Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-1105 Council Mtg PACKET ~1.0~ Imoortant: Any citizen attending council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair willreeognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to be heard, and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL November 5, 1996 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers. II. ROLL CALL /' APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting minutes of October 15, 1996. f IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS: 1. Presentation by Jan Janssen and LA CASA Committee regarding the proposed skatepark in Ashland. V. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees. 2. Monthly Departmental Reports - October, 1996. 3. Quarterly Report from Finance Director. 4. Report of Ferrero Geologic regarding feasibility of well for Oak Knoll Meadows subdivision/Oak Knoll Golf Course. 5. Letter from City Attorney to OWRD requesting re-notice of proposed final order for well in Oak Knoll Meadows subdivision. ~ Authorization for the Mayor and City Recorder to sign Quitclaim Deeds for two easements. 7. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Darrell Gee to Bicycle Commission. 8. Ad Hoc \JlLfzens' Communication Draft Plan. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS (festimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker. All hearings must conclude by 9:30 p.m. or be continued to a subsequent meeting). 1. Proposed levy of assessments of Oak Street Local Improvement District. VII. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Limited to 5 minutes per sp~aker and 15 minutes total.) VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Decision on request for refund of appeal fee on P.A. 96-047 - Birnam Woods Subdivision. IX. NEW & MIScELLANEOUS BUSINESS: X. 1. Proposals for the restoration of bus service for the City of Ashland. 2. Update by Cascade Earth Sciences, Ltd. on status of demonstration Wetlands/Soil Filtration Project. 3. Memorandum from City Attorney regarding city liability to employees for PERS pickup after the demise of Measure 8. 4. ~ea-I'i'\~ct ~~ tv U 0 p&tlc-<es o INANCES RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS: Memorandum of Understanding between City of Ashland and Ashland ~arks and Recreation Commission for Wetlands Demonstration Project. 0 . Reading by title only of a Resolution exempting the Wightman/Fordyce fCC-a...., Improvement Project from standard competitive bidding procedures. ~1 vtv. ~ Reading by title only of a Resolution reinstating PERS pickup for certain ~ . -(Jw "- elected officials in order to comply with the invalidation of Ballot Measure 8 (1994). @ Authorization for City Administrator to sign Fund Exchange Agreement with c:l ODOT for E. Main Widening Project. ~ Authorization for_City Administrator to sign Engineering Services Contract for Phase I of the WWTP Upgrade Project. LY ~-h 6\1 -W.5J Oa-l $t. u 0 OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS ~ XI. XII. ADJOURNMENT .. M 0 NTH L.Y R E P 0 R T ASHLAND POLICE Vol. 1 No.8 September, 1996 . . . . y#/. :~'<~<<~.:'.:#~{::;::;:::'::B;l~;' Crime is down, but we're busier! That's right! It's hard to explain when you try to do it with just statistics. Crime in general this year (January through September) is down. Our case count is down, but our activity level is not My assumption is that it is best explained by our service level decisions. APD has resolved to ensure equal service to all citizens and to take the extra steps necessary to assist our citizens. This service level,along with specialized programs to meet the growing variety of needs within our community, especially those related to youth, is most probably the reason. Linda Hoggatt, Editor Crime Statistics: """January thru September""" PART 1 1996 1995 Homicide 1 1 Rape 1 5 Robbery 6 6 Agg.Assault . 1 7 Burglary Residential 70 64 Non-residential 8 40 Shoplifting 135 141 theft from MV 69 140 MV Parts-accessories 5 43 Bicycle Theft 70 80 Theft from building 30 65 Other Thefts 154 179 Motor Vehicle thefts 24 34 Arson 3 9 TOTALS 623 814 Residential burglary and theft of motor vehicle parts remain the only two categories in which there has been an increase over 1995. Part I crime is down 23.4% from 1995 (623 vs 814). Calls for Service Sep 95 Police 764 Medical Calls 62 Fire Calls 14 Pass Off*" 46 911 Calls 512 **(to another 911 center) Sep 96 828 144 24 30 427 charged previously to the police budget Chief Brown complimented all members of the department for their continuing safety record. Chronic Nuisance Ordinance takes effect.. Less than 3 weeks after the Chronic Nuisance Ordinance went into effect ~ was tested, with success. A residence had been identified on Beach Street as falling under the ordinance after police officers were called to respond twice for complaints within a 2 day period for loud parties. In an effort to minimize confusion the . Community Service Officer (CSO), Wendy Svaren made personal contact with the landlord prior to the letter of complaint going out to both the landlord and the resident Her personal contact aided the landlord to clarify any questions on eactly how the ordinance works and was met w~h much cooperation. The residence in question has not been a problem since. . Animal eradication becoming a daily event for police officers Time was when officers would have an occasional case of rounding up cows and returning them to their pasture or maybe even a loose horse or two. But today's daily log reads like animal control for the county. Citings of rats, citizens wanting deer eradicated from their yards and removal of a possom from their living room, a 5'8" python in the upper duck pond area that was eyeing his next meal, and courgar sightings are among the various cases being handled. Worker's Comp claims low for Police! ,= ~ ~~ I.~~ ~v,' ~t', I A recent report from the Finance Department revealed the Police Department has a GREAT safety record. Worker's comp claims were low enough to net a rebate of approximately $28,000 that was '.:" W~h regard to cougars, there has been much in the new lately. While we have had cilings around Ashland there is generally no emergency s~uation. General precautions, such as walking or jogging in pairs, not running from the animal if coming across one but backing slowly away, taking a dog with you while walking, etc are recommended. Any sightings should be reported to the Police Department immediately !! Cross State designation given to two of our investigators, At a recent swearing in ceremony in Medford, Detectives Parlette and Snow were sworn in as officers with authority in California. The cross designation, allowing investigators to have police authority in California, reduces red tape when an officer has to go over the state line to do follow up in the neighboring county. Members of Jacnet, Medord Police, Jackson County Sheriffs office and others were also sworn in at this ceremony. Crime Prevention Month activities planned.. In cooperation with Cities declaring October Crime Prevention Month, Officer Sm~h has planned brown bag forums for every Monday of the month. These forums will be held from noon to 1 :00 in the Council Chambers. The schedule is: Oct 7 - Chronic Nuisance Ordinance Oct 14- Workplace violence, the role of law enforcement Oct 21- Drugs in our society Oct 28- Selling up a Neighborhood watch program in your area Crime prevention take everyone's involvement. Please encourage neighbors, friends, business community members to attend these informative lunch hour sessions. Municipal Parking fees will increase in late Octo her. Toward the later part of October parking fees will be increasing. Judge Allen Drescher, on September 27th issued an order increasing fees to $9 for overtime parking; $15 for illegal parking other than blocking a fire hydrant and handicapped zone; $25 for blocking a fire hydrant; and, $190 for handicap zone violations. The added costs will not go into effect until the end of October as new ticket books have to be ordered with the changes. We have not had any parking fines increase by the court in the last 5 years. Bits and Pieces: Recruitment for police officer has begun to fill the patrol position that will open up when the School Resource Officer begins their duties sometime in late December or early January The selection process for School Resource Officer has begun and the officer should be assigned late October or early November. The officer wil attend SRO training at the Police Academy in Monmouth prior to beginning hislher new assigned duties. Gary Brown was the guest speaker for the 102nd graduating class for the Police Academy. His message to the new police officers was "Ten points I Wish Someone had told me when I was a Rookie". Officer Steve Maclennan was part of that graduating class on October 4th after completeing a state required eight week course in basic law enforcement. Our Transient population and violations for skateboarding have been increasing since the last week in September...presumably due to the upcoming Barter Fair October 18th & 19th in the Applegate area. The Oregonian did an article on the Police Departments decision to use Jeep vehicles for law enforcement in September. 9-1-1 Childrens Fair was a big success. The event this year was bigger than ever. Representatives from Ashland Police, Medford Fire, Ashland FirelRescue, Fire District 5, Phoenix Fire, Ashland Center for Emergency Services (ACES - Ashland 911), ODOT and Red Cross all participated. Barb Brown was features in this months NENA (National Emergency Number Association) magazine .for her efforts in establishing our 9-1-1 education program. Plans for patrol staffing for Halloween have begun. Halloween will be on a Thursday this year and a "dimer" night for some of the local pubs. \ MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL October 15, 1996 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Reid, Hauck, Hagen, and Wheeldon were present. Councilors Laws and Thompson were absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular meeting of October 1, 1996 were approved as presented with the exception of one change to page 1, Councilors Wheeldon and Reid mjs to approve consent agenda and requested item 3 be pulled oft consent agenda. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring October 21-29th as "1996 National Red Ribbon Celebration Week." 2. Proclamation declaring October 20,1996 as "Senior Citizen Day." 3. Proclamation declaring October 27-November 2,1996 as 'World Population Awareness Week." 1. Mayor Golden read aloud the Proclamation declaring October 21-29th as "1996 National Red Ribbon Celebration Week." 2. Mayor Golden read aloud the Proclamation declaring October 20, 1996 as "Senior Citizen Day." 3. Mayor Golden read aloud the Proclamation declaring October 27-November 2, 1996 as "World Population Awareness Week." CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees. 2. Monthly Departmental Reports - September, 1996. 3. City Administrator's Monthly Report - September, 1996. 4. Approval of Tree Commission's Request to participate in Green Thumb Project. Councilors Hagen, Hauck mjs to approve consent agenda. Voice vote: all AYES, Motion passed. (Council Meeting 10/15/96) I PUBLIC FORUM Dorothy Smith, 708 Indiana St./Discussed appropriateness as to the $250.00 fee paid by neighbors in the Burnham Woods Subdivision and asked the city refund the $250.00 to be redistributed back to the 12 neighbors. She indicated the hearing regarding the lot subdivision from a six-lot to a five-lot was improperly conducted and it was not the obligation of the property owners to make an appeal. Mayor Golden described there was no precedence for doing this. She further explained that a motion was made on the six-lot division and, as it did not pass, a motion to deny was heard. One vote was moved over to deny because it was a tie on a motion to approve, so the chairperson suggested a five-lot subdivision instead and it was agreed which the planning commission approved. City Attorney Paul Nolte indicated the fee was used to offset the cost of the appeal; there was nothing in the ordinance to address a refund and he believes there was a significant disagreement as to what the planning commission actually did. Councilor Hagen said he had met with planning staff regarding the five- and six-unit plan and he wanted to postpone issue until next council meeting to hear the other side of the story. City Administrator Brian Almquist stated that any interested party could appeal the planning decision but the purpose of the appeal fee was to cover city's costs. Mayor Golden requested procedures for the waiver be given to Dorothy Smith and it. was agreed that this item will be placed on the Agenda for the next council meeting on November 5, 1996. Public Forum Close 7:20 p.m. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Memorandum from Director of Parks and Recreation regarding application for a ground water permit which would allow for the installation of a well to maintain the pond in Oak Knoll Meadows subdivision. Public Hearing Open 7:20 p.m. Barbara Bean, 510 Terrace/Read aloud her memorandum addressed to the Mayor and Council members regarding the application for additional water rights for the municipal golf course. She felt a water permit to keep the pond full at all times is a mistake. 2 (Council Meeting 10/15/96) , Ron Roth, 6950 Old 99Sjlndicated he had talked with Ken Mickelsen and Hollie Cannon about the concept of wells going dry. He feels TID water could be utilized to fill the pond beyond the irrigation season by taking over the Ashland Canal. Does not feel city should apply for a permit to put water in a pond without serious negotiations with TI D as to cost. Dudley Joy, 1060 Oak Knoll Dr.jlndicated he represents the nine homeowners surrounding the pond and expressed concern over water in the pond being depleted. Is concerned about aesthetics, wildlife, and people walking the banks around the pond. Jerry Stein, 806 Cyprus Point Loop/Explained he is a homeowner adjacent to the pond. He voiced concern that when the water goes down the view of the pond is unpleasant. Feels it is beyond the expertise of city council to discuss water resources and whether it is appropriate to have a well or not and wants the State Water Resources Board to handle this. Chris Skreptos, 4424 Highway 66/Discussed that he and his neighbors oppose the well. He feels there may have been misrepresentations for the water usage and indicated they would have to haul water, dig another well or leave. He questioned whether it is prudent for the city to attempt to take the water available for groundwater to irrigate a golf course and thinks this is an inappropriate use of water given the grave water shortages in the area. He referenced a letter from Mr. Vanderpool who was not present. Mayor Golden read aloud the letter from Jacqueline Moffat opposing the digging of a well for the Oak Knoll Golf Course. Parks Director Ken Mickelsen addressed the issue of the pond as an irrigation pond for the golf course and the possibility that a well could solve water problems of the course. Stated there is over a multi-million dollar investment in the Oak Knoll Golf Course and it is important to maintain a certain standard as well as being good neighbors. He indicated the main purpose of having the well is to irrigate the golf course and if TID were to commit to grant water earlier and later in the year there would be no need for the well. He added that during TID season there is no problem with water and the well would not be used. City Administrator Brian Almquist indicated he has spoken with Hollie Cannon regarding the renewal of the 795 acre contract and whether that water could be used in dry years. He reiterated the problem when the water is turned off at the Greensprings Power Plant and could not justify paying the maintenance costs on the ditch from the Greensprings Power Plant into the city to TID to keep the pond full. (Council Meeting 10/15/96) 3 Councilor Reid asked whether the option would be available during a dry water year to not top off the pond and to only use the well when critical. Councilor Hauck questioned the proposed final order which indicated the usage period was March 1 to October 31, as this is the same time as TID usage. Parks Director Ken Mickelson replied that was a recommendation from the Water Resource Board to the city to only use until October 31, as that is when the pond is topped off and at that point the golf course does not normally need to be irrigated. Councilor Hagen discussed that the city had been focusing on the sale of water outside the city and questioned if the City had considered using drought tolerant grasses and whether there are better alternatives and options for the golf course. Parks Director Ken Mickelson indicated the critical parts of the golf course are the greens and tees and only certain kinds of grasses can be used and it is important to protect the investment of the golf course. Councilor Hagen inquired of City Attorney Paul Nolte the possibility of putting wells in rural areas for city use and if there would be a liability aspect if they did. City Attorney Paul Nolte indicated that a finding of water would have to be made first by the Water Resource Department. He further stated that it would not interfere with senior water rights for wells. The limit of liability is that if a new well should interfere with other wells with senior water rights the use of the newer well would have to be discontinued. Records i;Jave to be kept of water levels. Councilor Wheeldon asked whether a well was budgeted in the operating expenses in the golf course and asked how much a well costs. She questioned pursuing the TID . option, finding costs involved and that this should be brought before council. She indicated she was willing to have the State make the final judgment. Parks Director Ken Mickelsen replied a well would cost in the region of $10,000 for the type of well being considered. Chris Skreptos indicated private wells do not require a permit unless you draw more than 5000 gallons of water per day. His feeling was that the quantities of water asked for and for which the permit was tentatively approved are insufficient. Mayor Golden addressed the issue of the residents in the area of the airport who were unable to hook up to city water and the need for them to haul their water. Her feeling was the issue of the well should be settled at the state level. She questioned whether the pond would make it to the following year if it was topped off when TID water 4 (Council Meeting 10/15/96) . turned off and it was never used for.irrigation. She suggested questioning TID further and requesting an extension to obtain further information. City Administrator Brian Almquist indicated surface waters, water coming off the freeway and a soda water spring continue to be used into the fall and it is uneconomical to use potable water. He stated it was not possible to extend a season with TID to irrigate the golf course and felt it was not a legitimate use of extending the irrigation season. City Attorney Paul Nolte indicated that if nothing is done the permit will go forward and possibly be appealed if ultimately issued. If the application is withdrawn or if Water Resource Department is asked .to stop the process it would end there. Chris Skreptos indicated that under the timetable being operated the time for appealing the well is November 1. He suggested that if anything is to be done it should be appealed by that date and he will file for a contested case. He said the cost of an appeal is $200 and it is a formal procedure with a Judge from the Water Resources Department. Councilor Reid indicated she preferred to go along with the Parks Board's wishes and take this to the state level but wanted to balance the needs of citizens and their investments and neighbors who live outside the city. She urged the city to move ahead with the permit process and continue with the TID option. Parks Director Ken Mickelson felt it would be a mistake to delay the permit process and it would be up to the people who want to appeal to do that and there would be no cost to the city. He reiterated that the Parks Department only recently received notification that the well was approved and urged the city not to delay going forward with the permit. ().. >OC{ e.,...h A D-S '. ~J Councilor Hagen suggested waterfis used inefficiently and inquired as to the possibility of putting pipes in from Hyatt and'Howard Prairie. He opined the city hold this issue for 30 days and not lose our place, otherwise we go ahead. He also indicated that the rains are coming so the city would have time to delay and investigate the matter further. Councilor Hauck suggested that we not cut off the option available but keep the permit process moving along and investigate alternatives. Mayor Golden reiterated she would prefer to delay as this puts the city in a potential no-win situation and believes there is an opportunity to work towards something that will work for everybody. Mayor Golden felt there is an opportunity to work with existing agencies and neighbors and to delay the process. She suggested a motion (Council Meeting 10/15/96) 5 to seek a continuance on this particular issue and bring information back to the council study session on October 16. Councilors Hagen/Wheeldon m/s to seek a continuance on permit and bring Information back to the council study session on October 16. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Memorandum from Fire Chief regarding opportunity to repurchase Ashland's first motorized fire apparatus (1915 American La France). Fire Chief Keith Woodley indicated the merits of the fire apparatus and its history. He will meet with Jill Turner and Brian Almquist as to how financing can be accomplished. Councilors Reid/Hagen m/s to approve purchase of fire apparatus.. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed. 2. Designation of Mayor as voting delegate to League of Oregon Cities and Susan Reid as alternative. Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s the Mayor as voting delegate to League of Oregon Cities and Susan Reid as alternative. Voice vote: All AYES. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading, by title only, of "An Ordinance Establishing a Pesticide Policy for Department and Divisions of the City of Ashland." Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s to approve Ordinance #2790. Roll Call vote: Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon, YES. Motion passed, 2. Resolution regarding Financing of Street Assessment Bonds. City Administrator Brian Almquist read memorandum a resolution of the city council of the City of Ashland authorizing the issuance and sale of a limited tax improvement bond. Finance Director Jill Turner indicated the last time assessment bonds were purchased was in 1990, so these don't come up very often. Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s to approve Resolution #96-43. Roll Call vote: Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon, YES.. Motion passed. 6 (Council Meeting 10/15/96) " . OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Councilor Reid indicated that in Seattle public power .is underwriting public radio and she felt it a good idea for Oregon public power. City Administrator Brian Almquist indicated he would look into the matter. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 9:03 p.m. (Council Meeting 10/15/96) 7 City of Ashland PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES September 23, 1996 A ITENDANCE: Present: Absent: Pat Adams, AI Alsing, Bob Bennett, Teri Coppedge, Laurie MacGraw, Director Ken Mickelsen. None I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Coppedge called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Department Office, 340 S. Pioneer Street. II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA Chair Coppedge indicated that following the Regular Meeting she would like to have the Commission meet in Executive Session to discuss land acquisition. By consensus, the Commission decided to do so. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting - August 27. 1996 Commissioner Alsing said that at the bottom of Page 3 the minutes were written to indicate that he had both made the motion and seconded the motion. He said that he had seconded the motion bu( that he was not certain who made the motion. Commi-sioner MacGraw indicated that she had made the motion. ;"1". Commissioner Adams made a motion to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 27, 1996 as corrected. Commissioner MacGraw seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no IV. REVIEW OF FINANCES A. Approval of previous month's disbursements Commissioner Adams made a motion to approve the previous month's disbursements as indicated by checks #14050 through #14531 in the amount of $270,229.43. Commissioner MacGraw seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no V. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. Discussion and approval of trail lavout for Ashland section of Bear Creek Greenwav trail svstem Karen Smith from Jackson County Public Works and Parks and Wes Reynolds from the Bear Creek Greenway Foundation were in the audience to answer any questions the Commission might have of the proposed fmal design for the Greenway Trail through Ashland. Regular Meeting - September 23, 1996 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 2 Greenwav Trail - CONTINUED Regarding the very large bridge, Commissioners Adams and Alsing inquired about on-going maintenance and possible replacement of the bridge should severe damage OCcur in the future. In discussion it was determined that the bridge would be owned by the City and therefore future costs would be the City's responsibility. Ms. Smith said that the bridge was being engineered in such a manner that it would not be damaged easily and, that should such a severe flood occur which would damage the bridge, disaster relief funds would most likely be available for the City. In response to a secondary question regarding formal agreements between the City and County for maintenance, Ms. Smith indicated that none of the cities along the trail had requested formal agreements, different cities handled maintenance of the trail in different ways, but that it could be worked out if the Commission wanted one. Director Mickelsen said that the general understanding with the County had been that once the trail system is developed that it will then be the Commission's responsibility to maintain it and establish whatever other amenities the Commission deems appropriate. Commissioner Adams made a recommendation that an agreement be drawn up between the Commission and the County regarding future maintenance of the trail once in place. By consensus, Commissioners indicated that they felt it would be appropriate for a simple agreement to be written which would express the intent of the Commission and the County regarding future responsibility for the trail so that, 25 years from now when different persons are responsible for the system, there would be something to indicate what was anticipated when the trail was established. Director Mickelsen and Karen Smith.said that they would work on drafting such an agreement or letter of intent. Evan Archard was present in the au1ience to address the location of the bridge. He said th<.t he shared a property line with the park and felt that the size and location of the bridge was a serious mistake in that it would be the worst place if a severe flood should occur. He ",' .' indicated that he felt the decision was being rushed in that there was still a portion of the trail at the Billings property which had not yet been acquired and felt that there were possibly better locations for a bridge down stream. Ms. Smith addressed his concerns by indicating that OBEC was under a deadline to submit paperwork by December 1, 1996 to go through the review process and that in order to maintain federal funding for the project work had to begin by next spring. She said that she believed that OBEC, the engineering consulting frrm, has been very open minded and community aware; that they have looked at all the alternative sites for the bridge and that, other than going down to the Billings property there was not a better location. However, Mr. Billings has been very frrm in indicating that he would be unwilling to give up any land which would be appropriate for a bridge because of his own plans for the property. She said that in 1989 they had originally anticipated that the bridge would be located at the spot which now is the site of a heron rookery. The site under consideration now is the next best site and the project is under a time crunch. MOllON After some further discussion, Commissioner Adams made a motion to approve the Greenway Trail project and plan as presented with the understanding that minor adjustments to the plan can be made if warranted. Commissioner Alsing seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no Regular Meeting - September 23, 1996 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 3 Commissioner MacGraw left the meeting early. B. Discussion and approval of policies for new ice skating facility Commissioners reviewed a memorandum from staff outlining a possible cooperative rental agreement for use of the outdoor seating area of the Lithia Park Cafe from Larry Cooper. The concept would be to use that area for skate rentals and off-hour concessions during the months of operation for the rink this year. Director Mickelsen said that he had been contacted by Mr. Cooper who indicated that he or a lessee would have the cafe