HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-0817 Council PacketCouncil Meeting Pkt.
BARBARA CHRISTENSEN
CITY RECORDER
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Important: AnY citiZen attending ~uncil meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is the
subject of a public hearing which has been closed. The Public Forum is the time to speak oil any subject
not on the printed agenda. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form llocated near
the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize 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
August 17, 2004 - 7:00 p.m.
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
I1.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Council Meeting Minutes of August 3, 2004.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. Presentation by State Senator Sal Esquivel.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
~. Approval of Federal Aviation Administration Grant Offer for the Ashland Municipal Airport
2004 Airport Improvement Project.
V3. Termination of Utility Easements within the Billings Ranch subdivision.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject cfa
Land Use Appeal. All hearings must conclude by 9:30 p.m. or be continued to a subsequent
meeting.)
(None)
PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience n._ot included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for
Public Forum is 15 minutes. Speakers are limited to 5 minutes or less, depending on the number
of individuals wishing to speak.)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Vd'. Agreement for Services between the City of Ashland and the Ashland Chamber of
Commerce.
Adoption of Findings for Planning Action 2004-002 Approving an Application for Physical
Constraints Review within the Floodplain Corridor, a Tree Removal Permit and Site Review
for the Construction of a New Commercial Building on Land in Downtown Ashland located
along Ashland Creek and North of North Main Street and West of Water Street. Applicant:
Lloyd Haines.
. Adoption of Findings for Planning Action 2004-052, a Request for a Conditional Use Permit
and Site Review Approval to Convert a Portion of the Existing Residence at 904 Garden Way
into an Accessory Residential Unit. Applicants: Jane Cory-VanDyke and Dennis Gray.
4. The Billings Ranch Golf Course / Greenway- Update.
("() I rN (i: I1.. M I-; [!TIN (:; S ,,\ R. [.~ B R ()A I)('A SI' I., I V t:i ()N C lt A N N EI.., 9
V1SIT Tilt,; ('I'I'Y ()F ASI II,ANI..')'S WI~B SI'I'I! AT WWW.ASIII..,ANI').()I~,.t~S
IX.
X.
XI.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Discussion of Request for Proposals for the development of Affordable Housing above
downtown City owned Public Parking Lots.
v'~. Ashland Fiber Network Franchise Renewal.
3. Report on Ashland Fiber Network Full Faith and Credit Bond Sale.
4. Public Arts Commission request for remaining TOT funds.
ORDINANCES~ RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS:
(None)
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS:
XlI. ADJOURNMENT:
In compliance wit,~ the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-
2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibil, ity to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
VI,%I 1~ "I~I ll:: ('I'I'Y ()1: ASI II~ANI)'S Wl:~t~ SI'I'I-i Al~ W\V\,V,ASI
ASHI.AND (iI'I'Y CO[!NCII~ M t~ETIN(i
At. ~GI.?ST 3, 2004
PAG[-~ 1 of 5
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
August 3, 2004 - 7:00 p.m.
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor called the meeting to-order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilor Laws, Amarotico, Hartzell, Morrison and Hearn were present; Councilor Jackson was absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of July 20, 2004 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Mayor's Declaration to commemorate Hiroshima Day (Aug 6th) and Nagasaki Day (Aug 7th) was read aloud.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Liquor License Application from Chun H. Chan dba Chun's Palace, Inc.
3. Approval of Amendment No. 1 to Fund Exchange Agreement No. 20521, Water :Street Bridge
Project, between the City of Ashland and the Oregon Department of Transportation.
Councilor HartzellfMorrison m/s to approve Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. 1Vlotion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Continuation of Public Hearing regarding Appeal of Planning Action 2004-052, 904 Garden
Way, Ashland.
Mayor DeBoer read aloud the Public Hearing procedure for Land Use Hearings.
Public Hearing Continued: 7:09 p.m.
EX PARTE CONTACT
Mayor DeBoer and Councilor Morrison received an email from Oak Knoll Meadows Home Owners
Association; however neither read the message due to the public hearing being closed. Mayor DeBoer stated
he forwarded the email to Staff.
IN OPPOSITION TO APPLICANT
Lynn Costantino/892 Harmony Lane/Presented a poster displaying pictures of the subject property. Mr.
Costantino voiced concern that no architecture was considered and noted the close proximity to the adjoining
property. He also commented on the petition signed by the 46 neighbors and stated he is not the only one with
concerns.
STAFF RESPONSE
Community Development Director John McLaughlin stated the Council should consider the options presented
in the Staff Memo, which deal with the concerns raised during the first portion of the public: hearing.
Mr. McLaughlin clarified the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the accessory unit is an allowed use of the
ASI.f I~A N I) (.'i1'1'~~ (i()[. i N('~I I~ M E t:~'t't
At ~Gt;ST 3.2004
PAGt~ 2
zone under certain conditions. He stated there is only one other approved accessory unit in this zone, however
Staff has been notified of others that might be operating illegally and they will be investigating these claims.
Mr. McLaughlin stated an ordinance amendment would be required if the Council wished to set a number of
the allowed CUP's per neighborhood.
Ms. Harris noted the neighbors have raised concerns regarding the need to protect the electric pole. Ms. Harris
clarified that although the pole location is not ideal, there is nothing that prohibits its close location to the
proposed driveway. However, Council could ask for a condition that would provide a barrier to protect the
electric pole. The Electric Department would need to review this property in order to determine the potential
risk.
Mr. McLaughlin stated there are currently 94 approved accessory units and noted they are located throughout
the City. It was noted that Staff has not had any experience with negative impacts to neighborhoods as a result
of allowing accessory units.
Mr. McLaughlin clarified that the ordinance does not require homeowners to occupy homes with accessory
units. -
Mr. McLaughlin stated that the traffic generated by the proposed accessory unit would be no different than that
of a normal single family unit. In regards to architectural compatibility, the accessory unit would not change
the architecture and there is no reason to believe there will be any affect on air quality. In addition, Staff does
not see this application as setting a precedent for future applicants.
Mr. McLaughlin clarified the Council could deny the permit if they determine that the conditions are
inappropriate. However they would need to specify which conditions they do not agree with.
Mr. McLaughlin clarified that remodeling can be done without obtaining permits. It is only when the owner
wants to make a separate living unit that a CUP is required. City Attorney Mike Franell stated that the
potential violation of not obtaining the necessary building permits should be handled as a separate issue.
REBUTTAL
Jane VanDyke/668 Leonard Street/Stated they were taken back by all of the negative comments expressed at
the last council rneeting. She and her husband are attempting to do something that is positive, and were under
the belief that this was something that the City supported and encouraged. Ms. VanDyke stated she would like
to respond to sorne of the specific concerns and mis-information provided at the last meeting. First, they did
not turn the garage into an apartment. The garage was converted to two bedrooms and a bath in the 1970's, 30
years before they purchased the house. Additionally, their house is 13 feet away from the neighbor's, not 5 feet
as stated by the opponents. Ms. VanDyke stated that they want to have a legal unit, which is why they are
going through this process. Ms. VanDyke stated she does not understand why this neighborhood is only willing
to welcome "certain types" of people, and questioned if this property does not meet the affordable housing
goals of the City, than what does?
Public Hearing Closed: 8:13 p.m.
COUNCIL DELIBERATION
Mayor DeBoer expressed concern that this case was only heard in front of the 3 member Hearings Board, and
felt that it should ihave been heard by the full Planning Commission. He also expressed concern that two rental
units are being pl'aced in a single-family residence. Mayor DeBoer stated he does not support this application
based on the parking issues and the negative impacts on the livability of the neighborhood.
Council discussecl the seven factors that are to be considered, which include:
1) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage,
ASI II.ANI) ('l't'h' ('()[~NCII. Mlit,;'l'lN(i
A It ?(} l/S'l" 3.2004
PAGE 3 of 5
2) Generation of traffic and effects on su~ounding s~eets, bcre~es in pedes~, bicycle, and mass-~sit use
are considered beneficial regardless of capaciW of facilities,
3) ~chitectural compatibiliW with the impact area,
4) Air qualiW, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants,
5) Generation of noise, light, and glare,
6) ~e development of adjacent prope~ies as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan, and
7) Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use.
Councilor Hartzell suggested two additional conditions to add to those recommended by the Hearings Board
and Staff:
Condition # 17 - Ask the Electric Department to review the driveway pole and make any recommendations that
they see fit to ensure the electric pole meets safety standards.
Condition #18 - The accessory unit not be increased more than 500 sq. ft.
Concem was raised regarding setting a condition that would limit the size of the house and the unit in the
future. It was stated that building permits are required to add on to a house and questioned whether this would
be more of a legal condition.
Mr. Franell stated there are already building limitations in place. There is a condition that states, the accessory
unit cannot exceed more than 50% of the floor space of the primary unit. In addition, the Maximum Lot
Coverage Ordinance would apply. However, Council could add an additional condition further limiting the
size of the accessory unit.
It was noted that the applicant would have to apply for a new application if they wanted to make any of these
changes to the property in the future.
Council discussed whether Staff's Condition #16 should be included at this time or handled separately.
Councilor Hartzeli/Morrison m/s to uphold the application, denying appeal, with the following
conditions: Conditions #1-13 from the Hearings Board, Conditions #14 and #15 as stated in the Staff
Memo dated July 28, 2004, an additional condition that states that the Electric Department review the
driveway pole and make any recommendations they see appropriate to ensure protection of that pole
and neighborhood safety, and a condition that states that the accessory unit will not be increased more
than 550 sq. ft; If the owner wants to increase size ..of the accessory unit they would pursue an
amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. DISCUSSION: Mayor DcBoer voiced his concern with
livability. Council Hartzcll stated she shares in the Mayor's concerns. Voice Vote: Councilor Laws, NO.
Councilor Amarotico, Hartzell, Morrison and Hearn, YES. Motion passed 4-1. Mayor DeBocr spoke to
the owner of the house, and stated itjs very critical with a rental situation like this to monitor the rental closely.
Councilor Hartzell hi,rs-to direct Staff to take the action as noted in Condition #16 and that Council
direct the Planning Department Staff to investigate any accessory units in that neighborhood that might
be unpermitted and take necessary action. Motion dies due to lack of a second.
Mayor DeBoer noted that Staff is already required to follow any illegal activities. He also noted that if
neighbors are concerned, they can make a complaint to the Planning Department, and they will send someone
out to investigate.
Council discussed whether it was appropriate to direct Staff to only investigate this one neighborhood.
Opinion was expressed that because a complaint was raised, it is appropriate to formally ask Staff to follow up.
Opposing comment was made that Staff is already required to investigate complaints and Council should trust
Staff's discretion on how to follow through.
ASI-tI.ANI) (.'I'1'~' ("OI..iN(;ll. MI.!t-ii'lNG
A [ ;~GI !S'I" 3, 2004
PAG[; 4 o¢5
PUBLIC FORUM
Ryan Navickas,/711 Faith Avenue/Requested that the Council reconsider the most recent approved ordinance
regarding public: nudity. Mr. Navickas spoke regarding the cultural norm in regards to the human body and
expressed his concern with the passive and compulsive nature on the passage of this ordinance. He noted there
are already laws regarding lewd behavior and requested that this issue be placed on the agenda for council
discussion.
Erik Navickas/711 Faith Avenue/Spoke regarding the proposed Mt. Ashland Ski expansion. Mr. Navickas
requested that the Council move to halt the NEPA process until the Waste Treatment Facility on the Mt.
Ashland development is dealt with. He stated there are high nitrogen levels in the effluent and others serious
problems that exist in the current development.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None)
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Eighth Annual Report on implementation of the Valdez Principles.
Electric & Telecommunications Director Dick Wanderscheid stated the Valdez Principles were adopted in May
of 1990 and require an annual report on implementation of the principles. The annual report was submitted to
the Council and ils included in the public record. Mr. Wanderscheid noted the new items are in italic and gave
a brief explanation of each.
Mayor DeBoer acknowledged the use of bio-diesel fuel being used by the Ashland School District buses.
Public Works Director Paula Brown noted there is a Department of Energy program that will reimburse the
City 25% of all of the costs associated with going to the bio-diesel fuel.
Mayor DeBoer spoke regarding the styrofoam ban, and stated that it is his understanding that the new
styrofoam now dissipates quicker in a land fill than plastic. Mr. Wanderscheid agreed and noted that CFCs are
no longer being used to create styrofoam. Mr. Wanderscheid stated he will talk with Ashland Sanitary and the
Conservation Commission to revisit this topic.
It was noted the Cities for Climate Protection and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan was missing from
the report.
The BPA Power Shift Program was noted. Mr. Wanderscheid stated they have been disappointed in the
response to this program. The City has the ability to do 100 homes, at last count Ashland was only at 40.
It was noted that the bulk of the sign-ups came as a result of a front page article ran in the Daily Tidings. Mr.
Wanderscheid stated he is currently working with BPA to do a direct mailing to residents. It was noted that the
program offers a $100 rebate and residents can visit the City's website to sign up.
Mr. Wanderscheid quoted an article on Good Watch, which explained that this is a home energy management
system that employs technology that allows customers to automatically control their home energy uses.
Homeowners can. program their thermostat, pool pump, water heaters and other devices, at home or remotely,
around the clock via the internet. They can also monitor their setting whenever and wherever they happen to
ORDINANCES.I RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intention to Form a Local
Improvement District for Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements to W. Nevada Street from
Helman Street North to the Billings Ranch Subdivision."
Public Works Director Paula Brown presented the Staff Report on the intent to form an LID from W. Nevada
ASI:.II.ANI) ("l'l'h' (.O[ ~NCII. MEt-,~'I'IN(.~
AI, iv(~t,i~S'I' 3.2004
and Helman Street, North to the Billings Ranch Subdivision. Ms. Brown stated they will be looking at the
district boundary and also the costs. It was noted that the City may have over-estimated what file actual cost
will be. It was also clarified that the City received seven plans, and from those seven Staff created one
consensus plan.
Council requested that both the original and consensus plans be provided to the Council for re:view. It was
clarified that at the public hearing, Council will be able to view both plans and cost estimates and receive
testimony from anyone who wishes to speak on this issue.
Ms. Brown clarified the decision the Council is making tonight is to form a LID, they are not making a
decision on design. Concern was expressed that the change in costs would result in the need to re-notice the
neighborhood.
Councilor Hartzell/Amarotico mis to approve Resolution #2004-30. Roll Call Vote: Hartzell, Morrison,
Hearn, Laws and Amarotico, YES. Motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Mayor DeBoer stated there are currently opening on the Historic, Public Arts and Airport Comanissions. He
also noted that applications are kept on file for 6 months.
A Study Session is scheduled for tomorrow at noon in the Council Chambers. Topics of discussion include
making land use decisions and ex parte contact. In addition, Ashland Town Hall will be airing on RVTV at 6
p.m. tomorrow night.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Alan DeBoer, Mayor
ASI:tl..AND CI'IY ~,'()UNt:II_ SI':t I)Y SI:~SSI()N
,\l. 5(;t 5S'l' 4, 2004
PA(}t"i I
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
Wednesday, August 4, 2004 at 12:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor DeBoer called the meeting to order at 12:07 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
ATTENDANCE
Councilor Laws, Hartzell, Amarotico and Morrison were present. Councilor Jackson and Hearn were absent.
Community Development Director John McLaughlin and City Attorney Mike Franell were also present.
I. Presentation on Making Land Use Decisions.
Barbara Jarvis introduced herself to the Council and explained she was a Planning Commissioner for 9 years
and is currently an attorney and a pro-rem judge. Ms. Jarvis stated that while on the Planning Commission she
spent a good deal of time training her fellow commissioners and is before the Council today to discuss the
process of making land use decisions.
Ms. Jarvis explained that fairness is the touchstone of these types of decisions. It is imperative that the
community understands that this is a fair and open process. The councilors need to be able to act like a judge,
which means to be fair and not have any preconceived notions. Their decisions need to be based solely on the
evidence presented during the hearing and whether or not that meets the criteria for approval. Aside from their
families, most people feel their home is their most cherished possession and their emotions can run high during
the hearings. It is up to the council to not let these emotions sway their decision.
Ms. Jarvis suggested in order to keep everyone on tract, the criteria for approval should be posted on the wall for
everyone to see. When opening the hearing, the Chair should ask the public to direct their comments to which
specific criteria they will be speaking about. This helps the audience to understand the process and helps the
Council to make their decision.
Ms. Jarvis stated it is the councilor's duty to speak with the public. However, when dealing with planning
issues, the councilors must make a conscience effort not to discuss these issues with the public. If a person
wishes to speak with a councilor about a land use hearing, the appropriate action is to explain to them that in
order to remain fair, you cannot discuss the case with them. The appropriate forum for their concerns is at the
public hearing so that all of the Council and public can hear their concerns.
Ms. Jarvis stressed the importance of performing site visits, and stated it is important to make the property
owner aware of their presence, but to not enter into any conversations. Ms. Jarvis noted that during the public
hearing, it is important that the councilor verbalize anything specific they noticed during their site visit that they
would like the applicant to comment on. By getting this information out before anyone has the opportunity to
speak, it gives both parties the chance to react and know what that councilor is considering. Community
Development Director John McLaughlin added that although everyone might perform a site visit, they are
usually conducted at different times 'and sometimes people notice different things. In-addition, although all of
that evidence is contained in the pt/blic record, you should still state' which aspects might influence your
decision most.
Suggestion was made to prepare a pamphlet for developers and the general public notifying tlhem as to what the
councilors can and cannot discuss regarding land use matters.
AS}II.AND (TI'Y CO[':N('~ll, S'[t,;D'f SESSION
Al. 5G[.!ST 4, 2004
PAGE 2 of 2
Mayor DeBoer commented on reporters publishing incorrect information. Ms. Jarvis acknowledged that this
does happen, and suggests that the Mayor make note of the inaccuracies in the public record. In general, Ms.
Jarvis suggests not speaking with reporters in regards to land use decisions.
Council commented on the interim period after a land use decision has been made and before an appeal has been
filed. Ms. Jarvis suggests that the Council refrain from speaking on these land use matters until the deadline for
filing an appeal has passed. Council noted it can be difficult not to comment after a hearing, as the public often
wants the Council to explain their decision. Recommendation was made for Staff to send an email notifying the
Council when the appeal timeframe has concluded.
