolution increasing revenue estimates and authorizing expendi- ture of grant proceeds for the Senior Program was read and Bennett moved to adopt; Acklin seconded which passed unanimously on roll call vote. (Ref. Res. 87-01). A resolution accepting Construction of Reeder Gulch Hydro-Electric Project Contract No. 1 was read and Bennett moved to approve; Acklin seconded the motion which passed unanimously on roll call vote. (Ref. Res. 87-02). Reid noted that Traffic Salet~ Commission Minutes and others have been submitted to Council/a8d in the case of Traffic Safety the actions of the Commission would be helpful for Council in making decisions. Director of Public Works Alsing said that because of the meeting time there is a lag and they don't get in until the following meeting. Bennett said she tries to report to Council on RVCOG meetings to give an overview of business taking place at those meetings. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Nan E. Franklin City Recorder L. Gordon Medaris Mayor 2/3/87 P. 4 ') , . , MEMORANDUM ( FROM: Planning Commission TO: City Council RE: Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision Beginning back in 1981, the Mayor appointed an advisory committee to prepare an ordinance to deal with development in environmentally and geologically sensitive areas. After much work, the Physical Constraints Ordinance was adopted by the Council in December, 1982. In 1984, the Planning Commission was alarmed by the culverting of major creeks in Ashland and the attendant destruction of large pine and oak trees in the area. Since the Planning Commission already had the authority to require the retention of trees and natural topography as conditions of approval for subdivisions and site reviews, they felt it was necessary to amend the existing ordinance to address physical and environmental constraints, thus enabling the Planning Commission to review major earth removal or filling projects,prior to their occurrence, even if a development project was not proposed at the time. The Planning Commission held 4 public hearings to hear testimony from affected property owners and concerned citizens. The meetings were all well attended and many good ideas were discussed. Generally, the public supported the intent of the ordinance, but felt that it should not prohibit what are generally considered normal activities carried out by property owners on their own land. The Planning Commission worked through several drafts, prepared by Planning Staff, which were modified to accommodate many of the concerns raised at the public hearings. In the final draft, the Planning Commission included specific authority to deny development in floodplain areas based on historical evidence of flooding rather than relying solely on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which have proven to be inaccurate in the past. In addition, the organization of the original ordinance was changed to make it more easily understood. The ordinance submitted for adoption is a complete replacement of the original ordinance. The original Physical Constraints ordinance will also be included so you will be able to compare the two versions. , , . February 2, 1987 To the city Council of Ashland: The undersigned' property owners affected by the proposed Susan Lane Improvement District appreciate the consideration extended by the Council in postponing action on this matter to allow our further consideration of the City's Proposal #2. In the two week period provided we have carefully reviewed the design proposed, as well as the proposed revision in the assessment formula, and wish .to advance our own recommendation for final action on this matter. We will again divide our comments into the two salient categories of Design and Assessment. I. Desiqn Proposal #2 would reduce the cul-de-sac from a 39.5 foot radius to a 34 foot radius. It does not propose any change in the width of the road or the on-street parking arrangements. It is our understanding that under this proposal there could be no parking in the cul-de-sac and that on-street parking would be adequate for a maximum of four cars. We concur that the limitation to four spaces would act to ameliorate our concerns regarding Susan Lane's potential use as a parking area for High Street residents. We have, however, carefully reviewed the proposal with specific attention paid to the need for a cul-de-sac as opposed to the hammerhead turnaround we have previously advocated. It has been stated by proponents of the cul-de-sac approach that a hammerhead will not save any cost of construction over the proposed 34 foot radius cul-de-sac and that the hammerhead design would both adversely affect property values as well as present a safety hazard by preventing efficient operation by the fire department. On investigation we do not find these concerns to be warranted. 'On the subject of construction costs we have reviewed the two alternatives. We find that the area of the street and cul-de-sac as proposed is approximately 10,080 square feet. We estimate that by adopting our proposal for a regulation hammerhead and straight twenty foot road bed, and allowing for six regulation parking bays, the total paved project area would be only 8,51~ square feet. ' As proposed the paving of 10,080 square feet, with proposed paving cost of $9,800, or $0.97/square foot. Excavation and sub- grade preparation of $2,400 would cost $0.24/square foot. , " Ashlahd City Cauncil Page 2 February 2, 1987 assuming unifarm area casts the 2,193 square faat gain under our prapasa1 wauld praduce saving af $1,523 an paving cast, $373 an sub-grade prepartian and paving far a sub-tatal savings af $l,896. The attendent city engineering aver head cast of 20%, wauld pravide additianal savings af $379. Thus, the appraach we advacate wauld pravide savings af $2275 ar aver 8.5% af total estimated casts. We wauld impravement benefit far the ,mare excessive. nat abject praposed the added elabarate to. the increased cast if we believed the was warranted and pravided reasanable expense. Hawever, upan analysis we believe appraach af City Prapasal "2 remains Regarding the safety issue we abserve that the hammerhead turnaraund is autharized as a regulatian street plan in the City's Perfarmance Standards far Residential Develapments as nated two. weeks ago. We cannat believe that the City wauld include such a design in such a publicatian if the design presented knawn safety risks. Further, it has been asserted that the hammerhead wauld make fire safety a prablem an a street using such a design. Hawever, we have checked with an insurance underwriter and find that actuarially there is no. rated difference in insurance rates between a street which terminates in a cul-de-sac as opposed to. a street which has a hammerhead turnaraund. Since the insurance campanies' business is tracking the fire safety characteristics af vario.us residential co.nstruction designs and materials, we find the absence af any difference in rating by these prafessianals to. be campelling evidence that the actual difference in fire safety pravided by the hammerhead appraach to., be statistically negligible. While we cancede that a cul-de-sac may be a canven i ence to. 'the fire department we do nat find ita necessity and abject to. paying a high price iii bath cast, and aesthetic design when the likelihaad af use by the fire department is minimal. We also. note that the city has twice autharized the constructian af hammerhead turnaraund streets within the past two. years. One instance, an Dagwaad Lane in the Applewaad subdivisian, ser~ices mare hauses (9) than Susan Lane ever wauld and invalves a street af 20 faat width ather than in the actual area af the turnaraund. It has been nated that Dagwaad Lane is a street to. which the city does not hald title and that may have influenced design. we also. nate the co.nstructian o.f Lisa Lane off Morton In this instance a city-awned street, designed to. eight hauses, was canstructed with a hammeihead and a with a width af twenty feet far much af its length. The widens to. 28 feet far abaut 1/3 af its distance. Hawever, street. service street street , , . Ashland City Council Page 3 February 2, 1987 A drawing of Lisa Lane is attached. We have inspected both streets and have our own concerns about their design. In each instance the length of the hammerhead (the head of the hammer) was actually utilized as road bed with the short extension (the handle) providing the turnaround function. Under such an approach very little of the hammerhead is actually available for turning a vehicle. We are not advocating such an approach. ' " . Rather, we advocate a full, regulation hammerhead in which the entire 80 foot by 20 foot head sits at a right angle' to the road bed. This is a much larger area than was provided for either on Dogwood Lane or Lisa Lane. We think it is entirely adequate to the needs of Susan Lane and better fits the character of the area. It has the added benefit of costing less than the cul-de- sac. In our calculations, we have proposed two three-vehicle parking bays of regulation size. We note that the city's Proposal 82 provides for only four on-street parking spaces. While we would accept the six-car arrangement we would be happy to have only four provided as per the city's present design. It must be noted that if the hammerhead was built at the most westerly location of the right-of-way, no savings would be generated because of the additional street length needed to get to the hammerhead in that location. Our figure are based upon locating the hammerhead with its easterly boundary located on a line with the boundary between parcels 8100 and 8200 (#2). Parking bays could be located immediately west of the hammerhead either by adding a ten foot strip to the hammerhead (four ten