open for business during the months the rink was in operation, and, in subsequent discussion, that he and Mr. Cooper had come up with the concept of having the cafe open from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. with the Department offering limited concessions during off-peak hours. He said that he believed that this would be a cooperative arrangement which would benefit both parties. Mr. Cooper was present in the audience to answer any questions the Commission might have concerning the proposal. He said that the price he set for renting the outdoor seating area was very low because he felt that it would help get the rink off to a good start this first season. In response to questions, Mr. Cooper said that it would be a one year agreement but that he would certainly consider having an option to renew in the agreement if the Commission would like. The fact that the property was on the market for sale was discussed but Mr. Cooper said that any sales agreement would not interfere with this season's operation. MOllON Commissioner Adams made a motion to have a rental agreement drafted for rental of the patio area of the Lithia Park Cafe for 1 fee of $600.00 per month through March 30, 1996 which would include an option to renew. Commissioner Bennett seconded. "i'. . The vote was: 4 yes - 0 no Commissioners reviewed and discussed information concerning hours of operation and . fees for the ice skating rink. Cost projections related to various fees versus costs were reviewed. MOllON Commissioner Adams made a motion to adopt fees of $2.00 for skate rental and $1.50 for admission. Commissioner Bennett seconded. The vote was: 4 yes - 0 no MOllON With minor modifications, Commissioner Adams made a motion to adopt the ice skating rink policies and hours of operation as presented with the option of making further modification during the season if necessary. Commissioner Alsing seconded. . The vote was: 4 yes - 0 no C. Open Forum None Regular Meeting - September 23, 1996 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 4 VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Report from committee on skate board proposal Conunissioners reviewed a memorandum from the proposed skate board park conunittee with recommendations regarding the Commission's support for the project. Committee members Commissioners MacGraw and Adams recommended to the Commission that it set aside the open area of Water Street Park until July 1997 for the proposed facility, that it authorize the expenditure of up to $2,500 in architectural fees for a design and up to $47,500 for construction of the facility if the community based group can raise the balance of the monies needed for the project. Conunissioner Adams indicated that the group anticipated a total of approximately $100,000 would be needed for the project. She also said that she was personally recommending that the Conunission move forward to adopt the committee's recommendation because she believed that skateboarding was an activity being pursued by a large number of young people ranging in age from 5 to 25 and that this particular community group was focused and conunitted to attempting to raise the balance of the funds necessary for the project. She hoped that the community would respond to them as generously as it did to the ice skating rink project. The memorandum did not indicate that the Commission would be involved with the design work other than contributing up to $2,500 in frnancial assistance. Commissioner Coppedge said that she felt that the Commission needed to be involved in the design process. After some discussion, Commissioners asked Director Mickelsen to contact the group to suggest that they keep in touch during the design process so that the Conunission can make strategic recommendations if necessary. The intent was to assure everyone that when the final design was presented that it would be one which the Conunission could approve. MonON Conunissioner Alsing made a motion to accept the committee's recommendation regarding the skateboard park proposal. Commissioner Bennett seconded. The vote was: 4 yes - 0 no B. Discussion of road to dog park adiacent to Ashland Greenhouses Conunissioner Bennett and Greg Williams of Ashland Greenhouses made a reconunendation to the Commission that it pave the road from Nevada Street to the dog park area as soon as possible. The topic has been discussed in the past and the Department and dog park users have made some effort to minimize the dust and speed but those efforts have not been enough. Mr. Williams said that he has had to replace large fans at his business due to the dust damaging them. MonON After discussion, Commissioner Bennett made a motion to have department staff proceed to have the road paved as soon as possible with one or two speed "lumps" as deemed appropriate by engineering. Commissioner Adams seconded. The vote was: 4 yes - 0 no Regular Meeting - September 23, 1996 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 5 C. Discussion of master Dlan for Oak Knoll Golf Course Director Mickelsen presented the fmal draft of the master plan for Oak Knoll Golf Course. He indicated that the design has been posted at the golf course so that everyone can have the opportunity to look at it prior to a Study Session when it will be looked at for additional conunent and input from golfers and the general public. After brief discussion, Commissioners set the date of November 13th to hold a Study Session to discuss the plan itself as well as timelines and possible funding options to implement the plan. VII. NEW BUSINESS None VIII. COMMUNICATIONS and STAFF REPORTS Director Mickelsen reminded the Commission that the Department and Medford Parks and Recreation were co-hosting the ORPA conference here from October 6 - 9. Commissioners were invited to attend any functions or sessions in which they were interested. Director Mickelsen inquired as to what method the Commission would like to use for reviewing the proposals which will be submitted for gathering additional information for the natural area of N. Mountain Park. Following discussion, Commissioners decided that they would like a committee to review the proposals and make a recommendation to the Commission. Commissioners Coppedge and Alsing volunteered to serve on the committee which would be comprised of themselves, Director Mickelsen, Brian McCarthy, landscape architect for the overall park design, and possibly other community members. Commissioner Bennett will be an alternate fflr either Commissioners Alsing or Coppedge if needed. Director Mickelsen reported that he had received a request from Phoenix High School to hold," its graduation exercises at the Butler Bandshell in Lithia Park. In discussion, the Commissio~ reviewed its existing policy to only permit Ashland High School and S.O.S.C. to hold graduation exercises in the park. Although Commissioners understood the Phoenix students interest in holding graduation exercises in Lithia Park, by consensus, they chose to uphold existing policy and to restrict the use of the park for graduation exercises to Ashland's school, specifically the high school and college. Director Mickelsen said that he still needed to respond to the offered gift of the bust of John McLaren. Commissioner Coppedge said that while in San Francisco recently she had tried to see the bust by going to the DeYoung Museum but had no luck; the bust is not on display and no curators were available who could authorize fmding it in storage. MOTION Commissioner Adams made a motion to decline the offer of the gift of the bust of John Mclaren. Commissioner Bennett seconded. The vote was: 2 yes - 2 no (Alsing, Coppedge) As the motion did not pass, the decision of whether or not to accept the bust is still moot. MOTION Commissioner Adams made a motion to extend the meeting until 10: 15 p.m. Commissioner Alsing seconded. The vote was: 4 yes - 0 no Regular Meeting - September 23, 1996 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 6 COMMUNICATIONS and STAFF REPORTS - CONTINUED Commissioners reviewed a letter from Kate Harlzell and asked that Chair Coppedge answer the letter on behalf of the Commission. IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Adams forwarded an invitation from the Ashland Senior Club which would be celebrating its 35th anniversary at the Community Center the following day. The club meets between 1:00 - 4:00 p.m. and would be thrilled to have Commissioners stop in to say hello. Great food and entertainment. Commissioner Coppedge reported concern about erosion problems and general maintenance along the White Rabbit Trail. She asked that staff take a look to see if anything immediate needs to be done prior to winter. X. UPCOMING MEETING DATES and PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS Commissioners scheduled the following meeting: Study Session, Thursday, October 10 for the Wetland Demonstration Pilot Project; Study Session, Monday, October 14 for the N. Mountain Park natural area; Regular Meeting, Wednesday, October 30; and Study Session Wednesday, November 13 for discussion of the golf course master plan. XI. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, Chair Coppedge adjourned ."., . the meeting. Respectfully submitted, p~~ Ann Benedict, Business Manager Ashland Parks and Recreation Department ASHlAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 25. 1996 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Members In attendance were Amaratico, Buck, McCary, Hagen, Tuck, Chapman and Moats. Staff In attendance were Pearce and Amrhein. Minutes were approved with corrections. PUBLIC FORUM 1. Keith Cobb,(549 B Street #1 Ashland 552-9315) informed the Commission about a local group of citizens which are forming and will be known as the Institute of Sustainable Uvlng. They realize that mistakes from the past and from advanced nations are being copied by third wor1d nations which are impactlng"family values and sustainable living within and with the environment. The present format of the group will be a forum to present, record and exchange Ideas and models. They hope to have a web page soon. One of their goals Is to create a model village within the Rogue River Valley. Discussion included cohouslng as a model for this group and whether or not other communities are being considered. 2. Hillary Varaday . The update on the Healthy School Lunch Program shows support in Talent, Phoenix and Medford. The group continues to remain active In the community. 3. Georgia Varaday stated there would be an Environmental Open Stage at Headwaters on October 6. ASHlAND SANITARY UPDATE 1. Recycled Products Fair. BioMass has become a corporate sponsor. There are currently 3 student and 10 adult signups. Amrhein is in need of one additional judge. McCory and Buck both volunteered. The event is scheduled for Saturday, October 5th from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Judging is at 11 a.m. Recyclers of the year have been chosen. They are: Individual - Sooney Viani and Commercial - a multi-family residence. Johnston Manor on Park Street. 2. Compost Facility. Amrhein visited Oregon Soils In Oackamas where they are feeding all pre-consumer food waste from 16 Fred Meyer stores to worms. Based on this type of operations the estimate for Ashland to get started would be approximately $200,000. Ashland Sanitary and Recycling will continue to look at options for Ashland. 3. Chipper. Signups are going well. The date Is September 28th. The fee Is $10 for_ the first 10 minutes and $1 per minute thereafter. The majority of people want the chips. 4. Letter to the Restaurants - The letters have been sent. Greenleaf responded and is ready to setup compostlng as soon as the program Is ready. Additional responses were received from Key of C, Pilaf and Dairy Queen. 5. PET #1 . The list of manufacturers has been forwarded to Amaratico, Wanderscheid and Hagen. 6. Tour of South Stage and Dry Creek landfills - Rogue Waste is sponsoring a bus tour for public officials and their staff of Rogue's two landfills to explain what will be happening In the next two years;' South Stage is aoheduled to close in December of 1998 and Dry Creek will open. The tour Is 7 a.m. - 10 a.m., October 4th. 7. Telephone Books - The new Regional Dlrectortes (phonebook) are being distributed this week. In Ashland telephone books will continue to be collected at the Center, there will be no curbside pickup in Ashland. Rogue Disposal will begin collecting telephone books at curbside in Jacksonville, Medford, Central Point and Phoenix. 8. Internship - ASR has organized an Internship with the Ashland High School Charter School. The students wlll be developing a questionnaire about commercial recycling. OLD BUSINESS A. Committee Reports 1. Precycling . 1) Amrhein reported that a report from the Garten Foundation stated the market is declining for PET. The trend is leaning towards use of virgin material rather than recycling especially PET. The resin producers are flooding the markets with virgin material. This could put Ashland's program In a precarious situation. In the near future Garten will have equipment that will allow the sorting of the bottles from the clamshells which will allow them to continue to accept mixed batches. Garten will be trying this new equipment on a trial basis. Amrhein will keep the Commission updated. Currentiy the market value of PET has plummeted and ASR Is not being paid for this product. Hagen stated this turn may cause the Commission to direct users to paper products. Amrhein stated currently the price 01 mixed waste, junk mail, household scrap category of paper is priced at zero and probably by the end of this year or first of next year ASR will be paying RSI to take it. Currently the only reason Weyerhaeuser will take mixed waste Is because ASI continues to provide a good quality product of newspaper, cardboard and high grade. Discussion Included where the true responsibility lies, supporting markets of true reuse, publicizing current market prices for recycling products at the Recyding Center. Chapman requested this committee's next meeting be prior to October 12th. The State Garbagemen's Convention will soon follow and Chapman would like to take the developed restaurant criteria with him to encourage discussion with this group. Next meeting date - Thursday, October 3rd at Blue Mountain Cafe. 2. Education. 1) SUrvey - The form Is approved with an additional note "to be returned to the Utility Office- (with your bill). 2) Recognition award. Discussion Included how often to give the award, what format announcement for award applications will be In, what the award will look like. Discussion will continue next month. 3) Endorsement and New Technology Policy - At the next meeting we will discuss the question of a policy for endorsing products as well as reviewing products, ideas versus products, limiting length of time for presentations as well as number of times a product can be presented, working with Headwaters to create a list of 'products for the public. 3) Tree Free Paper. The final letter has been drafted and will be going out to tree free and non tree free paper manufacturers as well as paper manufacturers in general to let them know we are interested in something other than cutting down trees. B. Electric Lawnmowers - This item will be reviewed at the next meeting. C. Tee Shirt Update. Hagen reported the Finance Director suggested giving the logo to a local tee shirt shop and letting them print and sell the shirts. Discussion Included copyright protection for the logo, creating a bid process for selling the tee shirts, creating a business relationship with a local tee shirt or silkscreen shop and a worthy group, creating criteria for selling the tee shirts which is congruent with our mission. The full Commission requested that Wanderscheid review public/private partnerships and copyright protection and report at the next full Commission meeting. D. Saturday Class Update. There were 22 present at the Composting class. E. Renewable Resource Purchase Policy Update - The polley has been presented to the Council. It will now be drafted in resolution format for the next meeting. F. AOR Conference Update. A full report from Amrhein will be included in the October packet. Amaratico will also report in October. NEW BUSINESS A Community Organizing Workshop Sponsored by Headwaters. Headwaters will be sponsoring a workshop on Community Organizing Skills. ~ will be held on Saturday, September 28th from 10 a.m. until 4 p.m. and Sunday, September 29th from 10 a.m. until 3 p.m. at the Headwaters Environmental Center at 84 Fourth Street. B. Jefferson Monthly Conservation Related Articles. eric Allen from the Jefferson Monthly through Jefferson Public Radio is requesting a monthly commitment of articles from the Conservation Commission. The topics can cover any issue within the parameters of regionalism and sustainability. They should be between 600 and 900 works and may include some graphics. C. Draft Classroom Use Policy - Chapman wants the Conservation Commissioners who book the classroom to be responsible for both entering and leaving the premises as well as all property during any presentation. Chapman will draft language and bring it to staff. COMMISSION ITEMS There were no additional commission items. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. J , . ~emornndum October 23, 1996 'mo: city council Members JIf rom: Mayor--Golden --. - - ----. ~ ubjed: Bicycle commission Appointment d' I would like to appoint Darrell Gee to the vacant position on the Bicycle Commission. The term of this position expires on April 30, 1998. The vacancy was created by the resignation of Rees Jones. A copy of Mr. Gee's letter is attached. Attachments (f,eommlAppoinLm<m) .,., .... .... ....;..- '..:.'.:: .:.... -.: . ,. . - . . . . . . " - '':' - -;'" -- - ~_. ~ 20) fCi'f" ~~~~-' . . n____ ~ ~~ J)~~. Q~~ : ~2~ ~,-~Q~~';{~~---'-'-'" . ~~::~-f~~ "" ~i~ ~.fl (-4. ~~~~!:Lr;;-, ~ jl~~~~~~aI ~~W~. ~~~~ ~.d~.AMt2~~~ ~Z~/4"~~. 1ALr~~' ~. )j~~ S-::z.;) D tV,.. L/i?- - (9 b 19 ~emnrandum September 25, 1996 ijI 0: Susan; Jill; .Pat Caldwell; Barbara C.; Pete L.; Brian Jf rom: 1_ H. 01=. A""",,, City _= )-;j;). ~ubjed: Oak Street L.r.D. Final Report With the final acceptance of the contract work pexformed by North River Excavation the assessment district is now complete. Following is a brief report on the project: This project was bid on June 16, 1995 with a low bid of$67,404.50 submitted by North River Excavation. The contract was awarded on July 6, 1995. A pre-construction conference was held on August 17,1995, however, actual construction was not commenced until October, 1995. Substantial completion of the project was reached in January of 1996, but, due to ongoing sidewalk and curb construction by Lance Pugh and Tom Cantwell actuaI finaI approval was not made until August 8, 1996. The final construction contract amount was $89,451.33 which was $22,046.83 over the original bid of$67,404.50. The increased costs are due to additional lengths of utility trenching required to complete electric and telephone coooections. Another contributor to the additional cost was extra storm drain work that was required to replace substandard sections of drain that were discovered in the field. Attached is a copy of the finaI construction cost summary which shows a comparison of the original estimated units with the final as-constructed quantities. Also attached is a summary of the finaI prqject costs for determination of the assessment rate. Please review these costs and amounts with your records to be certain that all is correct. Please note that the assessment to Tom Cantwell (39-lE-09BA Tax Lot 14000) is significantly higher than previously shown due to a nxonfiguraJion of kx boundaries between Pugh and Cantwell. (See memo of 0ct00e2- 23, 1995) If these figures ~ rorred please let me know as soon as possible and I will ~ the necessary reclutioo to set the public hearing. ("'"",~.w.mon) a. <3: :2 > I- - Z - () - > N ..,. ,;: I,m. ~":;::tz S~f:tH i<j"" ~Um >, ", <D " co '" t.I;;;;.C.S.:,:r:II:.,I.S.,I.:C'IIIIC...C..lc,t.'t,ctl.:"I:lIl'CI.r:ltC I', . II' I I , i i! i i i Ii I Hi II Hii in j ii Ii il i i I i Iii i 1 i! iilli i i i if i hili i i i i i il i ri II: i I .: I 1 r t : ~ : .: I I t J I I It: : I I t c 1 t c I tit II .: I , I tit. C 'i I ' I ~ " .. .f'. 'I i', <x. ' ;"1;( .ty' ~'II t ((;Iitll ~;t$'t'l tit' rlLlIilll!l!..ln III/II Illlilll lllli ~ 2c';'lIIII:CI.CJ.t::C1C:I':Clll.11...,llt: , .'" ,t t'" 0' ' q i i I; ili Iii I H in in i II i Iii 111 i i i i 1l! Iii i .., . .:c:c:tcc.,c..i:t ~ ;! . , i it,"t$ I'id'''; lnhl!l~!l!l!!!l -<:) ~ 2:~ . t 0 _ u ::c I" r - ~ ~0, Cl ~ :>.. h \l~ ~ <: CI) :5<: ~ l.l0lt) '\ l.l u.. <:"-1:5; \ k, o~- "'0 a ~ l.l "- :::; w ....... S-. t) 0 ..... ::c <..:l C:II.IIIIIC::I i ", .r t.t Ii u.. I t ~ II ~ ~ t l t $ , II ililillll,j 11111..:111.::;; I lIqqiliP1Hii w Ii I 1 III i ::;C::I:I;::t:::; , . t . t:; ,$ ~ ~ 0 " ,. ,I' I' ! { ! ' , l!iilliiLd I !l 1I11tt:,a::rt,:tlt: It, , j" '" i" llliillill!i;1 ii u I J ~ t : , t I : : : : I :I I .:: : f! I 1 . .. t .. ~ f $ i. ~ f : I'" ;1i'dli'lil .l!ilili!ll iLlI CD u CD t I : : : 1 : : : z :r :: II . :; : ; I : : ~ t t I I ~ :I I ;" I _ <l: f. $ '!l' I; tit t ;: t t t i!.. t t' 1 t $ t ;: ~ i . i $ , , i l 1111lilddllll!l!l!l!lli!!II!, <l: ~ Ie::.: 1:1:::: : It; C It,::!, 11: t II' t, _ " . . II I , t ' ~ ;: $ t '.. t,; t, t t , ~. tit,; t i ~ j ! I i II ; I ! Ill! lilll III i ! I! 11111 ! ! ! N I.' t"1 o ..,. uo <D " OJ en OAK DISTRICT STREET L.I.D. NO. BOUNDARIES 70 '" 39 1E 9BA Q SCALE 1"= 1 00' , " , , , , "" ~ ~. 8~ '" ~ *-;........, . ~ "'".........:::: . I~-hi .-' . /-~'.;. ~ FT.~-,",,12 oJ _. ~. ~. '" ~..~ , . ~ , '- ~ '- OAK STREET L.I.D. FINAL PROJECT COSTS 1. Mail Tribune L.p.a.#59562 OS/22/95 $461.45 2. Daily Journal of Commerce L.p.a. #59570 05/31/95 $185.25 3. Quality Rock 04/30/96 $933.82 4. Construction Costs Payment No. 1 11115/95 $26,574.11 Payment No.2 11128/95 $2,118.50 Payment No.3 12/06/95 $47,347.05 Payment No.4 07/11196 $13,411.67 . 5. Less Storm Drain Costs (260-51-620.750) ($20,507.50) 6. Electric Department Charges $67,434.99 7. Imputed Interest through 09/30/96 $4,536.36 8. Engineering & Administration at 10.8% $14.899.61 TOTAL ASSESSA1JLE COST $..157.395.3~ '''. 9. Total Assessable Footage: 1,430.86' 10. Assessment Rate: $157.395.31 = $110/ft 1,430.86' 11. Published Assessment Rate:. $100.00/foot 12. Percentage Increase: 10% (o:"""io<<rllid\ookfinI2.e>1) .~ 00" ~5 ~.J <~ ~~ &S~ 000 o ~ o ~ = J = j~ '" C4) ~ ~ = o - .... l:l. 'C ~ l:l. ~ ~ ~ o ~.... E-<.3 o Z l:l. Ol ~ 8 ~ ~ ... <t:: - o - - ... 8 ~ o NO ...- gt$ _<U"'" I'Q.~ ~ "'>!:c ""'0'" ~~:: "<t''':a 0 .U ~ ~ 11)'- ~-5U 0.... ., ....lo-5 '5 ;l: 0 ~ ~ U !:;: c: ~, ~....ll>'. -.; >00 ~go e:SZ ;qliJ< S:I:....l Or-::t: p~~ ~ - < I'Q '" , ~ - , '" '" 8 ~ ff . <t:: - o - - ... 8 8 N ~ o ., ., -5-5 ~g oji N <u ...... uE-<"", .Q>!~ l'Qo- . ". ..c: N" '" .... .-::: < o..c:.... ....lUo .; c: - ., u 't ~"'C 0 ...""N ~@ "'l!: ~~~'" ..c:1'Q.,l>'. ~ s:::.s 0 ~>O-Cl 50JlZ rlliJO< 'CUU..J "or-::t: S_8Vl <UN< - ~ - < I'Q q- ~ - , '" '" 8 8 '" 00 '" ... !!:: o - - ... ~ o .,., '" "" ~ .- .... ..c: 0 U~ 0'- NU ...., g-5 Q3B-c _.ji~ _<u..c: o ... '" ....lE-<< ..c: ~ 1 ~ ]3~ !'lJ:lCl :E!VlZ ~. < d>CQ~ u. ::t: SNVl ..::lgg< 8 ~ - < I'Q '" , ~ - , '" '" o - vi N r- a\ ... <t:: - o - - ... - v oci 00 ., -5 .... o ~~ .e.~ ;'8 "'~ - .- 30 o '" 'N "....,., :QClr- ;l:;l:'" <U.,l>'. :I:'- 0 .,:> .- >0 Cl liJ"z ::S:;j< .,:>..J 2051 <;0< 8 '" - - I'Q I'Q '" d.l - , '" '" s; '" N N .,.,.. ... <t:: - o - - ... '" "<l; !; ",. - ~ji o <u - ... I'QE-< ~8 .e.~ '" .- ..c: o/llU ..,. ., _-5 3~ ll:: B ..c: 0 ;:J ~ ~ :; 'C +-' ~ "~o iiiJ:lCl ~VlZ -.;~< <uo..J -5 ::t: ._ v en ::E~< 8 - N - I'Q I'Q '" , ~ - , '" '" o r- ~ '" a\ ... <t:: - o - - ... r- '" ooi 00 ...ji U <u o ... i$E-< ~8 ~~ ~.- .e...c: \Du o/ll-S '" .... _ 0 32:: o N t .,., ~ ~ ~3~ .!!l J:s~ .3~< 1io..J .oo::t: ..9r---~ ... -..... 8 N N - I'Q I'Q '" d.l - , '" '" ~ 00 '" .,., . \D. ... !!:: o - - ... '" ~ '" '" ., -5 .... o ~~ ~~ .Q"", 1'Q8 c-'" ~ 36 o N .,., r- '" c:~l>'. to 'C 0 eClCl "uz I'Q .- c:iij ~~~ Br-tn Vl\D< 8 '" N - I'Q I'Q '" , ~ - , '" '" ~ ..; '" .... ~ .... ... iC 00 .,; ~~ .... ..: =: '" ~ '" l:l <::I 1:i =: <:> t <:> =: '" ... - '" " ~ :::: = ~ <::I ~ ..... ...~ ~ ~ " '" ~ ~ ~ :ij e. ... """ '" ~f ! '" " Ii .8 j' ~ .. =: ::t <:> !1 <::I '" - f: \;< PUBLIC WORK - ENGINEERING DIVISION FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS -Oak Street L.I.D. . rtem Description Bid Final Unit Amount No. Units Units Price 1 Site Work Lump Sum Lump Sum $1,321.00 $1,321.00 2 Utility Trench 1,642 LF 2,527 LF $14.25/LF $36,009.75 Construction 3 Street Light 23 EA 23EA $4861EA $11,178.00 Installation 4 Tree Planting 12EA 16EA $5oo/EA $8,000.00 5 Istallation Irrigation Lump Sum Lump Sum $6,550.00 $6,550.00 . System 6 . Crushed Rock 370 CY 775cy $12.OO/CY $9,300.00 7 Catch Basin 4EA 4EA $9oo/EA $3,600.00 8 Storm Drain 1 EA 1 EA $1,2oo/EA $1,200.00 Manhole 9 12-inch Storm Drain 492 LF 492 LF $19.75/LF $9,717.00 .c.O.l 1O-inch Storm Drain Lump Sum $2,330.00 $2,330.00 Extension .C.O.2 Extra Excavation Lump Sum $300.00 $300.00 .C.O.3 Repair Irrigation Lump Sum $445.50 $445.58 System Credit Less Pavement Patch Lump Sum ($500.00) ($500.00) . not Completed GRAA'D TOTAL $89,451.33 July 11, 1996 .change Order (,,"""~.w."'l .0",_,,', OAK STREET L.I.D. fINAL STORM DRAIN COSTS. July 11, 1996 1. Site Work 50% of Final Cost 2. Utility Trench Excavation 3. Street Light InstalJaJion 4. Tree PlanJing 5. Install Irrigation System 6. *. Crushed Rock 33 % of Final Cost 7. Install Cok:h Basin 100% of Final Cost 8. Street Drain Manhole 100% of Final Cost 9. 12-inch Stonn Drain 100% of Final Cost 10. ExJra Street Drain Construction TOTAL (c::\cl,rWD-~a() $660.50 -0- -0-. -0- -0- 3,100.00 3,600.00 1,200.00 9,71ZOO 2.230.00 $20.507.50 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ADMINI$TRA nos: (541) 488-5587 ENGINEERING: (;41) 488.5347 CITY HALL CITY OF ASHLAND 20 E. MAIN SrnEET ASHLAND. OREGON 97520-1S14 FAX (541) 4SS-&I06 . August 8, 1996 Mr. Bud Hop Northriver Excavation Pipeline Contractor, Inc. P. O. Box 696 GOLD HILL OR 97525 Re: Final Approval - Project No. 93-08 Dear Bud: . Thank you for taking the time to meet with us on Tuesday. With that final walk through we can now consider the project complete. As of this date the City of Ashland approves and accepts your work on the Oak Street L.I.D. (Local Improvement District), Project No. 93-{)8. The final payment (including release of the retain age) is being prepared and will be sent to you under separate cover. Please be reminded that under the terms of the Contract your work must be warranted against defects in material and workmanship for a period of two (2) years from this date, August 8, 1996. Thank you for your patience and cooperation during this long project. ~Sin~~ James H. Olson Assistant City Engineer cc: Susan Wilson Broadus, Director of Public Works Pete Lovrovich, Director of Electric Department Jerry Glossop, Street Superintendent Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent Jill Turner, Director of Finance Roger Balbo, Engineering Division Everett Swain, Engineering Division (,:"",,~."'l ~emnrandum July 11, 1996, 1995 '(lIoo: . .- .. . Jill TWnex & Pete Loviovich' . ~dO Jifrom: James H. Olson; Assistant City Engineer ~ubjed: PROGRESS PAYMENT NO. 4th & FINAL OAK STREET L.r.D. Nortiu:iver EtcaVatioo Pipeline CcnlI:dlr, Inc. has requeslI:d a fourth and final prDgleSs payment en !he Oak: Street L.I.D. Project No. 93-08. Payment is shown on the following payment schedule: Contractor: Northriver Excavation . Pipeline' Contractor Inc. P. O. Box 696 Gold HilI, OR 97525 Project No. 93-08 Purchase Order: No. 2141 Contract Amount: $67,404.50 Project Title: Oak Street L.I.D. Account No. 260-51-620.750 (Storm Drain) 41()"23-704.351 (L.I.D.) $2,230.00 $20,507.50 $1 I.I 81. 67 . $68.943.83 . $13,411.67 $89,451.33' PAYMENT SCHEDULE DEScRlPTION TOTAL COST TO PAYMENT TO CURRENT DATE DATE Construction Costs $89,451.33 $80,041.75 $9,409.58 Retainage - 5 % .0- ($4,002.09) $4,002.09 Net Due . $89,451.33 $76,039.66 $13,411.67 cc: Jerry Glossop Bud Hop, Northriver Excavation (",-~=.m=) ... '., .-.....; ..,' ~emnrandum October 23, 1995 '(lIlt: Paul Nolte,' Jill Turner Jlf rom: James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer ~ ubjed: LANCE PUGH ASSESSMENT In response to Lance Pugh's request for a re-apportionment of assessments for the Oak Street L.I.D., the following frontages and rates will apply for the final. Since I have not yet received a copy of the deed creating the new lot an assumption is made the lot does conform to Lot 2, Block 20 of the Chitwood Tract. PROPOSED FINAL ASSESSMENTS FOR BLOCK 20 (bounded by Oak, 'B', Pioneer and' A' Streets) LOT OWNERSHIP DESCRIPTION FRONT- ASSESS- AMOUNT NO. AGE MENT RATE 39-lE- Cantwell, Thomas Lots 3, 4, and 5, 600.00' $110/foot $66,000 9BA D. & Roselyn N. Block 20 of the Tax 957 Harmony Ln Chitwood Tract Lot ASHLAND OR to the City of 14000 97520 Ashland 39-1E- American Exchange Lot 2, Block 20 200.00' $11O/foot $22,000 9BA Service Inc. of the Chitwood Tax c/o Carolyn Tracts to the Lot Brafford City of Ashland 14001 2007 Coles tine Rd ASHLAND OR 97520 39-lE- Pugh, Lance K. and Lot 1, Block 20 350.00' $ IlO/foot $38,500 9BA Elizabeth Ann of the Chitwood Tax 882 'B' Street Tracts to the Lot ASHLAND OR City of Ashland 14500 97520 PAGE 1-(""",ID=IpUJ:!u..