Mr. McLaughlin stated the Council should let the applicant know if they do not feel there is not enough
evidence to make a decision. At that point, usually the applicant will ask for an extension to bring back
additional evidence.
Council discussed when was the appropriate time to ask Staff questions. Ms. Jarvis stated the appropriate time
is after the applicant and opponent have had the chance to speak. However at the beginning of the public
hearing, the Council[ should ask the speakers to address any specific concerns that will affect their decision. It
was noted that if the,' Council does not disclose an area that concems them, the applicant might not address that
issue because they are not aware it is a concern.
Council discussed how to determine if a council member has bias. Ms. Jarvis stated that usually the councilor
with the bias would disclose that themselves, however there are rare occasions where the Council should make a
motion and recuse the biased councilor by vote.
Council questioned why some applications are heard before the Hearings Board and not the full Planning
Commission. Mr. McLaughlin clarified that because of the 120-day rule, sometimes it is not possible to have a
case heard in front of the Planning Commission. Typically, the Hearings Board only handles the very simple
cases, and it is a way of managing the heavy workload.
Council discussed t]ae public hearing format. Mr. Franell clarified that the Council agreed upon the format,
however it can be changed if the Council desires to do so. Council agreed that they would like Staff to look into
the possibility of adjusting the public hearing format and bring a proposal forward at a future council meeting.
Adiourned:
Meeting was adjourned at 1:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
April Lucas, Assistant to City Recorder
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Non-Voting Members Present:
MINU g $ :EOR :, , ETING
ASHLAND.:FORE$ L ND "C- OMMISSlON
;"': .... " ..... ]U1 '14; 2004 - 4:30: PM
: ~.'
Communi.ty. DeveloPment, 5! inburn Way
.,.
Frank Betlejewski, Jo Anne Eggers, Stephen Jensen {',Chair),
Anthony Kerwin, Bill Robertson
Richard Brock, Diane White
Chris Chambers, Nancy Slocum, Keith Woodley
Chris Hearn, January Jennings, Marly Main
I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Jensen called the meeting to order at 4:33 PM in the Siskiyou Room.
II.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the Regular Commission Meeting of June 9, 2004
were approved with one date correction.
III. PUBLIC FORUM: No one spoke.
IV.
OLD BUSINESS
A. Schedule Winburn Hike - The commission agreed to schedule the public hike as soon as
possible after October 1 st on a weekend.
B. Grass Seed for Burn Piles - Betlejewski reported tl~at there is a tentative agreement with the
Bureau of Land Management. Robertson also suggested organizing volunteers to harvest
existing native grass on city-owned land. The commission agreed this was a good idea.
Ve
STAFF REPORTS
A. Jackson County Title III Grant Results - Woodley reported that the City applied for three
grants (Ashland Community Wildfire Response Plan, Implementing Community Forest across
an Urban Wildland Interface and Ashland Watershed Wildfire Planning Inventory). Only the
planning inventory grant was not funded.
B. CWPP Technical Group - Main reported that due to work and vacation schedules, committee
attendance has been sparse. Various attendees included Darren Borgias- Nature' Conservatory;
Evan Frost- Ecology Consultant; Richard Brock; Tony Kerwin; Frank Betlejewski; Diane
White; George Badura-Soils Consultant; Cindy Deacon-Williams-Headwaters; Jay Lininger
Graduate Student; Keith Woodley; Chris Chambers and Don Bouchet - Forest Service. Focal
points have included getting to know group members, simplifying the Forest Service's
dichotomous key, developing geographic and spatial layers of data and examining the
reliability of Forest Service data. Main said it was problematic combining the Forest Service
data with the City's data.
Main introduced two maps. One illustrated landscape hazards within the Ashland Watershed to
be treated and yet to be treated. The second map showed areas on south and west aspects as
well as areas with less than 60% slopes.
Commission expressed concern with reference to finishing the alternative by the October
deadline. Main said the Healthy Forest Restoration Act requirements and the Forest Service's
possible reaction are unclear as this alternative would be the first under this act.
C. CWPP Development Group - Committee attendance has also been meager. The group
identified the citizens of Ashland as the beneficiaries of a Community Wildfire Protection
Plan, not the Forest Service. The group will use Josephine County's plan as a template. The
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
C:\DOCUME-I\berteaut~LOCALS-I\TempXJUL 14.doc JUNE 9, 2004 - Page 1 of 2
VI.
VII.
VIII.
XI.
tentative schedule is to finish a draft in four to six weeks, take public comment, incorporate
the comments into the final plan due on October 1 st. The plan will include a timeline for
implementation and funding needs.
Betlejewski thought an important goal of the CWPP was educating the owners of interface land
on the possible fire danger from Forest Service land.
Jensen asked if Chambers was satisfied with the level of public representation. Chambers noted
that the Development Group's portion of the CWPP would be best served by having a final
draft reviewed by the public. He asked the Forest Commission to set a date and time for a
public hearing on the CWPP.
Robertson noted that he has difficulty hiring a logging contractor to help treat his private land.
He was distressed because the logging contractor's equipment was then vandalized.
NEW BUSINESS:
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
A. Public.. Update and Open Discussion of the CWPP - Eric Navickas, 711 Faith St, answered to
Robertson's comment. He stated that actively logging in the interface area has traditionally
been fimstrating to environmentalists. Navickas thought that additional data was available (eg:
tree cutting in the '50s and '60s and helicopter logging) and should be incorporated into the
data set. Main noted the difficulty in integrating the Forest Service's data set with the City's.
This capability is needed to calculate the number of acres. Betlejewski agreed that such data
should be incorporated and volunteered to assist.
Navickas was frustrated that the Forest Service has begun a new project when it hadn't
completed their non-commercial logging project.
Tom Rose, journalist for Sierra Club Walker, had no comment, but wanted to learn more about
the project.
Lin Bernhardt, Natural Resources Advisor to the Jackson County's Board of Commissioners,
admin:isters the Title III grants. She was present at the meeting to observe.
The commission wondered if more staff time was needed. Chief Woodley announced that GIS
Specialist Rich Hall was leaving the City and that James Newton would take over GIS work
on this project. Woodley said City Administrator Gino Grimaldi would be asking District
Forest Ranger Linda Duffy for more GIS staff time.
REVIEW AND SET COMMISSION CALENDAR / NEXT MEETING
A. Commission directed staff to set up a public hearing to review the upcoming CWPP draft.
B. Next regular commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, August 11, 2004.
ADJOURN: 6:09 PM
Stephen Jensen, Chair
Respectfully Submitted,
Nancy Slocum, Clerk
C:\DOCUM E-- I \berteau/SLOCALS- I \TempXJUL 14.doc
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 9, 2004 - Page 2 of 2
CITY OF
SHLAND
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
July 7th, 2004
Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way- Siskiyou Room
Historic Commissioners Present: Dale Shostrom, Keith Swink, Tom Giordano, Rob Saladoff, Joanne
Krippaehne, Terry Skibby and Sam Whitford,.
Absent Members: Alex Krach and Jay Leighton
Council Liaison: John Morrison
High School Liaison: None Appointed
SOU Liaison: None Appointed
Staff Present: Associate Planner Mark Knox
CALL TO ORDER
At 7:08 p.m., Chair Shostrom called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Krippaehne noted a correction in the minutes on Page 6, second paragraph, first sentance. The word "size"
should be deleted. Krippaehne moved to approve the June 2nd, 2004 minutes as corrected. With a second by
Whitford, the motion was approved with all voting aye.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 2004-077 is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit a portion of the former
Briscoe School (265 North Main Street) building and the surrounding grounds to be used for individual
workspace rental areas and community events Comprehensive Plan Designation: Multi-Family Residential;
Zoning: R-2; Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 05 DD; Tax Lot: 2500.
APPLICANT: Lithia Arts Guild
Knox gave a brief summary of the applicant's proposal noting that no extedor changes were proposed other than
a small sign near the intersection of Laurel and North Main Street. Tom Giordano asked how the proposed use
was compared to the target use of the zoning district. Knox explained the applicants addressed their findings
based upon the target use's full build out potential which would be multi-family housing.
Debbie Laray, representative for the applicants, described the proposal, described the ,different type of art
rooms, descried the neighborhood meetings, described the relationship with the Headstert Program and the
Ashland School District. The applicant also elaborated upon the types of events being proposed, the number of
expected patrons and students as well as the relationship between the events and the parking demands.
General discussion by the Commission occurred with concurrence the application should be supportive.
Discussion ensued pertaining to the proposed sign and that it's appearance may need 1:o be simplified and
possible materials need to be changed, but overall supported the idea of having a distinct, sign. The applicant
was open to any recommendations and noted the proposal for the sign wasn't fully thought out. The Commission
agreed to add a condition of approval to have the applicants return to the Commission's. Review Board with
alternative designs. The applicant concurred.
No one was in the audience to speak in opposition to the proposal. Giordano moved to recommend approval of
Planning Action 2004-077 with the incorporation ora condition requiring the* applicants to submit the proposed
sign to the Review Board for their review and approval. Swink seconded the motion and it passed with a
unanimous vote.
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes
July 7, 2004
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
OLD BUSINESS
Joint Meetinq with Conservation Commission - Krippaehne noted the Conservation Commission was
supportive of the opportunity to have a joint study session. The Commission discussed the possible topics
for the meeting such as prioritizing energy improvements as they relate to preservation. Other topics include
appropriate siding and windows. Swink noted that an acquaintance in the window restoration field may be
able to participate in a workshop. The Commission agreed on a time for the joint meeting (August 25th, 2004,
7:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room).
Review Board - Following is the July schedule for the Review Board, which meets every Thursday from 3:00 to
at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
July 8th
July 15th
July 22nd
July 29th
August 5th
Skibby, Swink, Krach
Skibby, Swink, Saladoff
Skibby, Whitford, Leighton, Shostrom
Skibby, Giordano, Krach
Skibby, Leighton, Saladoff
Proiect Assiqnments for Planninq Actions
PA #2000-120 485 "A" Street (Steve Hoxmeier) Shostrom
PA #2002-100 142 East Main Street (Earthly Goods) Leighton
PA #2003-005 35 S. Second Street (Winchester Inn) Krippaehne
PA #2003-092 124 Alida Street (Kirt Meyer and Vadim Agakhanov) Krippaehne
PA #2004-017 364 Hargadine Street (Ken Kolar) Krach
PA #2004-026 81 Central Avenue (Wes & Lucinda Vail) Giordano
PA #2004-018 322 Pioneer Street (Al & Sandra Carlson) Swink
PA #2004-043 246 Catalina Drive (Dr. William Rodden) Krach
PA #2004-081 954 "B" Street (Archerd/Dresner) Krippaehne
PA #2004-071 438 North Main Street (Bayberry Inn) Swink
Lithia Spdn.qs Property- Gun Club may be coming to the Park's Commission is August for further discussion on
lease agreement.
Co-Sponsorship with Conservation Commission for Fall Workshop - Will be discussed next month.
Memo to Council Reqardin.q Authorization for Multiple Listing for National Reqister- This will be discussed at
next month's meeting. Krach volunteered to write the memo after the discussion.
Possible National Reqister Nomination for Lithia Sprin.qs Property- There was nothing new to report.
Carneqie Library Restoration - There was nothing new to report.
NEW BUSINESS
Sin.qle Family Residential Design Standards - The Commission discussed the current trend towards
incompatible additions and remodels. The consensus was that a discretionary review process may be needed,
but that additional information should be gathered and further study should be done in order to determine the
appropriate steps to take. The commissioners agreed to doing some additional research on this topic by looking
on the internet and reviewing documents that Mark Knox has in his library.'
ADJOURNMENT
With a motion by Krippaehne and second by Skibby, it was the unanimous decision of the Commission to
adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes
July 7, 2004
CITY OF
SHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
JOINT STUDY SESSION
JULY 27, 2004
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Russ Chapman called the Ashland Planning Commission and Ashland Housing Commission Joint Study Session to order
at 7:05 p.m. on July 27, 2004 in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
ABSENT MEMBERS:
COUNCIL LIAISON:
HOUSING COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
ABSENT MEMBERS:
SOU HOUSING LIASON:
STAFF PRESENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Russ Chapman, Chair
Mike Morris
John Fields
Marilyn Briggs
Allen Douma
Olena Black
Michael Dawkins
Dave Dotterrer
Kerry KenCairn
Alex Amarotico, present
Matt Small
Alice Hardesty
Carol Voisin
Amy Korth
Liz Peck
Don Mackin
Faye Weisler
Kim Miller
Ryan Heihn, absent
John McLaughlin, Planning Director
Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist
Derek Severson, Assistant Planner
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
Alan DeBoer, Mayor
Cate Hartzell
II. TOPIC: PROPOSED ORDINANCE CHANGES TO R-2 AND R-3 ZONES INCLUDING MINIMUM DENSITIES AND LIMITING
FOR-PURCHASE HOUSING IN MULTI-FAMILY ZONES.
McLaughlin said the initiatives for the ordinance changes came from the Housing Needs Analysis and the Housing Action
Plan. It is a Council goal for this year. The changes will affect the land use process and how we will look at regulating
development in multi-family zoned lands.
Goldman gave a presentation using PowerPoint (attached to minutes) to explain the changes. Questions and issues arose from
the discussion. Overall, both Commissions favored moving ahead with the changes. Staff will incorporate their ideas and
concerns before returning a more refined version of the ordinance changes to the Housing Commission for public hearing and
further review.
DISCUSSION
· Term of affordability - more than 20 years? What are the lenders' requirements?
· Housing Commission would like to look into rezoning undeveloped property to R-2 or R-3.
If we are going to have new land brought into the city limits that can't be developed as anything but affordable housing, would
it freeze the value of what you can build affordable housing for? How will it play out?
III.
· If we do a lot of work, will we get affordable housing?
· What are specific unintended consequences of an ordinance change? The other side - unintended consequences will
occur. Move ahead.
· There is pressure for high value condos in the C-1-D. That has been a surprise.
· What have other cities experienced trying these types of changes? Find a mentor city.
· Simplification, particularly in the minimum density piece. State the maximum end.
· Should single fhmily development be prohibited in R-2 and R-37
· Both plans (Action Plan and Needs Analysis) show we are not achieving the housing types we need.
Should we hawe more R-3 land?
· There are pressures of growth and the fact we are running out of land. What about affordable housing for two to three
generations from now?
· Incentives are not large enough to attract developers.
· Can the City find money or funding? Can the City pay to bring the infrastructure to a site?
· Is there a living map - a map that changes when anything happens - a map identifying parcels available for
development and identifying zoning?
· Need input frotn the developers.
· Need more numbers and statistics - who are we targeting? Who are the people that are lower or middle income?
· Quality of construction for affordable housing.
· Can the City purchase land for affordable housing?
· Look at policies that would encourage young families to live in Ashland.
· Need more numbers for rental housing. What people are being served by rentals? How many rentals are there?
· Study Hersey Street affordable housing projects - why did it work and what were the problems?
· Make sure new members get appropriate documents (Needs Analysis and Action Plan).
ADJOURNMENT- The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
ASHLAND HOUSING COMMISSION
JOINT STUDY SESSION
MINUTES
JULY 27, 2004
CITY OF
SHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Russ Chapman called the Ashland Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. on July 13, 2004 in the Civic
Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
ABSENT MEMBERS:
COUNCIL LIAISON:
HIGH SCHOOL LIAISON:
SOU LIASON:
STAFF PRESENT:
Russ Chapman, Chair
Mike Morris
Kerry KenCairn
John Fields
Marilyn Briggs
Allen Douma
Olena Black
Michael Dawkins
Dave Dotterrer
No absent members
Alex tmarotico (Council Liaison does not attend Planning Commission meetings in order to avoid
conflict of interest.)
None
None
Bill Molnar, Senior Planner
Mark Knox, Associate Planner
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
There will a Planning Commission study session on July 27, 2004 to discuss a Council goal of reserving multi-family
properties.
Tuesday, July 27t~, Chapman and Dotterrer will be available at the Community Development and Engineering Services
building for the monthly Planning Commissioner drop-in "chat" from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m.
III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Current officers: Russ Chapman, Chair, Mike Morris, First Vice Chair, and John Fields, Second Vice Chair.
Chapman opened nominations for Chair. Black nominated Chapman, Briggs seconded and Chapman was unanimously
elected.
Moms was nominated for Vice Chair but declined. Chapman nominated John Fields, Briggs seconded and Fields was
unanimously elected.
Black nominated Dotterrer for Second Vice Chair and Briggs seconded the nomination. KenCairn objected based on gender.
Dotterrer withdrew his name. Black nominated KenCairn, Dawkins seconded and KenCaim was unanimously elected.
Fields arrived.
· IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS
Briggs/Fields.m/s to approve the Minutes of the June 8, 2004-meeting..Voice Vote: The motion passed. There were no
findings.
Douma asked Molnar if he followed up on the question from the last meeting regarding retention of notes. Molnar said the
state statute say notes need to be retained for five years. Briggs requested this as a future study session topic.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2O04
V. PUBLIC FORUM
KATHERINE DIMINO, Takelma Way, has purchased property on Strawberry Lane. She wondered if she would be allowed to use
permeable asphalt or concrete on her building site wondered when that discussion would happen. Knox said it would not be
brought up tonight but Staff has been discussing different types of asphalt with regard to lot coverage. He suggested Dimino
write a letter to the Plmming Department stating her request.
VI. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 2004-075
REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL FOR PHASE I (BUILDINGS A & B, AND A GROUP OF MINI STORAGE BUILDINGS) OF A
MIXED-USE DEVELOPMIENT LOCATED UPON AN APPROXIMATELY SIX ACRE PARCEL AT 550 MISTLETOE ROAD. THE
PROPOSAL ALSO RECtlJESTS A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR THE MINI
STORAGE PORTION OF' THE PROJECT.
APPLICANT: BURT & VERONICA BRIM
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site Visits were made by all but Morris. He is familiar with the site.
STAFF REPORT
Knox reported this proposal is for a mixed use project consisting of one office building, one retail building and approximately
68,000 square feet of mini storage space. An apartment is proposed above Building A for the manager. The property is zoned
M-1 and surrounded by M-1. There are a total of 107 parking spaces on the site.