foot wide and twenty foot long spaces equalling the hammer- head's eighty foot length) or by locating two three-bays to the west of the hammerhead in the areas at the north and south ends. Our calculations on costs have assumed paving c.ost for six, ten foot by twenty foot parking spaces. We also continue to advocate the construction of only a 20 foot road the entire length of the road bed. This is the width that was essent ially used for both Lisa Lane and Dogwood Lane with ,the exception of short intervals presumably provided for modest on- street parking. We are advocating an approach that would provide ~ parking opportunity than is available on either Lisa Lane or Dogwood Lane. We remain extremely concerned that the wider road bed unduly disturbs the area and remain vigorously opposed to the larger design. We believe this design is superior to the design of Proposal 82, better fits the site location and reduces costs for all owners. -~ . . , Ashland City Council Page 4 February 2, 1987 street Liqhtinq In the Council meeting on January 20 Mr. Almquist provided the Council with an accurate interpretation of our original request that street lighting not be provided on Susan Lane other than at the request of a majority of the owners. We renew that request would like to receive the city's assurance on this point as a part of the final ordinance for the paving of Susan Lane. I I. Assessment We appreciate the city's flexibility in proposing a revision of the assessment formula after our original objection. However, we incline to the view expressed by some members of the Council on January 20 that it is not necessary to revise the city's entire assessment policy in order to arrive at a reasonable and equitable assessment formula for Susan Lane. We reiterate our original position that customary assessment measurements are not equitable and useful for streets which are dead-ended. Our research on the general topic of street assessments leads to the conclusion that the use of frontage as a, measurement or,iginated with, and is best applied to, commercial property. For commercial users lot width is an indication of real commercial potential. Larger lots provide for greater parking areas, either for retail trade or labor force. In both instances the larger frontage translates directly into a larger commercial enterprise which benefits to a far greater degree from paving than would smaller establishments. ' By contrast the use of frontage for residential areas is more problematic. Studies indicate that residences tend to have quite stable traffic patterns. That is, the average car garaged at a residence makes a stable average number of trips to and from that' garage. Accordingly, to the extent that a street is providing access and convenience to residents living on it, an owner is securing access and convenience of access as a result of paving. And each residence will benefit to essentially the same degree regardless o~ lot size. The only variable to the equation would be the number of cars garaged at each house. In the case of Susan Lane all existing homes have two-car garages and city building codes require that all new construction also have two- car garages. Thus, this "benefit of access" is a constant for all owners. The city's motive for using frontage as a measurement appears to stem from the belief that lot values are appre'ciated in direct relationship to their frontage as a result of paving. Since the benefit in a commercial setting is more direct, the argument is reasonable for commercial property. However, we have explored the applicability of this argument to residential propoerty with realtors. And since what paving tends to provide for residences , , , Ashland City Council Page 5 February 2, 1967 is a constant benefit regardless of size, this would be. expected. We can find no evidence that a lot which has twice the frontage of another will experience appreciation which doubleB aB a reBult of paving. Our exploration further suggests that,in the opinion of realtors, the value of properties on Susan Lane will not be affected by construcing a hammerhead versus a cul-de-sac. In fact there is some evidence that property values would be enhan- ced by building a smaller street and a hammerhead turnaround based upon the ability to preserve the special characteristics of the area. ' This problem is substantially aggravated for streets which are dead-ended. When using frontage as a measurement, the inherent nature ~f a dead-ended street's design will present a larger proportionate burden to owners with property on the street por- tion of the road and a lesser burden to those owners located at the dead-end. The inequity is further aggravated when street- facing owners need to dedicate substantially more property to permit ,the street improvements than do owners at the end, whose property will be only touched by the traditional cul-de~sac. While it is not a reason for our advocating a hammerhead in this instance, it should be noted that use of a harrunerhead provides a slightly greater lineal frontage to owners on the dead-end and thereby slightly moderates this inequity. In view assessment cos ts is costs. of the foregoing, we remain of the opinion that the measurement which most fairly distributes improvement the measurement which most equally distributes those While City Proposal #2 provides relief by dimishing the spread between the assessments of owners, we remain of the opinion that the measurement which should be used for Susan Lane is a measure- ment based 100\ upon lot volume. In this particular case that' measure will distribute the costs evenly among all owners to a greater ~degree than any other measurement. We bel ieve' that is fair in view of benefit derived and that this approach will help minimize the advantage which normally attaches to the position of owners located on the dead-end. A pure volume approach based upon our recommended design, '''would produce the following assessment: Owner Lot 1!.. 1 volume Cest jf Berman 7700 13 $ 3,074 ;if( Cheney 7601 13 3,156 Welch 7600 12 2 625 McVay 7602 12 2,625 Kramer/Harpster 6101/02 21 5,116 Almquist 6201/02 19 4,697 ., Ashland City Council . , Nason 7501 *High street Frontage February 2, 1987 _ Page 6 10 2,465 We very much appreciate the time and energy which the. Council and city employees have devoted both to assisting us in exploring this subject as well as hearing our concerns. We believe the approach we are suggesting provides a logical design and the ,most equitable method of funding the project's costs. And we appreciate your continued patience and consideration in further reviewing this matter. Respectfully submitted, Elinor Berman 3'-113":H>. High street Ron Kramer & Nancy Hannon l20 Wimer Street Douglas Cheney & Elayne Puzan 335~ High Street., Dawn McVay 140 Susan Lane liliijffj\:,1!( 1#J<f>" p.," ..., . " 10 \ . , \ i \ ....... I. I, :' r', t.,,, \..... ',~ '., . \ . ......... .....\ i~:l ' ", .~., ..~-~~ ..........-; k . ..., ~"".'" . ~".:.: '--j ~_j."l; ~"i;,:.l "'lI.t J''': , , "ij I~' '- liYl! L "? ~~;',.;j ~ ~ ...-..... STA'FF REPORT August B, 19B4 PLANNING ACTION: B4-070 APPLICANT: David & Rhonda Lewis LOCATION: Top of Liberty Street ZONE DESIGNATION: RR-.5 (LoW Density Residential) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.BB I. Relevant Facts 1) Background _ History of Application: In Julydf" 1983, approval was granted for an outline plan to allow construction of a 39-unit Performance Standards Development on the subject tax lot. In October of 19B3, the Planning Commission granted final approval to the dev~lopment;' 2) Description of the proposal and Site: A narrative of the topography, vegetation and other physical features of the parcel is included in the attached Staff report generated from the original approval by the Planning Commiss~on in 1983. As noted in the attached narrative, access to this approved PUD was to be via Liberty Street with subsequent improvements to be made from the end of the paving on Liberty Street directly to the access to the development and up a natural drainageway located on the southeast boundary of the subject tax lot. Since this approval, subsequent negotiations have taken place between the applicant and Mr. Bill Beagle, owner of tax lots 2200 and 2500. In purchasing the property from Mr. Beagle, Mr. Lewis has provided an alternative means of accessing the previouslY approved 39-unit PUD. The revised access has, by necessity, created a revision to the lot configuration for the first eight units ," previously proposed to be accessed via Lisa Lane. This proposal eliminates vehicular access via the draw, though it still provides pedestrian access and utility easements down on the draw to access the development. Such access would follow the existing contours of this portion of the .development which is superior, in Staff's opinion, to the original proposal submitted. It will also eliminate the II ,:,ece~si ty for ~mtJrov ing the extens~on of, Water Line Road wi th lts Juncture w1th Morton Street, ~ln~p- the new Lisa Lane , will serve all eiaht lots in this ohase of the develooment. 1\ , i / l-t '('~, ' ".' , \." :', ~,'" '<\:.',........' \ ,h-.', , '~' . " \. ....:~e';...... ..... -.......:: ......~..... .', .... ...... ..:..... \ ' . " L --:- , " .' 'T ~o' lI<J'Ol"- -~ ',~,/' ..' r-J/- 'I j 0 l" '?6.~';';'" :"'~,.~ \ aJ 0 ~ 1'Z.o' Ef;;MT: pol":. 1~~\c.""'T'o, ,.' " ;"; '''1 ~= O' P'Tc.>-l, PEP, ,....cc:::..e~;,~~u..e. " (j,lt" r-y ';0 ~/,; .(, .44C? AG. 1?R,9G,' 10 r ~ .UJ 3'7-.' t ~/'r ~ '0 ,) @ ~Ji8 .~' Z - :- ~I "c...., .....Co, r-,b,j '3 ~'~"",~ J l'- ~I .~, ~ 0-" 9 52 21"~'" o I Z /' 0' ~Go'oc.:2'3' " IS.. ... \'U3\' ., .",,:>'f" AG. N~'51 ~p.u,e"..., INS.q-2.4'31' .~I \N ~\ L:>. - .o'2-"lo'T''''~'' - fill. c= l?\. ?' =-r L.. ~ ",.