-u.Man) Please note that the division of the Cantwell Lot (39- lE-9BA, Tax Lot 14000) is not as first proposed by Pugh and Cantwell. The engineering staff was given instructions by Pugh to divide the parcel on the center of the . common driveway and that a boundary line adjustment was in proceSs. This division would provide CantWell .' with 568 feet of frontage and Pugh with 582 feet. Apparently PUgh did notwish to e)Cpend the money neCessary to finalize the lot line adjustment and went back to the original Chitwood TraCt lot configuration since he could do that virtually without cost.' .. Resolution No. 14 established the assessment rate as well as the individual lot as~sments. (See attached copy.) As you can see, Cantwell's assessment has gone from $56,800 to $66,000. This is a 16.2% increase over the resolution rate and is not possible under our assessment code. I propose that this difference between the Cantwell and Pugh frontages be resolved before any payments are made on this L.I.D. cc: Steve Hall John McLaughlin Barbara Christensen PAGE 2~",'~h=~=) .' , . (I RESOLUTION NO. 94-. I '-/ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR UTILITY UNDERGROUNDING, STREET TREES AND STREET LIGHTING FOR THE OAK STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING THE . . ASSESSMENT OF THE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST PROPERTY TO BE BENEFITED AND PROVIDING THAT WARRANTS ISSUED FQB THE COST OF . THE IMPROVEMENT BE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY~F ASHLAND. RECITALS: A. The Council has declared by resolution its Intention to develop the improvements described in the above title and the improvement resolution previously adopted and to assess \lpon each lot or part of lot '. benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement as provided by the Charter of the City of Ashland: and B. Notice of such intention has been duly given and pUblished as provided by the charter and . ordinances of the City of Ashland, a public hearing was held and it appears to the Council that such Improvements are of material benefit to the City and all property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs; . THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES: SECTION 1. The council intends to make local Improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $143,086 all of . which will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated on the basis of front footage of each tax lot on the affected streets. Those tax lots will be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit A SECTION 2. A local improvement district is created and shall consist of all the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A The district shall be called the Oak Street Local Improvement District. This resolution was read by tme only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 92.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this IS }),day of )))c,.>.t!..I.v ,1994. q-../ ., 'l .' " I ~,k 7/U;t:/'.f:L..<.- Nan E. Franklin. City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this /r:;:,)i;. day of /) Z"L--r-c.VL-- . 1994. r4:~)[/{~C~ Catherine M. Golden, Mayor PAGE 1-FORMATION RESOLUTION "",,;1,\='.1"..,.) A ..... .J II .. en v Ci o 'l:I u. ::g C. o &:: .: .. .~ ~ '. CI ...... ~:l ,0 , b) c; '2 .g F.~ .~ ..~~ .tQ b \0 I ~ v . 'C. ~ ..8 . ;j ~ E ,,;2 U " <]z ....... Cl g . 0 r::'- .?;>." .~ D ;:i.~ ~ o () - il 8 -"- .~ J: ;;; Pl o "" . .s ~ " 8 2~ ~ v o -~ .3 ~~~ .i:: c,) c,) ;J ~ t::l 8 8 8 8 8 8 8. 8' ",,..: '" -.;r "-.:' C\ 0\ co ~ co r--- 'V G'\ \OCO"ClO-.icOV\ \r\V"I*"","~4h <'> ... '" l! '"" '"" -< 'C ;j :c '" .< 'd 'C a P<: ,.'j :a ~ '" s -< ;;: ~ tf] g oj " =c ~ > t:; ~ 8 '" '" '" 'E .3 il ~ 'd 'd"Oa a a :a :a - III -< ~ ~ ..:..:0 to to " ~ ~ '5 o 0 " .". 0 to ~ ~ to ~ '" '" ~ M ..,. - ... '" '" ci M' "":. - . . 'C <5 ~ 8 8 8 88 "l. ~ - '" '" il ~ .". ..,. - c-i c-i c-i - - - - - - . go.3 -< -< t::l ~.~ III I ~ ~ t::l co co t::l t::l t::l E- .'" '" '" '" ~ '" .~ Pl l;l Pl Pl P.l - - - - - - b . . . .. . . '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" M M M '" E- v j .( .~ -s "0 " o ~ P<: ,_. .:j iil ~ .:j o :.! F: 3 'C o ;i .s 1: ..0 ~ d 1:I: c " o E -< o c '-c III Jl :3 ~ .:j :i .:j ...l o U, 1:: c: ~.~ .8 ~ u 0 0 .- P<: 0; ~ 8 8 8 8 88 g 8 g g g g ------ ~ """ "'" "'" ~ ~ 8 8 "": ~ l;; g: co ~ co ~ .; 00\ \0<:0 co "\1"toV'l In u-. 8 ~ o@ ~ - co u-. '" ::;... ... I I . c:~ -8 8 . '8 8 _ - -' oj " . d.C: '" o co ~ ,0 - co - '" I I -<t::l ~ 0 " ;; il 1l ..0 ..0 u " to to ~ '" . '" ~ M ..,. - ... . I S o E- "....: ,f i !i '" o . -. u c .g U 8 ';; c o. u Ci 2 . u. c:-.-:. c 8. ." i:i o '"" C U .c- o . "0 :. .; ] '" o .. d 'u ..0 . 8. ~ . c u 'r. E E~g " i:'": .., . cd -0 0 -0 c:: >' . 8. ::: ..... " ~.,.' 1 ~. .0 .8 o 0 :; .:0 .. :l ;;; j1 8 .OX 0::1 > ~~ o 0 F:F: '.. '" . g: : - ~ : ~-8 . Y.':l ..., 0 ~ ,., 0 . '" ... 0 - . --.." i RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $157,394.60 FOR UTI LIlY UNDERGROUNDING, STREET TREE PLANTING AND STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS IN LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 70 RECITALS: A. The City of Ashland has constructed utility undergrounding, street tree planting and street lighting in local improvement district no. 70 during 1995-96. B. The total assessment for these improvements is in the amount of $157,394.60. C. The total assessments in this district are reasonable assessments and the assessments charged against each lot is according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to it from the improvements. The council finds that the evidence presented by James H. Olson in his final report of September 25, 1996 is convincing and accepts such evidence as the basis to support the conclusions recited above. D. Special benefit assessments should now be levied against property benefitted to defray the expense thereof. THE CllY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each lot for these improvements are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. . SECTION 3. Any owner of property assessed for $100.00 or more may request the payment be extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Bonding Act, if the request is made within thirty days after notice of the assessment is received. .SECTION 4. All assessments using the Bancroft Bonding Act are required to pay in 20 semi-annual installments together with interest. Interest charged will be the actual bond sale rate plus 1-1/2 percent, with a maximum of 10 percent. SECTION 5. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in sections 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. The foregoing resolution was READ BY TITLE ONLY and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the _ day of 199 . PAGE 1-LEVYING ORDINANCE (p:formoU",4.RooI Barbara C:. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of Reviewed as to form: . Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 2-LEVYING ORDINANCE (p:lomwI6d4.RooI f ,1995. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor -- \ i; ~z Cl)O ~~ ~~ &3~ ~~ ~o ~ = o .~ ... Co 'C ~ Co .~ ~ .. ~ o ~... E-<j o z Co ~ -= = o ~ 8 ~ ~ ... = j~ 4:: - o - - ... .. CJl S = o ~ 8 ~ o ~8 gtl -.."" t:%l.~ ~ "'>!:a ""(S'" ~~:: ~":.a 0 .U ~ M 4)'- ~.;;U Q..... '" ....lo';; - 'il ~ ~ U r-- .:::a- ~....ll><: 'il >.0 ..,"'!@ o 0 ~~< g:I:...l Or--:r: ~~~ ~ - < .t:%l a- , Ul - , a- e'> 8 ~ N t!- . 4:: - o - - ... 8 8 '" ~ u '" '" .;;.;; .....0 o~ 013 '" .. ~ ... uf-<"" .Q >! :;j t:%l(S- . ,. .c: '" .. '" _.-:: < 30'0 .; '" - '" o 'E ~"O 0 ...""c-< ~~ ..~ l;e&a- .c:t:%l",1><: .~ ",.50 ~>'~O =o1!z ~l;lo< 'CUu...l "'Or--:r: ..9-8~ ....Uc-<.... - ~ - < t:%l a- , Ul - , a- e'> ~ 8 "l co e'> ... 4:: - o - - ... 8 o ", e'> 1 .- ..... .c: 0 u~ 0'- c-<u ~ '" g.;; 1%l8;;! '."l :; -0- _...c: 3~.( .c: 0 l>O '" ~ ~ ]~~ .....0 ~~z ~~:s o' :r: ~"'CIl ...lgg< 8 ~ - < t:%l 9- Ul - . a- e'> o - vi c-< r--. a- ... 4:: - o - - ... - ~ co co '" .;; ..... o ~~ ,e,~ ;] M~ .s6 o S .c-< ...", :...Or-- ~~a- "",I><: :I:'- 0 ",> .- >.0 :."'Z ~=;;j< . >...l ~oBl <;:0< ~ - - t:%l t:%l 9- Ul - , a- e'> ~ e'> c-< N vi' ... 4:: - o - - ... a- ~ ~ ~ - ~tl o .. - ... t:%lf-< ~] ,e,~ ~ ", .- .c: ol:lU v'" ~.;; 3'0 l:t:: 8 .c: ;:J o c-< ", '" r-- .::: a- ";::: -~ "'30 ~D!@ ~~< "O...l -5 :r: .- v ell ~~< . 8 - c-< - t:%l t:%l a- , Ul - , a- M o r-- ~ e'> ~ ... 4:: - o - - ... r-- a- -i CO ~:l o :;l o ... 1%lf-< ..... "" o 8 ~~ ~ .~ ,e,.c: ,<:>u ol:l.s ",..... ~ 0 32: o c-< ~ ", ~ S; ~~I><: ...30 .~ D!@ ~~:s ",o:r: .coCll Or--.... 1><:-.... 8 '" c-< - t:%l t:%l a- . Ul - , a- e'> ~ CO a- ", :i 4:: - o - - ... '" "l a- ", '" .;; ..... o a-~ _ 0 .. ~ ... of-< ~] ,.:~ .s6 o '" ", r-- a- "'I><: :;j.~ 0 EQ "'00 t:%l.- Z .:::5< ",o...l >CIl:r: "'r--CIl V)\O< 8 e'> '" - t:%l t:%l 9- Ul - , a- e'> ~ -i 0\ "1. r-- In ... ... io 00 Q ~ .... ~ ~ t:l c:s 1 <:0 ~ c:s <:0 0: ~ ~ .., ~ ~ ~ ~ ... ..- -9 E .. .., .. ~ ~ ~l ~ l:lo .. C:Sj ~ ~ !I r8J . s OAK STREET DISTRICT L.I.D. NO. BOUNDARIES 70 I. 1;:-. ~ ... .". , , ,.. . .. " . .'!.,.. ( '.' I - '.~-'T- -~..... '39'1E.9BA g'.' . ' , J ]-I ,~-.; . . . , , CALE 1"=100' .. , " , , , , ~J- , . /- "'....;'ir::,,'.".i...;...: ..1.', ...., CITY OF ASHLAND MEMORANDUM Department of Community Development Planning Division DATE: November 1, 1996 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ~ John McLaughlin, Director of Community Developmen~ Refund of appeal fees - Planning Action 96-047 FROM: RE: You have received a letter from Dorothy Smith regarding the refund of the appeal fee for the above referenced planning action. Given the history of this action, her view of the events leading to the appeal are understandable. Hopefully, I can add some clarification to the issue. The original application involved a request for a 6-lot subdivision. After holding the public hearing, the Planning Commission deadlocked in their vote. After some discussion informing them that a tie vote was a "non-decision," one commissioner stated that he would change his vote in order to make an affirmative decision for denial. The Planning Commission chair then asked the applicant if he wished to have a continuance of the hearing in order to redesign for a 5-lot subdivision rather than receive a denial for the 6-lot request. The applicant agreed to the continuance. The Planning Commission did not make a final decision at that hearing. The following month, the applicant returned with a 5-lot design, but stated that after considering his options, he was requesting that the Planning Commission make a final decision on the original 6-lot subdivision, utilizing the 5-lot design for comparison. He either wanted the original 6-lot subdivision approved or denied, and that the 5-lot option was not on the table for consideration. After accepting public testimony regarding the request, the Planning Commission approved the 6-lot subdivision. As was stated earlier, they had the option of denying the request or approving it. In my opinion, the applicant was within his rights to request a final decision on his originally submitted application. It should also be noted that the Commission's vote during the first hearing took place very close to 11:00 p.m., the required end of their meeting. The discussion involving the continuance took place in a very limited time period, and the applicant was asked to respond in approximately one minute. The options associated with the decision were not fully discussed as the meeting was adjourned. I believe this "quick ending" to the meeting added to the misunderstanding associated with this action. Ms. Smith's letter states that the applicant should not have been allowed to come back with the original 6-lot design. However, since the Planning Commission never made a final decision regarding the 6-lot request at the first hearing, the applicant was entitled to have that design fully considered. This was a complex action, but I do not believe that the Planning Commission erred in its original approval of the application. Given their findings, their decision was justified. As noted by the split votes at both hearings, there was plenty of room for discretion in the interpretation of the ordinance. Similarly, the decision of the City Council was a split vote, with very good points made on each side of the argument. The adopted findings support the final decision, again with valid interpretations of our ordinance. The appeal process is designed to raise these issues before the City Council, and for that body to make the final decision of the City. This is especially important in instances such as this where the decision is coming down to an interpretation of the ordinance. Our land use appeal process does not have a refund provision, primarily since no matter the "winner or loser" there is a significant cost to process the request. The City Council has directed the Staff, through the Cost of Services study, to attempt to have fees cover the costs of administering our ordinances. Further, many times the final decision of the city is not clearly an approval or denial, but perhaps a modification of the original request with additional conditions. In those instances it would be nearly impossible to determine if an appeal fee should be refunded. In Staff's opinion, unless it can be clearly shown that a grievous error was made during a land use hearing we do not generally believe that refunds of appeal fees should be granted. In this instance, the issue was a disputed interpretation of the ordinance regarding the provision of open space bonuses. We do not believe this to be a grievous error. The Council, however, has the wide discretion to determine the appropriate action for each individual instance. It is hoped that this information will assist you in making your final decision on this issue. October 28, 1996 Ashland City ColDlcil 20 E. Main Ashland, OR 97520 RE: REFUND OR W AlYER OF $250 FILING FEE FOR THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING ACTION #96-047 - BlRNAM WOODS SUBDMSION Members of the City COlDlcil: As you know, last April the Planning Commission voted on the 6 lot Birnam Woods Subdivision proposal and it did not pass. Barbara Jarvis then made a mli~g. The perimeters were quite specific. She presented the developer with two options. Either the Commission would vote and deny his proposal for a 6 lot subdivision (which she stated they were going to do) and the applicant could then appeal their decision, or he could ask for a continuance to return with a 5 lot proposal. By offering the applicant a continuance, the door was open for him to come back with the 5 lot proposal without having to pay any additional fees. The choice was his. The applicant said he preferred (and he accepted) the terms oCthe continuance. He did not choose to have the Commission vote and then have to appeal their denial. ORDINANCE #18.88.030.A.5.b. states, "The Planning Commission may approve or disapprove the outline plan and application or require changes, or impose conditions of approval which it fmds necessary to conform with the standards of this ordinance and the purpose of this Chapter, Approval of the outline plan and application, and conditions of approval are final to all issues resolved at that time unless appealed." At the second hearing in May, the applicant submitted a 5 lot proposal that he had presented at a neighbOlhood meeting. It was a poorly planned and unrealistic hand- drawn rendering with inflated building envelopes and nothing drawn to scale. It was obviously a worse case scenario being used as a lever to resubmit the already debated 6 lot proposal,' The applicant never should have been allowed to come back in May and resubmit his 6 lot plan which did not meet all required ordinances, By ordinance, he was required to adhere to the Planning Commission's ruling. He had the choice of having the Commission vote against his proposal, in which case ifhe chose to pursue his 6 lot proposal, he would have to make an appeal against the decision. The Chairperson stated at the May hearing that the Commission could not tell the applicant what to do, but could only make suggestions. As we can see in the above Ordinance, this was clearly an error. J !l l ~ k I I , The Planning Commission went on to approve the 6 lot subdivision and our neighborhood was forced to be the ones to appeal its decision. This Council, thankfully, approved the appeal and the 6 lot proposal was denied. Because of the generous outpouring of support from our neighborhood, I personally ended up making very little financial contnbution to this appeal. Therefore, it is not for myself that I am requesting a refund of the $250 filing fee required. (If approved, all contributions will be returned in full to those who made them.) It was difficult accepting money from my elderly and single parent neighbors, most being on a fixed income. Though the contributions were small, several were certainly a sacrifice. And had it not become very obvious to me how much this gave them a sense of ownership and participation in what we all considered a critical and worthy cause; and even more importantly, made them feel like they were taking a part in regaining some sense of control back into their lives, I would not have accepted a dime. I realize that receiving a refund request is not the norm for this Council. However, in light of the errors made by the Planning Commission and the fact that the neighbors really never should have been the ones to make the appeal in the first place, I submit that approving the refund would not only be the right thing to do, but it would be an enormous gesture on the part of this Council and the City of Ashland to do so, Thank you for your consideration. Sin P.S. At the last Council Meeting, question was raised as to why I waited so long to request this refund. I apologize if this is a problem, but I would like you to know that I was at the August City Council Meeting immediately following the Bimam Woods Subdivision appeal to make the refund request. However, I was advised by a Council Member to return to a later meeting since some members of the Council were not present. Unfortunately, I was out of state on business during the September Council Meetings and did not have the opportunity to appear until two weeks ago. October 28, 1996 Ashland City Council 20 E. Main Ashland, OR 97520 RE: REFUND OR WAIVER OF $250 FH..ING FEE FOR THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING ACTION #96-047 - BIRNAM WOODS SUBDIVISION Members of the City Council: As you know, last April the Planning Commission voted on the 6 lot Birnam Woods Subdivision proposal and it did not pass. Barbara Jarvis then made a ruling, The perimeters were quite specific. She presented the developer with two options. Either the Commission would vote and deny his proposal for a 6 lot subdivision (wbich she stated they were going to do) and tbe applicant could tben appeal their decision, or he could ask for a continuance to return witb a 5 lot proposal. By offering the applicant a continuance, the door was open for him to come back with the 5 lot proposal without having to pay any additional fees. Tbe cboice was bis. The applicant said he preferred (and be accepted) the terms of tbe continuance. He did not choose to have the Commission vote and then have to appeal their denial. ORDINANCE #18.88.030.A.5.b. states, "The Planning Commission may approve or disapprove the outline plan and application or require changes, or impose conditions of approval wbicb it finds necessary to conform with the standards of this ordinance and the purpose of this Chapter. Approval of the outline plan and application, and conditions of approval are final to all issues resolved at that time unless appealed." At the second hearing in May, the applicant submitted a 5 lot proposal that he had presented at a neighborhood meeting. It was a poorly planned and unrealistic hand- drawn rendering with inflated building envelopes and nothing drawn to scale. It was obviously a worse case scenario being used as a lever to resubmit the already debated 6 lot proposal. The applicant never should have been allowed to come back in May and resubmit his 6 lot plan which did not meet all required ordinances, By ordinance, he was required to adhere to the Planning Commission's ruling. He had the choice of having the Commission vote against his proposal, in which case ifhe chose to pursue his 6 lot proposal, be would bave to make an appeal against the decision. The Chairperson stated at the May hearing that the Commission could not tell the applicant what to do, but could only make suggestions. As we can see in the above Ordinance, this was clearly an error. " .' The Planning Commission went on to approve the 6 lot subdivision and our neighborhood was forced to be the ones to appeal its decision. This Council, thankfully, approved the appeal and the 6 lot proposal was denied. Because of the generous outpouring of support from our neighborhood, I personally ended up making very little financial contribution to this appeal. Therefore, it is not for myself that I am requesting a refund of the $250 filing fee required. (If approved, all contributions will be returried in full to those who made them.) It was difficult accepting money from my elderly and single parent neighbors, most being on a fixed income. Though the contributions were small, several were certainly a sacrifice. And had it not become very obvious to me how much this gave them a sense of ownership and participation in what we all considered a critical and worthy cause; and even more importantly, made them feel like they were taking a part in regaining some sense of control back into their lives, I would not have accepted a dime. I realize that receiving a refund request is not the norm for this Council. However, in light of the errors made by the Planning Commission and the fact that the neighbors really never should have been the ones to make the appeal in the first place, I submit that approving the refund would not only be the right thing to do, but it would be an enormous gesture on the part of this Council and the City of Ashland to do so. Thank you for your consideration. P.S, At the last Council Meeting, question was raised as to why I waited so long to request this refund. I apologize if this is a problem, but I would like you to know that I was at the August City Council Meeting immediately following the Birnam Woods Subdivision appeal to make the refund request. However, I was advised by a Council Member to return to a later meeting since some members of the Council were not present. Unfortunately, I was out of state on business during the September Council Meetings and did not have the opportunity to appear until two weeks ago, Office of the City Attorney (541) 482-3211, Ext. 59 CITY OF ASHLAND 20 East Main, Ashland, OR 97520 (541) 488-5311 - Fax MEMORANDUM DATE: October 24, 1996 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: V'--' Paul Nolte, City Attorney RE: City Uability to Employees for PERS Pickup After the Demise of Measure 8 J The appellate 'judgment has now been entered in the Ballot Measure 8 (1994) case regarding the validity of the constitutional amendment affecting the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS)'. Measure 8 added three sections to the Oregon Constitution which changed how public employers were to treat public employees' PERS pick-up, the guaranteed rate of return and sick leave credit. As you know, the Oregon Supreme Court on June 21, 1996, held that all three sections violated the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution. The court held that Measure 8 was an impairment of an employee's retirement contract under the federal constitution Contract Clause. All three sections of Measure 8 were declared void. After the adoption of Measure 8 in November 1994, the city discontinued the PERS pick-up on the Municipal Judge and City Recorder. All other employees of the city were either subject to collective bargaining agreements or individual agreements that required the city to continue the pick-up. For employees hired after the implementation date of Measure 8 (January 1, 1955), however, the city did not pick-up PERS unless the employees were members of a collective bargaining unit. Because the city provided the PERS pick-up prior to the implementation of Measure 8, it has a 'contractual obligation to provide an undiminished level of benefits at a fixed cosf." The city is legally obligated to reimburse those employees who were required to make their own PERS contributions. 1 Oregon Police Officers' Assn v. State of Oregon, 323 Or 356, 918 P2d 765 (1996). 2 Id. 323 Or at 375. Mayor and City Council October 29, 1996 Pace 2 The contributions made by the municipal judge in lieu of the pick-up discontinued by the city should be repaid by the city. In order to make the judge whole, the amount should be repaid with interest at the statutory rate of 9% per annum3. . A slightly different issue is involved with the city recorder. The city never picked-up the current city recorder's PERS contribution because the recorder took office after the effective date of Measure 8. Since the entire measure was declared void by the court, however, the city recorder should be treated the same as the judge: the contributions made by the city recorder in lieu of the pick-up not made by the city should be repaid by the city to the recorder. In order to make the recorder whole, the amount should be repaid with interest at the statutory rate of 9% per annum. The same analysis should be applied to those employees who were hired after . January 1, 1995, and who were not members of a collective bargaining unit. The city never. picked-up those employees' PERS contributions and these employees, except as noted below, should be reimbursed by the city with interest as described above. PERS has now advised the city (and all other municipal governments using PERS) that the formula specified by PERS for paying retirement contributions after Measure 8 was wrong. This error affected those employees required to pay their own PERS pick-up and it caused them to overpay their contributions. For persons still employed by the city (e.g. the judge and recorder) PERS has presented the city with a method for resolving such overpayments through adjustments to Mure contributions. For those employees no longer employed by the city, PERS has yet to determine the method by which these ex-employees are to be credited with their overpayments. Until PERS has computed the amount of overpayments and the method by which the ex-employees are to be credited, the city cannot compute the amount of reimbursement it is to make to such employees. (p:e1o\pen,opnl 3 ORS 82.010. (~Irl'Y Ol~ llSIII...l.\.NJ) 1~1..1~(~rl'lll(~ I)O"TI~U i.\.NJ) 1.t1(;lIrl' 1)1~I.Allrl'~II~Nrl' IhREcron: PETER tovROYleR DATE: OcroBEB 1996 Mui I HL Y HiPUHI lflNIIUlIN If AY S'l'IlIm'I' 1..1(;11'1' IlIU.O(~A'I'ION !ION'I'IU.y AC'I'IVI'I'Y Ib,>>oll'I' Work has been completed along Winburn Way relocating existing street lights from the center of the sidewalk to behind the sidewalk. This project covers the area from the Hillah Temple to Nutley St. along Winburn Way. This will allow the free movement of all of our pedestrians within this area of the park. This type of project will be ongoing throughout the City until we have all sidewalks free of obstructions. New Primary (Feet) New UG Services New OR Services Services Replaced Temp Svc Installed Temp Svc Removed Residential Meters Commercial Meters Trans Installed Trans Removed Total KV A Increase 4094.5 St Lights Installed St Lights Repaired Poles Installed Poles Removed Total Wire Used (ft) Conduit Used (feet) UG Power Locates Delinquent Accts Delinq Disconnects Total Connects Total Disconnects VAN N I~SS S'l'IIEE'I' 1"'611'1' PIlO.JEC'I' While the Public Works Department is preparing to rework Van Ness Street between Oak Street and Helmen Street the Electric Department will be installing street lights adjacent to the new proposed sidewalks. Van Ness Street is currently not lit with lights. This addition will enhance public safety along this route. QCT. 6160 10 2 2 4 6 11 4 3 1 150 12 14 1 o 9560 5920 149 528 40 390 196 YTI2 46070 81 5 62 47 49 70 18 83 41 70 193 29 19 77875 45160 1342 4166 639 3690 2454 Umumll GUI..c1l I)OlVl~1l DOUSI~/DYJ)llo (;I~NlmA'I'OIl I?oll YOUIl INI~OllltIA'I'ION: I)OWER (~OST (~OMPARISON The Electric Department is currently engaged in the process of obtaining a contractor in order to replace the main ' generator bearings within the Hydro Generator at Reeder Gulch. While this work is being done mechanical support will also be added to the pelton wheel portion of the plant for added support and to ensure longer intervals between repairs. During 1995 the Hydro Generator produced in excess of $100,000.00 dollars in revenue for the City of Ashland. Weare investigating if we might be able to increase the output of our generator in order to further benefit from this source of revenue. I) ACIFIC. I)OWER AND LIGHT - Residential Service 1746 KWH Energy Charge Basic Charge TOTAL $94.31 $6.00 $100.31 CITY OF AsULAND I~LECTIUC - Residential Service 1746 KWH Energy Charges (Includes Basic Charge) Electric Users tax TOTAL $80.00 $20.00 $100.01 1~I..I~C'l'lUC ))I~I. All'nmN'I' TI~A~I UUIl..IlINH The Electric Department engaged in a team building exercise with Bill Mathis. This is the first time our department has had an opportunity to have all employees participate in this type of team building. Overall census was very good, all participants, were very open and objective. We were able to compile a list of goals and objectives that we feel will be very beneficial in our quest to be most efficient and to achieve job satisfaction. Our team building exercise will be very beneficial during our Strategic Plan. . .' - CITY OF ASHLAND MONTHLY ELECTRIC DEMAND AND CONSUMPTION TOTALS ELECTRIC CONSUMPTION ELECTRIC DEMAND ----~--------- 17 8 16.10 ~~~ " . "" I '" '" I /~"' In>INC~~ SDUETD '"' otlNI lNGPERtDD / " ~,I/ '" 1 lL913.703 " , <S2Ol,lll8) 1/ 1 II ! I~ lL013.9~~ 1 , 1Q.72:~.z~ (.f;18~f>) ($247,301) ! ! I , I , ^ ( 1 1 , 29,120 I (-'~"1O) , ! \ . , I 1 , / , ; , , I ! ! , , I , 1/ 23.19:5 (.f;'J9.