Staff had concems about lot coverage from the standpoint of storm water management. Knox explained the storm water
detention system planned for the site. The system has been approved by a private engineer and by the City's Engineering
Department.
The Tree Commission rnet and agreed the conifer trees planted on a manmade mound along the frontage of the triangular
shaped parcel should be removed. The mound will be removed and the trees will be replaced with trees from the approved
street tree list.
There will be a slight widening of Mistletoe in the front for parking. There will curbing, a seven foot parkrow and a six foot
sidewalk. The applicants are dedicating 15 feet in order to obtain this City street standard.
The applicants are requesting a bike parking variance for the mini storage portion. The mixed use portion will have the
required amount of bike parking (one space for every five parking spaces). Fifty percent of the spaces are required to be
covered. Typically, a person visiting his/her storage unit on a bicycle would park the bike outside the unit rather than a
location in the front.
Staff is recommending approval of the application. There are 13 Conditions of approval. This application will set a precedent
for the standard of development for this area.
Knox said there is a Condition that Buildings C7 and C8 have a gap in the buildings to meet the Fire Department's
requirements.
Black questioned the landscaping on the site and the tree plantings along the frontage as well as a concern for planting trees
that would produce more shade. Knox said heat reduction is not a criteria. He said since there would be future construction
and a risk of disturbing new trees, it would be best to defer the planting of ten of trees until the second building is constructed.
Fields asked about the residential use. Knox said over the years, one residential unit in E-1 or M-1 has been permitted as a
manager's unit.
PUBLIC HEARING
JOANNE KRIPPAEHNE, Madrona Architecture, 520 Terrace Street, project architect, addressed the lot coverage and landscaping
questions. She referred, to page 3, Phase I Landscaping. The total square footage of the entire parcel is close to 260,000 square .
feet. In Phase I they are providing 26,900 square feet of landscaping, over the required ten percent. They are providing 7500
square feet of landscaping in the parking areas that is over the seven percent required. There are five categories of trees listed
on Page 3. They are providing seven trees in front of Buildings A and B. They are providing 13 shade trees in the mini storage
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
parking lot (ten required). They are providing the required six trees in the parking area for the front buildings. At this time,
they will be providing 26 substantial shade trees. At a future date, they will provide another 22 street trees.
Krippaehne said part of the reason they want to remove the existing significant trees is because they are not canopy forming.
The Tree Commission has asked they change their selection to provide large canopy trees. The Tree Commission also asked
them to substitute the cypress trees along the north side of the mini storage to less fire hazardous trees and asked them to take
into consideration the three suggestions they made and intersperse them with varied shrubs.
They have talked with the Fire Department and have committed to working with them concerning the length, of the building.
KenCairn asked if it would be a hardship to do all the landscaping improvements and mitigation measures in Phase I.
Krippaehne said the only hardship is not knowing where future curb cuts and driveways will be placed. It could probably be .-
worked out. It would be their preference not to do all the mitigation during Phase I.
Black said the front building facing Mistletoe Road would be getting an enormous amount of afternoon sun. Krippaehne said
they had not planned any awnings, but they could consider it.
Dawkins thought they should think about planting the entire street with street trees first. When the other phase is built, some of
the trees will already be three or four old. Additionally, it would be more aesthetically pleasing. KenCairn noted if the
applicants follow the tree protection plan the trees should be fine.
MARGUERITTE HICKMAN, Ashland Fire and Rescue, 455 Siskiyou Blvd., said they have had discussions with the applicant and
they will work out access prior to obtaining a building permit. The entire ¥- shape is considered one building. One hundred
fifty feet of hose is not going to make it to all parts of the building. Some options would be to provide easements on the
adjacent property for access. Another option would be to divide the building to provide access. Providing the access points
will make the hydrant distances better too. Knox said the applicants have proposed seven hydrants with one on each end of the
buildings.
BILL PHILLIP, 4000 Kenny Road, Jacksonville, OR, stated he supports this application.
Staff Comments
Black wondered if there was anything in the plan about cleaning the storm drainpipes.
Rebuttal
Krippaehne said there is a separator as part of the storm water detention system. She said they can plant the street trees now,
but she would like to wait on the southern most 175 feet because they are not sure of the street alignment. There is not a right-
of-way currently. The right-of-way will be created at some point in time.
Some of the Commissioners suggested modifying Conditions 3 and 9. Briggs asked that Condition 9 be placed after Condition
3, requiring renumbering of the Conditions.
Knox clarified Condition 3, third sentence, delete "street trees". Condition 9, first sentence should read: "That street trees, one
tree for every 30 feet of street frontage be installed along the site's proposed curb improvement (along the entire frontage
except for the last 175 feet) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy." Renumber Condition 9 as 4 and shift
everything down.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Morris is concerned that Conditions 3 and 9 have been revised without any discussion. He is not in favor of putting in a
restriction. It seems unnecessary to take an area of future development and require street trees on that stretch. The risk is
greater that damage to the trees and irrigation system supporting it can happen and then the applicant will have to deal with
that.
KenCairn said there is another E-1 project where the entire infrastructure has to be done before any building.
Morris said this project borders another M-1 property that contains piles of concrete. Is this really something that needs to
happen at this point?
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
Dotterrer said originally he agreed with Morris, but if a tree protection plan is in place, it is a good compromise.
Morris reminded the Commissioners that mitigation is not a requirement.
Briggs is in favor of pi[anting the trees now so when the new buildings go in, all the trees will be the same size.
Douma doesn't think it is a good idea to require the applicants to put in plantings and irrigation that will be damaged. Molnar
said it doesn't appear that planting on the northerly section would be a problem. Most likely it would be hard to have a
driveway from Mistletoe to the northerly part.
Dotterrer/KenCairn fry's to approve PA2004-075 with the two changes (above) to Conditions 3 and 9. Roll call vote: All
approved.
PLANNING 2004-077
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT A PORTION OF THE FORMER BRISCOE SCHOOL (265 NORTH MAIN
STREET) BUILDING AND THE SURROUNDING GROUNDS TO BE USED FOR INDIVIDUAL WORKSPACE RENTAL AREAS AND
COMMUNITY EVENTS.
APPLICANT: LITHIA ARTS GUILD
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits were made by all.
STAFF REPORT
Knox said the current portion of the former Briscoe School is used by the Oregon Child Development Coalition (OCDC)
Headstart program. Headstart has approximately 40 to 50 kids and a staff of 35. The kids range in age from six weeks to four
years old. They use their portion of the building from July through December.
The Lithia Arts Guild is proposing to have an arts coalition in the other portion of the building (floor plan in packet). There are
no exterior changes proposed except for a sign. There will be a wall between the two wings. Six classrooms will be used for
artists' space, workspace, classroom space and Friday Art Walk. The purpose is to create an affordable area for local artists
and to bring the artists 'together in space. The hallway area will become primarily a place to display finished work.
The applicants are proposing a number of events on the site. They range in size from one to 15, 15 to 30, and 30 to 60 people,
with approximately fiw~ events per month. The small events will be for drawing classes with the Friday Art Walk as the larger
event (once a month). The applicants are proposing one large event to occur in June on a weekend. It is named "A
Midsummer Night's Dream Festival." It will last for a weekend, using the outside grounds (75 booths) and inside space from
10 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. both days. At the conclusion of the event, there will be a ballroom dance.
Parking for the area is ,,11 around the site. There are 26 spaces along Laurel and 14 spaces along Manzanita. The applicants are
working with the churclh to use their 65 spaces for their large event. There is parking on the opposite side of Laurel, Manzanita
and High Streets. The school has a total of 40 parking spaces. The Headstart program uses 35 spaces. That is a conservative
number. That leaves five spaces between 6:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. during the six months of operation for the Arts Guild.
During those times, five spaces should work. It very likely the artists will be working after the Headstart program closes.
Staff had concerns about retail use. Retail is not a permitted use in the R-2 zone. The applicants are not proposing to have true
retail. Retail will be a small bi-product. There is no cash register proposed. The artists do not intend to turn this into a retail
space. Knox noted a lel~ter from Colin Swales stating he would like some assurance through an annual report that the
applicants are staying within their approved use. Staff has asked the first year for a review of the large Midsummer Night's
Dream event.
Staff has recommended approval with the five attached Conditions. A sixth condition could be added regarding the annual
review to release information as to how the CUP is not going to have a retail environment.
Molnar said the Briscoe grounds are owned by the school district. It serves as an informal neighborhood playground. -
Knox explained the Art.,; Guild is a non-profit organization. The space will be used for teaching a multitude of ages. There is a
specific agreement with the school district that the Guild will provide a certain number of hours to the school.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2OO4
PUBLIC HEARING
Debbie Lorray, Lithia Arts Guild, P. O. Box 3194, Ashland, OR, stated the Briscoe art wing was proposed 'to remedy a lack of
artist's synergy, a lack of presentation of nonformula arts and events and a lack of community involvement. At the same time,
through a partnership with the Ashland School District, they will be enhancing the arts education and also contributing funds to
the school district through this project from the events. The Lithia Arts Guild has been in existence for 14 years. The art wing
will be a great asset to the community by encouraging an artists' community and collaboration and inspiration by daily
interaction with other artists. The project is possible because of the parmership with the schools. They have offered their skills
(270 hours per year) to the schools. The arts events will involve the greater community. The various aspects will occur with
minor disruption to the neighborhood. There will be less impact than with a school.
Lorray said there would be no developed retail/commercial use. The middle hallway will be used for exhibition. There are no
hours of operation, no cash register, no' one on hand to help the public. Artists will-put their names and corttact numbers on
their artwork. The Guild will not collect any commissions.
The artists will be using the facility mostly on the weekends and generally after 3:30 p.m. during the week. They have worked
hard to make sure OCDC, the Methodist Church and the surrounding neighborhood has been supportive of this project.
JIM YOUNG, said that by occupying Briscoe they could bring their art through collaboration with professional artists to young
people and teach them what it is to be an artist. It will allow for the creative spirit to come forward.
The events will all be part of the educational environment. They hope to study what it takes to produce a Show. They hope to
make use of the outside grounds in an appropriate way that serves the neighborhood and the entire community.
Lorray said there would be 50 booths, not 75 at the summer fair. She believes it is important to maintain rite outside space as a
park. There is a bus line on Main Street and a bike rack outside the main entrance. Many of the artists are planning to ride
their bikes to work.
Lorray said they would not have a problem with an annual review.
Briggs wondered if the artists don't get there until 5:30 p.m., how could young children come for classes? Lorray explained
most of the teaching would be done in the Ashland schools. They will mentor, do assemblies, and work with individual
teachers. There will also be adult education. They will be signing a three-year lease with the school. She said four percent of
the profits from the sale of art would go back to the schools.
Lorray said a security system is built into the school. The door will be open during the day, but there will be specified hours
for public access. Each room has a key and a locking door.
MARGUERITTE HICKMAN, Ashland Fire and Rescue, 455 Siskiyou Blvd., encouraged the Artisan's Guild to consult with the Fire
Dept. The summer fair also needs to go through the Fire Department..
Chapman read comments from DEVON STRONG, 2253 North Pacific Highway #66, Ashland, in support of the proposal.
MELISSA MITCHELL-HOOGE, 271 High Street, strongly supports this project. She submitted a letter in support signed by her
family and other Briscoe neighbors.
LIBERTY KESTER, 140 VanNess, #3, fully supports the project. She discussed the importance of giving artists an opportunity to
make and sell their goods in order to make a living.
CAMILLE STEWART, Family Service Manager of the OCDC, stated she is very happy to share the space with 'the artists. It is a
great match for their program.
HELGA MOTLEY, 111 Gresham-Street, Apt. A, said she has been involved the. arts and has a room reserved at Briscoe. She
currently teach'es various art classes 'during the summer and an after-school program during the school year where parents bring
their children to her for classes. Parents carpool. She would like to teach adults in the evening and offer her space to other
textile artists who would wish to teach on the weekends. She would offer to teach classes in clay at the Ashland schools.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
VICTORIA MCOMIE, 114,0 Old Highway 99 South, said she would be sharing Room 5 at Briscoe. Getting her work to the public is
difficult. Briscoe will allow greater public access to her work.
SOPHIA BOGLE, 1329 Beckman Avenue, Medford, OR 97501, said she is a bookbinder. She will occupy a room at Briscoe. She
hopes to teach book binding to students.
Staff Comments - None
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Knox said the zoning designation is Residential. A public school is a permitted use. This applicants want to call this a private
school (Conditional Use). The impacts are based on the target use of the zone. Based on the target use, 46 multi-family units
could be built on this property. Other things to look at are vehicle trips, lighting, and intensity of use over 24 hours. Is this
application compatible with the neighborhood? In staff's opinion, the application meets the criteria. Molnar said the
Commission needs to feel there is evidence that the proposed use falls within one of the conditional uses. There is a strong
educational component,, mentoring aspects and teaching aspects. It doesn't fit perfectly, but it is similarly in type.
Dotterrer believes it is unnecessary for the applicant to come before the Commission annually. Chapman agreed. The Guild
has to fulfill the educational component with the school district and he doesn't feel like burdening them any further.
Briggs wants the emphasis on the education, not the commercial. She believes the Midsummer Night's Dream event should be
held on grounds off-campus.
KenCairn did not agree.. Douma does not find booths on Main Street objectionable one time a year on-site. He would suggest
the CUP is reviewed annually.
Morris/Fields m/s to approve PA2004-077 with the attached Conditions. Roll Call Vote: Unanimous,
VII. OTHER
Douma referred back to two items from tonight's meeting. How can they do something about these items in a proactive way?
There is a backlog of housecleaning items. The items of concern are: 1) A residential use, including mixed use in an M-1
zone. It seems reasonable, but the language in the ordinance is unclear. 2) With regard to the bike variance at the mini
storage, why don't we change the ordinance to say that in mini storage areas, no bike parking is required?
Fields suggested adding; the items to the laundry list. Molnar said they would have to take the bike parking change to the Bike
Commission.
Fields asked to respond to the last action (Lithia Arts Guild). He disagreed with the concern that the space might mm into a
cormnercial use. This is a perfect fit. There are no neighbors complaining. He feels completely comfortable approving it. It
seems like an awful lot of oversight and Staff time to review it.
VIII. ADJOURNMENI' - The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Submitted by,
Susan Yates, Executive Secretary
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
CITY OF
4kSHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
JULY 13, 2004
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Dotterrer called the meeting to order at 1:40 p.m.
Commissioners present:
Absent Commissioners:
Council Liaison:
SOU Liaison:
High School Liaison:
Staff Present:
Dave Dotterrer
Marilyn Briggs
Kerry KenCairn
Alex Amarotico (Council Liaison does not attend Planning Commission meetings in order to avoid
conflict of interest.)
None
None
Bill Molnar, Senior Planner
Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist
Derek Severson, Assistant Planner
Sue Yates, Executive Secretary
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES & FINDINGS
Briggs/Dotterrer m/s to approve the minutes and findings of the June 8, 2004 meeting.
III. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS
PLANNING ACTION 2004-091
REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 19,428 SQUARE FOOT LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL/OFFICE BUILDING (PHASE I) ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF "EAST" JEFFERSON
AVENUE AND WASHINGTON STREET.
APPLICANT: ASHLAND CAPITAL, LLC
This action is approved.
PLANNING ACTION 2004-093
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT APPROXIMATELY 375 SQUARE FEET OF THE EXISTING
STRUCTURE TO BE USED AS AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT (ARU) FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 731 WALKER
AVENUE.
APPLICANT: JONATHAN LANDES
This action is approved.
IV. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ACTION 2004-094
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING, 440-SQUARE FOOT
DETACHED BUILDING LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AT 307 HILLCREST (CLOSEST TO TERRACE STREET)
INTO AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT (ARU). .~
APPLICANT: R. DOUGLAS & ANN D. SlERKA
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits'were made by both Commissioners.
STAFF REPORT
Goldman said a letter was submitted requesting a public hearing to discuss this action. In consideration of that letter, Staff
initially scheduled this action as a Type II hearing. He gave the history of the property as outlined in the Staff Report. The
.applicant is requesting to convert the 440 square feet of the existing non-conforming structure into an accessory residential
unit. The Terrace Street fight-of-way extends either to the building or the building may encroach one foot onto the Terrace
Street right-of-way. Though there are three parking spaces on-site, it is clear that the residents could park on Terrace Street.
The neighboring property owner has brought up his concern that parked cars on Terrace can obstruct the view and pose a
safety hazard. It is Staff's view that this road is not distinguished in any way from other residential streets that have on-
street parking. There have been three accidents that have occurred at this location since 1991. The applicant has had
personal experience and knows the hazard exist. There is an average of 600 vehicle trips per day. Staff believes there is
adequate capacity to accommodate the additional vehicle trips and the location is appropriate for on-street parking.
Staff has suggested some design elements. If approved, the applicant would be in a position to install a pedestrian
connection to Terrace Street. Staff would recommend the pedestrian connection and a mailbox to be located along the
northern portion of the frontage as a deterrent to parking immediately adjacent to the property owner to the north.
Staff is recommending approval of the application with the attached eleven Conditions of approval. Staff sees the re-use of
the non-conforming structure as a benefit to the community as a whole keeping with the goal of providing accessory
residential units.
PUBLIC HEARING
DOUG SIERKA, 307 Hi'llcrest, said their intent from the beginning was to live in the existing structure while they constructed
their own house on the property and then possibly rent the existing structure. The structure has been there since 1920. It is
14 feet from the curb.. He recently found out there is a 15 foot easement from the curb. The structure is a desirable,
affordable rental.
ROY BASHAW, 292 Terrace Street, lives next door to the said property. The small structure was there when they built their
home. It was vacant :['or some time and then the owner occupied it. The structure has no building setback. The reason for a
setback is that you can see up and down the street. In 1990, they were involved in a vehicle accident while entering onto
the street.
Neither the lot nor the dwelling has been used for an accessory dwelling. The proposal must conform to the overall setback
requirements of the zone. In order to grant a CUP, you have to find the proposed occupancy of the accessory dwelling unit
conforms to the setback requirements of the zone. If you can't make that finding, a CUP may not be granted. He believes
it is quite possible this is a problem. He would like them to consult with the City Attorney because it could affect some
future matters that they may consider. There is going to be a safety concern and an anxiety problem in getting out of their
driveway. It affects their livability.