<120' \ - '"3 I N. (fill' , - - )t-i-, .2"14 AC, .. ~~ ) r-, ;.J q '120, ~c.," ~ / N 85.00' '55' VV I- I/) ... @) .40,", AC. - - - _.- 01 P.u.E l' @ ."?44 .AG. ~ lI' IU rJ r- - "1/\' III fI _ fl ~tC\- o - - o r- _ 0 , tr o Z NoTeS' . 6l!..e l..e.o.el'U F 011:: E.><-P L."t>. , " "",,_,,0 ,t>> LI SA LANE. off Morton :'i-1+- Boundaries show Right of Way _ ~ Arrows added show street width o~ ZI.ZO' Z.S"I I R- 17?' : l.' "5.18' - T- 32..'11' c = ".q, BO' '^"jf'l-AST'c. CAf lYIKD' '^"f\- u:>R" ~S 79"1 jD:Y+' r-K. N.blL... T,AC,c..eo , L-S 75" REGhiTRED c,p')frS5!ON1\L I, '\' ) SU;";'.'EYOR A.. .J IT. -;i-r: ..- WI ER-' , ~. .- "0 . ,-,.. 148.'0 .J', 8400 820u . 8 Co"l " l .. .. I ..... . M._ ".M I 8301 (P- 4147) .. . . . . ~ ~ - . (P-3n6l Hoo 8300 " " .. ~ P4'.<10 I'~;:/'.. (''-lIMn) I NE.Cor. Goy'l. Lal 4.p , "Ill ~--------'\ '"' 1~.6. ~ ! 8000 '" _ ~ ~ ~ . . ~ " , . -E1 S'{ R E li 36CD ".-... ,...- 81.QI - :.) C ,- , . , ~ ..~ ~,. " ....,: ,. '" - f'.... ~ . 7900 ~ - 9 .. ~ "..,. .. 7800 . . . . ~ ~ . - " . ... ''''5,-S I 7700 . .' (.,) .,. ~ ;~ ....r . - . ... ._.. ..u ......!&.., .' ,_ .,.,,;..::1 ,-. J~ .....-.:..:;; LLJ >. - " a:::~ CI 7~00 ,T :eET 7400 . ~ ~ "- _ '.41 6901 . . oj! . ~ I I"."JI . ' (,,). . Z: WI u en I ; 6902 , .- "- .f,..~ L.. u.~' 61:.01 .: ~ , I ....;'\ .4'1111:: ,(. '.~ c CII (,) CII > . . ~ ~40 , '. 132 I'''./.J _. .:... .,~.:: ...,~.~t.-i.II.." SMJ.,lS ,,'I." 1.$1. J~ (CALC.) lOJ. So 7402 (p- ~ 195) To .' O ~. .- .. - &. \p .10,"'":. . , ....71. 7401 " T~'l Ii ,... ..~ - -~Sl. 14 ~~c.) - D_o:> 7:...- :,., ,..,H.... .'.....r) . "__ ..z--_ - - . ,"./.,j" - ... -../1 ,6900 .,6, <0', I'! 7300 ., 'Ac. ., r~ - ''''.toccuc..~~ . . . SUSAN LANE Owners Proposal #2 Street & Hammerhead i ~ 20 Ft I & 'I .. ." ~t ~... I ~ ::1 I. 1 J .1 : I 1 : I Of... ~ . u \ 100.00 ... .. Cd) @ .'i 7000 LEGEND: 1104_00 ,,,. .r SUSAN LANE L.I.D. ~ANZANITA ''''-'''' "'{(;,. !:GOO SCALE 1" - 100' Limit of Project "In Favor" by 1I1I1I1I1Il Agreement 4"- ~I J I - ., {~ .. .-., .. " SUSAN LANE L.r.D. 100% FR. FOOTAGE 50% AREA TAX LOT ! CURRENT METHOD 50% FR. FTG. + OR - . - -- 7500 $1327.51 $1969.78 +642.27 7600 3938.17 3395.55 -542.62 7601 4004.23 3607.07 -397.16 7602 4716.71 3762.21 -954.50 7700 5073.50 4065.95 -1007.55 8100 112 & 113 6114.85 5671.42 -443.43 8200 112 & 113 2897.36 3926.42 +1029.06 TOTAL $28072.33 $26444.00 -1628.33 , t j l . . 39 IE 50D II T'.-.L;---- WI MER-- .. ~l_\. I' zs<:, ..- 100.400 1.0, fa , 43 I 8400 820U. o 8 ck ~ ~ .. I \ 100.00 . . . "',00 ,. '.000 8301 (P- 4147) .. 0 . '. . ~ . , ~ (P-3926l 94."0 "Z 8300 " Q . ~ 'li1 SkI.oO -C.~:I . -.... .~7" .':I."'::.L.. TB'~..-j /9.., /2 ,~,..r " }. w >. - " o::~ o 7500 VI as t Li n 8 OLe, 404 NE.Cor. Oov't. Lot 4.p , 'i"JI ,...----....---, ""I /J9.~. ~ ~ 8000 " _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ I ---e:r s"\ R E l'''~' 35C() "Z;:/?... (P./~Bj J~4' 8101 .. ,> C " ~ . ~ '," ~,. ...!: ~i" " ' ~ , ~ . ... /4,..:$S.:$ (J,_ ~o - 7900 . ~ g .. . J7.,..D " 7800 0 . 0 . ~ ,. ... " 179....<.l . " . ,'o,~" .. , , 7700 t.:I ~, ,r:. ~ ,.... <; - 81000,4- '-I . ;; ~"O',J . "z. ,"3 140 . ~ . 132 Ln '. J'~./~ Ao>Q.':,,,,, Z$J. J. (('(Leo) \"" '., '. .'I..~ ,.~ ""-'2.."r,i' 6~ ... ,,' $46.";1. - _:t$I_ J. :(4.I..~.) a~" .'''6- =~-~6"'S'l'" 'S.'h'" - ';1"_: __ - - - IS~.I;;j. ~ .... -71 6900 N,<, eo., I j 7300 ,., V.2'J.'t,...'" I:; 1:4", I'; ;: I 'O! 7400 ~ ~ , _ _ f(M_~1 ~ 69_01 , . v . 0.7.. . . .1 P- "38 . , . ET ! ~ u .- Z: Wi U CJ) 69p2 0..., ., 1 , . '.0-<1. Q I ~ I~."'':' ,L ,~'" .r ~, 34-3.7$ ,,1.'9 laJ. So 7402 (p- ~ 195) '" .' C;;:. " lot \? .70 S": " , 7401 " ~~l ,4.'"T1f' 1~1.90(t.,e.J . . , ;i ,1 . ;:: . .... . " 0 ~ I <.:. \J: e - ::I: =..-1 70 <..t'....~.) . ~: ~ ~ 7200 .. I": . ~ Q I':. ;; , .. 0\ I ~! ':"1 :~ I ;j .,,, ~, ~l ' . I , I; I : , I i "..... I '3..\.1 \t... ~ ~ 2~,.._ :"'1' 7:~ ",'\ 710;"" :'!r-r~ Q~9(" o'/. '~ LEGEND IZ"I.OO SUSAN LANE L.I.D. ,I.' . MANZANITA \F.,;J'j (I c 7',_33.3 ..' 5900 5600 , .. . Limit of Project "In Favor" by 11111111111 Agreement <4.4' GkOI ,"o~ 'I' ~n' 13,-- 68C0, :2 I 3 1 ,^"",, SCALE 1" = 100' . . SUSAN LANE = COMPARISON ESTIMATE PROPOSAL NO.1 - 34' Cul-de-sac with 28' wide entrance. curb and gutter - 203 ft. @$6.00/ft. = Excavation - 50 C.Y. @$12.00/C.Y. = A.C. Paving - 99 tons @$35.00/ton = TOTAL $1,218.00 600.00 3,465.00 $5,283.00 PROPOSAL NO. 2 - Hammerhead with right and left maneuvering lanes - 20' entrance. Curb and gutter - 209 ft. @$6.00/ft. Excavation - 28 C.Y. @$12.00/C.Y. ,A.C. Paving - 56 tons @$35.00/ton Catch Basins - 2 each @$600.00/each 10" Storm drain - 75 ft. @$20.00/ft. TOTAL = $1,254.00 = 336.00 = 1,960.00 = 1,200.00 = ,1,500.00 $6,250.00 PROPOSAL NO. 3 - Hammerhead with forward and right maneuvering lanes - 20' wide entrance. Curb and gutter - 229 ft. @$6.00/ft. Excavation - 31 C.Y. @$12.00/C.Y. A.C. Paving - 62 tons @$35.00/ton Catch Basins - 2 each @$600.00/each 10" Storm drain - 75 ft. @$20.00/ft. TOTAL SUMMARY = .$1,374.00 = 372.00 = 2,170.00 = 1,200.00. = 1.500.00 $6,616.00 Because of the necessity of providing drainage structures at the northerly leg of the hammerhead, the total cost is over $1000.00 more than the cul-de-sac construction. The drainage system would include an inlet catch basin, 75 feet of inter- connecting pipe and an additional basin. The bubbler basin is not an ideal situation, however it appears to be the only possible method of water control. o N Z o H E-< H 00 o Pl r.. ~ E-< 00 QJ .0 o ~ ~ 'QJ QJ 1-1 ~ 00 ..c:: 01 .r-! :r: E o 1-1 4-1 ~ QJ QJ 4-1 . o~ MQJ QJ ~4-I lJl 1-1 CO ,r-!N 4-1 QJ QJ.o ..c:: ~O ~ ~ III 1-1 ..c::QJ ~'o I:: lJl.r-! QJIll lJlE OQJ p.1-I o 1-1'0 p.1:: III ~\ ~I 4-1 4-I~ IllQJ ~QJ 004-1 Z o H E-< H Ul o p., QJ '0' .r-! 01 :3: I:: .r-! ..>oe ~I-I 4-1 III P. o NO I:: III ..c:: QJ~ .>oe.r-! .r-! ~ ..-t ~ 'OQJ ..-tQJ ::ll-l O~ ~lJl Ul ~ ~ ~ o :>< E-< ~ ~ p., o lie , ~I ..c:: ~ '0 .r-! ~ ~ QJ QJ 1-1 ~ 00 , o '0 I:: III QJ ..c:: 0 lJl ~ ~ 01 Ill.r-! Ill..c::.o >t .r-! .olJl4-l..c:: 1-1 Q) 0 '0 Ill.r-! 1-1 Q)Q)..c::p. ~ >tV o 0 ..-t>tQ)~ ..-t1::1-I III Ill,r-! I:: Er..O ..c:: .r-! ~'OQJlJl '0 Q)..c:: lJl .r-!~E-<.r-! ~ ~ ~ E'r-! .0 ::J'OQ)V EQJ.-l .r-! '0.0 >t ~ III ~ . IlllJl..-tQ)l'l E 1ll.r-!4-I 0 :3: III Ill.r-! Q) :>U1~ ..c::>tlll 0 ~Ill OQ) ~ lJl.r-! ~ o III 4-10 ~4-I~4-I1-1 o 1llP. '0 >t 1-1 QJ~IllE-<>t I)...c:: ~ ~ 001 Q)QJ ..-t.r-!4-I..c::4-I Q)1-I0~1ll :> lJl QJlJl~'O 'O.r-!..c:: QJ 0 ..c:: Oll'l'r-! lJl E-<.r-! O..-t III 1-1 .r-! .0 ~ ~::l ...-t.r-! P. .>tlll~ ~1lll'lQ)1-I U1~0P.0 .r-! 4-1 1::4-1 ~ >t ' III 0 ,r-!.-l 01 'tJ 'tJ~~ .r-!~'Ol::-r-! I-I..c:: III QJ.>oe Q)0l 01-1 ..c::.r-!0Q)1ll 00 1-11:: 1-1 P. '0' Q) ~ QJ p.4-I I:: o III ..-to...:! Q) N . :> 1::1-1 Q) >t III QJ 'O..-tlJl'O l'l ::l.r-! >tOUl:3: ..-t +J+JQ)>t l'lllll-ll'l Q) Olll o .4-1 Q)+JQJQJ 1-1001-1.0 QJ >tl'l..c::+J +J1ll+J0 .r-!'O I:: U.r-I .. I-IQJ'O Q) Q) '0 QJ ..c:: ..c::.r-! QJ E-<U1:3:1:: ..c:: +J '0 .r-! ~ +J QJ QJ 1-1 +J 00 < I+J I::.-l O::l 00 .r-! Q)4-I .04-1 .r-! 'tJ'O .-l ::l QJ 0.0 ..c:: . lJl..-t 01 ..-tl:: ~.r-!'r-! QJ ~ :> QJ III 1-1 +J P. ~.r-! lJl '0 QJ'O '0 0 III l'llll III ..-t '0 p.1:: '0 III QJ l'l p.-r-! lJl o .0 ..-tQJI-I QJ O::l :> l'l 0 Q)O '0 QJ ..c:: QJ .+J .olJl +J+J >tOO ..-t..-t::l ..-t 1-1 1ll.-l+J ::l..-t lJl +J1lll'l I:: 0 Q) QJ 0 :> :> QJ QJ 1-11-1 Q) ..-tlJlO ..-t +J .r-! 0 ~ ~ >t ..-t lJl'O+J +JQ)lJl o~o .-l00 ::l ..-t1-l'O ..-t+J1:: o<(lJllll '0 1::1-1 Q) 0Q)p. '00 lJll::..-t Q) .r-! Q) lJllll:> ::lEQJ OQ)'O ..c::1-I Q) OQ).o :3:..c:: ~+J+J o >t '0 I:: . ..-t l'l I:: I:: Ill.-l 0 o ..-t P. Q).r-! ::l Q) I:: :3: I-IIll +J lll...:!lJl..-t +J.r-! Q)1::0::l 1-I1ll..-t.o Q) lJl ..c:: ::l4-l1-1 E-<U100 4-1 o +J l'l Q) ~ o ..-t Q) lJl :>+J Q) 0 ~...:! '0 Q) Q) l'l ..-t ..-t .r-! ~ >t .-l QJ +J III E .r-! +J ..-t ::l '0 l'l III lJl '0'0 QJ 1-1 I). III 0'0 ..-tl'l QJ III :>+J Q) lJl '0 1::1:: ::l III .0 >tl-l .-l::l I:: 00 +.l - ..-t'O III QJ I-Ip. ::l0 I-I..-t Q) +J:> OQJ l'l'O lJllll .r-! +J QJ III Q) QJ 1-1 I-I+J o<(lJl Q) . .olJl '0 ~I-I o III l'l'O I:: '0 III Q)+J Q)lJl I:: I:: '0 III l'l.o III 1-1 ::l .-l III 0 I-I+.l ::l 1-1'0 Q) lJlp. .r-! 0 ..-t 1llQ) Q):> I-IQ) 0<('0 >t ..-t +J Ill. Q) +J III 4-1 lJl +J III o lJl'OlJl p.Q)1:: ::l1ll'O lJl 01 I:: III lJl III 'OQ) ..c::l::lJl+J Olll::ll:: ::l Q) lJl . Q) E o lJl QJ lJl+JQ)O QJ QJ..c:: 1-1 .-l ~o o - 4-1 .r-! >t 1-1 l'l ..c::1-I0Q) QJQ)4-I :>:> I:: .r-! 01 III Q) .-l I:: o Q).r-!..c:: .r-! '0 .>oe +J :> I-I,r-! 1-1 Q) III ~ QJlJll). lJl.r-! +J 'O+JQJ Q) I:: I:: QJ +J1llQ)1-I III ..c:: .r-! +J 'OOOlJl o I-I.r-! EQJ4-IQJ EE4-I..c:: o ::l~ o - lJl OlJl l'l III 1-1 ~ 0 QJO o 'O.-l P. +J1ll..-t::l Q)1ll '01-1 '0 QJ +Jl'l '01-l0Q) Q) QJ l'l QJ+J ..-t I::QJO..-t E'O.r-! lJl ~ -rot .. rn >t>t~ . 0l'-<11l0<i 1::Q);3:.-lQJ .r-! :> QJ 4-1 .-l .>oe.r-! :> '-<.0 I-I.-l.r-! QJ 0 III QJ 1-1 :> 1-1 Pl'O~Op. '0 QJ '0 aJ Q) l'l lJl .r-! 01 I:: .r-! .>oe 1-1 III . p.lJl Q) ~E Q)O Q)..c:: 1-1 +JQ) lJl :> I 1-1 l'lQ) o lJl 00 Z~ III QJ 1-1 0<( 4-1 o QJ ~ 01 I:: .r-! .>oe 1-1 III Pl I ~Q) I-I..-t Ill.o P.1ll ..-t >t.r-! ~Ill .r-! :> .-llll ,r-! +JQ) ::ll-l III ..-t ..-t+J III QJ QJ '-<1-1 O+J 4-100 +J..c:: QJOl Q).r-! I-I:r: +.l 004-1 o ..c:: OllJl .r-! Q) :r:'O .r-! l'llJl o ..c:: Ol~ l'l0 .r-!1Il ~ 1-1 III . P.0l I:: +J.r-! I::~ Q)I-I .r-! III op. .r-! 4-I+J 4-IlJl . ::lQJOl lJl::l1:: Ol.r-! lJl ,.>oe . .r-t <d ~ I:: III Q)1llP. 1-1 QJ 011-1 ..c::1::0 E-<'r-!4-I 1).. l'l::l+J o 00 ..-t 'O.-l..c:: Q).r-! 01 '04-l.r-! .r-! :r: :>..-t O..-t E I-I,r-! 0 p.:3:1-1 4-1 lJl+J ..... OM Ul 1-1 0lQ)Q) I::I::~ .r-! III 1-1 ~...:!Ill 1-1 P. III I:: P.1ll..c:: lJl+J 4-1 ::l.r-! HUI:3: 01 I:: .r-! .>oe 1-1 III Pl I ~QJ 1-1.0 . III Q) 1).'0 lJl .-l0 +J::ll). Q)01-l Q)~::l 1-1 P. +JlJl lJlQ)lJl I O,r-! CIll..c:: o p.+J lJl o 1-1 C+JO QJ4-I 4-IQJ .r-!I-I'O +JQ) +JlJl+J III I III ..c::4-I0 ~4-I,r-! 0'0 aJ QJ +J'O'O 1llQ) +JC>t lJl:3: III 0:3: lJl +J >t4-1 C..-t 0 Q)O E,r-! +J QJ.