~ ",no '-'98178> 16 15 14 13 "...... 12 .1: ::3 11 .x '-/ Z 10 Cl t-t I- CL L :::) (I') Z o U 9 7 6 5 4 3 2 JUL AUG SEP'" OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY ,JUN FISCAL YEAR 1996 ~ 1997 YEAR TO DATE TOTAL CONSUMPTION YEAR TO DATE TOTAL DEMAND 49,761,505 KIJh 109.514 KIJ $908,592 $471.677 .38 37 36 35 34 33 32 "...... ~ 31 .x '-/ 30 ,:::a' Z 29 <I: L W 28 ,:::a 27 26 25 24 23 CITY OF ASHLAND ,.." Q: o III ... ~ FINANCIAL REPORT For the three months ended September 30, 1996 ~emora:ttdum October 25, 1996 ijt 0: ~ubjed: Mayor and City Council Jill Turner, Director of Finance ~ Financial Report for September 30, 1996 JIf rom: Attached is the September 30, 1996 Financial Report for the City of Ashland. It does not include the Parks and Recreation Commission reports, which will be released to the commissions. Unaudited balance sheets, expenditure and revenue reports are available for review in the Finance Office. Bude:etarv Compliance The fIrst 18 pages are the Statement of Resources and Expenditures for the three months ended September 30, 1996. Page 19 is a Summary Statement of Resources and Expenditures for the fIrst three months. Page 20 is a listing of Cash and Investments by Fund and Investments by type and holder. The statements are prepared on the budgetary basis o(accounting. The expenditures are listed in the same classifIcations as the . adopted budget, therefore showing budgetary compliance. Budgetary non-compliance is not an issue this early in the 'fIscal year. Individual Funds General Fund The General Fund resources are at 32.76% of budget which is comparable with last year. The carryover to the 1996-97 Budget (fund balance at June 30, 1996) was $1,073,000 which is $93,000 above the previous year.~ Expenditures are at 23.07% of Budget compared to 22.74% last September. The September 30, 1996 Fund Balance is $70,000 above this time last year. These indicators all point to a steady performance by the General Fund. Cemetery Fund The fund balance of $72,500 is within $700 of the balance at the same time as last year, again an indication that the fund is following projections. Street Fund This fund shows a high fund balance due to the delays in the Fordyce/ Wightman storm drain project. This project should be completed by September 1998 for a cost of $200,000. Ambulance Fund Gross revenues within this fund are as budgeted. Collections have been slower than anticipated. Overtime has been higher than expected, due to the volume of calls plus vacations in the s~me month. Water Fund In the spring of 1994, the City adopted a.new water rate schedule which was designed to encourage conservation. Financial stability was an accepted weakness in the rate design. In the summer of 1994, the City earned !I).ore than expected with the very hot, dry summer. With the cool wet summer of 1995, the City earned less than the previous year, even with an intervening rate hike of 20%. This summer was hot with an adequate water supply and consumption rose. Revenues increased $232,290 over the previous year. Sewer Fund The Sewer Fund is preforming as expected. Staff will update the sewer rate model and bring back the plan for rate review in February. Public Works is fInalizing the contract for design of the plant and Finance is reviewing debt fInancing options. Electric Fund The Electric Fund revenues are $59,000 more than at this time last year. This is primarily due the increase in the air conditioning load. ' Summarv of Funds This page is new so no comparisons can be made to other years. Overall numbers look reasonable. Cash and Investments The total cash and investments dropped with the privatization of AsWand Community Hospital. The city investments yield was 5.68% as of September 30, 1996. GraDhs Attached are three graphs comparing an AsWand utility customer to a Medford customer. The quantities used for comparisons were based on the use of an average AsWand utility user. j ill\ wp\counciI\qfs\qfsept. 96 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 GENERAL FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 976,000 1,072,542 -96,542 109.89% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 4,71.3,000 946,002 3,766,998 20. on Licenses and Permits 339,000 122,673 216,327 36.19% Intergovernmental Revenue 464,000 38,609 425,391 8.32% Charges for Services 429,000 103,126 325,874 24.04% Fines and Forfietures 193,000 49,161 143,839 25.47% Interest on Investments 54,000 21,171 32,829 39.21% Miscellaneous Revenues 64,000 15,808 48,192 24.70% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 7,232,000 2,369,092 4,862,908 32.76% EXPENDITURES Human Resources 82,000 45,485 36,515 55.47% Economic Development 251,000 71,815 179,185 28.61% Miscellaneous 84,000 5,372 78,628 6.40% Debt Service 87,000 43,465 43,535 49.96% Operating Transfers Out 189,000 23,000 166,000 12.17% Operating Contingency 192,000 0 192,000 .00% Police 2,426,000 592,209 1,833,791 24.41% Municipal Court 183,000 45,191 137,809 24.69% Communications 745,000 90,393 654,607 12.13% Fire 1,883,000 503,235 1,379,765 26.73% Senior Program 127,000 30,455 96,545 23.98% Planning Division 487,000 112,649 374,351 23.13% Building Division 340,000 69,257 270,743 20.37% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 7,076,000 '1,632,526 5,443,474 23.07% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 156,000 736.566 -580,566 472 .16% 1 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 , CEMETERY FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 104,000 115,357 -11,357 110.92% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 166,000 2,628 163,372 1. 58% Charges for Services 48,000 23,115 24,885 48.16% Interest on Investments 6,000 1,291 4,709 21. 52% Operating Transfers In 45,000 7,471 37,.529 16.60% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 369,000 149,862 219,138 40.61% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 101,000 26,296 74,704 26.04% Materials and Services 139,000 50,559 88,441 36.37% Capital Outlay 35,500 0 35,500 .00% Operating Transfers Out 500 500 0 100.00% Operating Contingency 15,000 0 15,000 .00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 291,000 77,355 213,645 26.58% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 291,000 77,355 213,645 26.58% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 78,000 72,507 5,493 92.96% 2 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 3 CITY OF' ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUND RESOURCES Intergovernmental Revenue TOTAL EXPENDITURES Personal Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay TOTAL TOTAL EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE 400,000 13,736 386,264 ---------- ----------- ---------- 400,000 13,736 386,264 37,000 7,774 29,226 302,767 8,596 294,.171 58,700 0 58,700 ---------- ----------- ---------- 398,467 16,370 382,097 ---------- ----------- ---------- 398,467 16,370 382,097 ---------- ----------- ---------- 1,533 -2,634 4,167 % 3.43% 3.43% 21.0l'lr 2.84% .00% 4.11% 4.11% -171.82% ) ~~vp. /5 4 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 STREET FUND RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover Taxes Intergovernmental Revenue Charges for Services Interest on Investments Miscellaneous Revenues TOTAL EXPENDITURES Personal Services Materia'ls and Services Capital Outlay Debt Service Operating Transfers Out Operating Contingency TOTAL TOTAL EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE BUDGET 672,000 342,000 856,000 623,000 37,000 3,000 2,533,000 598,000 1,086,500 369,000 3,000 129,000 55,500 2,241,000 2,241,000 292,000 ACTUAL 724,682 75,000 142,296 162,416 8,068 52,768 1,165,230 147,465 253,663 o 1,493 o o 402,621 402,621 762,609 5 VARIANCE -52,682 267,000 713,704 460,584 28,932 -49,768 1,367,770 450,535 832,837 369,000 1,507 129,000 55,500 1,838,379 1,838,379 -470,609 % 107.84% 21.93% 16.62% 26.07% 21.81% 1,758.93% 46.00% 24.66% 23.35% .00% 49.77% .00% .00% 17.97% 17.97% 261.17% ,.,.1, .'. CITY OF ,'ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 . AIRPORT FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 27,000 30,502 -3,502 112.97% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 56,000 14,063 41,937 25.11% Interest on Investments 1,000 423 577 42.30% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 84,000 44,988 39,012 53.56% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 1,000 0 1,000 .00% Materials and Services 48,000 11,725 36,275 24.43% Capital Outlay 10,000 0 10,000 .00% Operating Contingency 5,000 0 5,000 .00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 64,000 11,725 52,275 18.32% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 64,000 11,725 52,275 18.32% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 20,000 33,263 -13,263 166.31% 6 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 7 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 BANCROFT BOND FUND RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover Assessment Payments Interest on Investments TOTAL EXPENDITURES Debt Service TOTAL TOTAL EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE 293,000 319,720 -26,720 ---------- ----------- ---------- 400,000 99,305 300,695 18,000 3,986 14,014 ---------- ----------- ---------- 711,000 423,011 287,989 536,000 0 536,000 ---------- ----------- ---------- 536,000 0 536,000 ---------- ----------- ---------- 536,000 0 536,000 ---------- ----------- ---------- 175,000 423,011 -248,011 8 %' 109.12%' 24.83%' 22.14%' 59.50%' .oo%' .oo%' .oo%' 241.72%' CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 GENERAL BOND FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 273,000 272,029 971 99.64% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 190,000 2,932 187,068 1. 54% Interest on Investments 14,000 4,071 9,929 29.08% Operating Transfers In 266.000 266,000 0 100.00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 743,000 545,032 197,968 73.36% EXPENDITURES Debt Service 470,000 274,206 195,794 58.34% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 470,000 274,206 195,794 58.34% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 470,000 274,206 195,794 58.34% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND .BALANCE 273,000 270,826 2,174 99.20% 9 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 DEBT SERVICE FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 109,000 106,223 2,777 97 . 45% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 0 9,046 -9,046 .* ,***.**% Interest on Investments 6,000 3,148 2,852 52.47% Miscellaneous Revenues 10,000 0 10,000 .00% Operating Transfers In 356,000 279,000 77,000 78.37% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 481,000 397,417 83,583 82.62% EXPENDITURES Debt Service 370,000 101,768 268,232 27.50% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 370,000 101,768 268,232 27.50% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 370,000 101,768 268,232 27.50% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 111,000 295,649 -184,649 266.35% 10 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 AMBULANCE FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 41,000 114,364 -73,364 278.94% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 657,000 169,724 487,276 25.83% Interest on Investments 3,000 140 2,860 4.67% Miscellaneous Revenues 2,000 1,000 1,000 50.00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 703,000 285,228 417,772 40.57% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 148,000 35,595 112,405 24.05% Materials and Seryices 361,000 106,020 254,980 29.37% Capital Outlay 8,000 0 8,000 .00% Debt Service 153,000 12,000 141,000 7.84% Operating Contingency 33,000 0 33,000 .00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 703,000 153,615 549,385 21.85% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 131,613 -131,613 **/***.**% 11 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 WATER FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1,659,000 2,111,760 -452,760 127.29% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 2,856,000 1,154,879 1,701,121 40.44% Interest on Investments 91,000 15,014 75,986 16.50% Miscellaneous Revenues 30,000 97 29,903 0.32% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 4,636,000 3,281,749 1,354,251 71.25% EXPENDITURES Forest Inte'rface 100,000 5,737 94,263 5.74% Operations 2,425,000 571,957 1,853,043 23.59% Operating Transfers Out 266,000 266,000 0 100.00% Operating Contingency 200,000 0 200,000 .00% Conservation 90,000 23,280 66,720 25.87% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,051,000 866,877 2.184,123 28.41% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 1,555,000 2,414,776 -859,776 155.29% J~0 W- fiJ5t- JA' (!Jjvc;J '~~;~ ~^Pfl'""j UJ~.~ ~~~1b '~ ~ 12 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 , SEWER FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 6,223,000 3,107,905 3,115,095 49.94% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 917,000 249,779 667,221 27.24% Charges for Services 2,181,000 559,315 1,621,685 25.64% Interest on Investments 309,000 34,799 274,201 11. 26% Miscellaneous Revenues 0 40 -40 *,***.**% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 9,630,000 3,951,838 5,678,162 41. 04 % EXPENDITURES OPERATIONS , Personal Services 527,000 121,705 405,295 23.09% Materials and Services 937,000 205,559 731,441 21.94% Capital Outlay 3,356,000 18,380 3,337,620 .55% Debt Service 370,000 0 370,000 .00% Operating Contingency 3,440,000 0 3,440,000 .00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 8,630,000 345,644 8,284,356 4.01% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 8,630,000 345,644 8,284,356 4.01% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 1,000,000 3,606,194 -2,606,194 360.62% 13 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 ELECTRIC FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE \ RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1,358,000 1,430,900 -72,900 105.37\ ---------- ----------- ---------- Intergovernmental Revenue 284,000 28,716 255,284 10.11\ Charges for Services 7,535,000 1,838,488 5,696,512 24.40\ Interest on Investments 60,000 14,159 45,841 23.60\ Miscellaneous Revenues 20,000 8,606 11,394 43.03\ ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 9,257,000 3,320,869 5,936,131 35.87\ EXPENDITURES Conservation 461,000 87,562 373,438 18.99\ Operations 7,417,000 1,865,113 5,551,887 25.15\ Operating Contingency 500,000 0 500,000 .00\ ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 8,378,000 1,952,675 6,425,325 23.31\ ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 879,000 1,368,194 -489,194 155.65\ 14 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 CENTRAL SERVICES FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 350,000 323,203 26,797 92.34% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 2,465,000 '610,477 1.,854,523 24.77% Interest on Investments 30,000 5,797 24,203 19.32% Miscellaneous Revenues 5,000 1,340 3,660 26.80% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 2,850,000 940,817 1,909,183 33. on EXPENDITURES Administration 658,000 145,577 512,423 22.12% Finance 1,070,000 242,326 827,674 22.65% Operating Contingency 52,000 0 52,000 .00% Recorder '107,000 19,924 87,076 18.62% Public Works 573,000 129,777 443,223 22.65% Computer Services 390,000 39,027 350,973 10. on ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,850,000 576,631 2,273,369 20.23% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 364,186 -364,186 **,***.**% 15 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) , For the three months ended September 30, 1996 INSURANCE SERVICES FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1,070,000 1,135,606 -65,606 106.13% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 370,000 169,575 200,425 45.83% Interest on Investments 88,000 4,659 83,341 5.29% Miscellaneous Revenues 10,000 4,642 5,358 46.42% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1,538,000 1,314,482 223,518 85.4 n EXPENDITURES Personal Services 15,000 3.797 11,203 25.31% Materials and Services 611,000 134,852 476,148 22. on Operating Contingency 400,000 0 400,000 .00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1,026,000 138,649 887,351 13.51% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,026,000 138,649 887,351 13.51% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 512,000 1,175,833 -663,833 229.65% 16 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 EQUIPMENT FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1,697,000 1,676,599 20,401 ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 1,106,000 257,108 848,892 Interest on Investments 100.000 20,602 79,398 Miscellaneous Revenues 20,000 2,495 17,505 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 2,923,000 1,956,804 966,196 EXPENDITURES Personal Services 158,000 38,931 119,069 Materials and Services 382,000 107,702 274,298 Capital Outlay 568,000 10,908 557,092 Operating Contingency 125,000 0 125,000 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1,233,000 157,541 1,075,459 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,233,000 157,541 1,075,459 ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 1,690,000 1,799,263 -109,263 17 % 98.80% 23.25% 20.60% 12.47% 66.95% 24.64% 28.19% 1. 92% .00% 12.78% 12.78% 106.47% CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 18 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the three months ended September 30, 1996 SUMMARY OF FUNDS BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover J.6,347,000 J.4,094,600 2,252,400 86.22% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 6,598,000 1,339,654 5,258,346 20.30% Licenses and Permits 339,000 J.22,673 2J.6,327 36.19% Intergovernmental Revenue 2,578,000 326,468 2,251,532 J.2.66% Charges for Services J.8,499,500 5,133,853 13,365,647 27.75% Fines and Forfietures J.93,000 49,J.6J. J.43,839 25.47% Assessment Payments 500,000 J.2J.,J.83 378,8J.7 24.24% Interest on Investments 909,000 J.52,882 756,118 J.6.82% Miscellaneous Revenues J.74,000 J.13,638 60,362 65.3H Operating Transfers In 2,561,500 552,97J. 2,008,529 21.59% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 48,699,000 22,007,083 26,69J.,9J.7 45.J.9% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 9,86J.,000 2,359,037 7,50J.,963 23.92% Materials and Services 13,828,267 3,370,529 J.0,457,738 24.37% Capital Outlay 8,833,200 216,139 8,6J.7,06J. 2.45% Debt Service 2,328,000 520,03J. J.,807,969 22.34% Operating Transfers Out 977,500 567,97J. 409,529 58.J.0% Operating Contingency 5,119,500 0 5,J.J.9,500 .00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 40,947,467 7,033,707 33,913,760 J.7.J.8% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 7,781,533 J.4,973,376 -7,221,843 J.93.17% 19 CITY OF ASHLAND SCHEDULE OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS September 30, J.995 and J.996 GENERAL CEMETERY BAND COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUND STREET AIRPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS HOSPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BANCROFT BOND GENERAL BOND DEBT SERVICE AMUBLANCE FUND WATER QUALITY WATER CONSTR. SUB-FUND SEWER SEWER CONSTR. SUB-FUND ELECTRIC UTILITY CENTRAL SERVICES INSURANCE SERVICES EQUIPMENT CEMETERY TRUST SKI PARK FUND HOSPITAL PARKS & RECREATION. SUBTOTALS PETTY CASH GENERAL BANKING ACCOUNTS L.G.I.P. U S TREASURY BILLS & NOTES BANKERS ACCEPTANCES CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT STATE & LOCAL INSTRUMENTS U.S. GOV'T AGENCY INVEST TOTAL . J.995 J.996 $ 666,969.87 $ 709,637.56 75,265.87 75,422.67 37,825.29 46,2J.8.65 (J.4,947.8J.) (J.,935.35) 570,2J.4.28 766,004.J.4 2J.,438.8J. 36,921. 5J. 350,521.87 659,043.72 306,333.38 0.00 506,070.24 420,409.43 252,386.98 27J., 925.03 22J.,J.47.J.2 295,648.35 0.00 8,093.05 671, 9J.8. 13 979,527.89 2,580,033.J.7 837,521.66 508,634.J.9 J.,075,362.40 J., 968, 878.20 2,094,728.53 95J.,646.14 1,J.40,4J.0.99 372,803.52 465,313.J.0 J., 089, 712.89 1,404,208.J.2 1,639,429.65 J.,80J.,905.67 6J.9,066.06 628,607.8J. 530,795.00 564,363.00 5,584,3J.8.50 0.00 949,225.05 J.,378,406.76 -------------- -------------- 20,459,686.40 J.5,657,744.69 948.00 (478,050.J.2) J.0,655,4J.8.79 4,326,778.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,254,591.48 973.00 (259,226.83) 3,378,563.33 800,851. 56 486,823.61 0.00 0.00 11,249,760.02 $20,759,686.40 $J.5,657,744.69 20 21.23% 5.03% J..54% 0.00% 0.00% 35.63% I Average Utilities Medford-Ashland Graph 61 60 50 +" ...................... C 40 :J 0 E .............---...... <( 30 .... ro 0 ...................... 0 20 ...................... 10 o Eleclric+ Tax Water Sewer SIreel Storm Utility . 1_ Medford _ Ashland . 100 90 80 +-' 70 c :J 60 0 E <C 50 .... ID 40 0 0 30 20 10 0 Average Utilities Medford-Ashland Graph 62 $92.82 Medford Ashland City _ Electric+tax _ Water ~ Sewer EtEJ Street/Storm 60 50 +-' 40 c :J 0 E <( 30 ~ ro 0 20 0 10 0 .' .. ~ Average Electric Bill with Tax Graph 64 $49.75 Medford Ashland City 1_ Electric _ Tax .' ,- ",- ~\ FERRERO GEOLOGIC ~IC 760 Oak St. Ashland OR 97520 (541)488-2452 To: City of Ashland' Mayor and City Council/Parks Department Ashland, Oregon, 97520 - ~. ~---_._~ -~-- Date: 10/17/96 Subject: Geohydrologic conditions, vicinity of proposed City of Ashland well to supplement Oak Knoll Golf Course irrigation pond ~ Introduction I have completed a geohydrologic study of the vicinity of the proposed well. The data that I evaluated included well logs from 1993 and before, and various geologic and hydrologic publications. The area is within the limits of a larger study that I completed in 1993 related to a well on the proposed Clear Springs Resort property. Since the well permitting process for Clear Springs is ongoing, proprietary Clear Springs data is not included in this report. The well logs and publications from which the data for this study were compiled are part of the public record. The attached map shows the site in relation to roads and geohydrologic map units. The dot pattemed zones are areas where initial driller well productivity estimates are 10 g8llons per' minute or less. Actual long tenn productivity is generally less than driller estimates, especially in the range from 0 to 10 gallons per minute. The unpattemed zones are areas where initial driller well productivity estimates are 10 to 50 gallons per minute. Only wells with anomalous productivity estimates (above or below of the range defined for the unit) are plotted individually. . , ., Findings Compilation of well log data from 61 wells located within a 3/4 mile radius of the proposed well site (as of 1993), yielded the following facts. > There are 28 wells with initial driller well productivity estimates ofless than or equal to 10 gallons per minute, 15 wells less than or equal to 5 gpm and 9 wells less than or equal to 1 gpm. J Engineering Geology, Geohydrology, Environmental Geology and Mining Geology Since J 983 " FERRERO GEOLOGIC 760 Oak St. Ashland OR 97520 (541)488-2452 " > 13 wells have been deepened. Average total well depths before and after deepening are 190 and 366 feet. Average driller productivity estimates for the original well and the deepened well are 6.8 and 9.4 gallons per minute. In four cases, the deepened well productivity estirruites were less ihanfor the original wells. . >There are 42 wells within 1/2 mile of the proposed well site. >There is one well within 1/4 mile of the proposed well site (that one deepened twice to 301 and 642 feet deep, producing 2.75 gpm). Conclusions and Recommendations ,. The proposed well site is located northwest of Tolman Creek, and the Tolman Creek Fault. Based on well log data, the proposed well site is within a geohydrologic corridor along the northwest side of the Tolman Creek Fault that is characterized by interlayered mudstone and sandstone aquifers; and wells with low productivity. A significant number of well productivity decreases in the corridor have lead to the need for well deepening. The decreases most likely are related to the increase in well density over the years, and to some extent related to the long drought of the middle and late 1980s and early 1990s. The Tolman Creek Fault separates the low productivity corridor on the northwest from a high productivity, fractured sandstone aquifer adjacent to the fault on the southeast (see' the anomalous wells in that area of the map). . Since there are no wells adjacent to the proposed well site (within the city limits), th~re is a data gap between the 9 well, <10 gpmarea southwest of the proposed well site and the 12 well, <10 gpm area northeast of the site. However, the available logs of wells that are as close as 1/4 mile and up to 3/4 mile away strongly indicate that the low productivity corridor is continuous across the proposed well vicinity. The dashed lines connecting the two <10 gpm areas on the map indicate the projection of that continuity. Ifmy projection is correct, it is likely that the proposed well will produce less than 10 gallons per minute, and that productivity will possibly decrease with drought and interference if and when additional nearby wells are drilled. The original permit application projected 0.949 cubic feet per . second (425 gallons per minute) from the well, and the modified permit application projects 0.167 cubic feet per second (75 gallons per minute). The former exceeds the productivity of any well 2 Engineering Geology, Geohydrology, Environmental Geology and Mining Geology Since 1983 FERRERO GEOLOGIC 760 Oak St. Ashland OR 97520 (541)488-2452 that 1 am aware of in the vicinity. The latter exceeds the productivity of the vast majority of wells in the vicinity, and is many times the productivity that 1 would expect given geohydrologic data. Will the well still be worth drilling with such a significantly lower productivity than projected? Will 10 gallons per minute maintain the pond level and provide irrigation water as hoped? If75 gallons per minute are needed, it seems unlikely. The positive aspect of a low productivity well is that it is much less likely to effect neighboring wells. Obviously, the extent of the depression of the vicinity water table will be significantly less at 10 gallons per minute than at 425 or 75 gallons per minute. Since the closest 'well is 1,000 to 1,200 feet away from the proposed well site, it is unlikely that alow productivity well will impact other wells. At 425 or 75 gallons per minute, there is a real potential for impact on wells between 1/4 and 1/2 mile away, given the vicinity geohydrologic conditions. There is the possibility that the well will produce 50 or more gallons per minute. The anomalous wells on the map prove that there are isolated high productivity wells within low productivity well clusters. This is typical of bedrock fault and fracture hosted aquifers - sometimes referred to as compartmentalized aquifers -' as opposed to continuous, alluvial valley aquifers, like those found in the WillametteValley, eastern Oregon, etc. However, the odds are against a high productivity well. The actual minimum, adequate well productivity for the intended water use should be calculated based on pond volume, percolation and evaporation rate estimates, and irrigation ~eeds. If that number is significantly greater than 10 gallons per minute,it is unlikely that it will be worth the cost to drill a well. Bucking the odds and successfully drilling a high productivity well comes with the real risk of eventually negatively impacting neighbor wells, or at least becoming a target for blame when neighbor wells have problems, no matter what the cause. Please contact me if you have questions or need additional infonnation. Sincerely, 3 Engineering Geology, Geohydrology, Environmental Geology and Mining Geology Since 1983 II t' , . ... L r , , , , :::::::::::::::<1(j:gpr.n:::: 10 50gpm ......... .... -...... ................. / 1, .}:<<:::<::: 7 wells ~'" ........ . :::::::::::::: ::.:.:::.:. 10 to 50gpm ........ -. -....... . . . - - - . . . . - - - . . . . - ::::::::::::::::7wells:::::::. Ashland sec. 23 sec. 13 .. -...... -. .... - - -.......... -.- .....................; .. -...... -...... -. .. -..... -......... .... - -...... -....- .. ."0..... . _.... .... - - -........ -... -........ .... -..... - - -... -...- . .. -.... , sec. 24 Scale: 1,000 ft. Geohydrologic Study Vicinity of Proposed Well .'1').... '.. City of Ashland ....::::::... ":~'0<~ Ferrero Geologic ::::::':<10gPn;:: ...~.::.::. .... -. . . . . . . . . . . . . -........ -. ;. c. , . " . .'. ..'" ..' ..... , , . ' . ", ',- ,'(, ,", .' '.', '. ," '. . . . ~. ;"~',"~;;':,?~~;'~::.~, :~.~.:~: ", .~.:::. " .' '" <.:' ."''''':'-.' .... -', . - . ~.~, .... ....;.. ~ - , '-,' ',~ .", . - . ~ . . '.' ~. , . CI T'Y" O'F"A SH LAND,:; '. " ." , " ."'.:.,' ~. '-. ,,~: _ I . .' :C'I r .y, < ,';,:. ASIiJ.N:lO, oR~ilpN97520, .'. : . ....Iephone.(ead. 541) 482-321 );-'. . . . .' . ," '. . :~.I,:_~'> ". ' ( ~'.: . H:~L:L ." , . . .. "','-, ", .... ,'. .' . '., '\.. SEN1: VIA FAX TO (503)' 378-8130 -. - --. October 29, 1996 Dwight French Welter Rights Section Mahager . .' Oregon Water Resources Department . '.GommerceBui/ding . . 158 12th Street N. E. Salem; OR 97310-0210 .' . RE:' ApplicatiollG-13824 On behalf of the City of Ashiand, applicant for a water use permit #.