LUCY BASHAW, 292 Terrace Street, referred to page 4, paragraph 3, of the Staff Report. She does not believe there is any
"unique visual impairment". She is careful to keep shrubs cleaned back so they have a clear view. It does affect their
livability. The built building is not compatible with the other built buildings on Terrace Street. He does not believe the
size and architecture are compatible with the neighborhood. She was concerned there are no sidewalks until reaching
Gresham Street. It is :not a particularly safe place to walk
Staff Comments
Molnar said he spoke with Mike Franell, City Attomey. If the structure is slightly encroaching into the right-of-way,
Franell wanted Staff to see if Public Works or Planning had a concern.' The City might have a greater liability if the
structure is a residence with someone living there than if it is a shop building. In checking with Public Works, the 15 foot
right-of-way is large compared to what would be required today. The only other improvement we would ever consider on
that street would be a sidewalk. With the grade drop-offs from Terrace, we wouldn't have a planting strip, and only a five
foot sidewalk.
Rebuttal
Sierka said with regard to the parking, a neighbor across the street suggested the curb could be painted yellow on the north
end of their lot. Or, they could put a mailbox on the north end. They will try to address the neighbor's concerns. He is in
agreement with the design features that were suggested. ..
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Briggs noted Condition 7. Staff suggested the walkway be as far away as possible from the north end. Briggs could
envision the walkway closer to the south end and closer to the front door. She would rather get out of a car closer to the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMIVIISSiON
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
walkway. Goldman reworded Condition 7 to read: "That the walkway extending to Terrace Street shall 'be located at least
25 feet from the north property line."
Briggs believes it is very important we provide affordable dwellings wherever we can.
Briggs/Dotterrer m/s to approve PA2004-094 with the attached Conditions and the change to Condition 7.
V. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Susan Yates, Executive Secretary
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
JULY 13, 2004
ASHLAND AIRPORT CO/vlMISSION
April 6, 2004
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: CHAIRMAN PAUL ROSTYKUS, BOB SKINNER, FBO, PAUL WESTERMAN,
CLAUDIA STOCKWELL, WILLIAM SKILLMAN, ALAN DEBOER, IBRENT
THOMPSON, RICHARD HENDRICKSON
STAFF: PAULA BROWN, DAWN LAMB, JIM OLSON
MEMBERS ABSENT: BRITTANY WISE, ANN SKY, LINCOLN ZEVE
o
CALL TO ORDER:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Public Forum:
10:00 AM
March 2nd minutes approved with changes
,
OLD BUSINESS'
A. T-Hangar Updates -
Contractor is working with Building Department on the submittals. The building has been
ordered from the manufacturer. There are six interested pre-paid leases to date.
Action:
Staff will continue to update.
e
NEW BUSINESS:
A. Pre-Paid Lease Draft
Discussion ensued regarding the limit of one reassignment for the 15 year term lease.
Commission feels this is restrictive, could two reassignments be allowable. Brown cautioned
that allowing a large number of sublets/reassignments could create a profitable income for
the original lessee if they sublet for more than the $225 a month. Anything above the $225
will be income for the original lessee. Thompson would like a fee to be applied for staff time
incurred during the lease transitions. Brown reviewed the cancellation schedule attached to
the lease with the commission. The idea of this payback schedule would be to cover the loss
of the 25% income to the City and gained by Skinner if the lessee cancelled their lease and a
new renter occupied the hangar. The $1000 fee on top is for staff handling of the lease
changeover. This will hopefully keep the hangars from having a high number of turnovers.
Section 18.3 has language regarding a sublease without consent and this needs to be
stricken from the lease. Commission agreed that the word sublease or sublet was not what we
want, staff will change the word sublet to reassignment throughout the lease.
Commission asked how the electric payments would be received. Staff included the $5.00
per month charge in the interest letter and wil'l ask utility billing !o make it a quarterly or bi- ' '
annual billing to the renters.
Action:
Staff will make changes to the lease; delete section 18.3, change sublet to reassignment and
delete the last part of section 11 referring to the utilities.
C:\DOCUME~l\berteauf~LOCALS~ l\TempWpdl 8 2004.doc
Bo
Beacon Discussion
Staff presented a summary of the repair history of the beacons. They have proven to be costly,
unreliable devices. The current beacon was sent in for repairs which cost half of the purchase
price from three years ago. The spare beacon will now have to be sent in for rebuilding since
it was used in place of the main beacon for three months. The commission needs to direct
staff if they are willing to purchase a new bacon from another company and send in the spare
for repairs.
Skinner would like to find out if the state has emergency money available for beacon
replacement. ODA donated three partial used beacons to Skinner for rebuilding. The Electric
Department staff looked over the beacons and did not see benefit in trying to rebuild them.
They also noted they were similar to beacons we had phased out because parts became
difficult to impossible to find. Skinner reported that the slip ring on the beacon'needed to be
replaced often because the arc from the light burns out the slip ring.
The Electric Department offered a quote from Crouse Hinds for a 400 watt and 1000 watt
beacon. The Electric Department suggested using the 1000 watt. The commission would like
staff to find out what the safety requirement for wattage. If we are not required pay for more
wattage we should go with the smaller wattage.
Funding will need to come from the maintenance fund if other funding is not available
elsewhere. The newly repaired beacon will become the spare if a new one is purchased.
Hendrickson and DeBoer felt this was a safety issue that should qualify for some kind of
.emergency funding. Staff will continue to contact ODA and FAA for help.
,Action: Staff will continue to contact ODA and FAA for help.
Co
,Airport Day
Various commission members heard that Hamilton feels no airport day would be possible.
Hamilton has organized the events for nearly ten years. Skinner coordinated a few of the
airport days prior to Hamilton but does not have the time now. If the airport day happens it
will need to be rearranged. The FAA restrictions have become very stringent and costly. The
airplane rides attract the crowds and without the crowds the breakfast won't happen and
airport day will fade away.
Skinner and Hendrickson both had seen an article in the Flightlines about the Oregon Air
'Four. They are scheduled to be in Ashland this summer. This is a tour of antique airplanes
that fly into airports throughout the year. It would be nice to organize an event on this day.
There needs to be a resurgence of the Airport User's Group that helps to organize these
events and other activities at the airport.
Action: Rostykus will research the dates and size of the Tour and try and get the mailing list
from Hamilton for the Airport User's Group and try to resurrect interest.
Other:
1. ' 'B'udget Document '
Brown presented the narrative that will appear in the budget document that explains the use
and financial information on the airport. Brown will make it more explicit that the airport
supports itself.
2. Superunicom - This is still tied up in approvals. The money is being held in waiting for the
final decisiOn of the FAA. Skinner will cOntinue to follow up 'on this.
C:\DOCUME-l\berteauf~LOCALS-l\Temp~pril 8 2004.doc 2
AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION:
A. Status of Airport, Financial Report, Review of Safety Reports
Weeds need attention soon. Ramp licjhts are burnt out in between the fence and Valley Investment's
hancjar. Staff will ask the Electric Department to check with Skinner on this. Skinner asked if the street
sweeper could be sent out to clean up even thoucjh we are not doincj airport day. Staff will contact
John Peterson to have it scheduled.
Skinner will be in Seattle for a fueling seminar. If there are new requirements he will report at the next
meeting.
Lamb asked if anyone was. planning on attending the Airport Management Seminar & Aviation
Tourism conference in May. The presentation or distribution to other managers on our SASO
requirements was being sought after and this would be an easy way to present our information.
6. NEXT MEETING DATE: MAY 4, 10:00 AM
ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 11:07 AM
C:\DOCUME-l\berteauf~LOCALS~l\TempV~pril 8 2004.doc 3
MINUTES FOR THE MEETING
ASHLAND FORES T L/INDS COMMISSION
.... ' JUly 14, 2004 - 4:30'PM
Community Develop, ment, 51 Winburn Way
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Non-Voting Members Present:
Frank Betlejewski, Jo Anne Eggers, Stephen Jensen (Chair),
Anthony Kerwin, Bill Robertson
Richard Brock, Diane White
Chris Chambers, Nancy Slocum, Keith Woodley
Chris Heam, January Jennings, Marty Main
I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Jensen called the meeting to order at 4:33 PM in the Siskiyou Room.
II.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the Regular Commission Meeting of June 9, 2004
were approved with one date correction.
III. PUBLIC FORUM: No one spoke.
IV.
OLD BUSINESS
A. Schedule Winbum Hike - The commission agreed to schedule the public hike as; soon as
possible after October 1 st on a weekend.
B. Grass Seed for Burn Piles - Betlejewski reported that there is a tentative agreement with the
Bureau of Land Management. Robertson also suggested organizing volunteers to harvest
existing native grass on city-owned land. The commission agreed this was a good idea.
STAFF REPORTS
A. Jackson County Title III Grant Results - Woodley reported that the City applied for three
grants (Ashland Community Wildfire Response Plan, Implementing Community Forest across
an Urban Wildland Interface and Ashland Watershed Wildfire Planning Inventory). Only the
planning inventory grant was not funded.
B. CWPP Technical Group - Main reported that due to work and vacation schedules, committee
attendance has been sparse. Various attendees included Darren Borgias- Nature Conservatory;
Evan Frost- Ecology Consultant; Richard Brock; Tony Kerwin; Frank Betlejewski; Diane
White; GeOrge Badura- Soils Consultant; Cindy Deacon-Williams- Headwaters;; Jay Lininger
Graduate Student; Keith Woodley; Chris Chambers and Don Bouchet - Forest Service. Focal
points have included getting to know group members, simplifying the Forest Service's
dichotomous key, developing geographic and spatial layers of data and examining the
reliability of Forest Service data. Main said it was problematic combining the Forest Service
data with the City's data.
Main introduced two maps. One illustrated landscape hazards within the Ashland Watershed to
be treated and yet to be treated. The second map showed areas on south and west aspects as
well as areas with less than 60% slopes.
commission exPres'sed 'concern with referenbe to finishing the alternative by the October 1 st
deadline. Main said the HealthY Forest Restoration Act requirements and the Forest Service's '
possible reaction are unclear as this alternative would be the first under this act. .
C.. CWPP Development Group - Committee attendance has also been meager. The: group
identified the citizens of Ashland as the beneficiaries of a Community Wildfire Protection
Plan, not the Forest Service. The group will use Josephine County's plan as a template. The
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
C:\DOCUME-I\berteaulSLOCALS-I\Temp~JUL 14.doc JUNE 9, 2004 - Page 1 of 2
VI.
VII.
VIII.
XI.
tentative schedule is to finish a draft in four to six weeks, take public comment, incorporate
the comments into the final plan due on October 1 st. The plan will include a timeline for
implementation and funding needs.
Betlejewski thought an important goal of the CWPP was educating the owners of interface land
on the possible fire danger from Forest Service land.
Jensen asked if Chambers was satisfied with the level of public representation. Chambers noted
that the Development Group's portion of the CWPP would be best served by having a final
draft reviewed by the public. He asked the Forest Commission to set a date and time for a
public hearing on the CWPP.
Robertson noted that he has difficulty hiring a logging contractor to help treat his private land.
He was distressed because the logging contractor's equipment was then vandalized.
NEW BUSINESS:
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
A. Public Update and Open Discussion of the CWPP - Eric Navickas, 711 Faith St, answered to
Robertson's comment. He stated that actively logging in the interface area has traditionally
beent frustrating to environmentalists. Navickas thought that additional data was available (eg:
tree .cutting in the '50s and '60s and helicopter logging) and should be incorporated into the
data set. Main noted the difficulty in integrating the Forest Service's data set with the City's.
This capability is needed to calculate the number of acres. Betlejewski agreed that such data
should be incorporated and volunteered to assist.
Navickas was frustrated that the Forest Service has begun a new project when it hadn't
completed their non-commercial logging project.
Tom Rose, journalist for Sierra Club Walker, had no comment, but wanted to learn more about
the project.
Lin Bernhardt, Natural Resources Advisor to the Jackson County's Board of Commissioners,
administers the Title III grants. She was present at the meeting to observe.
The commission wondered if more staff time was needed. Chief Woodley announced that GIS
Specialist Rich Hall was leaving the City and that James Newton would take over GIS work
on this project. Woodley said City Administrator Gino Grimaldi would be asking District
Forest Ranger Linda Duffy for more GIS staff time.
REVIEW AND SET COMMISSION CALENDAR / NEXT MEETING
A. Commission directed staff to set up a public hearing to review the upcoming CWPP draft.
B. Next regular commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, August 11, 2004.
ADJOURN: 6:09 PM
· StePhen Jensen, Chair
Respectfully Submitted,
Nancy Slocum, Clerk
C:\DOCUM E- I \berteau[LOCALS~ 1 \Temp~IUL 14.doc
ASHLAND FOREST LANDS COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 9, 2004 - Page 2 of 2
CITY OF
SHLAND
Ashland Tree Commission
Regular Meeting
July 8, 2004
Minutes
Ill.
IV.
Call to Order: Chair Ted Loftus called the Ashland Tree Commission meeting to order at 7:08
p.m. on July 8, 2004 at the Siskiyou Room in'the Community Development/Engineering Services
Building at 51 Winburn Way.
Commissioners Present:
Commissioners Absent:
Council Liaison:
Youth Liaison:
Staff Present:
Ted Loftus, Chair
Bryan Holley
Bryan Nelson
Mary Pritchard
Laurie Sager
January Jennings
Fred Stockwell
Cate Hartzell
None
Maria Harris, Associate Planner
Donn Todt, Parks Department
Approval of Minutes: Holley/Sager m/s to approve the minutes of June 3, 2004 as presented.
Voice vote: All AYES, Motion passed.
Welcome Guests & Public Forum:
Margaret Dole introduced herself. She said she has lived here for a year and wa,,; attending
because she is curious about what the Tree Commission does.
Public Hearinqs:
A.
PLANNING ACTION 2004-075 is a request for Site Review approval for Phase I (Buildings A & B,
and a group of mini storage buildings)of a mixed-use development located upon an approximately
six acre parcel at 550 Mistletoe Road. The proposal also requests a Variance from the minimum
required number of bicycle parking spaces and the associated design standards for the mini
storage portion of the project. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Comprehensive Plan
Designation: Industrial; Zoning: M-l; Assessor's Map #: 39 1E 14 A; Tax Lot: 2301.
APPLICANT: BuR & Veronica Brim
A staff report was given and members of the Tree Commission asked several questions regarding
the possibility of leaving the berm and trees in space along the frontage of future building sites,
storm drainage and the use of a bioswale, and the absence of an irrigation plan. JoAnne
Krippaehne, Madronna Architecture, 520 Terrace Street, the project architect of record,
represented the applicant. She described the project to the Tre~ Commission including that there
are. ! 3 trees six inches diameter at breast height (dbh).located on a berm along the front of the Six.
acre site that are proposed for removal. There was a discussion, with. Krippaehne regarding the
timing of the development of the vacant building areas at the north and south end of the parcel
adjacent to the street and the timing of the removal of the berm and associated trees. There was a
clarification that 26 trees are being installed as street trees, and that 23 of the trees are required as
street trees and parking area trees. There was a discussion of the row of Leland Cypress planted
along the north side of the building adjacent to the railroad right-of-way, the appropriate plantings
July 8, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes Page 1 of 4
and spacing, and of fire hazard issues. There was a discussion of the lawn area shown as
groundcover in the planting strip in the Mistletoe right-of-way.
There was no other testimony received for or against the proposal. Loftus closed the public
hearing and the Tree Commission further discussed the proposal. The Tree Commission
recommended approval of the project with the following specific recommendations.
Recommendation:
1. Street Trees - Pink Plum, Prunus Bureanna - This variety is not on the approved street tree list.
Chose large stature species from "7-foot Parkrow" or "8-foot Parkrow" from the Recommended
Street Tree Guide.
2. Soil for Parkrow - Use topsoil at least two feet in depth. Do not use fill from site because past
use ihas interspersed concrete in the soil, and the concrete increases the ph of soil making it
unsuitable for trees.
3. ]Lawn in Parkrow - Consider drought tolerant ground cover instead of lawn. Plant material
should not be planted up to base of tree.
4. Recommend Incense Cedar, Bakers Cypress or Arizona Cypress instead of Leland Cypress in
planter adjacent to railroad row. Do not plant as a hedge row, incorporate and intersperse a variety
of plant material.
5. Emerald Green Arborvitae, Thuja Smarago along east side of parking area behind building A &
B needs a lot of water, may not do well in this setting.
The recommendation was read back to the Tree Commission by Staff, and all members
aclmowledged that they were in agreement with the items as presented.
V. Action Items
A.
Review Draft Heritage Tree Materials and Discuss Next Step in Moving
Forward Through Process
There was a discussion of the nomination form and ordinance revisions made by
Paul Nolte, City Attorney based on the comments at the June 2004 Tree
Commission meeting. Suggested changes include: 1) use Variety instead of
Kind under inspection report, and 2) specifying a time frame for the filing of a
quitclaim to remove a tree from the Heritage Tree List.
There was a discussion of whether the Heritage Tree ordinance revisions should
move forward alone or if it should be combined with more extensive revisions
of Chapter 18.61 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO). There was
agreement among the Commission that the Heritage Tree revisions should be
moved forward separately.
Sager/Pritchard rn/s to recommend moving the Heritage Tree ordinance
revisions and nomination form forward All AYES, Motion passed.
.
· .
. ..
July 8, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4
B,
Determine Commissioner Interest Level in Design Professiona~l Ordinance
Amendment
Draft ordinance revisions to 18.72.020, 18.72.060 and 18.72.110, (attached)
requiring a design professional to prepare and inspect landscape and irrigation
plans were passed out at the meeting. There was a discussion of the history of
the Tree Commission requesting the revisions being made to the ALUO. There
was a discussion of whether the irrigation system should be required to be
inspected by the design professional. There was discussion of requiring an
inspection by the design professional of tree protection, site preparation and
grading, plant materials and irrigation coverage. The Commission ,decided the
group needed time to review the materials and agreed it should be reviewed at
the September 2004 meeting.