-l..c:: 1-1.0 01 .r-! ::l.r-! ::l p. 1-1 lJI Q)l'l0 1-IQ)l'l :> +JQ)lJl l'l lJl.r-! Q) E - Q) +J '0 1-1 I-IQ)QJ 1ll'O..c:: p..r-! E-< Q) :> ~O 1-1 . 01 p.'O I:: Q) .r-I (/) ~ I::.r-!.r-! I:: ::l 1ll00lJl ..-tI::QJ Pl.r-! 1-1 01 I:: .r-! .>oe 1-1 III I). +J Q) Q) 1-1 +J lJl 4-1 4-1 o . '0 1llQ) 1-1'0 +J QJ ~ Q) Q)l'l OlJl Z.r-! 01 I:: .r-! ~ 1-1 III Pl +J ..c:: 01 -r-! 1-1 ..-t III I:: . 01:: .r-! 0 +J.r-! ,r-! +J 'O.r-! 'O+JQ) III 1-1 lJl III 0 4-I0.p. o 1-1 'O::l I::l'lp. o III .r-!...... lJl +J -r-! 1ll1-I..c:: OO+J .r-!I:: 'O'r-!I-I Q) E 0 'tJ 4-1 4-1 '00>t Q) III I-IQ)~ .r-! E ::l-r-!4-I lJI+J 0 Q) I-IQ)+J ..c::..c:: +J+J0l l'l .r-! aJ ~ 1-1 lJlll'O 1-I00QJ III 1::'0 p..r-!,r-! Q).>oe > ~I-IO III 1-1 0l1).P. I:: ,r-!l-IlJl I:: 0 1-1 1::4-1 QJ III 0. .-l >< 0 Pllll.-l :3:Q) Q) > tl~~ 4-1 o . ~Ol ..c::1:: Ol-r-! .r-!~ 1-11-1 III ..c::p. 01 ::l+J o QJ I:: QJ Q) 1-1 +J +JlJl 01 l'll:: o lJl .r-!I-I o Q)4-I 1-1 QJ>t ..c::1ll E-<:3: >t III ~ 4-1 o +J ..c:: 01 .r-! ~, I CO ..-t '" ::l o I 0 4-Il'lQJ o 1-1 Q) ~l'l ..c::Q) 1-I0::l +JlJl Q).-l QJ 0 +J ..-t l'l lJl..c:: 1-1 p. aJlllllllllE-<OI-l E ..c:: 4-I::l id'O~ P. .r-!..-t0+J .>t 'O::l.-ll::lJlllllJl O..-t aJ l'l ~.r-! 1ll~IllEO ..c:: +J1Il4-l+J ..c::lJlOI-IIllO +J-r-!+JIllQJ '-< .r-!..c:: p.1-I+J0 ~ E-< E QJ ..c::4-I ::J~>t0l o E +J.r-! l'l III ..r-!QJQJI-IO lJl +J I:: 1-14-1 .r-! I Q).r-!.r-! III .-l +J aJ Q) E: r.. lJl Ill.r-! '04-1 I::+J I Q) aJ 1-1 0 1-1 ..-t ",..c::..c:: 0 ,r-! III ::lr-+JE-<4-I+Jp. o .r-! 4-IlJl '0'0'0 III o.r-! . III '01:: +JQ)1ll1ll lJl'O'OI::..c:: ..-t I:: 1-11:: QJ 1-1'0 o III III E: aJ QJ 1-1 .r-! '0 P. ~ 1-1 0 lJll:: o.r-! .r-! I:: .r-! III Ill::l ::l .r-! :> +JlJl lJI..c:: lJI E: l'l lJl I QJ Q) QJ QJ 1ll1-l4-1 Q)'OQ) 0 ..-t..c:: I 1-1 +J l'l 1ll+J..-t.r-!lJlOQ) lJl ::l 4-1 I::.r-! E: o l'l 0 .r-! lJl.r-! P.1ll >tllllJl+J o..c::Q).oOl'r-! 1-I+J..c:: IllE:QJ p. +JQ) E..c:: 1-1 lJl'O 0 ~ lJlQJI::::lQ)U - ..c:: 0 '0 ~ >t+J '01:: 01 III +J III 01 (j) QJ I:: . -r-l'-<I::+JE'r-!u U .r-!OEl'l1ll +J.>oe'r-! 0 I:: lJl Q)Q)1-I1-I01ll1 ..c::QJIll+JQ)..-tQ) E-< 4-1 I). lJl 1-1 Pl '0 '0 l..-t III ::l Q) 0 0:3: QJ 1::'0 III ~ QJ . o..c::..-t I::I-I.-l Q) QJ lJl! :3: .r-! lJl o..c:: III III lJllll~ I lJl Q) '0 ::l '01::'", I III ..-t Q) ::l>t:> 01-11-1 III Q) "':lJllJl 'g r4 +J III +J~ I:: QJ Q)Q) lJt III 00 Q) 1-14-1 E-<O 'OQ) ..-t..c:: lJl +J::l+J III .r-! 0 ..c::4-I 'OQ)'OlJlO Q)..c:: Q) I::+J'O+JQ) .r-! .r-! Q) 1-1 1ll..c::>Q)1ll +J Ol-r-! 1-1 :3: .o::l'O+J1ll 00 lJl '-< lJl QJ Q) ..c::.r-! Q) 1-1 1-1 +J ..c:: III Q) 'O+J ~ l'll'l lJl o III Q) '-< lJl.r-!..-t 1-1 Q) aJ+J 01:: I-IOlJl4-l~ ::l III III Q) 0 +J 1-1 1ll'O~Q)'O I:: l'llll..c:: I:: 0l1ll..c::+J1ll .r-! ..-t +J .-l lJl '0 Q) '0 I:: +J lJl E: QJ III I:: ~g3~~Q) I:: lJl QJ lJI'O ~4-IlJlaJQJIll o 0 III 1-1 lJl E: +J.o >tl::lJllJl::llJl +Jo.r-! U1.r-! I-I.r-! Q) QJ+J+J..c:: Q) I)..r-! H +J . lJl 0'0 '0 III 1-1 I:: I:: Q)..c:: 1).0 '0>0 o l'l 01-1 Q) 0'0 1-1 ::l ..c:: Ill.r-! I:: P. P. +J lJllllE: lJl lJl E:-r-! I:: 4-1 III ,r-! QJ Q) o E:'OQ)..c:: = E .0 ~ QJ '00 QJ I::Q)UI-I>t= 01:: O..-t I:: OlOlErlOl +J.r-!R Cli'rl ::l lIl-rl III ::l III .0 I l'l QJ +J I Q) I:: 0,1:: Q) ..-tI-lIllIllQJI-I ..-t p...-t.-l :> p. 0<(= Plp.Q)=, 01 I:: .r-! > 1-1 III 0 p.4-I >t +JaJ>t I-I..c:: III Q) ~ P. P. O+JO 1-Il'l+J I). III lJl :3:+J+J Q) l'l l'l ..c::+JIllQ) +J0:3:E: I:: Q) 4-1 +J:> 0000 '01::1-1 ..-t P. III lJl 0 E 1-I1-I'O.r-! QJ Q) :> 1::'0 Q) Q)~I::..c:: U101ll~ III 1-1 Q) l'l ~ >t+J ~lJl 1-1 QJ Q) 1-1 I).QJ O+J I-Il'l PlH +J 'rl QJ lJl ::l QJ III Q) o lJl Q)- .0 Q) >tl). .-l,r-! +JI). lJl o QJ 001 III QJ l'l '-<'rl o III E: 1-1 '0 Q) .0'0 I:: '0 III ..-t ::llJl o l'l ~,r-! III '0 III 1::.0 ::l o..c:: 1-10 1ll+J I:: III 1-1 U ::l +J..-t III 'Ol'l III 0 QJ.r-! ..c::+J I-I'rl QJ'O ~~ ..c::Q) 1-1 n:s...-4- ::l+J -lJIl:: >tQ)Q) :::I-;~ III '0 0 ::l.-llll +J::l+J OO+J "':~Ill '0 l'l ::l . O>t I-I.-l 1ll+J I:: lJl 1-10 ::l 0 +J lJl 'OlJl III Q) Q)..-t ..c:: 1-1 QJ Q).o !~ ..c::::l o 0<(:3: '0 I::+J ::l QJ o QJ 1-11-1 Ill+.l l'lUl 1-1 ::l4-1 E-<O 4-11:: 00 .r-! +J+J lJll-I 00 UPl - lJl ''0 1-1 QJ 0 QJ p.1::+J1:: o QJ :J .-lQJ'OO Q) .o.-l QJ > aJE: Q) >t..c:: 0 '0'0 ..c:: 1llQ) QJQJ.oQJ lJll-I ...c:: O.-l'O+J ..c::1ll..-t +J ::l0 lJlO+J Olll..c:: +J..c:: lJl QJ o I:: '0 'O.r-! 01-11::> lJllll ::ll-l -rl '0 0 QJ 1-1 I:: I-IlJl III III III I).+J I:: QJ E:lJll-I+J o ::l III 0~+Jg. I:: lJl'O QJ .r-! I 1::'0 Q)1ll1ll +J'O Q) I ..c:: QJ Q) ..-t +J '0 1-1 ::l'O.r-! +J o.r-! > lJl :J 0 . Q) 1-10 .-l..c:: +J p..r-! III E-< QJ ..-t ::l QJO.o lJl 1-I+J::l ::l . +J I). I:: lJllJllJl ::ll-l '0 QJ 1llQ)1-I..c:: I::QJ..c::Ill+J III >t+J '0 l:l'O +JQ)+J1ll1:: 0..c::::l+J1ll I:: +J.o lJl lJl lJl ..c:: '0 +J 1-1 .r-lOlQJl:lO ::lI-lQJ+J lJl 0 Q) I-I.r-! .r-!I-I:J I-IlJl ..c::..c:: 0 ::l.r-! E-<+J..-tu> I 3lJl 0'0 1-11-1 .r-!Ill 0'0 l:l ..-t III . 1ll+J'O ::llJl QJ lJl 1-1 ::l QJ QJ l'l ..c:: :J ::l+J0 ..-t l'l'O 1lll:lQ) Ill.o lJl ,r-! Q) '0 O..-t lJll:l::l .r-!Ill 0 ..c::+J..c:: E-<lJllJl lJl '0 1-1 III 'g III +J 00 ~ QJ QJ 1-1 +J 00 80 Hargadine Street Ashland, OR 97520 February 9, 1987 Ashland City Council Ashland City Hall Ashland, OR 97520 Dear Council Member: SUBJECT: Street Barricades on pioneer and Hargadine streets I am sorry to have to inform you that we are headed down the road to litigation. This letter to you is our attempt to resolve our problems before it is too late'. In the spring of 1986, we contacted the City Attorney on the legality of the city barricading our streets on a nightly basis throughout the summer months for the benefit of the Oregon Shakespearean Festival. The restrictions on our ingress and egress were unreasonable and illegal. The City Attorney relied on the Ashland Municipal Code Section 11.12.050-- temporary blocking or closing of streets, and completed his opinion by stating that questions of degree and fact could only be answered by a court of competent jurisdiction. This answer was unsatisfactory because it virtually told us "if you don't like it take us to court." This is a rather hard-nosed approach to a legitimate citizen's complaint. The city has the lawyer on retainer; we don't. We could not afford to pursue our complaint. Since then, things have worsened. In October 4, 1986 (2 days before the end of the barricade period) my husband became involved in an altercation with a policeman manning the city barricades. The result of that was the strong possibility of criminal charges being brought against my husband. Needless to say, we are frightened this will happen again. All my husband was trying to do was to come home from fishing at 8:40 in the evening. We have reason to believe that others were permitted to go past the barricades that night prior to him trying to go through, but he was refused. We saw the policeman's actions as provocative. 1 " Ashland City Council February 9, 1987 We have recently come by information on what the previous City Attorney had to say about the city blocking streets and alleys. Although not specifically referring to this situation, this is what Gerald Scannel, previous City Attorney, had to say: suffice it to say that in Oreqon Reports in Volume 123, page 383, an abutting owner on a street has the right of access to light, air and view and the right to have the street kept open. The case also holds that the abutting property owner has the right to use a pUblic road or street for the purpose of ingress and egress to or from same. In 64 Ore 223, the owner of a lot abutting a street was held to be entitled to a mandatory injunction for a permanent obstruction in a street which obstructed his ingress and ,agress, and in 62 Ore 510 the owner of a property abutting on a street who has access obstructed and the property value depreciated is entitled to sue for damages caused by the maintenance of a private obstruction. This, of course, refers to the fence. There is a case which also holds that an obstruction need not be continuous to entitle the abutting owner to enjoin further obstruc- tion, it being sufficient that the hindrance be only occasional or for a few hours at a time. Streets and highways belong entirely to the public and cannot be encroached upon or impeded by private persons for private use and municipal corporations must prevent obstructions. There is another case wherein the City of Eugene sued. The case is reported in 87 Ore 435, which case holds that the City as trustee of the steets for the use of the public is bound to remove all obstructions and encroachments which materially disturb the public user by whatever adequate legal or equitable means seems best. 2 Ashland City Council February 9, 1987 There are many, many other cases and facets which I wish to discuss with the Council in executive session and to get their feeling concerning the same and for that reason request that the meeting be held later . . Of course, all of this memorandum is for the information of the Council and I am sure that its contents will be kept within the Council so that we can better serve the interests of the City without extraneous factors . . . As I write this I am not able to give case numbers or citations but I am sure that this is an inverse condemnation in itself, since it directly affects the adjoining property and is obviously meant to be a buffer zone so that the properties fronting on Main street would not be able to use it for commercial purposes and detract from the Shakespearean Festival Theater property by putting up a hotdog stand or something of that nature. Further it shows that this rezone actually includes some property belonging to people fronting on East Main street. This to me is an inverse condemnation and would result in damages being placed against the City and should be rectified in any type of a joint user or rededication of this alley so that there be a common ground and understanding as to the use and dedication. I have