<3-13824;1 request . that the Water Resources Department re-notice the Proposed Rnal Order. The City desires that this matter be re-noticed as s09n as possible for the minimum permissible . notice period, which I understand to be 45 days. .' . . The City acknowledges that the Department will not be able to process' the application within the statutory time limits because of this request. ~0~" Paul Nolte City Attorney --- c: Jim Olson Ken Mickelsen Chris Skrepetos {p:parka\french.ltrl Wo: Jlfrom: ~ubjrd: REOUEST: ~emnrandum October 16, 1996 Honorable Mayor Catherine Golden & City Councilor . s_ wnw, '<<"do<. P.E.. Di= of l'><bli' W,,""City ""gi,= r Termination of Two Easements . Public Works has recently received two requests to terminate all or portions of public easements which were previously created on land partition plats. Following is a further description of each of two requests: 1. Drainaee Way Easement: Mr. Jeffrey Golden has presented a Quitclaim Deed needed to revise the limits of an existing drainage way easement along Ashland Creek. Mr. ~'s IECel. of IarxI <9"57 G1k Street) was crealed by a IarxI plrtitioo CI1 Augu<t17, 1989. The plrtitioo plat aOO established the easterly boundary of the AshIand Creek lOO-year F1oo:Iway and further dedicated the area within the floodway as a drainage way easement The Planning . Defertment's subsequent re-estlblislunent of the AshIand Creek lOO-year flood corridor did not cxin::id;: ~y with the FEMA estlbIifui flood boorxiaIy. AltInJgh the flood 1nnIaIy limits . were officially altered, the underlying drainage way =nent that was created in 1989 still retlins it's original limits. The eastern limit of the floodway has moved west approximately 75 feet leaving a WH~lding amount of =nent outside the flood boundary. To be coosistent with . =t land = guidelines the drainage way =nent should be oompletely cootained within the flood corridor. The a1trlJed Quitclaim Deed is intended to rel= all of the City's right, title and interest into that p;xti<n of drainage way =rrnt lying betm= the fa1ra- and pr=lt fIcxxIw.ly lmOOaries and as fully described on attached Exhibit' A'. 2. Public Utility Easement: Mr. Roger Shaw has requested the elimination of a newly created IO-foot wide public utility easement adjacent to his property located at 96 Water Street. 1liis reqll':St is very similar to the ere 3frCO\Ied Ia.<t nmth kc Lloyd Haines 00 the q:p:lSiJe side of Wa1f:r Street like Mr. Haire:s, Mr. Shaw wm:s to ~ his 1'1l.y..wi buiIding c:km" to the strel:t than the lO-foot wide easement would allow. PAGE 1-(""",~\le"""oId.M"") The public utility easement was established by Partition Plat No. :-126-1994 on December 6, 1994 by Ann Clouse. The easement extends across the full frontage of the lot on Water Street, a distance of 123.94 feet. There are no similar easements either north or south of this property. The area is wned E-1 which allows a zero front yard set-back. The attached building plan shows construction to the right-of-way line. This would leave five (5) feet of space between the building and the curb for future sidewalk construction. BACKGROUND: Further information, including maps,. memos and Quitclaim Deeds are attached for each request. The requests have been individually routed through affected City utility departments. No objections to the termination or adjustment of the easements have been received. In each instance the requested action would not adversely impact the City's use of its facilities in the area. . RECOMMENDA nON: Staff recommends Council approval of the two attached Quitclaim Deeds. cc: Brian Almquist Paul Nolte Barbara Christensen PAGE 2-("....~\l<nn<oId.1ol=l a. <t ~ >- I- - Z - CJ - > N I;: !.,Hl j:;"n ::tHH 1."" i~li~!i tl..~"t.~ ., .... <J1 <D .... OJ ""> r I t I 1 I 1 It: J I : , : C : I I : I I I I , . . I I 2 r I I 1 I ~ . . . t I I : f 2 : t; I t 1; r t I I : 1 2 . .: I I It' C : It' 1'1, . 11 I 1 1 I {,lfco'itfnlli,!,:Q'liliit"J lft'it'tr't tt'!: (ll's 1'". fit h: 'II i illllllllll!!!! nlllll! lllllllllll d ,Ill 11 j 1111111 ill! ill I illiln li 11"Ct21::IIIIIII,::,lllll;lllltl:I'.11111: " ~ , l' I i" <l'; J i H i1 d i Hili I i I i I ii n illll j Ii HIll: illi ~ :.- tt'121111.="IIIII;::111211121:111."III: I .- ,:', i : I," q I" i': l' I! If, ,id, , I I ,i H " · ,1In III ! Ii dill! 11111 11111 11111 Ii III11I - f. l:tlelttr.lt..I:' ..... . , . (. If ., ' "1" i, I"ll " li,lll!!:!!l!!!!1 ..... t :r <.:> t:III",'.I:11 i i, t' t t ll... , if p I ~ i'!' I"" II i iI i Ii' II ,III:llllll.t;;: " w ........ h G I il,:i I'i 'I ii i',' 'II '\;,': W I ill I I II i t o :::I::I:l:::C:::' f ., ;", i' i'[' "~'I i'I" 0 liU!.HLll I II u 1 : t t : ~ I : : I : ,It : t t i t i " ~.. i "i t .!~ i ~ d!i!ili!llid H u 11,1:'tl::::I:lI;: OJ OJ: ~ .1 ":; I: I:J::::: I t ltlt': II' I: t I J 'I' _ tt J I . t'" tj, I ' ,II"". 'I i'" I, I !I!!dlllll!:dllllii!llillll!!! 1 i 1 .... en o ,..., N ""' <D .... o:J FOAL! N.. nl _OUIn:l..AJN DEED (I"dlwld...l Of Corpo,"t.I. =_.__u_=_~.=~~~_" II H4 I (.OO:-~;'-=.~~__I'~:I~~~~1 VO'>.~,~_co.~~~ooO_OOl'!'C" I I 1/ I i I I I :1 I' I' ,I il :1 Ii " ,/ I! <r:iI\, CUITClAIM DEED ~""1l!' KNOW ALLMEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That .J:.11::~C.!?.f......t:l:~.~.~~~.~.J"'~'''''~~~~'~~'~~'''~,~:!~ ...........-...........-............-..........-....................-..-....................................................................................., h~T~jnafter called trantor, lor the consideration hereinafter slated, does hereby remise, release and quUclaim unto .~_f.f..~~....~..:...~..':'..'::~.~... _....~.....~.~:~..~~.'.~."!.~~_......._......................_..~...................._..............._..........-..................................................................................... hereinafter (;.sUed trantee. Ilnd unto Irantee's heir!. succesor, Ilnd Ilssitns aU 01 the trllntor's ritM. title lJnd interest in that certain real property with the tenements. hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto be/onting or in any way appertaim'ng. situated in the County 01 .....;r.;.7.!~.~.~::!......._.................. State 01 Oregon. described as follows. to-wit: AJ (k1~f:oJT""' Fo1't- ~"c...+'''''''G f f'v,,"-,oJI:S GA"""'r':"b r"u -r-rf,," c.'ry of=, ') ,4,) "Df"SC.A.I6E-l> ".,J r''-f:' SVR>lf"-( ,vo. 11<O9~ (\/01... 9 PI4G~ 7-.,t. A.s1fL..A-I A-'1> I'AILT"1T"fO.vS'~ ~AC.t<.JO.,J C.()v~r'"f OR~G.o..J) FII...~"bo .~"...Jo" L . ,~ 4- AS ~/-II$ EASI!:"'-"fif:'-J-r A'PI"''-/(-J ""-a A- I'A'<'C.~L. OF A,.,lln... 2..', Ilffj ) ..J '-A...."b CL..AI"'1 NO. ..,., ,''''' r'-I1r NO.c.....I<I-J'~Sr .... ...1 l:l o-'A--r-.o L) ~"".,J" :!....vA-ri;., .. ./ ""'UI..oJ~$""'P 3'9 50..rr11 OF- ,..."q......G.E- I " ~ S~t...T"/O- ~ a"'~ Ie; Cl14,4-rt''''- 0 , 8 A-" A-.....J 7,) ,;..f (-fL.1l' 1 A-...J ,A.J ~c.."'J'o"'" .,-,.1-, l.,...hL..l-A-,...,t-.,-r, EA-S-r o~ .::7A....'~1.... IS !=VLI....", 'OE-S'C..;lL/.s~b. o...~ t;.o-J . -r'ri-' S , c.ov;.Jr~ A .,-0 -r-oI-'S ""DOc.v.....,~..,J-r: ou A-rT'"..+u.f"...../t;:-J-r-' llf SPACE INSUffJCIENT. CONtiNUE DfSClJPTlON ON IlFVnSf SIDEI T6 H'H'e and to Hold the same unto the grantee and grlJntee's heirs. successors and assil1ns forever. The true Itnd lJctullI consideration paid for this trltnsfer. stltted in terms 'of dolllJTS. is 1._..tY.!?~.~......__.._..... @However. the actual considerlJtion consists of or includes other property or vlJ/u~ ~iven or promised which i, IMWhol. .a . (' d' h' h) ~ ~. ) ,.." o/tM conSl erlttlon In lcate w IC . ""' TJ.. ,..nt.ne. boo'....n II.. .ymbol"b. it not .pphubl.. ahould z,. d.l.llId. S" ORS 93.030. In constru,.nl this deed. where the context .so requires. the sin~ulllr includes the plurlJl and a11 ~TlJmmatical chlln~es .sha11 be made so that this deed sha11apply equa11y to corporlttions and to individuals. In Witnrss Whereof. the ~rlJntor hilS executed this instrument this................ day 01..................................... 19.......... if II corporate ~rantor, it has ClJused its name to be ai~ned and its seal. if Itny. allixed by an ollicer or other person duly authorized thereto by order 01 it, board of directors. .: i. il :! " " ;, :1 :1 I ij Ii : . i " ;' d !! THIS INSTRUMEtIT....m Nor AllCM' USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCR!BED IN THIS .......................................................................................................... INSTRUMENT IN V1OUJION OF APPliCABLE lAND USE LA't\'S AND REGU!.JJION5. SEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT. THE PERSON ACOUIRl~ FEE .......................................................................................-....-........... TITLE 10 THE PAOPERTY SHOI.Il.D CHECK WITH THE APPROPR1A1E CITY DR mum PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPRMD USES AND TO DETERMINE IJ('( ........................................................................ ................................. UMJ1~ ON LA'NSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES J.S DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. STATE OF OREGON. County of ..~!::~.~.!?'.~..............................) 55. Thi, instrument WIIS IIcknowled4ed before me on ..................400...............................19......... by................................................._................................................................_...................................._.......... This instrument was acknowledged before me on ....................................................,19......... by .....................................................................................-............................................................................. as......................._...._........................_......................._................................................................................... of ......._...... ........_......_...................... .:................................ .......... ......... ..... ......... .. ...... ............. ..............._.... ;1 .' il 'I 1! " :) !i ;i " " '. j: il " ii " 11 " " 'I Ii ij !I !j q ii !! [I !I II I, I, Ii " ., :i ii ;i , 'I ...................................................................................................-..... Nota.ry Public faT Ore Ion My commission expires ........................................................:....... =i !! .-....-..........-....-....-....-................-....................-..-..-.. S~~~~~~.~~.~.~.~~:..._...__.._...._} 55. 1 certify that the within instrument was rt'Ce'ived for ucord on the....._...day 0/................................................. 19......... Ilt ................. o'clock .......M.,and recorded in bOOk/reel/volume No................... on plt4e ........................ lJndjor as fee/file/instru. ment/microlilm/rt'Ce'ption No~..__..__.... Record of Deeds of slJid County. Witness my hand Ilnd seal 01 County alfiud. ~ 1 ;1 .-....-....-....-.....--.-....-....-.......................-........-..-.-.. Go_I....N_-"""...... ,. .' q .--..-..........-....--.-..........-......................-....-..-..-..-.. .-....-..........-....--..-....-................-.......................-...... " .-......................-....................................-............-..-....... G.-..... N......"" ""'...... "'h.........i~.'.,."'I.IN._.U.......ZI,I. .~"I:I "['["~IO ,., "1:1:0"0111.' U'I I: !; '; -..-..........--....-....-...............................................-..-.-.. -....-..........-...........--..-...............-..........~...._......._.._.. .-....--..........-..-....-....-....-....-....-....-..............---..-.. , u...u ...._...... .........i.. ,Oft'll .111.. "."_." I. IN_. ,........ ZI,I. ........-......-.........-....-....-....-.............-........-....-.......-..-.. .-....-................----....-................-....................-..-..-. 'i By ................._M.._._.._...._.._.._..., Deputy it ."7.~.""::,..=:-:::-==-=~=:--:.":".-._- ..~-_.-:~.-:.~~.-=-=-:-__.::-:-_._.. _._'J 10.0."1 Tn...1 .-..--..-...........-..--..--...-.........-..........-..-..-..-.-. -.--.---.----. -.-.-. -..--.-... \.. A.r-rAc..A......'',.",.- A .-u QtJ,.....c..L.A.- "D"':"'b ...-oA..\ (.....,.~Asok...t-J"b G1-*-.l .....-: ,.,.~~ s. C.....-,. f;-J 6A..A-'....""'oJer..- 1 STEWART LAND SURVEYS 6370 Highway 66 Ashland, Oregon 97520 phone (541) 488- 2831 EXHIBIT "A" PRO PER T Y DES C RIP T ION All that tract or parcel of land situated in Donation Land Claim No. ~1 in the Northvest One/Quarter of Section 4, Tovnshlp 39 South of Range 1 East of the Willamette Base and Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon and being more fully described as folloys: COMMENCING at a found 2 Inch galvanized iron pipe yith a 3 inch diameter brass disk situated at. the Northeast corner of Donation Land Claim.No. 40, of said Toynship and Range; THENCE South 74 degrees 01 minutes 42 seconds East for a distance of 440.30 to a 1 inch by 30 inch galvanized iron pipe situated in the Westerly right of yay line of Oak Street, as found monumented; THENCE leaving said Westerly right of yay lIne North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along the Northerly boundary line of Parcel No.2 of that certain Partition Plat No. P-74-1994 filed for record in the Plat Records of Jackson County, ,'Oregon for a distance of 200.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF 8EGINNING; THENCE leaving said Northerly boundary line, North 22 degrees 04 minutes 33 seconds West for a distance of 130.67 feet to the Northerly boundary line of that tract of land as set forth in Volume 10 Page 104 of the Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon; THENCE South 89 degrees 59 minutes 29 seconds East along last said Northerly Boundary line for a distance of 41.12 feet to the Easterly line of that certain Drainage Easement as shoyn on Survey No. 11698 filed in the County Surveyor's Office in Jackson County, Oregon; THENCE leaving last said Northerly boundary line and along said Easterly Drainage Easement line as folloys: South 45 aegrees 53 minutes 34 seconds East for a distance of 26.82 feet; THENCE South 40 degrees OS minutes 35 seconds East for a distance of 31.83 feet; THENCE South 35 degrees 31 minutes 54 seconds East for a distance of 33.95 feet; THENCE South 16 degrees 12 minutes 24 seconds East for a distance of 39.64 feet; THENCE South 15 degrees 54 minutes 09 seconds East for a distance of 12.87 feet to a point on the said Northerly boundary line for Parcel NO.2; THENCE leaving said Easterly Drainage Easement line, North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along the said Northerly boundary line for Parcel No.2 for a distance of 66.08 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. '. Together yith and subject to; covenants, conditions, restrictions, maintenance agreements, and easements of record as veIl as those apparent on the land. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL. LAND SURVEYOR \'Y1.~c... ~,.,Jt OREGON JUl'fU.1tCl MARTI'" C STf;WART 205"i Surveyor's Registration Reneval date is June 30, 1998 file: C:\msvorks\sutext\lgla9605.vps "''''''..,.... l~~~..~" P....I/C;.,... ...1._I....~.l "oJ :~.. Gt'tt"""U~.SJ.....;:>,.t;t . , O.-._-_'_~~~~~rz.. -n-..----o-.--___~-- fn . . ..... .' ~ l! 8 '-- .. .. ;.''';: '.Zr SOd ~ l: .. ~ ~ c ;,.....--.--~!':-'.~.~ ~~~~.. n Z. ,SO.tLt ......ll .,z.oo r; -.. ;:..: ; ;;: I {) :a 'IOl .-.-.-.-.-._J . 1~~'~ ,00 '1Oa... ;;: ~ .... ~ : ~ i; U _ ,. I J.) a: ~r] ; 1:1.. g ~: :: : . .,1 J UJ i.'" . {'I'" .. . :_'.~; ';.. ... I - i~"2;U ~ i- "1 ~:ICC.:c ..~. r'8'r--' I- .tri-i:'g..!~: b- iili: ...::: w=:. .. _ ;.~ ~:~:j 0+........ UJ =tp~L~r! ...~ '<0'1; ~~~.~: ~~ .. ~~~! ~f~ ~~r III - :fi;:i~if '1ff i;~ ..... c~ ~;:; :~ .. .. _.. "ii. ~... ..... 0 I ~kj.13.~.~~ I'I, ..- E".~o ~~ ....~ - ... Hit. _"- 2'. .l.rt"2~"5:; ...", ~.: _:~. =~ ~3!~ I" ~ Q) (,) t- -1~tl':1 U"i !~l -gg'_:>> :; -s _ J1! - ~ICl i~::; ....""'C "'i;.....Ir~.' .f_ "a5f;::: ::=:u =~ .. :; U..N i,"'...:-' ~ J!!.'s...'D i.. 'Ii~ 2"":;?: is ~ . ::: I"'N -0- - i .. _ . "ii:...!!~ '.'.i _=.;.:~:. c....... "'~Cl' 00) . ? a ..:" ==i~.... . . ~: ~i .' h i~11 1 Q.."l 0 It/;; - ~~f ~i~~ ~ i ~ i .... ;;:; '" :.. ~ ~i I !If c:i Z . ; 1 .; ..: i 1~ ~ ~f _ f c'.. iZ =.... q~j; !Z .~~ .--:J~ ... . - 'Ii- WIlO'lOl.lli ;; ! '" 4 ~;Z.OO N.... :;..... ~ --f-- .. ~ ~.\! ~. UJCJ) :' '. .~~..::::' i l' Ln;;"-- ! tW:1 ': ~ ~.~.:........+ ~ I I "'- I :":: <(. ... .:::::...:...... :::::! ! . ~ n ~ ~~ .:Will:::" ~~ W!~; :; ~ " I" .k .-,<::...1:.., .... .':'.. - ? tlI .' W .... .,. L::;_o.::c,; , - ..... . "'It' I.! 0:"- ~i':;e;."...',. ..... 0) D ..... :' 1;= #:1~:ii:'''' ~~ ~ "I..) ::::: 0) '5 ~ I. ~ I ~E;:._ ~:"-~ .::,;. I &.l C :. ~ );.4'&::. 1.__,. 15 .,:::. ~ .... 1. ~ '1:~ ;i~i: '..J,~~ : i~:~ ..:.:,:::;.:;:: J a .JO'" fill ~~..... , -. ..... a"~ >~J I :'::0:' "./ t . . f:':' '. .~ Q, o j;j I:~ :; . ....:::'i..~~~"4,~.~,. .' e ~~ ~ j~~ .: ~.,~ '~'~$-; f .. ft. c .. ~ l' :.~ :':'~~'l1."Cl .~. ~:; g,~ ~ it: .......0') '.. l,,) .... .... .. 9 ~ r:: ::; ~ . . ~..".;., .g~:::'l:" ~ I;) ~ li;&d.~ .;":;I~"; :::'" .::: c: " .1 I,J.~ 0..... l: - C,/) 0 . r:t:cr:..", ~.5 ~~. ....0 ~ t)) -<.1 till ......~ Cl~ -.... .><co 1.81"~~OIt ,,1:-:..., 8 ~. 0..... .j:."'a...::!'OI Cl~:)", . ..... t-}QO 1ll;S\,~U: "I ~. $...;~~"g 0 n, It'''' ":)"1'"(1 . ~..i"" ..... """ ~o Cltlt 0 1'1 \,/J f'..."lJ' ..w-. i~e ~ 0"" ~~~:2.5 CD ~~ ~ ~c: ~~8:a:"" <: . ~~l z ~..2 .eo", :J;c. ~ 'c-g ~ ~. ~ 8 l~' Q) U zo. 0 ~ "<( z" .!~: 0 "<( ;:; Q, . . E' l.... ""t' lj i$~kjq~t=g~r;~ t. ~ . 0 0) ~ wi..;":~;~~~~~i~ cr: I..;.. ;:; Q.. - : ;; . ~ "'12 ~~. _ C3 i t::! .=1: ~~ CI - c... ~I: ~~ ~ ~.g~ :.....:i :!i~ "d'l! (5 :f~:~ ~.: a oct:- I I ~~~ 1 .~ ~a~ .. -a: I... lj8 . .1 ~ ~ I ot' "K .~ '7': . :".ss .:0.00 ~ ;;;;. I . ~ . . !i~ g 5! '~'. t! ;~ 0. d ~ ~ ~ '. ~ 'l. ~ . f~ .- ~ ~ . ~ I '" ..... III C! _ ~ ;.~'.' ~ . ~ ~j g~ - T..." : ,,' \~ 2;;':~:~~I=Pl'~ ~~U'."'3 u'J"""j~. -: d ~.... ;.. ?\ \@. '. 0 . . 0 D .....- Q -. "~\, .. ,oo'u." ,= ~..Jl"";:"--.' ~-:t:-..e"'.~. _-'.: ~l~@ M.,=:~~Il.~ N M.'='= .'=0.00 H ~ .....e .,"'fZ.N.. . . -'1'-:;; t... ....:!...f:.:t-._ 9L'EEt "'ss so co N ./ .~ - - -'-'-'-'-'--1. ! I '. '. "e..::-r::=-'i:- ... " . 'i; r. ~I ?k i~l!~. !"<~;:rG'~- ---5"':i:>.':";:~.~'::-"'''';::':l. "'--i:~.-.-'" I-") :,. ~.: !~ r,,! Q ...... e..:t- .1 =$1. ~ :::: 8" r:-a.l~! -.J ~"::. "'8 ,- b. . ,..: .., (; . & .. ,".. ~ul . . PI b . _ - '- ... -.J !... "'-. ........ -.. 0.... kC'O . Cl .. j'" i :..... -.J~:O ... "; 0..1 : id ~j ){ ~r~'CI~T:r" ,. ~ C3 ~ (l) ~ .'l . . ~ :;; .: o :ll -d ~ o . . z ..~~o - go S ""*";: == p:; '-oUIJO 6~S 0'06 . ... ..~ . . ". . ~1::so ,O.g ~ .of Z J E~~ ~ ...:tD.~ .t ... .. J - c:: 1:1 0 ... E--c Uo.,U.. ~:1 "-'" ... . c .. "'4' . 0..... . ....J ~ 0 . :C"P"f' '.:~'" ~ ''-.:!! S ~ '1-7 cZ"'z j H ','c ID....O ~O'.g=cgJ ~ . c:Su ~ -=< ~ 0'" E-t .' '" ~ ~ -< ... P-t ::J .~ L':;"f\! en f-og.... u . ~ . ~-;;~ 1 .,.;.' g:q 11 ..:~'. : "C'::s~ I'. .~ '."...:..e t.... i '.;:1" , :;; "'.. ~ 1 .::~ ..:-:-.;~~..~ Ii I ': ...;. .,: ~...,!~ '. .... - C1::i I .. ~ ~~:'. . - i~ ~ f'" , '.. .! ... ~ > ~ :J ') .~.' . :~ o )... '>=1 > .~ '::J C/) .~ . U -.:~ g~ . .. I .. :..~ " ~~ ~" ,,~ o c I:J:J.JIS >10-0- ._~_n~;.....~...-;-l;~-;;;C--ii,;-;;,~~., I' lot).! :,,~,- ",. 1.-...... A. gU!1.Jt1IU.:> ,f 1'" "... .( .., 1\ . ~ --'.;;-'l"II-'(::LII':~-"~;;.ii:"p;r~)"-;;::il":Ci:oo 5'-"-"-"---\,: '-..~ ~ ~~,,"g ? ~[f; ~ .n'o 'I'.S[ ."s H .Ju'<1 . : "- .....":11\-..'01-11....'_'... ~ t d ..I."C"I'''I.I..t,t:''''~ ~ ~.OO'OSt ,00." -::;j~- I I J 3 i.:u~j~ l:f]~ . r iJ Ii: " _ .! . ~ PI '.! -_!~ 11-11 H ,.t rr :, i!{ I I, 1_ .: ~_ 1 !~f ~I: ~! ._~ t" ~;; t:t; I. i: ad 'i~ I -: S' Ii I ~ ---l g il 1___ ~ Q.) '"0 ~ o ej. ""~""i"~!"i"i";; ~~~~!~~~~~~~ ~r~:or:;;r-?~F: !::g8~S~!::;!3~SS~ zrzzzzzzzzzz '" ..tl "'...... ..:-......_ ~ It' ..x .~7.~ ',t1 ''fLZ ~ ,; ~ ~ 1> ~ oJ ~ ~ ... '" '" - I .... "- ;. I ~ Q, .: ,; N "'-!.. .. ;. i;+ ~ 0:- ~ ~ ~ c" ,!!O :::... "1:- . c"! 8 Q,o ~ 8' 0 .., 1> . ,; z '" "i ~ 0 Q, ~! ~';i +: J~ ... ~~ ~ ..,; ~ ~J .... J ..., " ....~" e::- Ci ~ c~ g= \0 0 . u ",,'-1::1 L. ~ -t"":C:O o '''Q: .""-.J .. '" 0 ~. J\ .:c:ci:~"" ~ J\ ~ 5 u"tJ_ 0 ..., ) Cl:.U 10 L. llJ~ O::J-.J C L. t.'J ~ 0 ll:I Lor-- ~ ll."tl 0 .l( II c: CO U -'- ~llJ ..... 1: ll:I""l "'~ll. ~ . 8 8 1> . z I ~ ~ ..,. ,...1\ """':;:' r-i 8 .; ~ ~ ~ " .., ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ .. " ~ . :g ~ .!, " , ~ '" ~ .~ 09.27.96 Srteet Engineering Department ~ity of Ashland Ashland, Oregon 97520 attn: Jim Olsen re: request to remove easement at 96 Water Street Dear Mr. Olsen, This is a request to remove a 10' Public.Utility Easement along the western boundary of the lot located at 96 Water Street. The easement is described on the attached prelininary title report, item #4. The request for removal is based upon the attached schematic plans where the building is sited 5' from the western boundary. There is also a low wall along' the property line with plantings between the wall and the building. The building location is consistant with the Waterside Inn next door, where no easement is possible. The removal of the easement will allow the proposed design to proceed and provide a cohesive streetscape along the eastern side of Water Street. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ~ representative: Ryan Langmeyer 482-3512 I 482-8701 FDA.. ':!"J?1 - OUlTCt.Al~ D[_~~ (I~~l Of ~.l~l. C~~I....~ ".'_(.~':'!:"(:5.i_~_~__oo..!9'!-'~_!?".J~ NA. QUITClAIM DEED 70228pg {.a~ KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That ......~rD:..Qf....~~.I~~.(...0...1))!.,l.IJJ.9.;i;~!..~!?~~.~~JqD...............~.H~ -..........-................-.........................-...................................-....................................._..............................., hereinafter called Arantor. for tilt, comiderBtion hereinafter stated, does hereby remise. release Bnd quitclaim unto ....T.!:l.~...f.I2Y.@.~'!J.~..f9.~...9QD _._..I3~J.?D-:r.].~.(.._?D...Qr.~gQD._.!;Q~f:9.l!9.1}..._...._......................................_....._._............................................_.._.._....._...... hereinafter cal/ed trantee. and unto trantee's heirs, succesors and assiAns al/ of the trantor's ritht. title and interest in that cerlain real property with the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto be/ontint or in any way apperlainint, situated in the County of ......J.Sl_~~.~g!.L........................... State of Oreton. described as fol1ow!, to-wit: A 10 foot lXJ!>lic utility easement, incluclin;l 'l"CI Cablevisioo, as disclosed 00 Partiticn Plat reoorded the 6th day of DecanI:er, 1994, as Partiticn Plat No. P-126-J.994 of "Re:::ord of Partitioo Plats" in Jad<scn County, Oregcrl, and filed as SUrvey No. 14306 in the Office of the Jacks:n County Surveyor. (Affects ~ly line) . Grantnr l'erein releases and terminates all right, title and interest in and to the aJ:oi..e refererx:Ed easement. I I I I II " II I, " " I i , I ! ! (I' SPAC! INSUffiCIENT. CONTINUE OESCRIPTlON ON trvERS! SIDEI To Ha~'e and to Hold the same unto the trantee and trantee's heirs. successors and assi4ns forever. The true and actual consideration paid lor this transfer. stated J'n terms 0/ dol/ars, is 1......nfJne.~...........__.._ CDHoweyer. the actual consideration consists 0/ or includes other property or value Aiyen or promised which is Ih. whol. 'd . (' d' h' h) ~ parI 01 the conSl eratlon In lcate w IC . "" Th. ..nt~nee I>.'_n ,h. .ymbol.<D, it not .ppJ;~.bl~, .houJd I>. de/ef.d. S,.. ORS 93.030.) In construing this deedl where the contert so requires. the sintu/ar includes the plural and all Arammatical chanAes shall be made so that this deed shall apply equally to corporations and to indiyidua/s. In Witness Whereof. the trantor has erecuted this instrument this......._...._.day 0/ ._.~.t.Q~E.._............ 19.~_~...: if ill corporate trantor, it has caused its name 10 be sitned and its seal. if any. al/ixed by an officer or other person duly authorized thereto by order 0/ its board of directors. CI'IY OF ASHLAND 8Y: THIS INSTRUMENT Will NOT AlllJN USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS ..........._..n..........................__............................m..................-........... INSTRUMENT IN V10lA110N OF APPlICIJIlE LAND USE LAWS AND RtGULA110NS. BEfORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT. THE PERSON ACOlJIRlNG FEE8Y.:........n TITLE to THE PROPERIY SHOtJL.O CHECK WITH THE APf'ROPRLtJE CITY OR COUtm' PlANNING DEPARTMENT to VERIfY APPRMO USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY ......................._.................................................................................. LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR fORtST PRACTICES /IS DEfiNED IN ORS 30.930. STA.TE OF OREGON, County o/......~~.<::~~.~~__........................n......)Ss. This instrument was acknowledted be/ore me on .................._.................................19........, by......__..._......_...................._._.._............................_............:...............__._....._..._._.__..........................___._.._... This instrument ~'as acknowledted before me on ....OctoOOr..........................._..., 19..9b.. by........................................._.............................................................__............................................_...__._._.... ( . ~t LAND PARTITION SURVEY PARTITION PLAT NO .~P~ l~ Co -/99~ 8 e i n gap 0 r ti 0 n 0 f the S . \'1. 1/ 4 0 f S e c. 4, T,39 S., R.1 E., W.M. City of Ashland Jackson County, . Oregon for Ann Clouse 70 Water. street Ash land, OR 97520 \'iater street IV '" !n1t1al point. Set 5/6.x30~ pi~ wI pl~st:c c~p ~kd. L.J.FRIAR & ASSOCIATES. IV '" IV '" N 10' PUE EASEMENT~O BE TERMINATED :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::J:""~:ili\::::::::::::::~:~r:':'r . . ....................:":~................... ..... . ....~.T.=.=.iFilt2.4T..=.....:...-'-' '-'-'" " . I : ~~ I ...-" . 00. CD I "... '" r:..o 0 "<1 '" :"" . .. - j. Ce..... pari<:r.g' './ lot NELY 0.5 I. , r 0 r ". 0 ". C, "'- C ~ '" 0 n 0 '" n '" - c, - c, -< 0 -< ~ <> :J ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 > " > ::t " '" ~ " 0. ~ 0. 4.8":" ..: . Oi AN W'" co '" . '" ~ 0 >: , d Crcek~CL 20' CL J.sl1..a~ .,,'oy Easement '-.~C;eDra.n::ll.. "" .. . . 9.2 ':. 123.93 . 523'47'09'" 0.06 5E: co '" _ '" '" '" '" Parcel 1 S913 sq 1t '" "' g, - N co '" A B t.."'l . '" "' Parcel 2 18313 5Q It . - .... 60~:>:a_: 523'11 '3S;w---. . f( I . '-- ' . /"f' f ___' -f} . " ' " D~,. . ~'C"'; . . '''), . A':-!-;; r o ". Ol o ~ o n _ ^.~ w o 2.5'"1 ~ 1501 "/ C:::J "'-z ..,Cl . "'- f '" 3 c... 4,~-' () '" :J - t."'l l.>"'l -l g -oJ o .,J W :; co po > '" ::t ~ '" ::> 0. '0 '" '" '" '" . , ~2.L ~~ l?A 12~) . 60.-:0 'E.~.14 r"\_1_ . c.._""........ - -. 1.0"':; I iN ; A , W 8.0 l ~ w I ~ 0.06 SE :.:\1 ~ 0- fg c :': 1" t~ ~ X - --1 4.5 J 7.5: " (OM E~.71,)~ :', , 12.22 Vl Ol A ... o ~ . ro co m (,!) r - ~. ~ SCALE: .1-.. 50' < w C1 p "1l >- 0 :-' '- () ::J '" :.f) ::J - '0 '" Ol '" - lr.....'"J.., ''':9"' 0 -, ".'".. I _" C. .'::'v @1 /"' ~- ~ (\ -. s; .. _fT ;> n ~~ ... J)~ I !~. ,.~ . ~~ I '1M I <. fT I (\ -- ~i~ -J-.~l III ll' 91 ~ -'4' I ;0 a I-.-~ I I I I 1 Gt. .j, .'~~- ~~ 11 -. f 10- ~. ]f:9' :" ro:::; 9-rn o . &. 11 ~ Z. ~ :z- "- 06- J)j "' of- (> -. J Of' 0 ;>- <; ~C' ". It 3_ Il-~ . . I b - - f - - --, ~~.-:--:- -:-:---: (I s; ~ tr C ':Z rn -R,,-,RQG.E.R 9'Aw AS~~NQ OR.~7.5eo .~q-n ~j:f'0 .('\ . .,.c. ....:-....t-i ~, . 8Q. . liJ ~- '.. .. - J' . .' I' I " .. .. L___l_l r" t i :i. 4Q' (5 it /"'rl-t'-f\ ilili ~" ... ! 0 .If ... (\(\1 ~cjl. ..>90-- -, , , I ~;. \ --.: \ ltl~\\ .,r/" \} &.;l '.r G' I. \ jt.", ._\,,,~~J '::,,[/ a~ e- Jj~ )!! 2'ti' ~ .l;"r . to e C!. it. ~ If :- 00 rl-G> ~o I' /l.e.O'95 6"""'1'9 by 0..<:'..0.... \UIIR/- ~ J;i- r I I .J>- ~- -'. ., . $nl cYl RO o~ ~~ 0';' ~~. (1l () o J:. ~ c: 9 o z: L~iNG H ~R.cni1l:C"NR~ .....,..105 ~ ~t.uCl"40.~I:t' (/) I I ("\ 6Ji'l pi .1 JTl > I , o ~ il (\ "F ~ -. '" "i 1.-' J' ,. . .- ~ ':2 <( rJ. o z 11 ~ ~I 4 l!J e - III 2- ~ ~ ~ tJ Ul ti 3 .. ~ :z f, j r-=- ;j: ~. ~ (j "3 1 .a... "~ 3 .\ ~t ic I ?-..~ ::0 ~~tf 013 I.' t ~ ~ 0 u. ~ t:t- ~ S 0 lIJ ~ k- Ii: ~ J,r~ ~ ~..... z . -I.> L.] < ~~ .~ 2. b z: 0 ~ "-0+ oJ! v~ A. ,,~ ~-+- ... N{[J . ~ \1\ JU -~ 2 ~ "':, I ~Q.. '-.I j!_9 ! ~~ ~"~ __ _I , +- d J i !'\..A J-~; -- ,)1 ,;3 ~ _ _ { rv J _ J (j _). I _ tl--- I :5t. -.... \ ^f-1]''f.1 I ''>I..~ . . SSo.J. -+ "/ J-:> "'" . 014/ 0-J0J- A~D J' r 901 J- ot 5 r. ""IP)'1l fv1b I _so . "I ..b-, ~.pj ". do-fd....t. ---., "O-,Q1 SIOQ"W ! i""J I ~ ?rQ')) ~.l3S .?is ~-- - tl- el VI o 11\ a- ) 1 ~~ ~ Ul v ~ -' f I h:" ~ .:... ~ ~ , .. , I - I ~ - ~ ~ \..; ~ \3' Q VI ~8 ti)C> ~ (~ \ ," . , "'i-r '0' .., " i t ~~ 3\.\ -\, of . l g ,1--cJ a 1 IX) . ~ - ~:-t;:Cf- t!llll >-0 ->L ~ 0""$ .~.I} E 1'- .' '" <II ~ 3 c a f F'~ ~ ::l4-~:r:~.51\1 () 'fir .l~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tr.~ 3 ~ ~ c ~ rf\" W I 2" s)o 11.., .$ ~:Q>-: q; 5F -JJ ):" l1QJ4.:;j.--e 4-~ZL~ Q.) oS ~ [ll' ....4 ,<oJ ~- -. :9 ~+ . ~ ~._ Q.) oJ ~xjQ)~-4; "- "" ~ -A "11-0 ;f-- r.J) _5 f ~ ~ i '-f" () vc..; ~ ~~ ~ 'l ., FIRST PAGE RECORDING REQUIREMENTS PER ORS 205.234 NAME OF TRANSACTION: Quit Claim Deed NAME OF PARTIES: Grantor: City of Ashland Grantee: Jeffrey S. Golden DOCUMENT TO BE RETURNED TO: Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder, 20 East Main, Ashland, OR 97520 . TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION: $1.00 UNTIL A CHANGE IS REQUESTED, SEND Not Applicable. TAX STATEMENTS TO: QUI ^ City of Ashland, Oregon, Grantor, releases and quitclaims to Jeffrey S. Golden" Grantee, all right, title and interest in and to the following described real property: J' An easement for drainage purposes granted to the City of Ashland as described in filed survey No. 11698 (vol. 9, page 74, "Minor Land Partitions," Jackson County, Oregon), filed April 26, 1994, as this easement applies to a parcel of land situation in donated land claim No. 41 in the northwest one/quarter of section 4, Township 39 South of Range 1 east of the Williamette Base and Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon. This parcel is fully described on the attached Exhibit A. The true consideration for this conveyance is $1.00 plus other property or value is a part of the consideration. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPUCABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY UMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. Dated this day of ,1996. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Barbara Christensen, City Recorder State of Oregon County of Jackson This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 1996, by Catherine M. Golden as Mayor of the City of Ashland, Oregon, and by Barbara Christensen as Recorder of the City of Ashland, Oregon. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires: QUITCLAIM DEED 19:\paul\ro""goldon.dod) ~ Ii ! , f .i 11 T""'"<.J'O' ._......v. .. .... OV''''c.-....4''''''' "P..~ .....oA..\ c..r.,~/h~oIf-oIb G1-....~ I .:rc~F~~ 5. Go..,~ 6/t.A-1T"tr<c 1 STEWART LAND SURVEYS 6370 Highway 66 AshlDnd, Oregon 97520 phone (541) 488- 2831 EXHIBIT IlA" PRO PER T Y DES C RIP T ION All that tract or parcel of land situated in Donation Land Claim No. 41 in the Northwest-One/Quarter of Section 4, Township 39 South of Range 1 East of the.Willamette Base and Meridian in Jackson .County, Oregon and being more fUlly described as falloys: COMMENCING at a found 2 inch galvanized iron pipe with a 3 inch diameter brass disk situated at the Northeast corner of Donation Land Claim No. 40, of said Township and Range; THENCE South 74 degrees 01 minutes 42 seconds East for a distance of 440.30 to a 1 inch by 30 inch galvanized iron pipe situated in the Westerly right of way line of Oak Street, as found monumented; THENCE leaving said Westerly right of way line North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along the Northerly boundary line of Parcel No.2 of that certain Partition Plat No. P-74-1994 filed for record in the Plat Records of Jackson County, Oregon for a distance of 200.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE leaving said Northerly boundary line, North 22 degrees 04 minutes 33 seconds West for a distance of 130.67 feet to the Northerly boundary line of that tract of land as set forth in Volume 10 Page 104 of the Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon; THENCE South 89 degrees 59 minutes 29 seconds East along last said Northerly Boundary line for a distance of 41.12 feet to the Easterly line of that certain Drainage Easement as shown on Survey No. 11698 filed in the County Surveyor's Office in Jackson County, Oregon; THENCE leaving last said Northerly boundary line and along said Easterly Drainage Easement line as follovs: South 45 degrees 53 minutes 34 seconds East for a distance of 26.82 feet; THENCE South 40 degrees 05 minutes 35 seconds East for a distance of 31.83 feet; THENCE South 35 degrees 31 minutes 54 seconds East for a distance of 33.95 feet; THENCE South 16 degrees 12 minutes 24 seconds East for a distance of 39.64 feet; THENCE South 15 degrees 54 minutes 09 seconds East for a distance of 12.87 feet to a point on the said Northerly boundary line for Parcel No.2; THENCE leaving said Easterly Drainage Easement line, North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West along the said Northerly boundary line for Parcel No.2 for a distance of 66.08 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Together with and subject to; covenants, conditions, restrictions, maintenance agreements, and easements of record as well as those apparent on the land. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR '"\'Vt~c..~J OREGON .u..V1S,1"- MARTI,. C STF.WART 205> Surveyor IS RegistratIon Renewal date Is June 30, 1998 file: C:\msvorks\sutext\lgla9605.vps \ , CITY OF ASHLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Engineering Division DATE: November 1. 1996 TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor Catherine Golden and City Councilors Susan Wilson Broadus, PE, Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~ Exemption from Competitive Bidding for the Design and constructe:; Improvements to Roca Creek from East Main Street to Bear Creek (Wi!lhtman/Fordyce Proiect) SUBJECT: Action Reauested City Council authorization to exempt the above project from competitive bidding. Backaround Purposes of the Roca Creek (Wightman/Fordyce) project include mitigating flooding and non-point source pollution problems, as well as providing natural and environmentally sensitive methods of stream restoration. The intent of selecting the design/build option for this project is to maximize innovation by responsible proposers and minimize time delays often associated with the traditional approach of design followed by separate construction operations. Channel improvements will include stream bank stabilization, channel realignment, floodplain restoration and obstruction removal, wetlands construction for treatment of non- point source pollution and revegetation of riparian zones. In order for the City to receive proposals from qualified firms to design and construct Roca Creek improvements, an exemption from competitive bidding is necessary. This exemption is sought because the actual cost of design and construction of the improvements is just one factor in determining the most qualified designer/contractor. Far more important will be the background and experience of the firm which successfully submits a proposal. Because this project combines selection of qualified experts in numerous fields such as engineering, geology, landscape architecture, wetlands, stream restoration, environmental education, public involvement and general construction contracting, it is difficult, if not impossible. to competitively bid this for an award to the lowest bidder. The selection of such firm will be objectively determined by criteria set forth in a Request for Proposals (RFP). These criteria emphasize the experience of the firm in designing and constructing projects similar in scope, size or discipline; qualifications and backgrounds of I . key personnel of the firm in these types of projects; processes the firm proposes to use to design and construct channel improvements; benefits and impacts of the improvements; and community benefits and impacts. State law authorizes the City Council sitting as the local contract review board (pursuant . to AMC ~ 2.50.030) to exempt certain contracts from competitive bidding if the local contract review board finds: "It is unlikely that such exemption will encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or substantially diminish competition for public contracts; a~ - The awarding of public contracts pursuant to this section will result in substantial cost savings to the public contracting agency. In making such finding, the. . . board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid and such other factors as may be deemed appropriate." ORS 279.015(2).' In making an exemption state law also requires that the local board: . "Where appropriate, direct the use of alternate contracting and purchasing . practices that take account of market realities and modern or innovative contracting and purchasing methods, which are also consistent with the public policy of encouraging competition. Require and approve or disapprove written findings by the public contracting agency that support the awarding of a particular public contract or a class of public contracts, without competitive bidding. The findings must show that the exemption of a contract or class of public contracts complies with the requirements of (ORS 279.015(2)(a) and (bJ)." Recommendation Because of the unique nature of the proposed project and the reasons described above, staff recommends Council approval of an exemption from competitive bidding. 1 AMC is quite similar. AMC 2.50.030 "The contract review board may by resolution exempt other contracts from competitive bidding if it finds: a. The lack of bids will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract; and b. The exemption will result in substantial cost savings. In making such findings, the board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid, and such other factors as the board may deem appropriate." . . RESOLUTION NO. 96- BEFORE THE CITY OF ASHLAND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION EXEMPTING FROM COMPETITIVE . BIDDING THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION_OF LCRB RESOLUTION ROCA CREEK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Recitals: A. AMC ~ 2.50.030.B permits the Ashland City Council sitting as the Local ~ Contract Review Board to exempt contracts from competitive bidding if it finds: 1. The lack of bids will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract; and 2. The exemption will result in substantial cost savings. B. This ordinance provides that in making such findings, the Board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid, and such other factors as the Board may deem appropriate. Where appropriate, the Board shall direct the use of alternate contracting and purchasing practices that take account of market realities and modern or innovative contracting and purchasing methods, which are also consistent with the public policy of encouraging competition. C. In order to exempt a public contract from competitive bidding, the Board shall adopt written findings that support the awarding of a particular public contract or a class of public contracts without competitive bidding. The findings must show that the exemption of a contract or class of contracts complies with the requirements of AMC ~ 2.50.030.B. The Board adopts the information contained in the memorandum from Susan Wilson Broadus to the Mayor and City Council dated November 1, 1996 as findings justifying the exemption. The Board finds that this exemption will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract and the exemption will result in substantial cost savings. The Board resolves that an exemption be granted as follows: Design and Construction of Roca Creek Improvement Project. This project is exempted from competitive bidding. The city shall use requests for proposals (RFP) as the alternative method in selecting a qualified designer/contractor/monitor. The RFP shall set forth the specific criteria upon which the selection shall be made and how the proposals submitted in response to the RFP will be evaluated. The criteria will utilize the qualifications described in the memorandum referred to above and shall be specific as to final product envisioned by the city. Cost shall be evaluated as a factor, . but shall not be the sole determining factor in awarding the contract. PAGE 1-LCBR EXEMPTION (p:."j\wightma,uoo' I, This r~solution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code ~2.04.09p duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of . 1996. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of .1996. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 2-LCBR EXEMPTION (p""dlw;,,htm...,..1 RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION REINSTATING PERS PICKUP FOR CERTAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE INVAUDATION OF BALLOT MEASURE 8 (1994) Recital: The Oregon Supreme Court in the case Oregon Police Officers' Assn v. State of Oregon, 323 Or 356, 918 P2d 765 (1996) has invalidated Ballot Measure 8 (1994) as an impairment of government employees' retirement contracts under the federal constitution. Because of Measure 8's invalidation, the city is required to reinstate the PERS pick-up that was discontinued when Measure 8 was adopted. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The city will contribute to the Oregon Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) for the Municipal Judge, City Recorder and other elective officers as defined in Section 1, Article III of the Ashland City Charter who are members of PERS by virtue of their regular employment. Enrollment in PERS will commence six months from the date of the official taking office unless the person was in PERS immediately prior to taking office. The city will also assume or pay for these persons the employees' contributions at a uniform rate of six percent as provided in ORS 238.205. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code ~2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,1996, nunc pro tunc October 1, 1996. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,1996. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor ~ewed as to form: w~A- Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 1-RESOLUTION (p:Ofd\pen.n961 CITY OF ASHLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Engineering Division DATE: October 31. 1996 TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor Catherine Golden and City Councilors Susan Wilson Broadus. PE. Director of Public Works/City Engineer P- Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Fund Exchange Agreement for Improvements to East Main Street SUBJECT: Action Reauested City Council authorization for the City Administrator to sign the attached Amendment to the ODOT Local Agency Fund Exchange Agreement Number 13389. Backaround This amendment incorporates three previous agreements for improvements to East Main Street from the railroad to Walker Avenue. The three agreements total $418.095 in federal funds with a 94% exchange ratio. making a maximum of $393.009 available to the City in state funds. The East Main Street improvements include storm drainage. widening. sidewalk. bicycle and parking improvements. ._ _..Recommendation Staff recommends Council approval. Oregon October 15, 1996 DEPARTMENT OF n'")' - 'i~h, c;-' '--;J--'~';"-;;- --::.--, TRANSPORTATION ii r; .~ Ll'} !~ : \if .'~ I~":: 'I ' , r -. -- h'.______''-_c''--, I; i I fi" ; ! Ii; i ' REGION 3 !i:LJ! OCT 161996 ii~i I I ! I ; CT';;(:F'L<:~;"\ ~~D- I FILE CODE: . .....----. ,'...." '>-..'""'\.II.'"2..J JIM OLSON CITY OF ASHLAND 20 EAST MAIN ASHLAND OR 97520 Dear Jim: Enclosed for review and signature by appropriate city officials are three (3) copies of Amendment No. I to Agreement No. 13389 for the East Main Street fund exchange project. . This agreement shall be authorized during a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council. After your review please return the signed agreements to me. Sincerely, ~C-fh~ Michelle Mock Region 3 Agreement Specialist mm' Enclosures John A. Kilzhaher GO\'t~m('lr ~ M~.",., I~~;"~-- :.~\ ."\....-: /~ .......... lrm 7~-1$29 (10-95) 3500 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg. OR 97470 (541) 957.3500 FAX (541) 957.3547 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AOMINISTRA TKJN: (5<') 488.5587 ENGINEERING: (S04 1) 488-5347 CITY HALL CITY OF ASHLAND ,_' t ~ . .,...t . -...,. --' 20 E. f/.AIN STREET -. ASHLAND, OREGON 97520-1814 FAX (5<~4SS-&X16 " August 22, 1996 Ms. Michelle Mock Region 3 Agreement Specialist Oregon Department of Transportation 3500 N.W. StewartPariway " :R9.$EBURQ OR 97470 i'j"~ 'I-' .. ".".. ~. . , ~::., ]'~ . ,.~1 ....~'..,. .' . "." ..,.. ~ . ~ ~e: ',' Local Agency Fund Exchange' Agreement Nos. 12229; 13106, & 13389~' ;~'~~'Lc.. ~.t( ,': - ". '. '::.:, ;' ,: ; cy-: ...... -.,...~.. 'i" '_ ~ ~chelle: , , . .' It has been Some time since the first of the Local Agency Fund Exchange Agreements for the ill1P!ovement of East Main Street was approved and I thought it prudent to give you some insight ~tO'.tl1eproject chrOnology. ""'. ",," '. . " ',,' , ..,. '.-" '"-'". The following fund exchange agreements were acquired for the East Main Street improvement: The agreements were acquired for three (3) phases of construction on East Main Street. Obviously for economical purposes, and for construction continuity, it was intended that the project be fully ~nstructed at one time under a single contract. With the acquisition of the final agreement in 03/04/95 plans were commenced for the street improvement. Following is a chronoJogicallisting of the major work perfonned to date: 1. 2. 3. 4. RF.P. for engineering services prepared. RF.P. advertised. RF.P. received. R.F.P. acrepted. 04/07/95 04/28/96 05/19/95 , 06/22/95 PAGE I-(c:corD:u\mo:l:.l.I1) f J {, .,,' __I P"t.;' 5. 'Contract for sexvices approved ,6T~=:'- Pre-design conference with engineer. ;.orf' ;<;;::-.. ... . . 7.,,;,:: Eighty percent (80~) project plan reVIew. '. 8. Notification of property owners with request to review plans. Ninety-five percent (95%) project plan review. Final notice of Public Works construction sent to utilities. Final plan approval. Advertise for construction bids. Bids opened. Bid rejected (single bid received was (97,000 over engineers estimate). 15. Notice of delay in construction sent to property oWners. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 07/31/95 08/14/95 , 03/22/95 , 03/26/96 04/04/96 04/05/96 05/17/96 05/19/96 06117/96, 07/10/96 07/10/96 . . -.' As you can see from the above schedule, work on the project commen~ immediately folloWing the approval of the final agreement. The first agreement was 15 months old at ~ time. ,By the time that two years bad expired from the date the first agreement was' approved the project design was approximately 75 % complete. It is my understanding that the two year contract limit applies to commencement of actual work on the project and not total project completion: Would you please confirm that this is correct? , , \ __ jd~!;: .. With the rejection of the single bid received on the project, its final completion will be delayed further. It is anticipated that the project will be bid again in February, 1997 with an anticipated completion date of August, 1997. May we be assured that thethree agreements will be in effect to cover this, time frame? Is a formal contract extension needed to =mplish this? ' ..' We would also appreciate any guidelines or instructions on how moneys are requested from these . agreements. Thank you very much for your assistance. If you require any additional information please feel free to call at 488-5347. -, ~~cere1Y, /..h Ii: ~,~{///1 ()j~~ H. Olson Assistant City Engineer cc: Greg Scoles, A>Wtant City Admini<trator Jill Turner, Fmance Dire<:lOr Susan W1lJon Broad"', Public Worb Director PAGE 2-(,,00f~'Ur) '. ,,-:,.;. ':. ':.. ~.: ,0; ~ "';J:',-!, L:...,,:.;/,':!,:> '<~) ,:... '. ' .'~[:ij~:;'L :'_~: ; ~~2 .~..u " ''-/'~;::::' .:\. October 15,1996 ,6 r:;' c~..';~>: ;':,~ . .;.; '~~,:...'j ~:;,T. '(':"-." C'. '. Misc. Contracts & Agreements . :,: No: 13389 #1 :::> ,;:",.,~ t. " - ~ .t:)~f9YI :'.. " f ':~'. . .' .L.!.C;:' . ':'j;; -, : " .,:...:: ('. -: ,"~ :.:. . _'.:':;U~:' . ).-' '. .(~10J.L:'~:' i.. .' '-, -" ".. . :. :;.:i'..''- ~ . , . . ,:l'l~j:.,:..; u~: ,,- 'jf:"~'/" :~'j:.'~~;.." ~ .": :.J'..:--, ".r 'I",.!. . ....'... l~_ H. :~ ,', :; _' i : ,','--.. --, -'_: g:~i'-.;;f;;f : AMEND~ENTNO~ J:-. :~ :..~,::',' " LOCAL' AGENCY , ,', ., FUND EXCHANGE AGREEMENT _';;:';f:.!'_' The STATE OF OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as-~'State", and THE CITY OF ASHtAND, hereinafter referred to-as "Agency"'entered into Misc. Contracts & Agreements No. 13389 March 4, 1995. Said agreement' covers the preliminary engineering and construction finance of the reconstruction of East Mairi Street, from Southern Pacific Railroad to Walker Avemie, Phase nrproject. . 'j' ':c;e,,:> ::.-:] y--:, ' " .-"'-' SIb rr! ~;.:.': 1.~' .:.:~_..:..:,. : ~;~ .':.~. ::';.' hl':;',: :'/" ,<.r.,::; ;:< ...~r::~.-.i... :::::..':': ','u"': It has now been determined by State and Agency that the agreement"referenced above;'shall be amended by, this agreement to incorporate the terms and conditions of Misc. Contracts & Agreements No. 12229, executed on December 22, 1993; and the terms and conditions of Misc. Contracts & Agreements No; 13186, executed on December 12, 1994, as follows:' :___ , ' .' . , . - '., ..;:. 1.:: '. .... -- ''!~i . . Paragraph 4. shall be amended 1.0 read: ". , .-, 4. To assist in funding the project, Agency has requested State to exchange Federal funds which have been allocated to Agency, for State funds based on the following ratio: $94 State for $ I 00 Federal Based on this ratio, Agency Wishes to trade $4 18,095 Federal funds for $393,009 State funds. ' Paragraph 6.0. shall be amended to read: D. This Fund Exchange shall be on a reimbursement basis, with State funds limited to a maximum amount of $393,009. All costs incurred in excess of the fund exchange, amount will be the sole responsibility of Agency. I / ,- / J. Agency shall compile accurate cost accounting records. Agency shall bill State, in a form acceptable to State, no more than once a month, for costs incurred on the project. State will reimburse Agency at 100 percent of the billing amount, not to exceed $393,009. The cost records and amounts pertaining to the work covered by this agreement shall be retained for inspection by representatives' of State for a period of three (3) years following final payment. Copies shall be made available upon request. IN'lWITNESS.WHEREOF, the parties hereto have' set their hands and affixed their, seals as,ofthe day hereinafter written. ' ,~) " ':'",;".. -- --' ':' Agreement No. 13389#1 City of Ashland Paragraph 6.1. shall be an1ended to read: 2.~[::". 'E",.: . ;..,':it-::: " : .. ~.:". ,--,---:;' 1~fh,;n;~~ ~:' ", : 1: .',t( ." ,~ -:---', r,"." r ; . ,J.._ . ....,\j >:.:" . '1..-:.. .; ,~ rrro'{j .;~,::-"" '\ " . .. . -' ~J '. .. _ -' .. ;,- ~;: . '~ ;-, . ~ ' ;':- . . :.. .:;f': .:. On March 7,1996, the Oregon Transportation Commission adopted Delegation Order2; which Order grants authority to Region Managers to approve and execute agreements for work in the current Statewide Transportation Improvement Program or approved workplan budget. ,;', ," $',7:)';" ,.. ,.,", .:120/. I' - ~ ". ~ .. ,-' APPROVED AS TO LEGAL ' SUFFICIENCY By Asst. Attorney General ;.J.!:.. Date APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By Agency Attorney , ' ,,: \ Date :', ~:..: '. , STATE OF OREGON, by and through its, Department of Transportation By , ; Region Manager Date CITY OF ASHLAND, by and through its Elected Officials By City Administrator Date P~np .., ..f . . . i . CITY OF ASHLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Engineering Division DATE: October 31,1996 FROM: Honorable Mayor Catherine Golden and City Councilors Susan Wilson Broadus, PE, Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~ Authorization to Execute Contract for Engineering Design and Construction Services for Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades I TO: SUBJECT: ~ Action Reauested City Council authorization for the City Administrator to sign the attached Engineering Services Contract with Carollo Engineers to provide engineering design and construction management for the Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades. Backaround The City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for engineering services for the Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades. Three consulting firms submitted proposals in response to the RFP: Brown and Caldwell, Carollo Engineers and Lee Engineering, Incorporated in conjunction with CH2M Hill, Incorporated. The cost estimates associated with these proposals were $879,000, $754,362 and $1,100,721, respectively. The original Engineer's Estimate from the Facilities Plan for Phase I work was $1,303,000. That estimate included the Demonstration Wetlands work. A panel consisting of the following members evaluated each proposal in accordance with weighted criteria established in the RFP: Greg Scoles, Ashland Assistant City Administrator Dennis Barnts, Ashland Water Quality Superintendent Dick Marshall, Ashland Water Quality Supervisor Robert Weber, PE, Josephine County Public Works Director Susan Wilson Broadus, PE, Ashland Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The criteria applied in the evaluation were: 1) General experience and qualifications, 2) Project understanding and thoroughness in describing technical benefits and ability to meet pending permit requirements, 3) Community benefits and impacts, 4) Cost and 5) Ability to provide engineering and construction management promptly and efficiently. The panelists unanimously selected Carollo Engineers. Following the preliminary selection, . .' . , the City entered into negotiations with Carollo for additional services to be incorporated into Phase I. The additional services include: 1) Development of an electrical! , instrumentation master plan, 2) Assisting the City in negotiations with Department of Environmental Ouality (DEO) on National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit terms and 3) Expanded landscape architecture services for the purposes of site screening and blending with the Demonstration Wetlands Project. The total cost estimate to the City, including the additional services described above, is $836,849. , The Engineering Services Contract and Exhibit 1 describing the scope of services are attached for review. ,.. Recommendation , Staff recommends Council approval to proceed with execution of this contract with Carollo Engineers. .. ,. ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACf 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: CAROLLO ENGINEERS City Hall 5100 Southwest Macadam Ave. 20 E. Main St. Suite 440 AsWand, Oregon 97520 Portland, OR 97201 (503) 482-3211 (503) 227-1885 FAX: (503) 488-5311 FAX: (503) 227-1747 Date of this agreement: 1B: Proposal date: November 5, 1996 August 22, 1996 '2.3. Contracting Officer: Assistant City Administrator '2.4. Project:;. Phase I of WWTP Upgrade Project '6.L Engineer's representative: Robert B. Eimstead '8.3. Maximum contract amount: $836,849 B. City issued a request for proposals (RFP) for engineering services needed by City for the project described above. Engineer submitted a proposal in response to the RFP on the date noted above. C. After reviewing Engineer's proposal and proposals submitted by other offerors, City selected Engineer to provide the services covered by the RFP. City and Engineer agree as follows: L Relationship between City and Engineer: Engineer accepts the relationship of trust and confidence established between Engineer and City by this contract. Engineer covenants with the City to perform services and duties in conformance to and consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals of engineer caliber in the locality of the project. Engineer further covenants to cooperate with City, City's representatives, contractors, and other interested parties in furthering the interests of City with respect to the project. In order to promote successful completion of the project in an expeditious and economical manner, Engineer shall provide professional engineering services for City in all phases of the project to which this contract applies, serve as City's professional engineering representative for the project, and give professional engineering consultation and advice during the term of this contract. PAGE 1.ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT. WWTP Phase I Improvements ..- Engineer acknowledges that City is relying on Engineer to provide professional engineering services in a manner that is consistent with the interests of City. 2. Definitions: Generally words, terms and phrases used in this contract shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the construction industry, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. As used in this contract: 2.1. "Contract documents" shall mean this contract, written authorizations under subsection 5.4, written assignments under subsection 5.2, written amendments to this contract, schedules established under subsection 5.4 and exhibits incorporated in other contract documents. 2.2. "City" means the City of Ashland, Oregon. 2.3. "Contracting Officer" means the person specified in Recital 'A' above or that person's designee. 2.4. "Project" means the project described in Recital 'A'. 2.5. "Work" or "Services" shall mean all labor, materials, plans, specifications, construction contract documents, opinions, reports, and other engineering services and products which Engineer is required to provide under this contract. 3. Term: The term of this contract shall co=ence on the date specified in Recital 'N above and end on completion of all services required by this contract unless sooner terminated as provided in this contract. 4. Authority of Contracting Officer: The Contracting Officer shall have the authority to act on behalf of City in the administration and interpretation of this contract. Subject to the limitations on authoriZation of assignments under subsection 5.2, the Contracting Officer shall have complete authority to authorize services, the contracting Officer shall have complete authority to authorize serviCes, transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define City's policies and make other decisions with respect to Engineer's services. 5. Engineering Services: 5.1. Engineer shall provide services to City that are described in Exhibit '1' which is attached to and incorporated in this contract. 5.2. In addition to the services described in Exhibit '1', the parties may agree to have Engineer provide other discrete services that are necessary for completion of the project. Such services will be initiated by written assignments as follows: PAGE 2.ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT. WNTP PI1ase I Improvements 19:tmh\c8rolo) .. '. .. 5.2.1. Assignments under this subsection should be used only for services that are beyond the scope of.the services described in Exhibit 1. No assignment is necessary to authorize services that are customarily provided in conjunction with, or are ancillary to, the services described in Exhibit L 5.2.2. Assignments which cover services that will cost less than $15,000 or are listed as Optional Services in Exhibit '1' may be initiated by the Contracting Officer. Assignments that cover services which will cost more than $15,000 and are otherwise not listed as Optional Services, must be approved by the City Administrator. 