C. Recommendations for Training for Landscape Plan Review
There was a discussion of a concern among Commission members that the
Planning Staff does not having the appropriate training to review landscape
plans and suggestions for training including working with two to three
Commission members, contacting individual members with questions and
reviewing ISA brochures. Staff explained that the Historic Commission, which
also serves in an advisory capacity to the Planning Commission, reviews all
levels of Planning Actions at their monthly meetings including Type I Planning
Actions and suggested the Tree Commission consider this approach or a similar
approach. There was a discussion of the difference between a Type I and Type
II Planning Action. The Commission decided that two to three members would
review Type I Planning Actions starting in October and a sign - up sheet would
be circulated at the September 2004 meeting. There discussion of having the
Type I review during the lunch hour on the same week of the Tree Commission
meeting, and that members would be responsible for finding a substitute.
Continued Review of Chapter 18.61 Tree Preservation and Protection
The item was deferred until the September 2004 meeting.
There was a discussion of the upcoming Street Improvement Projects.
The item was mistakenly left off of the agenda. The Commission
reviewed the draft project plans and the project timeline which is to go
out to bid at the end of July 2004. The was a discussion of the draft
project plans including the improvement of the east side of Tolman
Creek Road from Albertsons to East Main Street, the improvement of
the north side of Hersey from Ann to North Mountain Avenue, the
addition of a right hand turn lane on the east side of Walker Avenue
and the repavement of East Main from Eighth Street to North Mountain
Avenue. The issues relating to trees that were discussed by project
were: 1) Tolman Creek Road - there are some Oaks and Arizona
Cypress (just a little north of Alhertsons) that will be impacted. Also
trees in the street right-of-way and on private property that .appear to be
in the impact area. It was noted that there was a ditch that was run
parallel to Tolman Creek Road (maybe an electric line trench) in this
area, and that up to the ditch line the trees in this area had been root
pruned. This results in that digging up to this point would not harm the
July 8, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4
VI.
VII.
trees.; 2) Hersey Street - Would like to see Red Oaks offered to the
residents to plant behind the sidewalk .; 3) Walker Avenue - Trees on
east side of road behind sidewalk will be removed. It was noted that
these trees could be tree spaded and replanted if done in the right time
of year being late October and after.; 4) East Main Street - no concerns
as the project is limited to street repaving in existing curb-to-curb line.
The Commission members agreed to conduct site visits to the project
individually and report back to Nelson. Nelson would then forward a
recommendation to Staff.
Items from Commissioners
A,
Liaison Reports - 1) Cate Hartzell, City Council, 2) January Jennings, Forest Lands, 3)
Dorm Todt, Parks
Jennings reported that Forest Lands Commission is broken up in groups and
each group is working on their own plan. She recommended reading article in
the latest City Source.
Todt said Ailanthus located by entrance to Lithia Park on the plaza was probably
first tree planted in the plaza. He said the tree was damaged by a strong
windstorm around 1978 and lost a large limb as a result. Todt said he knew
would be problematic because the large limb was at a point where all of limbs
joined. Since that time, the Parks Department has been regularly cabling. He
reported that in June, two additional large limbs broke off. He encouraged and
offered to assist Commission members if anyone was interested in looking at the
tree. Todt said the tree is probably borderline on being hazardous even though
40% of canopy has been removed and additional cable has been added. He said
he hoped it would not happen, but it may be a candidate for tree removal. Todt
said the tree was planted in the late 1870's, so it is long lived for an Ailanthus.
There was a discussion of root injections prolonging life. Todt said he didn't
think it would as the nutrient levels are good. There was a discussion of using
the tree removal as a public education opportunity if the tree needs to come out.
One idea discussed was leaving the stump in the ground with a sign including an
explanation. Todt announced that the Parks Department will do a walk through
of Lithia Park and invited all commission members to attend.
B. New Items
There was a reminder that the Tree of Year process needs to get started, and it
was agreed that the timeline would be reviewed at the August 2004 meeting.
Adjo~urnment: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9: 29p.m.
July 8, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4
CITY OF
-AS Ft LAN D
Council Communication
Title:
Approval of Federal Aviation Administration Grant Offer for the
Ashland Municipal Airport 2004 Airport Improvement Project
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Reviewed By:
Approved By:
Public Works Department
August 17, 2004
Paula Brown)~t~.~
Mike Franell~/'/fffff_
Gino Grim al ~lJ~{
Synopsis:
Attached is a copy of the Federal Aviation Administration grant offer for the Ashland Municipal Airport
2004 Airport Improvement Project (FAA Project number 3-41-0002-006). The City of Ashland
requested this grant as a part of the FAA' s eligible airport development program for municipal airports.
This FAA AIP will provide medium intensity runway lighting, reconstruct and overlay aprons, electrical
modifications, construct an airport wash-down area and install taxiway retro-reflective markers. The
AIP construction bid has been opened, but the contract has not yet been awarded. LTM was the only
bidder on the project and staff has been evaluating bid estimates to ensure the best costs. It is staffs
intent to award to LTM once council accepts this grant offer and all of the bid costs are evaluated. The
total project was originally estimated at approximately $922,000 and includes the design, base bid and
two bid additive alternates. The City of Ashland has applied for a Federal Aid to Municipalities Grant
(FAM) and if approved, this would provide up to $25,000 toward the City's 5% match for the Airport
Improvement Project. The remaining funds come from the annual entitlement of $150,000 for FFY05
and the airport fund.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Council accept Federal Aviation Administration Grant Offer fi)r the Ashland
Municipal Airport 2004 Airport Improvement Project and authorize the City Administrator's to sign the
attached agreement as the "sponsor's designated official."
Fiscal Impact:
The 2004 Airport Improvement Project is a federal assistance grant to the City from the Federal
Aviation Administration. The FAA funds 95% of a local project and requires a 5% match. The Oregon
Department of Aviation can assist the City through the FAM Grants with up to $25,000. That will leave
the City's Airport Fund with a combined cash and "soft" match for the remaining $21,500. Soft-match
are typically attributed to staff oversight time and are accounted for as a part of the Aiirport' s central
service fees. All funds will go to support only public use areas. The Airport Fund, although not
extremely healthy, is definitely on the road to recovery and has been gaining in self-sufficiency.
The construction bid came in 21% higher than the engineer's estimate. The engineer's estimate was
$756,400 and the construction bid was just over $917,000.
CC Approval of FAA AlP Grant 17Aug04
Page 1 of 2
The are several potential factors that could have influenced this higher costs;
· FAA specifications require a significant amount of testing and other requirements that are
different than the requirements on ODOT street jobs that are typically used in comparisons for
the engineer's estimate;
· There ils currently a significant amount of road and bridge work in Southern Oregon which
impacts the availability of bidders on new jobs;
· LTM is the only firm in Southern Oregon that is approved for the FAA asphalt mix design;
· The tinning of this project and the specified completion date is tight and costs might be reduced
if the time frame is extended;
Staff is in the process of reviewing LTM's bid to ensure all cost are necessary within the FAA scope. It
is expected that staff will be able to negotiate some of the unit costs with LTM, or will reduce the scope
of the work to fit within the allowable federal funds. Currently, the total available funds and expenses
are as follows:
Design (David Evans and Associates)
Construction estimate (post bid adjusted)
Anticipated Expenses
$121,000
797,000
$918,000
FAA Grant (attached)
FFY05 Entitlement Funds (available March 2005)
FAM Grant (if approved)
City Local Match (soft match) - Airport Fund
City Airport Funds - Beacon
Total Available Funds
$713,000
150,000
25,000
20,000
10,000
$918,000
Background:
The Ashland Municipal Airport is a general aviation airport providing services to private pilots, flight
training, and freight operations. There are two businesses at the airport, our FBO, Bob Skinner and his
business, Skinner Aviation (aircraft maintenance, flight school, and search and rescue operations), and
Sky Research that does air related operations and research. Also included at the airport is a Civil Air
Patrol wing. The airport has seen some growth over recent years, most notably with the two "new"
commercial sized hangars and recently with the construction of the new city-owned T-Hangars that will
enable an additional 14 aircraft to be housed in door rather than out in the open tie-down spaces.
Our general aviation airport is eligible for federal and state funds. The AIP program defines project
eligibility based on master planning efforts and those projects are programmed well in advance. This
year's AIP project elements were defined from the 1992 Master Plan. The master plan is currently
under revision with Century West providing that State funded update.
The airport was established back in the 1920s and became a federally approved City owned/operated
airport in 1964. Improvements included runway paving and lighting (1968), administrative building and
taxiway improvements, parking apron were added shortly thereafter. The runway is a single 3400-foot
long by 75-foot wide paved runway oriented at 120/300 degrees. Currently the runway has a weight
bearing capacity of 15,000 pounds for aircraft with single-wheeled landing gear configurations.
Attachments:
FAA Grant Agreement
CC Approval of Fi~ AIP Grant 17Aug04
Page 2 of 2
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
Grant Agreement
Part 1 - Offer
Date of Offer: July 26, 2004
Ashland Municipal Airport
Ashland, Oregon
Project Number: 3-41-0002-006
Contract Number: DOT-FA04NM-0060
Page 1 of 5 pages
To:
City of Ashland, Oregon (herein called the "Sponsor")'
From:
The United States of America (acting through the Federal Aviation Admiinistration, herein
called the "FAA").
WHEREAS, the Sponsor has submitted to the FAA a Project Application dated July 12, 2004, for a grant of
Federal funds for a project at or associated with the Ashland Municipal Airport which Project Application, as
approved by the FAA, is hereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the FAA has approved a project for the Airport (herein called the "ProjeCt") consisting of the
following:
Rehabilitate Runway 12/30 lighting, including new,electrical building; Rehabilitate south and
center aprons in FBO area, including airplane wash apron and revising as-built Airport Layout
Plan (ALP); Install taxiway reflectors;
all as more particularly described in the Project Application.
WHEREAS, this Project will not be completed during Fiscal Year 2004; and the total United States' share of
the estimated cost of completion will be $863,000.00.
FAA Form 5100-37 PG 1 (10-89)
Page 2 of 5 pages
NOW THEREFORE-', pursuant to and for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of Title 49, United
States Code, as arr~ended, herein called "the Act", and in consideration of (a) the Sponsor's adoption and
ratification of the representations and assurances contained in said Project Application and its acceptance
of this Offer as hereinafter provided, and (b) the benefits to accrue to the United States and the public from
the accomplishment: of the Project and compliance with the assurances and conditions as herein provided,
THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES,
HEREBY OFFERS AND AGREES to pay, as the United States share of the allowable costs incurred in
accomplishing the Project, ninety-five (95) percentum of all allowable Project costs.
This Offer is made on and subject to the following terms and conditions:
Conditions
.
The maximum obligation of the United States payable under this Offer shall be.$713,000.00.
For the, purposes of any future grant amendments which may increase the foregoing
maximum obligation of the United States under the provisions of Section 47108(b), of the Act,
the following amounts are being specified for this purpose:
$ 0.00
$713, 000. 00
for planning
for airport development or noise program implementation.
,
The allowable costs of the project shall not include any costs determined by the FAA to be
ineligible for consideration as to allowability under the Act.
.
Payment of the United States' share of the allowable project costs will be made pursuant to
and in ;accordance with the provisions of such regulations and procedures as the Secretary
shall prescribe. Final determination of the United States' share will be based upon the final
audit of the total amount of allowable project costS and settlement will be made for any
upward or downward adjustments to the Federal share of costs.
.
The Sponsor shall carry out and complete the Project without undue delays and in
accordance with the terms hereof, and such regulations and procedures as the Secretary
shall prescribe, and agrees to comply with the assurances which were made part of the
project application.
o
The F/~ reserves the right to amend or withdraw this Offer at any time prior to its acceptance
by the sponsor.
.
This Offer shall expire and the United States shall not be obligated to pay any part of the
costs of the project unless this Offer has been accepted by the Sponsor on or before August
26, 20(:)4, or such subsequent date as may be prescribed in writing by the FAA.
.
The Sponsor shall take all steps, including litigation if necessary to recover Federal funds
spent fraudulently, wastefully, or in violation of Federal antitrust statutes, or misused in any
other rnanner in any project upon which Federal funds have been expended-. For the
purposes of this grant agreement, the term "Federal funds" means funds however used or
disbursed by the Sponsor that were originally paid pursuant to this or any other Federal grant
agreernent. It shall obtain the approval of the Secretary as to any determination of the
amount of the Federal share of such funds. It shall return the recovered Federal share
including funds recovered by settlement, order, or judgment to the Secretary. It shall furnish
to the Secretary, upon request, all documents and records pertaining to the determination of
FAA Form 5100-37 PG 2 (10-89)
.
o
Page 3 of 5 pages
the amount of the Federal share or to any settlement, litigation, negotiation, or other efforts
taken to recover such funds. All settlements or other final positions of the Sponsor, in court
or otherwise, involving the recovery of such Federal share shall be approved in advance by
the Secretary.
The United States shall not be responsible or liable for damage to property or injury to
persons which may arise from, or be incident to, compliance with this grant agreement.
Special Conditions
It is mutually understood and agreed that if, during the life of the project, the FAA determines
that the maximum grant obligation of the United States exceeds the expected needs of the
Sponsor by $25,000.00 or five percent (5%), whichever is greater, the maximum obligation of
the United States can be unilaterally reduced by letter from the FAA advising of the budget
change. Conversely, if there is an overrun in the total actual eligible and allowable project
costs, FAA may increase the maximum grant obligation of the United States to cover the
amount of the overrun not to exceed the statutory percent limitation and will advise the
sponsor by letter of the increase. It is further understood and agreed that if,, during the life of
the project, the FAA determines that a change in the grant description is advantageous and in
the best interests of the United States, the change in grant description will be unilaterally
amended by letter from the FAA. Upon issuance of the aforementioned letter, either the
grant obligation of the United States is adjusted to the amount specified or the grant
description is amended to the description specified.
10.
The maximum obligation for the current fiscal year stated in Condition 1 of this agreement
may be increased by the additional amounts, if any, added by the document issued under the
subparagraph below, but may not exceed the United States' share of the total estimated cost
of completion, except as provided in Section 47108(b) of the Act.
Under Section 47108 of the Act, as amended, and at the Sponsor's request, the FAA
commits the United States to obligate an additional amount to this project for fiscal year (FY)
2005 pursuant to Section 47114 of said Act, and subject to the restrictions on the use of such
apportionments now or hereafter imposed on FAA by statute now or hereafter enacted by any
regulation. It is further understood by the parties that this commitment does not in itself
obligate, preclude, or restrict the FAA in the use of any funds made available for discretionary
use under Sections 47114 of said Act to further aid the Sponsor in meeting the cost of this
project under the terms of this agreement and limitations of law.
The exact amount of this commitment will be established for FY-2005 by the FAA in a letter to
the Sponsor stating the current maximum obligation for this project. This letter will be issued
to the Sponsor by FAA when such computation and obligation can be made in FY-2005. The
parties agree that upon its issuance, this letter shall be considered incorporated by reference
into, and part of, this agreement.
11. The Sponsor agrees to perform the following:
a. Furnish a construction management program to FAA prior to the start of construction
which shall detail the measures and procedures to be used to comply with the quality control
provisions of the construction contract, including, but not limited to, all quality control
provisions and tests required by the Federal specifications. The program shall include as a
minimum:
FAA Form 5100-37 PG 3 (10-89)
Page 4 of 5 pages
1. ']'he name of the person representing the Sponsor who has overall responsibility for
contract administration for the project and the authority to take necessary actions to comply
with the contract.
2. Names of testing laboratories and consulting engineer firms with quality control
responsibilities on the project, together with a description of the services to be provided.
3. Procedures for determining that testing laboratories meet the requirements of the
American Society of Testing and Materials standards on laboratory evaluation, referenced in
the contract specifications (D 3666, C 1077).
4. Qualifications of engineering supervision and construction inspection personnel.
5. A listing of all tests required by the contract specifications, including the type and
frequency of tests to be taken, the method of sampling, the applicable test standard, and the
acceptance criteria or tolerances permitted for each type of test.
6. Procedures for ensuring that the tests are taken in accordance with the program, that
they are documented daily, and that the proper corrective actions, where necessary, are
undertaken.
b. Submit at completion of the project, a final test and quality control report documenting the
results, of all tests performed, highlighting those tests that failed or did not meet the applicable
test standard. The report shall include the pay reductions applied and reasons for accepting
any out-of-tolerance material. An interim test and quality control report shall be submitted, if
requested by the FAA.
c. Failure to provide a complete report as described in paragraph b, or failure to perform
such tests, shall, absent of any compelling justification, result in a reduction in Federal
participation for costs incurred in connection with construction of the applicable pavement.
Such reduction shall be at the discretion of the FAA and will be based on the type or types of
required tests not performed or not documented and will be .commensurate with the
proportion of applicable pavement with respect to the total pavement constructed under the
grant agreement.
d. The FAA, at its discretion, reserves the right to conduct independent tests and to reduce
grant payments accordingly if such independent tests determine that sponsor test results are
inaccu~rate.
12.
Unless otherwise approved by the FAA, the Sponsor will not acquire or permit any contractor
or subcontractor to acquire any steel or manufactured products produced outside the United
States to be used for any project for airport development or noise compatibility for which
funds are provided under this grant. The Sponsor will include in every contract a provision
implernenting this special condition.
FAA Form 5100-37 PG 4 (10-89)
Page 5 of 5 pages
The Sponsor's acceptance of this Offer and ratification and adoption of the Project Application incorporated
herein shall be evidenced by execution of this instrument by the Sponsor, as hereinafter provided, and this
Offer and Acceptance shall comprise a Grant Agreement, as provided by the Act, constituting the
contractual obligations and rights of the United States and the Sponsor with respect to th~.., accomplishment
of the Project and compliance with the assurances and conditions as provided herein. Such Grant Agree-
ment shall become effective upon the Sponsor's acceptance of this Offer.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
~EdE~RAI~AVIAtIO_~I~dMI NISt/R)aTION
..............
By j._. Wade Bryant, Manager, Seattle Airports District Office
Part II - Acceptance
The Sponsor does hereby ratify and adopt all assurances, statements, representations, warranties,
covenants, and agreements contained in the Project Application and incorporated materials referred to in
the foregoing Offer and does hereby accept this Offer and by such acceptance agrees to comply with all of
the terms and conditions in this Offer and in the Project Application.
Executed this .................... day of ........................................ ,2004.