taken the time to go to the law library to read and copy the cases Mr. Scannel cited, and feel that our rights to unrestricted ingress and egress to our property are undeniable. We approached Mr. Almquist with this information on January 26, 1987, requesting that the City cease the practice of blocking the access to our home. He refused and stated that he would not discuss it with us further and if we had anything more to say, to tell it to our attorney. This is a very serious situation now. My husband and I have an impeccable record and we cannot expose ourselves to, the jeopardy we are in. We feel that we are SUbject to constant 3 -' AShland city Council February 9, 1987 harrassment from the police with even an unstated agenda of making our lives so miserable we will move. We cannot and will not move. Our economic livelihood is too entrenched in Ashland. We have decided that we will get legal representation to prevent the City from barri~ading and blocking our streets, as opposed to have to get legal representation to defend ourselves from criminal prosecution. We, again, formally request that you direct tbe City police not to erect road blocks or barricades on pioneer Street and Hargadine Street. As a matter of pOlicy, the City Council and Planning Commission has stated and reiterated that the residential aspects of this area should take precedence over all other commercial concerns. We will continue to work with the DEQ regarding the noise pollution in this area and will work to recapture our rights of quiet enjoyment of our property as those living in other residential areas have. We wish to give the City Council an opportunity to respond to our request to not place road blocks on Pioneer street and Hargadine street. In light of the foregoing, I hope you will see the reason in this. Sincerely, .---~"" '---'; ~ \/'./ In , -"".......... {f-- c--.c"~y .....-k --,- Sharon-xhormahlen . ," -~k-A// Y. ,( ~ /' ~~c___.II. ..~-<cr1/!~_ --Pfiilip Thormahlen .-"' -- ST:bc Copies to: All members Ashland City Council Mr. Dave Finanque!ACLU, Eugene, OR Brian Almquist, Ashland City Manager Mayor Gordon Medaris 4 ~emnrandum February 5, 1987 mo: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator , ~ rom: it Allen A. Alsing, Director of Public Works ~ubjed: Recommendations from Traffic safety Commission The Traffic Commission at its meeting of January 28, 1987, recommended to the City Council that: 1. One parking space on each side of the driveways at 251 and 255 Maple Street be marked for "No Parking". It is dangerous for vehicles to exit both of these properties because of inadequate vision clearance. These are both medical centers and they generate a large amount of traffic. There is also a large amount of plant material at these drive- ways and the property owners will be encouraged to trim this material to help the situation. 2. The last parking space on Palm Ave., on the west side of the street, adjacent to Siskiyou Boulevard, be posted for "Handicapped Parking Only". This request was made by Dr. Aubrey Hill for his many handicapped patients. The nearest parking lot to his office is presently across Palm and to the north several hundred feet. The parking spaces along Palm are presently mostly filled by SOSC students. 'ID 0: Jff rom: ~ubjl'd: ~emnrandum January 29, 1987 Vic Lively, Chief of Pol ice Nan Frankl in, City Recorder LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS \ Very soon license renewals wi I I start coming in tor endorcements. Prior to placing this matter on the Counci I agenda, wi I I you P I ease rev i ew your records and I et me know if the Po I ice Dept. has had problems with any establ ishmonts that would cause their license not to be approved. I would I ike to have this on the Counci I agenda tor Feb. 17, 1987. /-/"" / ( ,- " -T( o::)!"t:-<./ ,,/ cc: Brian Almquist, C. Administrator J8Ilemnrandum February 12, 1987 Wo: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator ~ Jlf rom:6L Allen A. Alsing, Director of Public Works ~ubjed; Airport Lease You will recall that the lease with the present FBO at the Ashland Airport expires in August of this year. The Airport Commission has developed a proposed new lease based upon material forwarded by Wadell Engineering. The proposed lease was prepared to fit within the following framework: 1. Working toward the airport eventually becoming self-supporting. Anticipated revenue would equal the amount presently budgeted. 2. The FBO would lease the terminal building and fuel island. The remainder of the airport would be operated by the City. 3. The utilities would be modified and separated such that the FBO would pay for utilities utilized on his leased areas and the City would pay for utilities utilized on the unleased area. 4. Fees to be paid to the City would include: a) A base fee - tied to the Portland CPI; plus, b) fuel flowage fees; plus, c) percent of tiedown gross receipts; plus, d) percent of hangar gross receipts. It is proposed that the fees paid by the Lessee the first year would be reduced by 10% to allow the Lessee to develop his opera- tion. 5. Anticipating that the City will eventually own all buildings on the airport property, including the maintenance hangar and tee hangars. 6. A lease which gives the City a fair return and allows the FBO a fair profit. The Commission feels that it is essential that the FBO have ance hangar available as part of his business and service. feels that the City should acquire the existing maintenance a mainten- It also hangar at Airport Lease February 12, 1987 Page Two this time if at all possible. An appraisal of all airport buildings is presently under way and should be available in the next week or so. After the appraisal has been received, the Commission would like to discuss this item further with you. In order to provide continuous service at the airport at the expiration of the present lease, and since it will take considerable time to advertise, receive proposals, and make a selection, it is necessary that we proceed as quickly as possible on this matter. I have forwarded copies of the proposed lease to Ron Salter for his comments and to Bob Nelson for a review of insurance requirements. After your review, would you please forward this item to the Council? Attached is a cover letter to the Mayor and Council from Bill Knowles, Chairman of the Ashland Airport Commission, and the proposed lease. Attachments (2) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT OF SUSAN LANE FROM HIGH STP-EET WESTERLY BY CONSTRUCTING THEREON CURBS, GUTTERS AND PAVING; AUTHOR- IZING THE ASSESSMENT OF COST OF SAID IMPROVEMENT AGAINST PROPERTY TO BE BENEFITTED THEREBY: AND PROVIDING THAT WAR- RANTS ISSUED FOR THE COST THEREOF BE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND. WHEREAS, the Council has heretofore by Resolution declared its intention to construct the improvement hereinafter described in accordance with plans and specifications and to assess upon each lot or part thereof adjacent to and benefitted by such improvement its proportionate share of said cost of said improvement, as provided by the Charter of the City of Ashland; and I<HEREAS, notice of such intention has been duly given and published as provided by the Charter, and a public hearing held thereupon, and it appears to the Council that such improvement is of material benefit to said City and that all proper~y to be assessed therefor will be benefitted thereby to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs thereof: NOW, THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It is hereby ordered that Susan Lane from High Street westerly be improved by the construction thereon of curbs, gutters and paving in accordance with the plans and specifications therefore heretofore adopted on file in the office of the Director of Public Works, and that the cost thereof be assessed upon each lot or part thereof adjacent to or benefitted by such improvement, as provided by the Charter of the City of Ashland. SECTION 2. That warrants for the construction of the aforementioned im- provement shall bear interest at the prevailing rates and shall constitute general obligations of the City of Ashland, and said warrants shall be issued pursuant to and on the terms and conditions set forth in O.R.S. 287.502 to 287.510 inclusive. The foregoing ordinance was first read on the 6th day of January , 198'7, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 1987. Nan E. Franklin City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,19il 1,. L. Gordon Medaris Mayor ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $247,500.68 IN THE MATTER OF PARKING LOT CONSTRUCTION, CURBS, GUTTERS AND PAVING IN LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 57, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, has heretofore constructed parking lot, curbs, gutters and paving, during 1986; and WHEREAS, the total assessment for parking lot, curbs, gutters and paving in the said district is in the amount of $247,500.68 and WHEREAS, the Common Council does hereby determine that the total assessments for the property and individuals assessed are reasonable assessments; and WHEREAS, special benefit assessments should now be levied against property benefitted and fronting on such improvements to defray the expense thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Local Improvement District No. 57 consists of improvement of parking lot construction, curbs, gutters and paving as hereinafter designated in Section 2 and project located as follows: Otis Street Elizabeth Street Sheridan Street Walnut Street Water Street-Parking Lot Auburn Street Ridge Road Section 2. assessments property in That there are hereby levied special benefit in the respective amount and against the respective the City of Ashland as follows: Assessor's Name & Address Street Map & Lot No. Assessment Folick, Joshua & Bonnie Auburn St. 9CA 2600 $ 1,509.74 200 Gresham St. Ashland, Oregon 97520 Kreitner, Don Auburn St. 9CA 2800 1,363.95 155 Union St. Ashland, Oregon 97520 Robertson, Kaye Auburn St. 9CA 2900 2,756.39 518 Auburn St. Ashland, Oregon 97520 ORDINANCE NO. Name & Address Hendricks, Ed & Lucille 10 Del Rey Ct. Lafayette, Ca. 94549 Perillat, Diana 475 Auburn St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Thommes, Martin 549 Auburn St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Patner, Susan 156 Union St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Tucker, Lester & Gussie Skinner, Patricia 1947 Dale Medford, Or. 97501 Skillman, Wiliam & Conie 337 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Bollong, Louraine 267 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Bollong, Louraine & Nichols, Gregory 289 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Kaough, Richard & Susan 309 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Skillman, William & Connie 337 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Pierce, Jeanette 455 S.W. 141st St. Beaverton, Or. 97007 Baylis, Robert & April 300 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Magruder, Robert & Karen 298 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Byers, Joe & Norma 400 Sheridan Ashland, Or. 97520 Street Auburn St. Auburn St. Auburn St. Auburn St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan S t. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Walnut St. Assessor's Map & Lot No. Assessment 9CA 3000 $ 4,863.54 9CA 3200 902.94 9CA 3300 1,970.15 9CA 3400 3,031.00 5CA 200 7,393.57 5AC 300 2,349.90 5AC 301 2,088.80 5AC 302 2,088.80 5AC 303 2,591.94 5AC 304 2,584.89 5AC 400 3,370.80 5AC 500 1,305.50 5AC 700 2,613.35 5BD 702 3,761.93 ORDINANCE NO. Name & Address McNealy, Steven & Gail 282 Sheridan St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Wasmund, Orville P.O. Box 688 Ashland, Or. 97520 Adams, James 1007 Sherman Oaks San Jose, Ca. 95128 Adams, James 1007 Sherman Oaks San Jose, Ca. 95128 Carter, Sharron 730 Walnut St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Merriman, Lynn & Theresa 731 Grover St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Lunt, Stephen Jr. & Jean 375 Grant St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Hargadine Cemetary Assoc. C/O City of Ashland City Hall, ,AshJand Or. 97520 Hodgson, Nora 699 Walnut Ashland, Or. 97520 Howard, Lee & Judy 90 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Frank, Robert & Carol 139 Highland Dr. Medford, Or. 97501 Laufer, Eva 195 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Orf, David & Rebecca 143 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Street Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Sheridan St. Walnut St. Sheridan St. Walnut St. Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Assessor's Map & Lot No. Assessme~ 5AC 800 $ 1,492.1 5AC 801 1,492.1 5AC 1100 7,154.1 5AC 1300 2,224.8 5AC 4800 5,031.4 5AC 4803 2,788.9 5AC 4805 2,242,4 5BD 600 7,310.8 5BD 700 2,289.: 9CB 200 1,625.7 9CB 300 3,655.E 9CB 301 2,379.S 9CB 302 1,420.C ORDINANCE NO. Name & Adress Romeo, Anthony & Patricia 100 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Goes, Dale & Morie 120 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Osborne, Bessie 140 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Fries, Archie & Josephine 170 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Hooper, Gary & Jan 615 Ashland St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Maurer, John & Mary 234 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Akeri11, James & Betty 246 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Turner, Willis & Mary 252 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Skerry, Harry Jr. & Margaret 270 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Lewis, Herbert & Nell 288 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Busch, Jim & Dorothy P. O. Box 490 Ashland, Or. 97520 Maurer, John 290 N. Main Ashland, Or. & Mary #1 97520 Amos, Wayne & 325 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. Ila 97520 Street Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Ridge Road Assessor's Map & Lot No. Assessme~ 9CB 400 $ 1,266.: 9CB 500 1,391.; 9CB 700 1,325.4 9CB 1000 1,145.~ 9CB 1100 1,384.7 9CB 1200 1,735..? 9CB 1201 1,219.6 9CB 1600 2,219.1 9CB 1900 1,618.2 9CB 2000 1,461.5 9CB 2100 1,437.8 9CB 2200 9.786.6 9CC 200 1,082.0 ORDINANCE NO. Name & Address Street Assessor's Map & Lot No. Assessmen Roberts, James & Erna 339 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Ridge Road 9CC 300 $ 1,925.0 Williams, Maurice & Ruth 340 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Ridge Road 9ce 400 3,868.5 Clark, Judith 326 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Ridge Road 9ce 401 1,188.3 Barnet, Vaughn & Mary 365 Ridge Rd.' Ashland, Or. 97520 Ridge Road 9ce 500 1,910.0 Jewett, Michael 353 Ridge Rd. Ashland, Or. 97520 Ridge Road 9CC 600 541. 0 Eggert, Aili 2225 H St. Eureka, Ca. 95501 Otis St. 4BC 400 19,469.6 Olson, Wallace P. O. Box 643 Ashland, Or. 97520 Otis St. 4BC 504 4,450.5 Taylor, Anne 492 Willow St. Ashland, Or. ~7520 Nielsen, Floyd 531 Laurel St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Otis St. 4BC 1100 2,832.0 Otis St. 4BC 1102 6,974.0 Alsing, Al & Katherine 970 Walker Ave. Ashland, Or. 97520 Otis St. 4BC 1103 2,509.9 Christlieb, Norman & Mary 581 Morton St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Elizabeth Ave. 5AD 100 9,537.0 Cowan, Don & Diane 1330 Oregon St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Otis St. 5AD 200 7,135.1 Egdorf, Dorris 375 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Otis St. 5AD 300 2,452.0 Green, Andy & Paige 344 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Otis St. 5AD 500 2,788.8 ORDINANCE NO. Name & Address Jensen, Brent & Paige 300 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Ebey, George 4027 Scripps Palo Alto, Ca. 94306 Lang, Judy 320 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Dale, Russ Goldman, M. & Corrine 332 W. 42nd Ave. San Mateo, Ca. 94403 Meiser, Robert & Maureen 332 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Stout, Carlyle III & Barbara 356 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Kersey, Austin & Betty 495 Willow St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Butler, Charles & Linda 499 Thornton Way Ashland, Or. 97520 Slattery, Michael & Denice 590 Elizabeth Ave. Ashland, Or. 97520 Ka1b, John & Shari 580 Elizabeth Ave. Ashland, Or. 97520 Thormah1en, William 570 e1izabeth Ave. Ashland, Or. 97520 Mitchell, Michea1 315 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Jensen, Steve & Carol 355 Otis St. Ashland, Or. 97520 Street Assessor's Map & Lot No. Assessmer Otis St. SAD 501 $ 2,161.: Otis St. 3,559. ; SAD 502 Otis St. SAD 503 3,486.( Otis St. 4,520.[ SAD 505 Otis St. SAD 506 2,789.1 Otis St. SAD 507 2,788.E Otis St. SAD 508 2,720.8 Elizabeth Ave. SAD 158 2,363.7 Elizabeth Ave. SAD 159 2,124.5 Elizabeth Ave. SAD 160 2,123.8 Elizabeth Ave. SAD 161 2,123.': Elizabeth Ave. SAD 162 5,630.7 Elizabeth Ave. SAD 164 6,610.,) ORDINANCE NO. Name & Address Street Assessor's Map & Lot No. Assessment City of Ashland City Hall, Ashland, Or. 97520 ' Water Street 9BB 200 $ 8,409.22 City of Ashland City Hall, Ashland, Or. 97520 Water Street 9BB 10900 13,775.78 TOTAL ASSESSMENT $247,500.68 Section 3. That if the owner of any property so assessed for such local improvement in the sum of $100.00 or more, at any time within ten days after notice of such assessment is received, so desires, he may have the payment thereof extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Act. Section 4. That inasmuch as it is necessary to provide the funds immediately with which to pay the cost of such local improvements, it is hereby deemed necessary for the public peace, health, and safety of the citizens of the City of Ashland that an emergency be, and the same is hereby, declared to exist, and this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. The foregoing Ordinance was first read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland held on the day of , 1987, and was passed to a secona-reading and duly adopted on the day of 1987. . Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 1987 ,L. Gordon Medaris, Mayor ~emnrattdum February 12, 1987 ~o: Honorable Mayor & City Council ~rOtn: B,io" L. Almqui,'. ei'y Admi"i"'O~~ ~ubject: Chief Building Official Compensation As you know, the Fire the budget two years agoo who now also serves as the Inspector who was assigned functiono Inspector position was eliminated from Those duties were reassigned to the Fire Fire Marshal, and by the Chief Building the fire and life safety plans review Chief Chief Building Inspector Murrell was appointed an Assistant State Fire Marshal in March and is authorized to approve building plans for fire and life safety, In addition, he was recently approved by the International Association of Arson Investigatorso In order to recognize his additional duties and certifications, I am proposing a $50000 supplement to his present salary which is $2631 per month, Attached is a resolution accomplishing the change, Attachment (1) .. RESOLUTION NOo 87- A RESOLUTION M1ENDING RESOLUTION NO. 86-27 WITH RESPECT TO THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL COMPENSATIONo WHEREAS, the Chief Building Official has accepted the responsi- bilities for structural fire inspections and fire safety plans review; and liHEREAS, compensation should be available for these additional responsibilities 0 NOH THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOHS: SECTIONL A footnote shall be added to Resolution Noo 86-27 which shall read as