5.2.3. Each assignment shall specify the duties of Engineer, the objective of the assignment, the scope of the assignment and the estimated cost of the services. 5.2.4. Each assignment shall be signed by both parties. 5.2.5. Each assignment shall incorporate and be subject to the provisions of the contract documents unless the assignment specifically provides otherwise. 5.3. In connection with the services described in Exhibit '1' and services authorized by assignments under subsection 5.2, Engineer shall: 5.3. L Consult appropriate representatives of City to clarify and define City's requirements relative to the services. ' 5.3.2. Review available data relative to the services. 5.3.3. Identify data which is not available and is needed to fulfill the services, and act as City's representative in obtaining such data. 5.3.4. Prepare monthly progress reports to the Contracting Officer on the status of services. . 5.3.5. Cooperate with other consultants retained by City in the exchange of information needed for completion of the services and the project. 5.4. The services described in Exhibit '1' are divided into discrete work elements. Engineer shall commence performance of services within five days after receiving written authorization from the Contracting Officer for work elements described in Exhibit '1' or assigmilents made under subsection 5.2. Engineer shall perform the services as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the project. Upon request of City, Engineer shall submit for City's approval, a schedule PAGE 3-ENGINEERlNG SERVICES AGREEMENT. WNTP Phase I Improvements 19:triot,\oMoIo) ., for the performance of work elements described in Exhibit '1' and assignments made under subsection 5.2. Each schedule shalUnclude allowance for periods of time required for City's review and approval of Engineer's services. Each schedule, approved by City, shall become a part of this contract. 5.5 Engineer shall perform the services as an independent contractor in accordance with generally accepted standards in Engineer's profession. Engineer shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and the coordination of all services performed by Engineer. Engineer shall, without additional compensation, correct or revise any error or deficiencies in the services that are caused by Engineer's negligence. City's review, approval, acceptance of, or payment for, any of the services shall not-be construed to waive any of City~s rights under this contract or of any cause of action arising out of Engineer's services. In the event of any breach of this contract by Engineer or negligent performance of any of the services, City's cause of action against Engineer shall not be deemed to accrue until City discovers such breach or negligence. The preceding sentence shall not be coritrued, however, to allow City to prosecute an action against Engineer beyond the maximum time limitation provided by Oregon law. 5.6. Construction cost estimates provided by Engineer shall be developed on the basis of practical engineering experience and best professional judgement. While Engineer will endeavor to ensure that such estimates are accurate, there is no guarantee that future bids or actual project construction costs will not vary from such estimates. 5.7. Construction documents shall include a provision which indemnifies City and Engineer, to the fullest extent permitted by law, for all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorney's fees, arising out of, or resulting from Contractor's site except for the sole negligence of City or Engineer. Both Owener and Engineer shall be named as additional primary insured(s) by Contractor's General liability and Builder's All Risk insurance policies, without offset. ' 5.7.1. Engineer assumes full responsibility for including provisions in the construction contract documents requiring the Contractor to provided the insurance policies required in subsection 5.7. 5.7.2. Engineer is not responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected by contractor, including safety precautions and programs incident to the work of Contractor. 6. Assignment of Engineer's Personnel: 6.1. The services covered by this contract shall be rendered by, or under the supervision of the person specified in Recital 'A' above, who shall act as Engineer's representative in all co=unications and transactions with City. PAGE +ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMEfolT . WWTP Phase I Improvements lo:m.h......aIeJ 6.2. Engineer will endeavor to honor reasonable specific requests of City with regard to assignment of Engineer's employees to perform ,services if the requests are consistent with sound business and professional practices. 7. Responsibilities of City: ' 7.1. City will cooperate fully with Engineer to achieve the objectives of this contract 7.2. City will provide information, documents, materials and services that are within the possession or control of City and are required by Engineer for performance of the services. ' 7.3. City will arrange for access to, and make all provisions for Engineer to enter upon, public and private property as required for Engineer to perform the services. 7.4. City will provide all permits necessary for completion of the project. 7.5. The Contracting Officer will act as liaison between City, Engineer, public agencies, and others involved in the project. , 7.6. City shall perform such other functions as are required by written assignments under subsection 5.2. 8. Payment: 8.1. City shall pay Engineer for services and reimburse Engineer for expenses incurred by Engineer in performance of services ,in accordance with a payment schedule to be submitted by Engineer and accepted by City. No reimbursement will be made for expenses that are not specifically itemized in this payment schedule without prior approval by the contracting officer. 8.2. Engineer shall submit monthly invoices to City for Engineer's services within ten days after the end of the month covered by the invoice. 8.3. Total payments under this contract shall not exceed the sum specified in Recital' A' above unless authorized by assignments under subsection 5.2.. 9. Compliance with Law: 9.1. This contract will be governed by and construed in accordance with laws of the State of Oregon. Engineer shall promptly observe and comply with all present and future laws, orders, regulations, rules and ordinances of federal, state, City and city governments with respect to the services including, but not limited to, provisions of ORS 279.312,279.314,279.316 and 279.320. PAGE 5-ENGINEERlNG SERVICES AGREEMENT. WWTP PhaSe I Improvements lo:..........w " \I 9.2. Pursuant to ORS 279.316(2) any person employed by Engineer who performs work under this contract shall be paid at least time and a half pay for all overtime'in excess of 40 hours in anyone week, except for persons who are excluded or exempt from overtime pay under ORS 653.010 to 653.261 or under 29 U.S.c. Sections 201 to 209. 9.3. Engineer is a "subject employer" as defined in ORS 656.005 and shall comply with ORS 656.017. Prior to commencing any work, Engineer shall certify to City that Engineer has workers' compensation coverage required by ORS Chapter 656. If Engineer is a carrier insured employer, Engineer shall provide City with a certificate of insurance. If Engineer is a self-insured employer, Engineer shall provide City with a certification from the Oregon Department of Insurance and Finance as evidence of Engineei:'s status. 9.4. The following provisions concerning equal opportunity in federally assisted construction projects shall apply to the performance of services under this contract: 9.4.1. Engineer shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Engineer shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: Employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of payor other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Engineer agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of the nondiscrimination (Federally Assisted Construction) clause. 9.4.2. Engineer shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of engineer state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 9.4.3. Engineer shall send to each labor union or representative of workers, with which it has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice advising the labor union or worker's representative of Engineer's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. 9.4.4. Engineer shall comply with all applicable provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, as amended, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. 9.4.5. Engineer shall furnish all information and reports required by the amended Executive Order and by the rules, regulations, and orders of the PAGE 6-ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT - WWTP Phase I Improvements ..-.... , I Secretary of Labor, and shall permit access to its books, records, and accounts by the Bureau of Reclamation and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of ' investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. 9.4.6. In the event of Engineer's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may cancelled, terminated, or suspended, in whole or in part, and Engineer may be declared ineligible for further government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in the Executive Order 11246, as amended, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in the Executive Order, or by rule, regulation, or other of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. 9.4.7. Engineer shall include the provisions of subsections 9.4.1 through 9.4.7 in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by the rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of the amended Executive Order 11246 so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. Engineer will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the Bureau of Reclamation may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance: provided however, that in the event Engineer becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the Bureau of Reclamation, Engineer may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 10. Ownership of Documents: All documents prepared by Engineer pursuant to this contract shall be the property of City. To the extent permitted by law, City shall, within the limits of the Oregon Tort Claims Act, defend, indemnify and hold harmless Engineer, its consultants, agents and employees against all damages, claims, expenses and losses arising out of any reuse of plans, specifications and other documents prepared by Engineer without prior written authorization of Engineer. 11. Records: ~ 11.1. Engineer shall develop and maintain complete books of account and other records on the services which are adequate for evaluating Engineer's performance. Engineer shall maintain records in such a manner as to provide a clear distinction between the expenditures and revenues related to the project and the expenditures and revenues related to Engineer's other business. 11.2. Engineer's books and records shall be made available for inspection by City at reasonable times, to verify Engineer's compliance with this contract. City shall have the right to request an audit of Engineer's books and records by a certified public accountant retained by City. PAGE 7.ENGINEERlNG SERVICES AGREEMENT. WWTP Phase I Improvements (g:tMh'ic.... " 12. Indemnification: Engineer shall defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from any and all claims, actions, costs, judgments, damages or other expenses resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage to property (including loss or destruction), of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the negligent performance of this contract by Engineer (including but not limited to, the negligent acts or omissions of Engineer's employees, agents, and others designated by Engineer to perform work or services attendant to this contract). Engineer shall not be held responsible for any claims, actions, costs, judgments, damages or other expenses, directly and proximately caused by the negligence of City. B. Insurance: 13.1. Engineer shall, at its own expense, at all times during the term of this contract, maintain in force: 13.1.1. A comprehensive general liability policy including coverage for contractual liability for obligations assumed under this contract, blanket contractual liability, products and completed operations and owner's and contractor's protective insurance; 13.1.2. A professional errors and omissions liability policy; and 13.1.3. A comprehensive automobile liability policy including owned and non-owned automobiles. 13.2. The coverage under each liability insurance policy shall be equal to or greater than'the limits for claims made under the Oregon Tort Claims Act with minimum coverage of $500,000 per occurrence (combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage claims) or $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $100,000 ,per occurrence for property damage. 13.3. Liability coverage shall be provided on an "occurrence" basis. "Claims made" coverage will not be acceptable, except for the coverage required by subsection 13.1.2. 13.4. Certificates of insurance acceptable to the City shall be filed with City prior to the commencement of any work by Engineer. Each certificate shall state that coverage afforded under the policy cannot be cancelled or reduced in coverage cannot be made until at least 30 days prior written notice has been given to City. A certificate which states merely that the issuing company "will endeavor to inail" written notice is unacceptable. 14. Default: PAGE ~GINEERJNG SERVICES AGREEMENT. WoNTP Phase I Improvements ~~ . " I' .' 11- 14.1. There shall be a default under this contract if either partY fails to perform any act or obligation required by this contract within ten days after the other party gives written notice specifying the nature of the breach with reasonable particularity. If the breach specified in the notice is of such a nature that it cannot be completely cured within the ten day period, no default shall occur if the party receiving the notice begins performance of the act or obligation within the ten day period and thereafter proceeds with reasonable diligence and in good faith to effect the remedy as soon as practicable. 14.2. Notwithstanding subsection 14.1, either party may declare a default by written notice to the other party, without allowing an opportunity to cure, if the other party repeatedly breaches the terms of this contract . 14.3. If a default occurs, the party injured by the default may elect to terminate this contract and pursue any equitable or legal rights and remedies available under Oregon law. All remedies shall be cumulative. 14.4. Any litigation arising out of this contract shall be conducted in Circuit Court or District Court of the State of Oregon for Jackson County. 15. Termination without Cause: " 15.1. In addition to the right to terminate this contract under subsection 8.4 or subsection 14.3, City may terminate by giving Engineer written notice sixty days prior to the termination date. 15.2. In addition to the right to terminate this contract under subsection 14.1, Engineer may complete such analyses and records as may be necessary to place its files in order and, where considered necessary to protect its professional reputation, to complete a report on the services performed to date of termination. 15.3. If City terminates the contract under subsection 15.2"Engineer shall be paid for all fees earned and costs incurred prior to the termination date. Engineer shall not be entitled to be compensated for lost profits. 16. Notices: Any notice required to be given under this contract or any notice required to be given by law shall be in writing and may be given by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail, or by any other manner prescribed by law. 16.1. Notices to City shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer at the address provided for the City in Recital 'A' above. 16.2. Notices to Engineer shall be addressed to the engineer's representative at the address provided for the Engineer in Recital 'N above. PAGE 9-ENGINEERlNG SERVICES AGREEMENT. wwrp Phase Ilmprovemon1s ..-- \1 ~ 17. Assignment: City and Engineer and the respective successors, administrators, assigns and legal representatives of each are bound by this contract to the other party and to the partners, successors, administrators, assigns and legal representatives of the other party. Engineer shall not assign or subcontract Engineer's rights or obligations under this contract without prior written consent of City. Except as stated in this section, nothing in this contract shall be construed to give any rights or benefits to anyone other than City and Engineer. 18. Modification: No modification of this contract shall be valid unless in writing and signed by the parties. ENGINEER CITY BY BY Gary Deis, Partner Date BY REVIEWED AS TO CONTENT: Jamel Demir, Partner Date Fed. ID #86-0132531 BY City' Department Head Date BY City Legal Counsel Date CODING: (for City use only) PAGE 1G-ENGINEERlNG SERVICES AGREEMENT. WWTP Phase I Improvements ..-.... . r . , ~_ ; i .\ , 'I II " EXHIBIT 1 ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR PHASE 1 OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE PROJECT INTRODUCTION Engineer shall provide the following Phase 1 services related to the design and construction management lor the upgrade 01 the City's wastewater treatment plant as generally described in the City.s request lor proposals dated August 19, , 996. Engineer's services may continue on subsequent phases 01 work depending upon satisfactory completion 01 preceding phases. Subsequent work and compensation will be identified in amendments or extension 01 the original engineering services contract. TASK I . Preliminary DesIgn Services The objective 01 the preliminary design task is to more lully outline the project elements that have been identified by the Facilities Plan as Phase 1 project elements. A key component 01 this effort Is to integrate successful aspects 01 the Demonstration Wetland Project into the treatment plant upgrade design to improve the cost effectiveness 01 the overall project. There remains several issues that are not fully defined at this time. These items will be relined through engineering evaluations as well as input from the plant operations staff and City steff so that a recommended approach can be established. 1.1 Review Existing Data Engineer shall obtain and review existing data, plant hydraulics, reports, as.built plans, specifications, and other pertinent information that relates to the project. The objective of this subtask is to gain an understanding of the existing plant facilities. plant operations and the proposed improvements. 1.2 Finalize Project Elements Engineer shall prepare a series 01 technical memoranda which shall refine the elements of the Phase 1 project. These memoranda will be consolidated into a predesign report which will be submitted to the City in a draft lorm lor review and comment and as a linalized document. Technical Memorandum No 1 . Headworks Improvements and Odor Control Tha type of odor control technology (wet scrubbers, carbon scrubbers and biofilters) and the type of mechanical screen (climber screens, continuously cleaned screens and rotating screens) will both be evaluated and the most appropriate and cost effective equipment in both cases shall be determined. G:\ASHLAND\SCOPEWPD Pg.1 ~. , ~.,..., ........,....,.....,,,-''""' ,.. ,......" ., ...-............. i"'\r ~,...., '""..... The alternatives that are available for containing odors so that the foul air can be treated shall be evaluated. This evaluation shall include constructing a building to enclose the existing headworks structures as well as installation 01 covers over the various channels and basins which comprise the , headworks. Alternative materials of construction for a building which shall be evaluated shall include masonry block, wood frame. and metal frame buildings. The scope of engineering design services which Engineer shall provide under Task II is based on the assumption of the installation of a carbon scrubber for foul air treatment. installation of a climber screen and screenings conveyor to a dumpster, and construction of a masonry block building around the existing headworks structures. This basis for the scope of the design effort may require revision depending upon the recommendations put forth in Technical Memorandum No.1. Technical Memorandum No.2 - Secondarv Treatment Ootions Two options lor secondary treatment shall be evaluated under this subtask: utilizing an oxidation ditch process or utilizing an activated sludge process with diffused air technology. Both options shall be evaluated for feasibility, performance, capital cost. operating costs, and ability to satisty discharge permit limits. Design criteria and s~e layouts shall be developed for both processes. Engineer shall also prepare an analysis of phasing options for incorporating new secondary treatment facilities into the Phase 1 project. This analysis shall evaluate the cost impacts, treatment implications and construction requirements relative to phasing options that are available to the City. The scope of engineering design services which Engineer shall provide under Task II is based on the assumption of the Installation of new floating aerators and the construction of a selector zone in one of the existing aeration basins. It is assumed that construction of new secondary treatment facilities recommended by this technical memorandum (oxidation ditch or aeration basins) will be constructed under Phase 2, This basis for the scope of the design effort may require revision depending upon the recommendations put forth in Technical Memorqndum No.2. ' Technical Memorandum No.3. Disinfection Ootions Engineer shall prepare a technical memorandum evaluating the following disinfection options. 1. Ultraviolet light 2. Gaseous Chlorine / SOe 3. Hypochlorite I Bisulfite The evaluation shall include capital, operations, and maintenance costs and ability to reliably meet e. coli limits. The evaluation of the gaseous chlorine option shall consider safety issues and the impacts associated with compliance with Fife Code requirements. Undertaking a risk analysis relative to the continued use of gaseous chlorine and incorporating this analysis as part of the evaluation is beyond the scope of this technical memorandum. The scope of engineering design services which Engineef shall provide under Task II is based on the assumption of the installation of an ultraviolet disinfection system in one of the existing chlorine contact basin channels. This basis for the scope of the design effort may fequire revision depending upon the recommendations put forth in Technical Memorandum No.3. G:V.SHLANDISCOPE,WPD Pg.2 E'd ~N3 OllO~~J NHOf Wd0E:S0 96, !E 1JO Technical Memorandum No.4 - Electrical/Instrumentation Mester Plen Engineer shall evaluate the electrical loads for the Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 projects. Based , upon this evaluation, Engineer shall determine the cost effective approach to electrical improvements at the site, such as upsizing the existing power feed and main switchgear, sizing of motor control canters to accommodate the future loads and sizing of duct banks and electrical manholes. Engineer shall include an evaluation of the standby power needs of the plant which shall incorporate the recommendations provided in Technical Memoranda Nos. 1 . 3. Engineer shall prepare a conceptual plan for upgrading or replacing the existing Instrumentation devices at both the treatment plant and the pump stations which are part of the collection system. Engineer shall identify the instrumentation system and devices thet will be needed for the future facilities envisioned by the Facilities Plan. This master plan shall be in sufficient detail to allow preparation of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 designs so that construction of the Instrumentation systems under future phases will be facilitated. TechnicllJ Mllmorendum NO.5. B:lsis of DQSian This memorandum will consolidate the recommendations of Technical Memoranda Nos. 1 - 4 to establish the basis of design for the Phase 1 project. The memorandum will refine the project elements for each phase of the project, establishing the recommended division of project elements based on cost effectiveness; operational considerations, compliance with regulatory issues and constructablity. Design criteria for the Phase 1 project elements will be set forth. Plant layouts developed under Task 1.5 will be included in this memorandum. 1.3 OED Coordination & NPDES Permit Negotiation Engineer shall interface with OED during this phase of the project. Engineer shall conduct a kickoff meeting with the Department to obtain consensus on the approach to the project, gain an understanding of the DEO' s concems and outstanding issues, and seek to establish a partnering relationship between the Engineer, the C~y and DEO. Engineer shall maintain contact with DEO during the course of preliminary design. Engineer shall assist the City in negotiation with OED and finalization of the NPDES permit for the wastewater treatment plant. This task will Include providing review of draft permits, attendance at up to four meetings to resolve permit issues, provide technical review and Input on permit issues, and general coordination and interface with DEO by telephone, correspondence and facsimile. The work identified above as part of this subtask 1.3 will be limited to a total of 200 hours. This labor hour estimata does not include hours associated with work to be undertaken by subconsultant Scott Wells. Technical assistance in support of NPDES permit negotiation will be provided by Scott Wells. PhO, who will be a subconsultant to Carollo Engineers. Technical review of draft permits shall include a review of background information on Bear Creek and Ashland Creek including DEO water quality data, flow data and characteristics of point and non.point source discharges. A mixing zone model for discharge to Bear Creek shall be constructed using the EPA CORMIX model. The results of this model shall be utilized ta study the dilution effects for ammonia toxicity which will influence the allowable ammonia concentration in the plant eHluent. A reviaw of the in-stream model used by DEQ for establishing TMDLs (QUAL2E) will be conducted to evaluate the appropriateness of the application of this model to Bear Creek. G:\ASHlJ\NDISCOPE.WPD Pg.3 P'd ~N3 Oll~~) NHOf Wd0E:S0 96, IE 1JO 1.4 Public Parlicipation/Education Engineer shall assist the City in undertaking a public participation and education program. Engineer shall develop the program content and shall prepare materials such as meeting anncuncements, project descrlptlons, fliers. newsletters, and door hangers, Engineer shall assist City in conducting a presentation for neighbors of the treatment plant, City Council members. and other concerned individuals and organizations. Up to 3 meetings are anticipated. The presentations shall focus on providing information, promoting the project as a positive component of the City's goal of protecting water quality, identifying positive Improvements and pOssible negative impacts. and soliciting concems. Presentations will be coordinated with the demonstration wetlands project. 1.5 Prepare Preliminary Layouts and Design Criteria Engineer shall prepare a preliminary design layout and design criteria for recommended Phase 1 improvements. Layouts shall be Incorporated Into Technical Memorandum No.5. 1.6 Preliminary Cost Estimate Engineer shall refine the Phase 1 cost estimate identified in the Facilities Plan by preparing a preliminary estimate of the project cost based upon the layout and design details determined from the preliminary design effort. 1.7 Evaluation of Reuse Options Engineer shall assist the City in efforls to evaluate and pursue viable reuse water options. This task will involve attendance at meetings w~h various Interested parties. Engineer's scope for this task is limited to 100 hours. 1.8 Landscape Architecture Engineer shall develop conceptual landscape layouts for the entire plant sita for the purposes of site screening and blending into the wetlands landscape. An architectural subconsultant will be utilized to prepare conceptual layouts, artistic renderings, and other materials that may be needed for public meetings. A preliminary landscape plan specifically for the Phase 1 project will be developed, 1.9 Meet with City Staff Engineer shall meet with City staff during the course of the predesign effort to obtain input, report preliminary reCommendations and communicate progress and status of the various tasks that are underway. G:\ASHLANDISCOPE.WPD Pg.4 S'd ')I-J] O,lOi-ltD fJHClf ~IF:Gl GI;. IF 10() Prior to completing the preliminary design effort, Engineer shall conduct a workshop with City staff to present the results of this phase of the work, review the preliminary design recommendations, and obtain input. Meeting notes will be developed and distributed to document this step of the process. Work products developed during preliminary design will be finalized after this meeting by incorporating the review comments Bnd input obtained from this workshop. TASK 2 - Final Design Services Task 2 entails the preparation of final design documents for the Phase 1 plant upgrades. Engineer's scope of work is based on the design of the, project elemen1s listed below which are the project elements that are anticipated based upon the knowledge of the project to date, The project elements may be revised based upon the outcome of the predesign effort. Headworks 1. Remove existing screens and replace with one climber screen and a manual screen in the second channel. Install a conveyor to transport the screenings ta a dumpster for hauling off site. 2. Replace the grit collector mechanism and drive with new equipment. 