City of Ashland, Oregon
(SEAL) By ..........................................
Sponsor's Designated Official Representative
Title: .......................................
Attest: ....................................
Title: .....................................
CERTIFICATE OF SPONSOR'S ATTORNEY
I,. .................................... , acting as Attorney for the Sponsor do hereby certify:
That in my opinion the Sponsor is empowered to enter into the foregoing Grant Agreement under the laws
of the State of Oregon. Further, I have examined the foregoing Grant Agreement and the actions taken by
said Sponsor and Sponsor's official representative has been duly authorized and that the execution thereof
is in all respects due and proper and in accordance with the laws of the said State and 'the Act. In addition,
for grants involving projects to be carried out on property not owned by the Sponsor, there are no legal
impediments that will prevent full performance by the Sponsor. Further, it is my opinion that the said Grant
Agreement constitutes a legal and binding obligation of the Sponsor in accordance with the terms thereof.
Dated at ................. this ....................... day of ...................... ,2004.
Signature of Sponsor's Attorney
FAA Form 5100-37 PG 5 (10-89)
Council Communication
CITY OF
4 SHLAND
Title:
Dept: ·
Date:
Submitted By:
Reviewed By:
Approved By:
Synopsis:
Termination of Utility Easements within the Billings Ranch Subdivision
Public Works Department
August 17, 2004
Paula Brown
Mike Franell'
Gino Grimald~t~
Approval of the attached quitclaim deed would terminate the City's interest in several unoccupied or vacated
sewer and electric utility easements within the Billings Ranch Subdivision. With the development of the
Billings Ranch Subdivision the utilities that formerly occupied these easements have been reconstructed and
relocated onto public rights of way or within new easements within the subdivision. The lc)cations of the
easements to be terminated are shown on the attached map. All affected utilities have beent contacted and
have indicated no objection to the termination of this easement.
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Council terminate the City's interest in the six utility easement,,; located within the
platted boundaries of the Billings Ranch Subdivision and authorize the Mayor's signature ,an the attached
quitclaim deed.
Background:
The following easements have been created over the past 80 years to support City electrical and sewer
utilities over the Billings property located west of Nevada Street and north of N. Main Street:
.
.
.
Public Utility Easement along the west boundary of Lot 54 created on the plat of the Billings
Ranch Subdivision. This easement is reportedly unused.
Electric and Utility easements along the easterly portion on the subdivision per documents
numbers 66-10796, 79-23079 and 84-00630. These three easements affect lots 64, 65, 66, 67, 68,
69, 70, 71 and 72. The overhead power lines which previously occupied these: easements have
been placed underground into the newly created easements within the subdivision,
Two sanitary sewer easements as described in documents recorded in Volume: 91 Page 514 and
Volume 208 Page 379. These two easements affect lots 10, 24, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34 of
the Billings Ranch Subdivision. The sanitary sewer lines, which previously occupied these
easements have been relocated onto newly created easements and rights of way.
Attachments: Quitclaim Deed; Vicinity Map; Detail Map
G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\Street Easement Terminations\CC Billings Ranch Subdivision PUE Terminations 7 04.doc
Page 1 of 1
'.I.S ~¥0
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
133~J15 /N¥$NVA
/
/
/
/
/
/
CORDLNG REQUEb"~D BY
.t Amerkmn Title Insurance Company of
~jon
D WHEN RECORDED MA~L TO:
*ngs Ranch Golf Group LLC
si, am abeVe Tkis U.e for Reeenler's rise (rely .
File No.: 7:[62-400662 (dis)
QUITCLAIM DEED
~R A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, The City of Ashland, an Oregon
anicipal Corporation
ruby remlse, release and forever quitclaim m Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC
fcfllowing descflbed property in the City of Ashland, County of 5ackson, State of Oregon:
Attached Hereto and Made a Part Hereof as Exhibits ;iv B, C, D, E, F
,, THIS DEED IS GIVEN TO RELIN.QUI$.H AND TERMINATE IN IT'S ENTIRETY THOSE
]~oI{TiONs OF ~{E SANITA~.'Y"SEW~ ELECTRIC AND 13TILITY EASEMENTS AS DFSCRIBED
IN EXHIBIT'S'A~ B, C, D, E AND F.
[I.q INSTRUMENT WX'L-L NOT ALLOW .USE .OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN TRIS INSTRUMENT IN
iOI~TION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIUNING OR ACCEPTING
[I-~: 'INSTRUMENT, THE PEP, SON ACQUIRI'NC, FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH
[E A~PROPRI~TE CITY" OR CSUNTY PlilLNNIIqG' DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND'TO.
,TE~LHINE' ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN
.S 30'.930,
have and to Mold., the above described and granted premises'unto the said
antee (s), their heirs amd assigns forever,.
tn!ess our hand (s) and zeal (s) this:-- day of,: _
...
..
_.. 2004
Maa Tax Statements To: .SAME AS ABOVE or Address Shown Below
Rle No.: 7162-400662 (dis)
TATE OF )SS
~F
, before me,
er.~z)nally appeared ,
e~z)nally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) bo be the personis) whose
arne(s) is/are subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
hls/her/their authorized capadb/(ies) and that his/her/their signature(s) on the Instrument the. person(s) or the
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the Instrument.
eEl"NESS my hand and offidal seal.
rhb area for olFdal
~ot~;fa/ sea/
Ignature
ly (~mmisslon Expires:
otary Name:
otaty. Regisl~aUon Number:
Notary Phone:
County of Prim;tpal Place cf Bu~ines$:
EXHIBIT A
That portion of a 10.00 foot wide public utility easement located along the
westerly boundary of Lot 54 in Billings Ranch Subdivision, a planned community,
according to the official plat thereof, now of record in Jackson County, Oregon and
· situated north of the northerly boundary of that 40.00 foot wide pipeline easement
described in Volume 544, Page 336 of deed records of Jackson County, Oregon and
being south of the south boundary of that 10.00 foot wide public utility easement located
along the northerly boundary of the aforesaid Lot 54.
06/03/04
(04158 _vac.doc)
PROFESSIONAL
~URVEYOt:t I
DARRELL L. HOCK
· 2023 ',
Darrell L. Huck
L.S. 2023 - Oregon
Renews 06/30/05
Hoffbuhr & Associates, Inc.
EXHIBIT B
All of that portion of an electric and utility easement as
described in Instrument No. 66-10796 of the official records of
Jackson County, Oregon that is located within the boundaries of
Billings Ranch Subdivision, a planned community, according to
the official plat thereof, now of record in Jackson County, Oregon.
PROFESSIONAL
FEB,P, UARY 4, 1983
DARRELL L. HUCK
Darrell L. Huck
L.S. 2023 - Oregon
Renews 06/30/05
Hoffbuhr & Associates, Inc.
June 9, 2004
(0124 l_ex_b.doc)
EXHIBIT C
All of that portion of an electric eaiement as described in
Instrument No. 79-23079 of the official records of Jackson County,
Oregon that is located within the boundaries of Billings Ranch
Subdivision, a planned community, according to the official plat
thereof, now of record in Jackson County, Oregon.
PROFESSIONAL
su v .roa j
OREGON
FEBRUARY 4, 1983
DARRELL L. HUCK
2 0 2 3 ....
Darrell L. Huck
L.S. 2023 - Oregon
Renews 06/30/05
Hoffbuhr & Associates, Inc.
June 9, 2004
(0124 l_ex_c.doc)
EXHIBIT D
All of that portion of an electric 'and utility easement as
described in Instrument No. 84-00630 of the official records of
Jackson County, Oregon that is located within the boundaries of
Billings Ranch Subdivision, a planned community, according to
the official plat thereof, now of record in Jackson County, Oregon.
~ND SURVEYOR ~
FEBRUARY 4, 1983
DARRELL L. HUCK
Da~ell L. Huck
L.S. 2023 - Oregon
Renews 06/30/05
Hof~ & Associates~ Inc.
June 9, 2004
(0124 l_ex_d.doc)
EXHIBIT E
All of that portion of a sanitary"sewer easemem as
described in Volume 208, Page 379 of the deed records of Jackson
County, Oregon that is located within the boundaries of Billings
Ranch Subdivision, a planned community, according to'the official
plat thereof, now of record in Jackson County, Oregon.
~. LAND SURVEYOR ~
OREGON
FEBRUARY 4, 1983
DARRELL L. HUCK
Darrell L. Huck
L.S. 2023 - Oregon
Renews 06/30/05
Hoffbuhr & Associates, Inc.
June 9, 2004
(0124 l_ex_e.doc)
EXHIBIT F
All of that portion of a sanitary sewer easement as
described in Volume 91, Page 514 of the deed records of Jackson
County, Oregon that is located within the boundaries of Billings
Ranch Subdivision, a planned community, according to the official
plat thereof, now of record in Jackson County, Oregon.
I PROFESSIONAL
! LAND sURv'EYOR!
FEBRUARY 4, 1983
DARRELL L. HUCK
D~ell L. Huck
L.S. 2023 - Oregon
Renews 06/30/05
Hof~ & Associates~ Inc.
June 9, 2004
(01241 ex f. doc)
Council Communication
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Approved By:
Synopsis:
Agreement for Services/City of Ashland and Chamber of Commerce
Administration
August 17, 2004
Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator
The attached is the Agreement for Services between the City of Ashland and the Ashland Chamber of
Commerce and Visitor and Convention Bureau for your review.
It reflects suggested changes from Cate Hartzell and Kate Jackson stated at the meeting on July 20 and
additional comments and changes submitted by Cate Hartzell on August 13. Their comments are noted in
the agreement as [CH] for Cate Hartzell and [K J] for Kate Jackson.
Recommendation:
Review additions to the agreement and accept or reject changes. Authorize the City Administrator to sign
the Agreement for Services.
Fiscal Impact:
Economic and Cultural Development Grant Allocation
$160,000 for Ashland Chamber of Commerce and $80,432 for Ashland Visitor and Convention Bureau
Background:
The council did not have time to fully discuss this item at the meeting on July 20. The meeting time expired
as council was attempting to discuss "shoulder season" at the request of Kate Jackson.
Earlier this year, a sub-committee of the council was formed to review the transient occupancy tax and the
distribution of funds through the Economic and Cultural Development Grant process. In addition, due to
changes at a state level, the committee also reviewed the distribution of TOT funds for tourism related
activities, which included allocations to the Visitor and Convention Bureau (VCB) and expressed interest in
creating a contract with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce that elaborated on the City's expectation's of the
Chamber.
In past years, the contract between the City of Ashland and the Chamber of Commerce was generic and did
not clarify the city's expectations of the Chamber as grant recipients.
This agreement identifies the overall objectives of the city, the accountability and reporting requirements of
the chamber to the council and the general provisions that appear on contracts with all grant recipients.
The Agreement for Services, without the edits of [CH] and [KJ] has been reviewed and reflects input from
the TOT committee, the Chamber Director and Executive Board, the Chamber's Attorney, the City
Administrator, the City Attorney and the Finance Director.
Attachments:
I Proposed agreement with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce
II Financial Assistance Award Contract
CITY OF
SHLAND
Attachment I
Agreement for Services
between
City of Ashland
and
Ashland Chamber of Commerce
Agreement between the City of Ashland (City), the Ashland Chamber of Commerce (CoC) and the
Ashland Visitor and Convention Bureau (VCB) for fiscal year 2004-05.
Recitals
A. The VCB shall receive $80,432 for promoting tourism in Ashland. That amount will be
adjusted each year by the amount of inflation or deflation established in the budget process.
Expenditures of these funds must meet the requirement of ORS 320.300 through ORS
320.350.
B. The CoC shall receive $160,000 for the purpose of economic development in Ashland. That
amount will be adjusted each year by the amount of inflation or deflation established in the
budget process.
C. The City, CoC and VCB now enter into this Agreement to identify their roles and
responsibilities.
D. Fund allocations are based on Ashland City Council resolution 2004-11.
Purpose
The City relies on the VCB to promote Ashland to visitors travelling from more than 50 miles to
Ashland and/or visitors who stay overnight in AShland. Promotion includes advertising, publicizing,
distribution of printed materials, marketing special events and festivals, conducting strategic planning~ I
visitor center management [CH] and research necessary to stimulate tourism development.
I
The City of Ashland has established a system of shared responsibility with the CoC to handle typical
economic development types of needs. Currently the Chamber provides the following kinds of services:
coordinated marketing, rapid response team to inquiries, relocation services, point-of-contact
management and information services, general inquiries, '::~:' ...... ' ........... - ..... "-' [CHi], training for
local business and coordination with the Small Business Association.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488..6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 541488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
The City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan is the guiding document for all development within the
community. The plan incorporates ten specific elements related to development. The economic
development element is identified in Chapter 7.
The CoC will strive to. [CH] emphasize, in its economic development activities, the importance of
maintaining Ashland's small-town feel and portraying Ashland as a family friendly community that
supports its schools and places great value on the quality of education offered.
Overall Objectives
Retention and Expansion of Existing Business
The CoC will develop and implement on-going strategies on retaining and expanding existing
businesses, particularly those businesses that are non-tourism related, in Ashland with an emphasis on
creating additional family wage jobs.
Methodology: Adopt an aggressive and focused business retention plan, which is research and
relationship based.
II
Promotion: Offer assistance to all City of Ashland cultural and economic development grant
recipients to make them aware of the wide array of business support resources in Ashland,
southern Oregon and the State of Oregon.
III
Service Delivery: Organize processes by which any existing business interest may acquire
accurate and timely information with regard to making a business expansion decision to stay in
Ashland.
Advocacy: Establish multiple pathways in which a local business may acquire specialized
support in growing their business, to include conduits to other agencies, governments, applicable
organizations or existing community leadership for the purposes of retaining jobs in Ashland.
New Business Development
The CoC will develop and implement on-going strategies with emphasis on creating new family wage
jobs by attracting new businesses to Ashland. The strategy will focus on non-tourism related businesses.
Methodology: Adopt an aggressive and focused new business recruitment plan, which is research
and relationship based.
II
Promotion: Attract the attention of potential new businesses through networking, making
personal or telephone contact, organizing special events.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
III
Service Delivery: Organize processes by which any outside business interest may acquire
accurate and timely information with regard to making a business location decision in favor of
Ashland.
IV
Advocacy: Establish multiple pathways in which a potential new business may acquire
specialized information on which to base their decision to locate in Ashland, to include conduits
to other agencies, governments, applicable organization or existing community leadership for the
purposes of creating jobs in Ashland.
Tourism
The VCB will develop and implement a year-to-year strategy to maintain current levels of tourism in
Ashland and increase tourism from November through February, known as the shoulder season. [KJ]
Methodology: Adopt an aggressive and focused tourism promotion plan, which is research and
relationship, based.
II
Promotion: Focus on promoting visits to Ashland during the shoulder season, with services and [
support prioritized for Economic and Cultural Development grant recipients [CH].
III
Service Delivery: Organize processes by which visitors may acquire accurate and timely
information with regard to making a trip to Ashland and by which once in town, visitors can
acquire accurate information about the community.
Accountability
Develop mechanisms for tracking progress, measuring success, auditing finances and reporting to the
Ashland City Council on a yearly basis. Present a progress report on current fiscal year activities at least
lly a..,,.;.,,- ..... ;~ ,,,,,a,, ·
annua ...... ~, a cot ........... .~ sess:on at a council meeting_[CHI-
General Expectations
I Retain or create jobs through business assistance programs measured by job retention or
expansion.
II Create new business and employment opportunities measured by job creation.
III
Maintain or increase the number of outside dollars spent in Ashland retail, service and lodging
businesses as measured by increased revenues and transient occupancy tax revenue.
IV
Reach out to other City of Ashland cultural and economic development grant recipients to
.... ~;,, ~ ..... ,t,.. ~.u~,..~..~[CH]
--~,v .......... ................. .. can assist them with their efforts.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
Specific Requirements
The COC shall .... :':" .... a ,.,..a.,,:. :,o ........ :,, a .... ~ ........ ,...,....,~..~: ......... ,.~ ................ a o~,.,~ rr~tdq
~v vlj _ _
provide an ~ual repo~ to the Ashl~d City Council no later than Janu~y 31 on its previous year's
activities, which shall at a minimum consist of the following:
Provide a report of Ashland businesses, which received direct assistance from the CoC for the
purposed of retaining or creating new family wage jobs in Ashland.
II
Provide a report of prospective businesses the CoC made presentations to for the purpose of
attracting new jobs to Ashland.
III
Provide a report of local and regional partnerships developed and maintained for the CoC for the
purpose of business retention and development including but not limited to: SOWAC, SOREDI.
AGA. Include documentation of supportive efforts including but not limited to offering
educational workshops, cross promotion and web links.
The VCB shall ..... ; ........ ,,.a~,,.~ ;,~. ,...,,..; ......... ,;,.. o,...,=...; .......... . ............... ~ ~,.,.,~t~.-~rcu~
provide an a~ual repo~ to the Ashl~d City Council no later than Janua~ 31 on its previous ye~'s
activities which, shall at a minimum consist of the following:
Provide a report on the variety of specific promotion activities executed for the purpose of
attracting visitors to Ashland. Include samples of advertising, which include family, quality of
life and educational opportunities.
Provide a report on the variety of specific promotion activities executed for the purpose of
attracting visitors to Ashland during the shoulder season. Include samples of advertisina, which
include family, quality of life and educational opportunities. [KJ]
General Provisions
1. Amount of Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement and in reliance upon Grantee's
approved application, the City agrees to provide funds in the amount specified above.
2. Use of Grant Funds. The use of grant funds are expressly limited to the objectives identified in this
agreement.
3. Unexpended Funds. Any grant funds held by the Grantee remaining after the purpose for which the grant
is awarded or this agreement is terminated shall be returned to the City within 30 days of completion or
termination.