follows: "(8) Plus $50 for assignment to fire safety plans review and structural fire inspectionso" The foregoing resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the 17th day of February ,19870 Nan L Franklin Ci ty Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of February , 19870 ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION MINUTES February 4, 1987 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairperson George Kramer. Members present were Hal Cloer, Bob Edwards, Margaret Dode, George Kramer, Craig Hudson and Jim Lewis. Also present were Associate Planner Steve Jannusch and Secretary Sonja Akerman. commission members Terry Grant, Maxine Colwell and Lorraine Whitten were absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Dode stated that on page 3 of the minutes of the January 7, 1987 meeting, the fourth paragraph down, third sentence, should read "Dode and Lewis will visit the site....., rather than Whitten and Lewis. Cloer moved and Dode seconded to approve the minutes as corrected. Motion passed unanimously. RAILROAD CENTENNIAL Pat Acklin, City Council member, was present to explain the Ashland Railroad Centennial. December will mark the 100th anniversary of driving the gold spike which completed the railroad lines in Ashland. Acklin, along with different groups in the area, is advocating public involvement in the celebration of this event. Dode was appointed to the steering committee and to act as liaison for the Historic Commission. STAFF REPORTS PA #B6-l23 Site Review 599 East Main Street Christian Life Fellowship Jannusch briefly reviewed the status of this Planning Action and presented drawings of the revised plans. Basically, he stated, the Church is now proposing cosmetic changes only to the exterior of the structure. Everett Chaney, applicant representing the Church, stated the roof line will be altered, the stucco will be sandblasted from the Historic Commission Minutes February 4, 1987 pOage 2 foundation and then painted, and the exterior of the building will finished with shiplap siding and painted in three shades of beige to brown. Cloer moved and Dode seconded to approve this application. Motion passed unanimously. PA #87-010 Site Review Corner of 6th and East Main Streets Pacific Northwest Bell Jannusch presented the Staff Report explaining the proposal is to place a six foot parabolic antenna on a 22' tall mast, which would be located on top of the roof of the existing Pacific Northwest Bell building. It would be located approximately 20' from the north building wall and approximately midway between the east and west walls of the structure. The dish would be mounted such that it would be facing east, with an overall height from the East Main frontage of approximately 38' to the top of the mast and approxi- mately 37' to the top of the dish, while the north elevation would be the tallest, reaching approximately 42'6" from finished grade to the top of the mast, and 41'6" to the top of the dish. No additional services would be required for the proposed use. Staff recognizes the problem that the location is in the middle of the Historic District and that the structure will have a negative impact on the area visually. Though it is a commercial use in a non-historic structure, the adjacent uses are predominantly residen- tial and a majority of the surrounding structures were constructed around the turn of the century. Jannusch stated that Staff believes the excessive height of the subject structure will be intrusive to this predominantly historic area. Typically, the proposal would have been reviewed as a Staff Permit, but due to the height in question, Staff elected to make this a Site Review to be approved by the Planning Commission. He explained the Planning Commission, according to Section lB.72.070 of the Land Use Ordinance, has the authority to "restrict heights of new buildings or additions over 35' and increase setbacks up to an additional 20'." In Staff's opinion, if the structure cannot be limited in overall height to 35', then it is not proper for this location. The claim by Pacific Northwest Bell is that the structure height is necessary in order to compensate for signal accuracy, anticipating an additional three feet of growth by trees to the east of the dish located on Emerick Street. The estimate is that three feet of tree growth would occur in approximately a ten year period. Phil Patterson, architect responsible for the drawings of the pro- posed antenna, stated that there are microwaves repeater stations throughout the area, and with approval of the proposed application, Historic Commission Minutes February 4, 1987 'I"age 3 it would enable Pacific Northwest Bell to have the capacity to tie in to the system. He maintained he made every effort to design the least obtrusive structure possible, thus the single mast for the microwave dish. Dave Wand, microwave radio engineer for Pacific Northwest Bell, then presented pictures of the building with a mock up design of the antenna constructed of cardboard and lumber placed in the proposed location. He stated the actual dish will be two feet deep and the ray dome will be three feet (an elliptical shape). After being questioned as to why the location had to be on the Pacific Northwest Bell building~and explained one main concern is because of economic reasoning, for example, acquisition or leasing land. Also, the signal would be weaker if located at a different site and then relayed to the PNB building. Tom McGill, director of community relations for Pacific Northwest Bell, then informed the Commission that Ashland has become the long distance server in the Rogue Valley. The microwave antenna would enable Pacific Northwest Bell to furnish state of the art telecom- munications to the customers of the Ashland area, providing a link between Ashland and the South Central Oregon area. There is a need, he explained, to be able to provide an economic approach to serve the public. Lewis questioned the life span of the antenna. Wand stated it is strictly mechanical, and that it would be at the mercy of tree growth and that when it would be detrimental to service, they would have to look at another service. In answering Lewis' question, he guessed the life span would be 30 to 40 years. Public Testimony Ken Droscher 164 6th Street Expressed vehement opposition to the application. He stated after encouraging the establishment of the Historic District, he feels it is a slap in the face to the Historic Commission to ask for approval. He also feels that if it is approved, it will set a precedence and will happen again down the road. Teresa Thomas 692 B Street Stated she assumes the telephone company has more resources than the citizens and can just as well locate elsewhere. She is afraid more dishes will be located in the area if this application is approved and declared she will do anything to oppose it. Lewis informed Thomas there are already numerous satellite dishes in the area, some of which he can see from his home. She also expressed Historic Commission Minutes February 4, 1987 .~age 4 concern about the "microwave pollution" and asked for concrete data from PNB regarding this. Zelpha Hutton 59 6th Street Does not think the building is necessarily obtrusive, but does think the dish is. She expressed concern with view property as far away as Scenic Drive. When she questioned Patterson about the color, he stated it could be any color. ' Barbara Morley 661 B Street Street Stated she is a realtor and concerned about the valuation of property if the antenna is installed. Eric Setterberg 165 6th Street Feels this is definitely not an aesthetic improvement. Ri ta Woods 775 East Main Street Questioned the height of the pine tree that was planted when the building was constructed in 1960. It is now 30' high and represents the fast growth of trees in the area. She questioned the location of the antenna in relation to the trees. David Feinstein 777 East Main Street Expressed his strong feelings for the Historic District and stated the antenna would obscure the view of the skyline because it would stick out. Harry Hutton 59 6th Street Stated the ilntenna would be directly in ,his view and that there should be the option to located it elsewhere. Robin Guerin 77 6th Street Loves the neighborhood, but the antenna would definitely put a damper on it. Historic Commission Minutes February 4, 1987 'J>age 5 Ian Judge 657 C Street Questioned that in the event of a natural disaster, would the antenna be an asset or detriment. Mr. Wand stated PNB has backup power and they would still be able to operate. Barbara Droscher 164 6th Street Questioned the fact that the current facility is obsolete. McGill answered that it was the AT&T station that is obsolete and that PNB would like to update its equipment. Teresa Thomas then questioned Jannusch about the zoning. Jannusch stated the Pacific Northwest Bell building is a pre-existing use and that the antenna would be a permitted use in the Land Use Ordinance if the height was 35'. Kramer closed the meeting to public testimony. Edwards again questioned why the antenna could not be located in a different area. Wand answered it would have to be protected, it would lose its signal and would have the same problems with aesthetics, trees, height of buildings, acquisition of property, etc. in other areas, and that economics would be a major factor in moving the antenna to another location. Cloer questioned lowering the antenna. Wand stated it would prob- ably be possible to relocate the antenna on the building to bring the height down, but it would be even more visible. It was the general consensus of the Commission that there would be a negative impact in the area. After discussion, Cloer moved to deny the application on the basis of exceeding the height limitation, that the Historic Commission express its concern that the existing building is an intrusion into the neighborhood and that every effort be made to reduce that intrusion. Dode seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. PA #87-018 Solar Variance 316 Scenic Drive Marcella Mizerak Jannusch reported the applicant is asking to allow additional solar encroachment onto her neighbor's property. Because of the shape and slope of both pieces of property, it is necessary the applicant be granted the Solar Variance in order to build a house. The neighbor whose property is affected has signed a solar waiver. Historic Commission Minutes February 4, 1987 '~age 6 Cloer moved and Hudson seconded to forward this application to the Planning Commission without comment because it is not of historical significance. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC BENEFIT Copies of the proposed Ordinance regarding the definition of public benefit were passed to Commission members. Kramer explained a draft had been typed and forwarded to Ron Salter, City Attorney, and Phil Arnold, City Council liaison. After receiving comments from both attorneys, the draft in its present form was derived. After discussing the wording of the Ordinance, Hudson moved and Lewis seconded to forward the Ordinance to the City Council after minor revisions are made. Motion passed unanimously. ORIENTATION MEETING It was decided the Historic Commission will meet on February 17, 1987 for its orientation meeting. At this meeting, Planning Staff will be present to answer questions concerning all aspects of the Land Use Ordinance. BUTLER-PEROZZI FOUNTAIN MARKER Kramer stated he felt it would be a nice gesture to place an etched marker with the history of the fountain (when it was first dedicated, when it was rededicated, etc.) at the fountain site. Jannusch has talked with Ken Mickelsen, Director of Parks and Recreation, who was receptive to the idea. It will be necessary to go through the Parks Commission for finalization, however. Mickelsen stated it is possible to get rock from the canyon and the Parks Department would set it up if the Historic Commission would pay for the etching. Kramer and Jannusch will investigate further. OTHER BUSINESS Cloer stated that some time ago, Terry Grant had suggested the Historic Commission give annual 'awards to someone who should be recognized as contributing to the historic integrity of the City of Ashland. The 'Commi ssion agreed it would be a good idea. It will be discussed further at the next meeting. Jannusch stated the kiosk at the fountain needs to be updated. While Diane DeBey was a member of the Historic Commission, she was in charge of updating this. We need volunteers to work on it. Kramer stated Diane DeBey had contacted him in regard to her posi- tion as Regional Advisor to the Historic Preservation League of Oregon. Because she is no longer a member of the Historic Commis- sion, she has turned in her resignation as she no longer keeps up Historic Commission Minutes February 4, 1987 '~age 7 to date on the Commission business. The person in the Regional Advisor position would write short articles for the HPLO newsletter about historic events in the area. Anyone who is interested should contact the Historic Preservation League of Oregon at 243-1923 for more information. ADJOURNMENT There being no ,further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. ,- " " -,- CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES MAPLE STREET VISIBILITY ONE-WAY SIGNS LITHIA WAY/C ST, BOAT PARKING ONE-WAY ALLEY PARKING SPACE "'OR HANDICAPPED MINUTES TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION January 28, 1987 The meeting was called to order at 4:05 P.M. by Chair pro tem Bill Marschall. Other Commissioners in atten- dance were Walter Schraub, Gary Cretan, Bev Lamb, Phil Gates, and Phil Arnold. The minutes of the November 26, 1986, meeting were approved as amended by inserting the names of persons who testified. Staff recommended that two parking spaces be eliminated at two driveways of medical centers on Maple St. and that property owners be encouraged to trim landscaping materials to improve visibility. The Commission voted to recommend to the Council that the four parking spaces be eliminated. Staff reported that the Texaco Service Station on Lithia Way at C Street is still planning to add a car wash next Spring. At the time of construction they will be required to install one-way signs on C Street to direct traffic exiting the service station and car wash. Staff noted that the City Council recently,passed an ordinance which limits parking of boats (and other items) on streets for a limited time. The Commission received testimony concerning the possibility of making the North-South alley between Siskiyou Boulevard and Iowa, east of Mountain Ave. one way to the north. Two persons spoke in favor and one spoke against the proposal. In addition letters were received from six persons and the City Planning Commission opposing the plan. The Commission voted to post the alley for 15 MPH speed, requested that Staff look at the width of the Boulevard entrance to the alley, and requested Staff to suggest to the dental centers that they'alert their patients to the speeding/parking problem. Aubrey Hill, M.D., requested that the first parking space at the intersection of Palm Ave. and Siskiyou Blvd. for southbound traffic, be marked for handicapped persons. The Commission voted to recommend this proposal to the Council. . , ~, M~nutes - TSC - Jan. 28, 1987 Page Two GLENWOOD DRIVE John A. Geddes, 775 Glenwood Drive, requested that consideration be given to removing parking from the north and west sides of Glenwood Drive, from Pleasant Way to Beach St. The Commission decided to review this matter at the next meeting. Staff will notify affected property owners prior to the next meeting. WATER AND VAN NESS RR UNDERPASS Kim Lewis, 1035 N. Main St. noted his concern for traffic safety at the RR underpass on Water Street. He had recently been involved in an accident at that location and indicated that additional warning was needed. Staff will suggest additional signing measures at the next meeting. SEAT BELTS A letter was received from Sandra Flicker, Director, Traffic Safety Now, requesting that the Commission adopt a resolution supporting a required seat belt use law. Chairman Arnold indicated that if such a law is passed, that an air-bag protection will be precluded. The Commission took no action on the request. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 5:20 P.M. \ tLfuA/ r:Z. tU~ / oJu Allen A. Alsing, Staff/Advisor ." . BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT ., DATE ,1anlJary 1 qR7 1t OF VALUATION PROJECT PERMITS I. Residential A. Sinnle Famil" Ro<idenro 3 198 722 B. Remodel/Additions ? 7 500 c. Foundation 4 11 300 D. Mechanical (Gas furnaces aa' w,tI>r hp,to~ \ n 26 008 E. Plllmh;nn ? ? 4q~ F. Woodstove Installations < 625 II. Multi-Femilv O,,<;~"nro A. Mnvp n"nlr.. "'~"n~,Hnn , 3 100 I I I. Non-Residential A. Remodel 1 6,500 B. Reroof 1 ? 'lpn C. Mechanical 2 4,490 D. Plumbinn 1 lnn IV. Woodstove Insoections 4 ---- ~OTAL THIS HONTH 37 263 020 TOTAL THIS HONTH LAST YEAR (Jan. 1986) 34 1 230 001 'T'OTAL ' " 1987 (Julv 86-Jan.87l THIS YEAR 1986 - 332 6.353.622 ITOTAL LAST YEAR 19~5 - 1986 (July 85-Jan. 86) 362 4 661 373 TOTAL FEES THIS MONTH THIS MONTH 3,389.86 THIS YEAR 70 ,877.66 LAST YEAR 8,875.86 TOTAL INSPECTIONS THIS MONTH THIS ~lONTl' 126 THIS YEAR 1411 LAST YEAR 159 NOTE: "This year" refers to the total so far for the c:.urrent fiscal year. .' ' " Single Family Residential 669 Prim 32 No. Wightman 67 No, Wightman Commercial . " JANUARY 1987 NEW CONSTRUCTION Contractor Edsel Roberts Medinger Construction Medinger Construction Contractor Valuation 80,000 60,722 58,000 Valuation .. c#Jfl em 0 r a udum February 9, 1987 '(fin: Mayor and City Council Jffrnm: L.R. King, Fire Chie:fi-Je,c/,', ~uhjed: MONTHLY REPORT - JANUARY During the first month of this year Ashland Fire Department responded to 79 alarms. Following the trend of increased calls for service this is up 13 calls for the same period in 1986. (16%) Over 100 commercial inspections were conducted in January with 56 violations of the Uniform Fire Code abated. One of the locations inspected for fire hazards was the Oregon Shakespearian Festival Theater, shops and offices. This month we provided training classes for fire personnel on Safety during a Natural Gas Emergency conducted by C.P. National and Fire Investigation - Responsibility of fire- fighters taught by the State Fire Marshal training personnel. ~emorandum February 12, 1987 ~ w~ ~~ Honorable Mayor and City Council Williams, Director of Electric Utilities ~~~ Electric Department Activities for January 1987 The following is a condensed report of the Electric Department activities for January 1987. The department installed 6 new underground services and 3 new overhead services. There were two temporary services installed and two were removed. There were two services replaced. We responded to 35 requests for location of underground power lines and repaired 8 street lights. Seven transformers were installed for a total of 260 KVA and five were removed for a total of 225 KVA, adding 35 KVA to our system. We installed 810' of conduit and 2010' of wire this month. There were 343 delinquent account notices worked, and 98 delinquent accounts were disconnected. There were 6 new meters installed and 13 replaced. We had 194 connect orders and 142 disconnect orders for a total of 336 orders. One pole was installed at Croman Mill to raise power line and one pole was removed at 897 Beach. The meter department tested 49 single-phase meters and 7 three-phase meters which were recalibrated or replaced. Employees attended monthly safety meeting.