3. Enclose the existing structures with a masonry block building and Install a carbon scrubber to treat foul air, Primarv Clarifier 1. Replace the existing sludge collector mechanism with a new mechanism and drive. 2. Replace the existing primary sludge pump. Aeration Basin 1. Install three new floating aerators in one of the existing basins and provide electrical power to the third aerator. 2. Install a baffle that will serve as selector basin. Secondarv Clarifier 1. Replace the existing sludge collector mechanism with a new mechanism and drive. 2. Minor rehabilitation to Clarifier NO.2. 3. Modify the existing RAS/WAS Pump Station to increase efficiency of flow splitting and install new pumps. Disinfection 1. Modify one channel of the existing chlorine contact basin and install new ultraviolet disinfection equipment. 2. Add scrubbing equipment at the existing chlorine storage room. G :\ASHLANDISCOPEWPD Pg.5 q',.j C')....,'"':lti'lf'l).D-fl"I\..V'lf""I.I,..H~.C~ Qt:._ TC I-"'V"I . Outfall 1. Construct new outfall to Bear Creek within the existing pUblic right-of-way and install diffuser at terminus. , Electrical Svstem 1. Upgrade main power distribution system to accommodate future loads that are projected. 2. Upgrade existing MCC rooms at the Operations Building and the Headworks. 3. Construct a stand-by power system. Landsl'-"nina 1. Add landscaping, lendscape irrigation system and sije screening as defined by the preliminary landscaping plan developed under task 1.S, 2.1 Prepare Final Design Drawings Final design drawings shall be prepared in sufficient detail to allow competitive bidding and successful construction of the project. Anticipated design drawings are Identified in the attached table. Emphasis shall be given to coordinating the project design with future project phases. This coordination will include the wetlands demonstration project and future irrigation system pump station and forca main. In addition, piping systems shall be designed and stub-outs provided to facilitate the Installation of future piping under subsequent project phases. Likewise, electrical systems shall be sized for future loads when this sizing is determined to be economical and duct banks shall be designed to accommodate future additions. The design shall also include specific provisions. for bypassing flows around structures to allow work within an existing structure to take place. Engineer shall provide descriptions of temporary facilities that the contractor must prOVide to allow the treatment plant to remain in good working condition while modifications to axisting facilities are underway. Design drawings shall be provided to the City and DEO for review and comment at the 50% and 90% completion stages. Review comments will be incorporated into the drawings. 2.2 Prepare Project SpeCifications Engineer shall prepare specifications for the project using EJCDC "front end" specifications with Supplementary Conditions developed specifically for this project. Technical specifications shall be in CSI format. The project specifications shall ba submitted to the City and DEO for review along with the design drawings at tha 50% and 90% design stages. Review comments shall be incorporated Into the specifications. 2.3 Design Review Meetings Engineer shall conduct review meetings with the City staff during the course of preparing the final design drawings. Meetings shall be held at least three times, these meetings occurring at the 25%. 50%. and 90""" design stages. All meetings will be held at the Ashland Treatment Plant G:IASHLANDlSCOPEWPD Pg.6 L'd C)J.J":I fYl-'~HI "-'~ r tJ.-l/l=' ~ c.~ Qh _ T~ Ill"'l . 2.4 Quality Control Reviews Engineer shall conduct an internal Quality Control review check at the 50 percent design stage. This review will focus on the technical aspects of the design, coordination between the new facilities and the existing facilities and constfUctability of the new facilities. A second Quality Control review shall be conducted at the 90 percent complete design stage. 2.5 Prepare Final Engineer's Cost Estimate The preliminary cost estimate shall be updated based upon the final design at the new facilities. This estimate shail be completed at the 90% complete design stage. 2,6 Prepare DEQ Submittals Engineer shall continue coordination with DEQ during the final design of the project. Engineer shall periodically advise the Department of project status and regulatory interlaces will be specificelly addressed. DEQ will be invited to the progress meetings and will be provided with progress submittals of the Drawings and Specifications at the 50% and 90% design completion points. TASK 3. Construction Services This Task includes the administration of the construction phase of the project. 3.1 ' Bid Period Services Engineer shall assist the City during bidding of the project by answering questions posed by contractors and developing addenda to the Contract Documents. Engineer shall assist City staff in conducting a pre-bid conference for Interested bidders. Following receipt of bids, Engineer shall assist City staff in evaluating the bids to determine the lowest responsible responsive bidder, 3.2 Construction Period Services Construction period services are based upon a construction time of 10 months. Engineer shall provide the fallowing services during construction of the plant upgrade project: a. Work directly with the plant operations manager to provide the proper coordination necessary to maintain plant operation during construction. b. Coordinate with City staff regarding the contractor's activities such as payment requests, change order requests, and construction issues that arise during the course of the project c. Provide on.site inspection services to evaluate and monitor the consistency and quality of construction. Identify inconsistencies between the constructed work and the Contract Documents and transmit written documentation to the contractor, G:\ASHLAND\6COPE,WPD Pg. 7 S'd ~N3 OI~~J NHor WM?F:~~ qh. IF Ion . . d. Conduct twice monthly meetings with City staff and the contractor. , e. Provide interpretations of the Contract Documents. issues clarifications and provide field changes as necessary. f. Coordinate construction reviews with DEO. g. Coordinate field changes with the contractor' s preparation of as-built drawings and review as-built drawings for accuracy and completeness. h. Assist plant staff with start-up of the new facilities. 3.3 Submit1al Review Engineer shall review submittals in sufficient detail to ascertain that the submitted items conform generally to the intent of the Contract Documents. Engineer shall develop written responses to submittals which detail the review comments that were generated. Scope of Services under this task , is limited to 175 individual submittals and 50 resubmittals, 3.4 Contract Record Drawings Prepare and submit to the City one set 01 reproducible drawings and the electronic AutoCAD files of drawings rellecting changes made during the course 01 construction. OPTIONAL SERVICES Because all components 01 this project cannot be defined at the time 01 execution of this Contract. expansion of the scope outlined herein may be necessary as the project proceeds. This section describes optional services that the Engineer shall provide if directed by the City of Ashland. Authorization to proceed with these services must be issued in writing by the City. Exoand Final Dllsion Services Expand the final design services to include the design 01 project elements that are identified in the Facilities Plan as either Phase 2 or Phase 3 elements. The budget allowanca for this optional service is established at approximately 10 percent of the cost of final design services for the be$8 project ($40,000). ' Exoand Construction Services Engineer shall provide the services outlined under Tesk 3 herein for the additional time period that may be required for construction of an expanded project. The budget allowance for this optional service has been established at $30.000 which would provide approximately 4 additional months of construction period servicas beyond the 10 month duration estimated for completion 01 base project. G;IASHLANDlSCOPEWPD Pg.B G'd CjI,J, 'Yl"Y\>lH, IJ1-<() r I.l-<l"l", CCl ""'- , T l" I 'Y\ . . ' . Exoand DEO Coordination Engineer shall provide additional technical support that is beyond the scope outlined under Tasks 1,3 and 2.6. Additional technical support may involve attendance at meetings, development of data that is not anticipated under this scope of services, or resolution of issues that may arise during the project. A budget allowance of $5000 is provided for purposes of estimating the extent of the optional services that may be provided. Excand Involvement In Water Reuse Issues Engineer shall expand involvement in rEisolution of water reuse issues such as attendance at additional meetings over the number of meetings identified in the scope of services or development of additional technicel background as may be necessary to resolve reuse Issues. A budget allowance of $5000 is provided for purposes of estimating the extent of the optional services that may be provided. MILESTONE COMPLETION DATES Draft Predesign Report Final Predesign Report Submit by January 31,1997. Submit within 14 days after receiving City's comments on Draft report. Submit by March 3,1997 Submit by May 30,1997 Submit by June 10, 1997 Submit by June 30, 1997 50% Drawings and Specifications 90% Drawings and Specifications 90% Cost Estimate Final Drawings and Specifications DELIVERABLES Engineer shall prepare and submit to the City of Ashland the following work products: 1. Predesign Memoranda 2. Preliminary Layouts 3. Preliminary Cost Estimate 4. Meeling Notes 5. 5 sets of 50% complele and 90% complete Drawings and Specifications for review. 6. 20 sets of Final Design Drawings 7. 20 sets of Final Project Specifications S. One full set of mylar reproducible drawings 9. Engineer's Cost Estimate @ 50% and 90% G:\ASHlANDISCOPE, WPO Pg,g cn'~ C)J,.n ()"'~l llUnr 1.I....ICC.Ct:) oc TC I-v\ . .,> . , O. Copies of construction-related correspondence , 11. A~-built drawings 12. Monthly progress reports SERVICES NOT INCLUDED IN ENGINEERS SCOPE OF WORK The following services are not within the Engineer's scope of services. If desired by the City, additional services will be provided as part of subsequent revisions to this Contract. 1. The cost of permit fees. 2. Administration of State Revolving Loan Fund. 3. Design of project elements not specifically noted herein. 4. O&M Manual revisions to Incorporate new facilities. 5. Materials testing during construction. S. Services during two year warranty period. G:\ASHLANO\SCOPE.WPO Pg. 10 n.d ~3 OllO~tl:) NHOf WdEE:S0 96, tE DO CIlY OF ASHLAND Department of Community Development MEMORANDUM Conservation Division DATE: October 29, 1996 TO: .. ~ayor and City Council FRO~ick Wanderscheid, Conservation Manager RE: New Conservation Program -- For Your Information The City of AsWand's Conservation Division is pleased to announce a new program which can help AsWand citizens save both water and energy. The new program, which officially begins on November 1, 1996, is paying cash rebates to encourage citizens to purchase front loading or horizontal axis washing machines. Tumble action washers, as the industry is now calling them, are in widespread use virtually everywhere in the world except North America. Because this technology uses gravity instead of an agitator to move the clothes, it needs far less water and detergent to wash clothes as well as washing clothes better and more gently. This also translates to less energy needed to heat water for laundry use. To encourage AsWand citizens to purchase these new machines, we are offering cash rebates to reduce their initial cost. Presently there are four European manufacturers and one American manufacturer offering models which qualify for the rebate. The rebate amounts are $200 for residences with electric water heaters and $75 for residences with gas water heaters. The electric savings portion of the rebate is being paid for with OMECA funding, while the water savings rebate is being paid for out of the City's existing Water Conservation budget. To our knowledge, we are the only Northwest utility that has blended both water and energy conservation benefits together to increase rebate amounts. ':1 ..~ ~emnraudum October 31, 1996 'ffi 0: Honorable Mayor and City Council Brian L. Almquist, City Admini~ Agreement with AP & RC for Wetlands Demonstration Project Jff rom: ~ uhjed: I am happy to report that we have reached agreement with the Ashland Park Commission, setting forth the terms and conditions for locating our demonstration Wetlands/Soil Treatment Project on Park land adjacent to the wastewater Treatment Plant. The commission has been very cooperative throughout the process, recognizing the educational value of the project, as well as the possible future tie-in of passive park areas with water treatment facilities, Recommendations: It is recommended the Mayor and City Recorder be authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the City. ----- .,. Memorandum of Understanding between City of Ashland and Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission for the Wetlands Demonstration Pilot Project city and Commission enter into this Memorandum of Understanding on October 1, 1996 for the purpose of providing a wetland demonstration pilot project rproject") site using dedicated park land. City and Commission agree: 1. City's Initial Obligations. City shall: 1.1. Include a Parks and Recreation Commissioner and the Parks and Recreation Director in the selection process for the firm which will develop the project. 1.2. Allow the Commission the opportunity to approve the final design of the project as it pertains to public access prior to construction. 1.3. Allow public access to the project which shall be open for public use as determined by the Commission unless for health, safety or maintenance reasons the area may be closed for a temporary period. 1.4, Assume all costs associated with the project including but not limited to planning, development, construction, public access, areas and amenities for public use as shown in the Demonstration Wetlands Project Request for Proposals and Contract. 1.5. Assume total responsibility for all costs associated with the overall management, monitoring, and ongoing maintenance including the public access, public use areas and amenities during the duration of the project, 2. City's Obligation Upon Continuance. If at the end of the three-year project the City chooses to continue to operate the wetlands system as part of the city's sewage or storm drainage systems, the City will assume all costs associated with the management, monitoring, improvements, and maintenance of the wetland pond area including public access, use areas and amenities. 3. City's Obligation Upon Discontinuance. If the City continues to use the wetland pond beyond the project but, at some future date, chooses to discontinue use of the wetland pond as part of its sewage or storm drainage systems, the City will give the Commission a one-year written notice of its intent not to use the pond. During this one-year period, the City will continue to be responsible for all costs associated with the area as described in this Memorandum of Understanding. PAGE 1-MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (ppa,k.\watlond.moo} "i :i' "i., . ' 4. Commission Not Required to Payor Continue. The Commission is under no obligation to retain the wetlands project area as established or to reimburse the City for any costs associated with the project, If, at the end of the project, the City does not choose to incorporate the wetland area into its sewage or storm drainage systems, the Commission is under no obligation to the City to retain the project area as established or to' reimburse the City for any costs associated with the project. 5. Restoration Requirements of City. Following the three-year project or after the one- year notification period indicating that the City will no longer be using the area, the Commission will have 90 days to inform the City whether or not it chooses to have the land on which wetlands project area has been constructed restored to its former condition prior to construction. 5.1. If the Commission chooses to have the area restored to its prior condition, the City will be responsible for all costs associated with restoring the site to its prior condition including costs of mitigation if necessary. 5.2. The Commission will have the opportunity to approve all plans associated with restoring the site including but not limited to determining specifications, setting a reasonable time-line for completion of the project, reviewing progress of the restoration regarding meeting specifications, and having final approval of acceptance of the project as complete. 6. Commission's Obligations. The Commission shall: 6.1. Provide the land depicted in Attachment A for the duration of the project. 6.2, Continue to provide the land as specified above if the City chooses to continue utilizing the wetland pond for City purposes associated with the sewage or storm drain systems. CITY OF ASHLAND CITY OF ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION By Catherine Golden, Mayor By Teri Coppedge, Chair By Barbara Christensen, City Recorder PAGE 2-MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (p,p.,ks\wet'.nd..moul ....;;J'. .... \ \ \ " \\ t B '!l f .. i ~+~ ~ * ~ ~~)j=: J;l~! ~S t .dll: :1 ji ... ~; B J . ....:.~: . ~ ..;.; . "",' ~ /;J I~ ~vo J J ~~:o: ~~~ ~!~ ~ ;! i ! I 4~ 1 " J a " ~ ,.: '" i ,.: ~ z '" w " " " 0 ~ ~ 3:)Qltl8nv:) ~ . ! I ~ llf\YoR- (~ Nov. 2, 1996 Publisher O'Brien Managing Editor Keating Ashland Daily Tidings Greetings: Because I am a newspaper buff and because I wish the Tidings well, share this thought with you: your paper is rapidly losing my respect. Your egregious cheerleading for DeBoermoutside of your editorial column---is inexcusable and unacceptable. If you don't see that you have been doing precisely that---bean counting and random call polls on the front page, indeed!---then I am afraid that you have abandoned any acceptable journalistic standards. In this regard, look at the headings of the election letters you published today: every letter of support for DeBoer has his name in the heading; those that support Golden do not. Is that an accident? Your reportage (Nov. 2) of Friday's SDC study meeting was wretched: biased, incomplete, and misleading. To make partial amends, you should publish the attached letter. I read your paper very carefully. If I do not see any improvement over your recent performance, I shall be forced to adopt your own rule: it will be time to change, that is, to cancel my subscription. Regretfully, ~dI {(Lf/1f~Ct'''l- CaVanaugh P.O. Box 247 <shland, OR 97520 VJ?'2--CrY3 . '. November 2, '96 FAX/letter; To the Mayor and Members of the Ashland City Council From Gerald Cavanaugh, P.O. Box 247, Ashland, 0 97520; Fax: 541-488-8216; Tel. 482-6543. Greetings: Having attended yesterday's 'Study Session" devoted to the issue of Systems Development Charges, I am moved to share with you some of my perceptions and reactions. In the first place, it became very clear to me that on such an issue the committee set up to make SDC recommendations to the Council ought to have had a membership heavily weighted on the side of citizens without any material or financial connection to the Chamber of Commerce, developers, or contractors. Only then can the rest of our citizens be sure that decisions will be made that have the interests of the entire city and its people as the primary purpose and goal. I do not mean to imply some sort of conspiracy to the effect that those directly involved in development willfully and deliberately set out to feather their own nests. simply mean that there are inherent conflicts of interest we should recognize and avoid, and that no person is so exceptional as to be above confusing personal and public benefits. As it turned out, I learned at the meeting, that this 'private citizen" element was lost or severely diminished rather early in the process, to the detriment of the 1996 SDC revision proposal. The city is now very tardy in concluding the decision-making process and finds itself having to go over issues that should have been settled months ago. There are some other 'perception" points I must share with you. So far as could tell there were very few ordinary citizens in attendance. myself was there only because Jack Nicholson alerted me to the meeting and I, in turn, asked other citizens to attend. Most of the active participants were from the "development" industry. And I must say that, for all their talk about "methodology," "hard numbers, " and "equitability" (a new word to me), it seemed to me that their only concern was to see the lowest SDCs as possible, said as much at the meeting, and advised them to be aware that this is by no means an uncommon interpretation of their position, Incidentally, the Ashland Daily Tidings, in its sketchy and misleading story on the meeting (Nov. 2) at once illustrates and perpetuates this distortion of the deliberative process. It describes the opponents of the revised SDCs simply as "Ashland citizens" or as "former members of [the SDC] committee, thus failing to note that all of those "citizens" and "former members" who were in opposition are connected to the development community. There is no mention in the story of the support given to the higher SDCs by private citizens like myself. In other words, the Tidings report is unjustifiably biased in favor of the developers. Very poor journalism, if not outright propaganda. Another perception, admittedly "subjective," as all perceptions are: I judged that the "development" spokespersons, far from being deferential to the members of the Council---who, after all) represent the sovereign people-non the contrary struck me as impatient with the Council, and almost arrogant in presenting their particular views on the issues. This perception, too, is not limited to my own subjective views and it should be something that the development community takes into consideration. Finally, the SDCs themselves: they should be as realistic as possible, Given that the future is unknown and that "hard numbers" are at best very soft and at worst an illusion, "worst case s~ario" numbers should be the benchmark, Of course, the estimates must be empirically well-founded and methodologically, legally, and constltuticmally defensible. But this means that the SDCs must be higher rather than lower. My position is that the existing SDCs are too low; that the proposed $7,388. amount is but a step in the right direction; and that, if we really want to manage our growth and development in a way that will preserve and enhance Ashland's unique qualities, we shall have to raise them even higher. As Jack Nicholson pointed out in his September 23 Daily Tidings commentary, Oregon excludes from the SDC accounting system such inevitable and very expensive matters as schools, fire protection and law enforcement facilities, and other capital improvements. These exclusions alone argue in favor of "worst case scenario" costing of SDCs, Finally, we should recognize (1) that SDC costs are not necessarily passed on to home buyers; (2) that increasing such costs does not necessarily have a negative impact on low-land moderate-income housing; (3) that SDCs are not necessarily bad for economic development; and (4) that SDCs are not difficult or costly to administer. I refer readers to Arthur C. Nelson, "Development Impact Fees: The Next Generation," The Urban Lawyer, Vol. 26, No.3 (Summer 1994) and to the publication of the 1000 Friends of Oregon, Landmark, January 1996, a special issue on growth in Oregon. I write all this in support of the work of the Mayor and the Council and with the hope that they will continue to keep as their primary goal the welfare of the entire citizenry and our posterity. Sincerely, ,11 I {( (7.-.., '" Jl./ ~IJA{\.M lJ,WliOUuy,L/' November 2, '96 FAX/Letter; To the Mayor and Members of the Ashland City Council From Gerald Cavanaugh, P.O. Box 247, Ashland, 0 97520; Fax: 541-488-8216; Tel. 482-6543. Greetings: Having attended yesterday's "Study Session" devoted to the issue of Systems Development Charges, I am moved to share with you some of my perceptions and reactions. In the first place, it became very clear to me that on such, an issue the committee set up to make SDC recommendations to the Council ought to have had a membership heavily weighted on the side of citizens without any material or financial connection to the Chamber of Commerce, developers, or contractors. Only then can the rest of our citizens be sure that decisions will be made that have the interests of the entire city and its people as the primary purpose and goal. I do not mean to imply some sort of conspiracy to the effect that those directly involved in development willfully and deliberately set out to feather their own nests. simply mean that t,here are inherent conflicts of interest we should recognize and avoid, and that no person is so exceptional as to be above confusing personal and public benefits. As it turned out, I learned at the meeting, that this "private citizen" element was lost or severely diminished rather early in the process, to the detriment of the 1996 SDC revision proposal. The city is now very tardy in concluding the decision-making process and finds itself having to go over issues that should have been settled months ago. There are some other "perception" points I must share with you. So far as could tell there were very few ordinary citizens in attendance. myself was there only because Jack Nicholson alerted me to the meeting and I, in turn, asked other citizens to attend. Most of the active participants were from the "development" industry. And I must say that, for all their talk about "methodology," "hard numbers, " and "equitability" (a new word to me), it seemed to me that their only concern was to see the lowest SOCs as possible. said as much at the meeting, and advised them to be aware that this is by no means an uncommon interpretation of their position. Incidentally, the Ashland Daily Tidings, in its sketchy and misleading story on the meeting (Nov. 2) at once illustrates and perpetuates this distortion of the deliberative process. It describes the opponents of the revised SOCs simply as "Ashland citizens" or as "former members of [the SOC] committee, thus failing to note that all of those "citizens" and "former members" who were in opposition are connected to the development community, There is no mention in the story of the support given to the higher SOCs by private citizens like myself. In other words, the Tidings report is unjustifiably biased in favor of the developers. Very poor journalism, if not outright propaganda. Another perception, admittedly "subjective," as all perceptions are: I judged that the "development" spokespersons, far from being deferential to the members of the Councilmwho, after all) represent the sovereign people---on the contrary struck me as impatient with the Council, and almost arrogant in presenting their particular views on the issues, This perception, too, is not limited to my own subjective views and it should be something that the development community takes into consideration. Finally, the SOCs themselves: they should be as realistic as possible. Given that the future is unknown and that "hard numbers" are at best very soft and at worst an illusion, "worst case scenario" numbers should be the benchmark, Of course, the estimates must be empirically well-founded and methodologically, legally, and constituticHlally defensible, But this means ttlat the SDCs must be higher rather than lower. My position is that the existing SDCs are too low; that the proposed $7,388. amount is but a step in the right direction; and that, if we really want to manage our growth and development in a way that will preserve and enhance Ashland's unique qualities, we shall have to raise them even higher. As Jack Nicholson pointed out in his September 23 Daily Tidings commentary, Oregon excludes from the SDC accounting system such inevitable and very expensive matters as schools, fire protection and law enforcement facilities, and other capital improvements. These exclusions alone argue in favor of "worst case scenario" costing of SDCs. Finally, we should recognize (1) that SDC costs are not necessarily passed on to home buyers; (2) that increasing such costs does not necessarily have a negative impact on lowfnd moderate-income housing; (3) that SDCs are not necessarily bad for economic development; and (4) that SDCs are not difficult or costly to administer. I refer readers to Arthur C. Nelson, "Development Impact Fees: The Next Generation," The Urban Lawyer, Vol. 26, NO.3 (Summer 1994) and to the publication of the 1000 Friends of Oregon, Landmark, January 1996, a special issue on growth in Oregon, I write all this in support of the work of the Mayor and the Council and with the hope that they will continue to keep as their primary goal the welfare of the entire citizenry and our posterity. Sincerely, ,] 1 / [1a~({ G}vtl.ll'1(/