4. Financial Records and Inspection. Grantee shall maintain a complete set of books and records relating to
the purpose for which the grant was awarded in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
CITY HALL Tel: 541-488-6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
w,~t.ashland.or, us
Upon reasonable notice to Grantee, City shall have the right to inspect said books and records and
supporting documents relating to the use of grant funds and grantees organizational budget [CH] at I
Grantee's business premises, provided that City shall not copy or remove said books, records or documents
from Grantee's premises without the consent of Grantee, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
The data and entries in any such books, records and supporting documents that are copied by City shall
remain the confidential information of Grantee and shall not be made public records by City. City shall
protect the confidentiality of such data and entries and shall not disclose or permit the disclosure of the same
except as required to enforce the terms of this agreement in the event of a breach of this agreement by
Grantee. [CH is concerned that this paragraph does not require the Chamber to provide the same
information as the organizations competing for grants. CH is suggesting that 'havin~ the Chamber adhere to
the same provision-of-intbnnation standards as other applicants is appropriate because it receives a larger
sum of money, is not required to invest in proposal writing, receives a higher % of their budget from City, I
and implements tourism promo activities we must track.]
CH submitted the tbllowing copy for council consideration, as a replacement to the above.
Grantee includes in the annual report to the City proof of the ~antee's non-profit status, corporate bylaws,
financial statement showing previous year expenses and revenues, and cun'en.t projected bud~oets, (total
organization and individual programs) funded through this agreement. All financial infom~ation provided
shall include other non-grant related funding sources and expenditures.
5. Living Wage Requirements. If the amount of this agreement is $15,713.00 or more, and if the Grantee has
ten or more employees, then Grantee is required to pay a living wage, as defined in Ashland Municipal
Code Chapter 3.12, to all employees and subcontractors who spend 50% or more of their time within a
month performing work under this agreement. Grantees required to pay a living wage are.also required to
post the attached notice predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all employees.
6. Default. If Grantee fails to perform or observe any of the covenants or agreements contained in this
agreement or fails to expend the grant funds or enter into binding legal agreements to expend the grant funds
within twelve months of the date of this agreement, the City, by written notice of default to the Grantee,
may terminate the whole or any part of this agreement and may pursue any remedies available at law or in
equity. Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, termination of the agreement, stop payment on or
return of the grant funds, payment of interest earned on grant funds or declaration of ineligibility for the
receipt of future grant awards.
7. Amendments. The terms of this agreement will not be waived, altered, modified, supplemented, or
amended in any manner except by written instrument signed by the parties. Such written modification will
be made a part of this agreement and subject to all other agreement provisions.
8. Indemnity. Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents'
harmless from any and all' losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other
damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage (including loss
CITY HALL Tel: 541-488--6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 54 1-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TrY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the performance of this
agreement by Grantee (including but not limited to, Grantee's employees, agents, and others designated by
Grantee to perform work or services relating to Grantee's obligation under the terms of this agreement).
Grantee shall not be held responsible for damages caused by the negligence of City or anyone acting in
behalf of City.
9. Insurance. Grantee shall, at its own expense, at all times for twelve months from the date of this
agreement, maintain in force a comprehensive general liability policy. The liability under such policy shall
be a minimum 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.
Liability coverage shall be provided on an "occurrence" not "claims" basis. The City of Ashland, its
· officers, employees and agents shall be named as additional insures. Certificates of insurance acceptable to
the City shall be filed with the City's Risk Manager or Finance Director prior to the expenditure of any grant
funds.
10. Merger. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There are no
understandings, agreements or representations, oral or written, not specified in this agreement regarding this
agreement. Grantee, by the signature below of its authorized representative, acknowledges that it has read
this agreement, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions.
11. Notices and Representatives. All notices, certificates, or communications shall be delivered or
mailed postage prepaid to the parties at their respective places of business as set forth below or at a place
designated hereafter in writing by the parties.
CITY of Ashland:
Gino Grimaldi
City Administrator
20 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Ashland Chamber of Commerce
Sandra Slattery
110 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
This Agreement constitutes the Entire Agreement between the parties. There are no understanding,
agreement, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this agreement. No
amendment, consent, or waiver or terms of this agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and
signed by all parties. Any such amendment, consent or waiver shall be effective only in the specific
instance and for the specific purpose given. The parties, by the signatures below or their authorized
representatives, acknowledge having read and understood the Agreement and the parties agree to be
bound by its terms and conditions.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
City of Ashland
By
Title
Date
Ashland Chamber of Commerce and Visitor and Convention Bureau
By
Title
Date
CITY HALL
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or, us
Tel: 541488-6002
Fax: 541-488-5311
TTY: 800-735-2900
Attachment II
CITY OF ASHLAND
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AWARD CONTRACT
CITY: CITY OF ASHLAND
20 E Main Street
Ashland OR 97520
(541) 488-5300
FAX: (541) 488-5311
GRANTEE: <<Company))
Address: <<Address))
<<City)), <<State)) <<PostalCode))
Telephone: <<WorkPhone))
Term of this agreement: July 1,2004 to June 30, 2005
Amount of grant: <<GrantAmount))
Budget subcommittee: Economic and Cultural Development
Contract made the date specified above between the City of Ashland and Grantee named
above.
RECITAL: City has reviewed Grantee's application for a grant and has determined that the
request merits funding and the purpose for which the grant is awarded serves a public
purpose.
City and Grantee agree:
1. Amount of Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this contract and in reliance upon
Grantee's approved application, the City agrees to provide funds in the amount specified above.
2. Use of Grant Funds. The use of grant funds are expressly limited to the activities in the grant
application with modifications, if any, made by the budget subcommittee designated above.
Grantee will report in writing on the use and effect of granted monies compared to the original request
(as modified) per the following:
a. Within 90 days of the event completion (Single event applications)
b. As part of a subsequent application for grant funds from the City
c. Within 90 days of the budget fiscal year
Grant applicants awarded less than $2,500 are encouraged to maintain documentation to this effect
but are not required to submit a report unless requested by the City except under 2 b. above.
3. Unexpended Funds. Any grant funds held by the Grantee remaining after the purpose for which
the grant is awarded or this contract is terminated shall be returned to the City within 30 days of
completion or termination.
4. Financial Records and Inspection. Grantee shall maintain a complete set of books and records
relating to the purpose for which the grant was awarded in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles. Grantee gives the City and any authorized representative of the City access to
and the right to examine all books, records, papers or documents relating to the use of grant funds.
5. Living Wage Requirements. If the amount of this contract is $15,964 or more, and if the Grantee
has ten or more employees, then Grantee is required to pay a living wage, as defined in Ashland
Municipal Code Chapter 3.12, to all employees and subcontractors who spend 50% or more of their
time within a month performing work under this contract. Grantees required to pay a living wage are
Grant Contract 2004-05
also required to post the attached notice predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all
employees.
6. Default. If Grantee fails to perform or observe any of the covenants or agreements contained in
this contract or fails to expend the grant funds or enter into binding legal agreements to expend the
grant funds within twelve months of the date of this contract, the City, by written notice of default to the
Grantee, may terminate the whole or any part of this contract and may pursue any remedies available
at law or in equity. Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, termination of the contract, stop
payment on or return of the grant funds, payment of interest earned on grant funds or declaration of
ineligibility for the receipt of future grant awards.
7. Amendments. The terms of this contract will not be waived, altered, modified, supplemented, or
amended in any manner except by written instrument signed by the parties. Such written modification
will be made a part of this contract and subject to all other contract provisions.
8. Indemnity. Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents
harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other
damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage (including
loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the performance of
this agreement by Grantee (including but not limited to, Grantee's employees, agents, and others
designated by Grantee to perform work or services attendant to this agreement). Grantee shall not be
held responsible for damages caused by the negligence of City.
9. Insurance. Grantee shall, at its own expense, at all times for twelve months from the date of this
agreement, maintain in force 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. The liability under each
policy shall be a minimum 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. Liability coverage shall be provided on an "occurrence" not "claims" basis. The
City of Ashland, its officers, employees and agents shall be named as additional insureds.
Certificates of insurance acceptable to the City shall be filed with the City's Risk Manager or Finance
Director prior to the expenditure of any grant funds.
10. Merger. This contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There are no
understandings, agreements or representations, oral or written, not specified in this contract regarding
this contract. Grantee, by the signature below of its authorized representative, acknowledges that it
has read this contract, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions.
GRANTEE
By
Title
By
CITY OF ASHLAND
By.
Date
Finance Director
Account Number:
(for City use only)
Grant Contract 2004-05
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Attachment I
Agreement for Services
between
City of Ashland
and
Ashland Chamber of Commerce
Agreement between the City of Ashland (City), the Ashland Chamber of Commerce (CoC) and the
Ashland Visitor and Convention Bureau (VCB) for fiscal year 2004-05.
Recitals
A. The VCB shall receive $80,432 for promoting tourism in Ashland. That amount will be
adjusted each year by the amount of inflation or deflation established in the budget process.
Expenditures of these funds must meet the requirement of ORS 320.300 through ORS
320.350.
B. The CoC shall receive $160,000 for the purpose of economic development in Ashland. That
amount will be adjusted each year by the amount of inflation or deflation established in the
budget process.
C. The City, CoC and VCB now enter into this Agreement to identify their roles and
responsibiliti es.
D. Fund allocations are based on Ashland City Council resolution 2004-11.
Purpose
The City relies on the VCB to promote Ashland to visitors travelling from more than 50 miles to
Ashland and/or visitors who stay overnight in Ashland. Promotion includes advertising, publicizing,
distribution of printed materials, marketing special events and festivals, conducting strategic planning,
visitor center management [CH] and research necessary to stimulate tourism development.
The City of Ashland has established a system of shared responsibility with the CoC to handle typical
economic development types of needs. Currently the Chamber provides the following kinds of services:
coordinated marketing, rapid response team to inquiries, relocation services, point-of-contact
management and information services, general inquiries, wisitor center management [CHi], training for
local business and coordination with the Small Business Association.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20Es st Ma in Street Fax: 541488-5311 ~'~
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
The City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan is the guiding document for all development within the
community. The plan incorporates ten specific elements related to development. The economic
development element is identified in Chapter 7.
The CoC will ~ ICH] emphasize, in its economic development activities, the importance of
maintaining Ashland's small-town feel and portraying Ashland as a family friendly community that
supports its schools and places great value on the quality of education offered.
Overall Objectives
Retention and Expansion of Existing Business
The CoC will develop and implement on-going strategies on retaining and expanding existing
businesses, particularly those businesses that are non-tourism related, in Ashland with an emphasis on
creating additional family wage jobs.
Methodology: Adopt an aggressive and focused business retention plan, which is research and
relationship based.
II
Promotion: Offer assistance to all City of Ashland cultural and economic development grant
recipients to make them aware of the wide array of business support resources in Ashland,
southern Oregon and the State of Oregon.
III
Service Delivery: Organize processes by which any existing business interest may acquire
accurate and timely information with regard to making a business expansion decision to stay in
Ashland.
Advocacy: Establish multiple pathways in which a local business may acquire specialized
support in growing their business, to include conduits to other agencies, governments, applicable
organizations or existing community leadership for the purposes of retaining jobs in Ashland.
New Business Development
The CoC will develop and implement on-going strategies with emphasis on creating new family wage
jobs by attracting new businesses to Ashland. The strategy will focus on non-tourism related businesses.
Methodology: Adopt an aggressive and focused new business recruitment plan, which is research
and relationship based.
II
Promotion: Attract the attention of potential new businesses through networking, making
personal or telephone contact, organizing special events.
CITY HALL Tel: 541-488-6002
20Ea st Main Street Fax: 5414 88-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
III
Service Delivery: Organize processes by which any outside business interest may acquire
accurate and timely information with regard to making a business location decision in favor of
Ashland.
IV
Advocacy: Establish multiple pathways in which a potential new business may acquire
specialized information on which to base their decision to locate in Ashland, to include conduits
to other agencies, governments, applicable organization or existing community leadership for the
purposes of creating jobs in Ashland.
Tourism
The VCB will develop and implement a year-to-year strategy to maintain current levels of tourism in
Ashland and increase tourism from November through February, known as the shoulder season. [KJ]
Methodology: Adopt an aggressive and focused tourism promotion plan, which is research and
relationship, based.
II
Promotion: Focus on promoting visits to Ashland during the shoulder season and makc
ass i st'an c c a v a il ab 1 c to E c o ia o na i ¢ an d C u 1 t u ral G va tat fcc ~..i_c!3_!:s. v.
-De¥'~~~..[~~_~:-(iA.D)[CH].
III
Service Delivery: Organize processes by which visitors may acquire accurate and timely
information with regard to making a trip to Ashland and by which once in town, visitors can
acquire accurate information about the community.
Accountability
Develop mechanisms for tracking progress, measuring success, auditing finances and reporting to the
Ashland City CoUncil on a yearly basis. Present a progress report on current fiscal year activities at least
lly '~'"';*'"' ~' ...... ;~ "*"'~ ...... ;"'" [CH]
annua ....... 6 a ....... ....... zo,.oo,,,, at a couOcil meeting .
General Expectations
I Retain or create jobs through business assistance programs measured by job retention or
expansion.
II Create new business and employment opportunities measured by job creation.
III
Maintain or increase the number of outside dollars spent in Ashland retail, service and lodging
businesses as measured by increased revenues and transient occupancy tax revenue.
IV
Reach out to other City of Ashland cultural and economic development grant recipients to
~--"~';" ' ..... *~'~ ~"'~*"~' ..... "' [CHi] assist them with their efforts.'
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20East Main Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
Specific Requirements
The COC shall .0. · ....... , .... ,~.~ ;. ........~.;~ ~ .... l~.~. .... , o.~,~,~; ......... **. ............ z~..o ~,~x shall [CH]
provide an ~ual repo~ to the Ashland City Council no later th~ January 31 on its previous year's
activities, which shall at a minimum consist of the following:
Provide a report of Ashland businesses, which received direct assistance from the CoC for the
purposed of retaining or creating new family wage jobs in Ashland.
II
Provide a report of prospective businesses the CoC made presentations to for the purpose of
attracting new jobs to Ashland.
III
Provide a report of local and regional partnerships developed and maintained for the CoC for the
purpose of business retention and development including but not limited to: SOWAC, SOREDI.
AGA. Include documentation of supportive efforts including but not limited to offering
educational workshops, cross promotion and web links.
provide an annual report to the Ashland City Council no later than January 31 on its previous year's
activities which, shall at a minimum consist of the following:
Provide a report on the variety of specific promotion activities executed for the purpose of
attracting visitors to Ashland. Include samples of advertising, which include family, quality of
life and educational opportunities.
Provide a report on the variety of specific promotion activities executed for the purpose of
attractin~ visitors to Ashland duri]~ the shoulder season. Include samples of advertising, which
include famil, y, quality of life and educational opportunities. [KJ]
General Provisions
1. Amount of Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement and in reliance upon Grantee's
approved application, the City agrees to provide funds in the amount specified above.
2. Use of Grant Funds. The use of grant funds are expressly limited to the objectives identified in this
agreement.
3. Unexpended Funds. Any grant funds held by the Grantee remaining after the purpose for which the grant
is awarded or this agreement is terminated shall be returned to the City within 30 days of completion or
termination.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20Ea st Ma in Street Fax: 541-488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
w~'w.ashland.or, us
Grantee includes in the annual report to the City_ a) copies of~'"~'~'rt~,,~.,, -..."r ,h.~.,.. '"-~'"'=='s501. (c).~,..,.,,.... letter, IRS non-
profit status= and corporate bylaws~; ~ ...... :~ ~'"'= ..... ' ~t ..... :'-. ..... ": ..........mg~p b)
_ , .............................. . ..... } .......... , .... ens list of Boar~
members, their occupations, and years on the Board; c) fi_~35~j)c~.l_Sts~flfi~3_~J'gs~13~!~9/jt~g
e~3~enses and revenues; ~) current and projected , .....~:~.,:~.o . ......
......................................................... budg~i~..p, ~,... ....... (total organization and
individual program/s ~ tktnded by this grant) ~.a ...... ......... c ,} ..... ..... .;~,.,;A. ........... l ..... .a ....
5. Living Wage Requirements. If the amount of this agreement is $15,713.00 or more, and if the Grantee has
ten or more employees, then Grantee is required to pay a living wage, as defined in Ashland Municipal
Code Chapter 3.12, to all employees and subcontractors who spend 50% or more of their time within a
month performing work under this agreement. Grantees required to pay a living wage are also required to
post the attached notice predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all employees.
6. Default. If Grantee fails to perform or observe any of the covenants or agreements contained in this
agreement or fails to expend the grant funds or enter into binding legal agreements to expend the grant funds
within twelve months of the date of this agreement, the City, by written notice of default to the Grantee,
may terminate the whole or any part of this agreement and may pursue any remedies available at law or in
equity. Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, termination of the agreement, stop payment on or
return of the grant funds, payment of interest earned on grant funds or declaration of ineligibility for the
receipt of future grant awards.
CITY HALL Tel: 541488-6002
20 East Main Street Fax: 541488-5311
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or, us
7. Amendments. The terms of this agreement will not be waived, altered, modified, supplemented, or
amended in any manner except by written instrument signed by the parties. Such written modification will
be made a part of this agreement and subject to all other agreement provisions.
8. Indemnity. Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents
harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other
damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage (including loss
or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the performance of this
agreement by Grantee (including but not limited to, Grantee's employees, agents, and others designated by
Grantee to perform work or services relating to Grantee's obligation under the terms of this agreement).
Grantee shall not be held responsible for damages caused by the negligence of City or anyone acting in
behalf of City.
9. Insurance. Grantee shall, at its own expense, at all times for twelve months from the date of this
agreement, maintain in force a comprehensive general liability policy. The liability under such policy shall
be a minimum 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.
Liability coverage shall be provided on an "occurrence" not "claims" basis. The City of Ashland, its
officers, employees and agents shall be named as additional insures. Certificates of insurance acceptable to
the City shall be filed with the City's Risk Manager or Finance Director prior to the expenditure of any grant
funds.
10. Merger. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There are no
understandings, agreements or representations, oral or written, not specified in this agreement regarding this
agreement. Grantee, by the signature below of its authorized representative, acknowledges that it has read
this agreement, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions.
11. Notices and Representatives. All notices, certificates, or communications shall be delivered or
mailed postage prepaid to the parties at their respective places of business as set forth below or at a place
designated hereafter in writing by the parties.
CITY of Ashland:
Gino Grimaldi
City Administrator
20 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Ashland Chamber of Commerce
Sandra Slattery
110 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
CITY HALL
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or, us
Tel: 541488-6002
Fax: 541488-5311
TTY: 800-735-2900
This Agreement constitutes the Entire Agreement between the parties. There are no understanding,
agreement, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this agreement. No
amendment, consent, or waiver or terms of this agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and
signed by all parties. Any such amendment, consent or waiver shall be effective only in the specific
instance and for the specific purpose given. The parties, by the signatures below or their authorized
representatives, acknowledge having read and understood the Agreement and the parties agree to be
bound by its terms and conditions.
City of Ashland
By
Title
Date
Ashland Chamber of Commerce and Visitor and Convention Bureau
By
Title
Date
CITY HALL
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or, us
Tel: 541488-6002
Fax: 541-488-5311
TTY: 800-735-2900
C)qmame~ d tim T~
h,w,~ R~,~,~ .~,,,~ · The orga~umon may Imva to use a copy of tl~s return m saru~y state ~ mqum~,a~*~
A For Ute ~fX)I calefvlar Nov 1, 2000 and endn~ ag 01
B Check d~
C) Ad=eSs
C] ~ ~
Grossreceq~,s Add Imes6b ~13 9b ~nd 1Obtokne 12 I~
Itc ~ml Revert .l~. ,..Ex~...n~,~s, and m Net Assets or Fund Balances
~ IConmms.'gdts grants, and sm~lar amounts recewed
.c::) 11,917,500
~%1 a Dtrec~ pubbc support
~ b In~rect pubbc support 0
=~ c Governnmm conmbutmns (grar~s) 201.'1~4
=3 12 19~.~4 0
--~ d Total (add lines la through lc} (ca~
2 Program sennce revenue including government tees and corm'acts ~ Part VII. line 93)
3 blembersl~p dues and assessments
C3 4 interest (m savings and tempoca~ cash ,westme~ts .
I/.f 5 I~wdends and interest from securr'deS
::2 gm Gross rents
b Less rental expenses 0
c Net rer~al income m' (loss} (subtract line 613 M3m line 6,9)
7 Other mvesmmnt income (desc~be I~ )
oe: .....
,,
0 .b Pi
i
o 8c ol
i i iii
H(cl Are au affrays ~ I-I y.~ ri ~o
~' 'No' attach · ks~ See msuuc~ons )
i ii
to a~ ~ e F~m ~ ~EZ ~ ~ P~
insW~s ~
La Gross amount ~rom sales of assets other
than mventory
b Less cos~ m other bas~s and sales expenses
c Gain or (loss) (attach sdedufe)
d Net gain or (loss) (cmlbme kne 6c. columns (A) and (B))
9 Speoal events and act]vibes (attach schedule)
'~ )~_~oss'i~eyenue (not mdud, ng S .., ' o o~
II,_V.C&:~.~m~ reported on kne la)
i- ~) Les~ 8irect expenses other than fundramflg expenses 0
'i 2~ ~ or goss) from speoal events (subtract line 9b .om kne
10a Gros~ ..~ales of inventory, less returns and allowances ~ ~--~-I--- 0
i',~~t of Ooods ~d U 0bi._ 0
11 -Od'~ revenue (from Part VII, line 103)
12 Tom revenue (add knes 1cl, 2. 3, 4, S, 6(:, 7, 8d:9c. 10c. and
d 1~ Program ms (from ~ 44, cokmll
14 Management and general (from line 44, cokmvt (C))
15 FundralSing 0r(om line 44, co. mn (D))
16 Payments to affihates (attach schedule) St:a~:emen,~_
17 lutes 16 Ind 44, c. dtm~
16 Excessor{def~3dfottheyea~(sul3tractlme 17 fromkne12)
19 Net assets or fund balances at beginning of year {from kne 23, column-{N)
:~zo Omer charu3es m net assets (x fund balances (attach expla~ $tat. ement.2
?.1 Net assets or hind balances at end knes 19. and
Fa P, pemork Red,,cbo, Act.~..~e_~.th?..~ ~'_: ' .' ....... C- No .zazY~' .. '
12,198,684
236
0
147,27t
745,714
0
487w275,,
25,878,180
11,119,737
S,7..5~.6o3
165
561:391,
le.566,Sg6
22 G~mlt~ arid allocations (attach
(chh S Sla~Ttent 3 non~ S 5,167 ) 22 5~16,7 5,167
i ii i i ii
23 Spe~'K; ass~tm~ to mdcvlduais (attach schedde) 23 _ 0 . 0
24 eemd~pa~too~fornvmd)rs(attKhschedule) _24 0
2s Compe. saT~ or ~,cL~s. d, re~ors, e~c ~ zs 3r~5.77o ~e~885] 18~5~ o'
aG Other 5~afleS and wages 26 10,374,~,6 " 7,~~I 2,53~4~,l ,497,8b?
z? ~e,s,~ ~,~ co, m~ ...z7 ~02,2~s ,o7~i 68,0B71 1~299
28 off~ em~e bene~s 20 1,1~,7M 867,834_1 261,3191 ' 40,751
29 Pay~l ~xes 2~_ 1,~2~3971 G85~821 291,882. i ,, 49,23~
3o ProfessK)nal fundrats~r.:j fees 30 24,026 ,., 01 01 24~026
31 A_,:~:_~ trees 31 41,388~01 41.388.l. 0
0 0 ,. 0
32 ceo~ fees 32 o~ 'i'8,367 "~20,e94 42,323
33 ~Jppbes 33 lrt,684 , ,
34 Te~phone 34 e~,!73 . a0,256 ~,~e31 .... s,.634
3s Postage ;ar~ s~vp~9 3S 173,096 e,657' 8~310 i 80~720
36 o~p~y ~6 s42,s02 m.072 ~1_.2..4301 0
37 E~tJpment ~at and ma~tefla~ce 37 , 1,,8;5~ ' 'iOiS¶O ,, 5f3991 2,631
38 Prmu~ and PublK~bons 38 .534,692 _4~5~12 . 333,546 ! .1H~634
~9 Travel 39 . 335,~ 237~146 22,769 ~ . 75,507
40 CCH~emnces, coflventJons, and meet]rTgs 40 0 0 Oi 0
41 htr. rest 41 .. 0 ....
42 Oepmc2atlon, clepletK)n, etc (atf~ch scheckde) 42 ' '48'1'S84~ " ._0 ' ' 46t,584 0
43 0thef expenses rKx cowed above Oteme44. ....... 4b 0 0, 0 0
. ........
............... O 0
c ................................. 43c 0 I 0 , 0
d ................ '43d 0 : 0 O
44 TOLll b.clmll eqmnMs ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~
c.~.m.J,c,,mu~c~d,m~mf~f$ 44 18,005.50,S , 11.11e,737l 5.7,S5,603 , 1,!3,0,16S
Joint Costs Check i> r'l d you are foli~ so~ 98-2
AreanyJ~m~fr~mac~m~xnededuca~cami~KJnand~s~kCtta~m~:N)i1~dm~B)~m~fam~er~ice~? ), ri Yes I~No
K 'Yes ' enter (ii the aggregate amount cd these joint costs S-- , (ii) the amoLJnt allocated to Program services S_
(,,) the amoum i, _tlo~"~ed to ~ and ~enefal S . and 0v) the amount aiocated to Funcb~psmcj S
i:FTimlll Statement of Prc~l. ram ~ Acc~._~,_ . .d~-n~t_..~ (See. SpeClhC Inst~_ctJons on p~_qe 24
What .s the organLzahon s primary exempt purpose? I> .S~~.S .......................................... Pledge-am ~
~ o~gara2atxm5 must desc~d~e thew exempt ixalx)se a(:f~eve,-ne~ts m a clear and (:(XK:tSe mamler S&ate the rNjfnl)ef tnequna~ md
d CtleflLS SL'~VeCI pul:dr..a~ ~ ~ ~ ~C)l~V~lllef1~. ~ a~ IlOt ~ ~ .~O1(c~3} ~ (4) 14)0rgs. BM
°fganfzaLl°ns and 4947(aXl) nOnexeml~t ~e ~ ~ ~ ~er the ornount d grants and ,aJfoCatKms to o(J~e~s )
i i i i£_
(Grants and allocabons $ ) 10,511,766
607,g81
· 0
11,119,737
--
Finn 9gO (2oo,
__ i i II ~ - I i i
I~]~i~ Balance Sheets (See Specd*K: Ins~mctJOm on page 24 ) · -' .~ .....
46 Savings and tem~cxa~ cash investmeflts 9,696,6751 46 6,880,199
4~a A~s ~wa~ 47B ~~
b L~ a~a~ f~ d~d ~ 4~ 0 651,92~147cl
4~ ~S re~wa~e ~ 6,16~891
b L~ ~~ f~ ~b~ ~~ 4~ ~,~ ~1~ ~8~,891
4S ~ Gmn~r~a~e .. 0J491 0
~ Recants ~ ~. ~;~. ~s, a~ kW
I I
(a~ ~e) 0L~j .... 0
sla ~ ~es ~ I~ ~~ (~ I Slal 5~.KS
~~)
~ b L~s dl~a~e ~ ~d ~ 1 SlbJ 0
' 1~5~1 szl
53 ~ exes a~ ~~ ~s .......
S~ I~s~. ~~ ~d
~m~t ~ss S~ ..... 0
b L~S ~med de~~
~ In~~~~ (a~ ~) O,L~~ , , o
~~) 8Th , 5,~ ~,2~ 1~1,085151~I ,
se ~r as~s (~~ ~ smmt 6 ) . 14~,728l ~ l
5g T~I K~ Cdd K 45 mr~ 5~ (~t ~ line 74): . ~,37e 89 47,os1,118
60 A~. pay~ ~ ~ ex~ 1,039,3101 60 1,o16.1o3
G1 ~ants ~ya~ ' ~G,~I- 6~ 0
62 ~f~r~ r~ ' 621 ~1~
~ 01631 0
~ ~H)
~' ~ Tax ex. pt ~ Imams ~ ~) 01~ ! ...0
I,69,~2
,. 66 T~llm~m~(addl~s~~~) , , 3,~9,1991 K 3,MT,4o
m G7 ~ ~ ~ I~s 73 ~ 74
6~ UnrK~ . . 18,~ ~,~0,~
s&~~] 3,~~
' GO ~~~~ ,~5, ..._ 1T,128,~1
~ 0~~ m~ ~ ~t rom SF~ 117, c~k Mm k ~ and
~ ~ k~ ?0 ~ 74
~ 7Z ~em~ ~rn~. ~, ~t~ ~, ~ ~
73 TWl ~ ms~ ~ ~ ~ (~ kn~ 67 ~ 69 OR ~
~ 70 ~ 72.~ . ~
74, TO~I ha~es a~ nd ~~ hb~ ~ ~ K8~ 73) ~ ~,378 74 ,~ 41,051.118
F(xm 990 :s avadable for pubbc mspectmn and, k:N' some people, sewes as the prmtauy or sole source of mf~mabofl 'about a
pamct~ ofganr~Btlon How the pubk: pe~cewes an o~gard~mOn m such cases may be determined by the ndofma .bpn presented
oft ~ts return Therefore. please make sure the return 6 complete and'accurate and fully describes m Pa~t I#. ttm orgaruzatlOn s
pro,ams and acc~shnmnts
Fmanaal Skatemenls ruth Revesme per ~ Fmanaal Statemeflts m~h Expenses per
Return tSee Speanc Return
ToLd revenue, gains, ancl olhe~ support · Tale1 expenses arid
per ~ Iinm~cud 51,teme. Ls P~ auchted IJnancml statements I,.
b Amoun6~~mh~a~~ b Amounts mcluded an hne · I~ no~
hne 12. F(xm 990 on bne 17. Form 990
(1) Ne~ ,mreabzed gmns (1) Donated serv,ces
off swesrjTlet~ ~_ ___ 0 aAduseoffocditleS Si 0
(2) Donat~ sef~qces (2) Pna'year
and use of I'acd~bes $ 0 reported m hne
(3) Recoveries of prior Form 990 · 0
year grants S 0 (3} Losses reported on
(4) Other tspeofy) bm 2O. Form 99O · 0
............. (4) Other (spe=~
S 0
Ac~ a.~ ~ ~ (I! ~maugh H} 1~ O ................ $
Add ~.~ on b~ (1) ~hrougb (4)~ 0
c Line a minus line b I~ 2S,316,789 c Line a rmnus line b t~ 505
d A~ntsu~:k~led~ 12. d Am(xmtsmr..kxledonlme17,
F(vm 990 bu( n(x on line a Form 990 but no[ on bne
(1) Investment expenses
nat mduck~ m line
6b Form 990 S 0
Add amounts on I~es (1! and (2) I~
e Total avenue pe~ #ne 12, From 990
(1) Investme~ expenses
6b, From' 9gO $ 0
('40mer (spea~
.~p~...b~t~.. to..
..E.~ F.ml. f S 56~, _3~J1_
561 Add amounts on hnes (1) and (2) · 5el 391
· Total expenses per t~e 17, Form 990
Idst of Officers, Dmrectors, Trustees, and Key Employees (bst each one even d' not compensated, see Spec~
Insmlctmns on page 26)
· II "Yes,' / schedule--see Specific II~bXfcbc~s on Image 27 - '
' 'J" ,:, /i ~' :~*' '., ~ .' ' * : ' ' '*'" /..',r.:."" ' ' : ,. " ' : ., :
..
From 990
,.
F4x~ flo ~! P~ S
Other InfonnatKm.(See ~ ~~~~
7g Was~8~~d~~~,~~
......................... 8~ ~ ~t~r ~ 8s ~ ex~ OR ~ ~x~pt
811 E~t~ d~ ~ ~r~ ~1 ex--es ~ ~ 81 m~s 181. ! o
b ~ t~ ~zah~ r~ F~ 11~L for h5
b ~ 'Yes,' d~d t~ ~~ ~de ~ ~
b ~ tm ~98~ ~e ~y m-~ ~~ e~d~ ~ S~ ~ ~ss? ~/~
~ a ~r ~ ~oxy ~x ~ for ~ ~ ~ar
c ~ as~~ a~ ~r ~ f~ ~ ~A
d ~ 162(e) ~b~ a~ ~ ~d~
f Taxa~ ~t ~ ~b~ ~d ~ ~~
b
87
b
501~c)(7) args Em, er a Inmamm ~ees and car)dam cordflbqJbons ~k?duded on [me 12
Gross cece~pts, included on line 12, fm pu~c use o~ club laoklzes
501(c)(129 orgs Enter a Gross income from members or shamhalders
sources agams~ (vnounts due or recenmd from ~ )
N/A
N/A
N/A
At any tmle dunng the year, ad the or~ own a SO% m ~te mt~ ~n a m~ ~a~ m
301 7~1.2 8~ ~1 7701 37 ff ~,' ~~ ~ ~
50l(c~) ~a~s ~ ~ ~ mx ~ m ~ ~=a~ d~ ~e ~ar md~
~ 4911 ~, 0 . ~ 4912 ~ 0 , ~n 49~ ~,"
50~) ~ ~1(~4) ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ m a~ ~ 49~ e~ss ~
~g ~ ~ ~ ~d K ~ ~e ~ an e~s ~ u~ ~ a ~ ~ ~' ~s.' an~
a =a~ e~m~ e~ ~
0
~S491Z4955 a~~ ~ ~ - ..
0
g~ _'pro, am ~ervK;e revenue
· Pb~d om~ Ev.nts
b
94
~G
g7
b
100
101
102
103
b
C
d
e
104
105
i~dUc.tlonM Prop-ams
~/Med~md payments
Fees and contracts from government agenoes
Memberdap dues and assessments
Interest on ~avmgs and WTpxary cash mvestmems
D~wdends and ~nterest from securmes
Net rental income o~ (loss) fax~.s real estate
debt-tranced property
Other IflVeS~l income
Gamor (loss) fromm o( asse~ oUur m wwmmoq
Net income or (loss) from specml events
Gross profit or (loss) from sales of mvemory
Olhe~reveflue a Miscellmneou$
Subtom (add cokmms (e~ {O~ and
Total (add kne 104, colurms (8~ (DL and (E))
Now Lm losp~t~e ;d Pa~;. ~equa/~ ~Cm..ane3~. Pa~./
l=J~al~JIII
..... Rabted of
(Al (la) ICl (D)' exemp* fimc~mn
Busml~ code Amoral Exclusmn code AmouM income
iiii J i i ii ii i
11,1~17,034
,
, . 307,141
,
iii iii icJ ~1 i~ ~1 II
- 14 "' 74S,7t4
i i i i i
, ~ i i .
I I
i i i
i i ii ! iii
.... ,487,27s
i i ii i · i i i i i
iiii iii i i mill
ii
13.679.496
Rebbonshmp of Actmbes to the Accomld~ent of Exempt Pwlmses (See Specific, Instmcuons on pacie 32 )
t.me No Exptam how o,~'h_ m:uv~ for wh,ch income ~s rupormd m cdmn (E) or Pan VII comdxfud ~ to ttu ~
03b PUbllcabofls Infofl'n the public about the _pl._and th~ r.~Mlval
1o3~ Funabons mMWi. to. the perfor?m~ ~c~ SUreafl the pmduc~m at' me ~ce~ ,
IMormabon ?=.. _=,hie Su_l~_~ and Em Instfuct~s ~m
I'_.ml.l IMommbOn Regarding Trensfa3 ~ted ruth Persmul Benefil ~ (See Speclc_~s on page 3:~)
(a) DM~hem~m~a~n~dmng~he~ear~mCe~pe~n~mds~dfec~ymmdrecdy~payp~emm~m~pet~ma~b~ir~ I-lYes I~No
lb) [hd me orgeruz~ofl during ~he year. pay pre,wins, ckru(:ffy ur mclrecUy, or, a persorul benefit con.act? E:] Yes ~ No
Note Ir Yes' to /]ae Form 8870 and Form 4720 msuucixms)
contribution, not to exc
lng event or mailing. '1 ~ charity can avoid the
penalty if it can show ti
reasonable cause.
Acknowledge~
Charitable Co;
$250 or More
A donor can deduct a
$250 or more only if
acknowledgement fror
tion. The donor must
by the earlier of:
1) The date the don
for the year the c(
2) The due date, inc
lng the return.
The donor is responsi;
taining the written ac
donee.
Quid pro quo contrit
vides goods or servi
change for the cont~
contribution), the acl
clude a good faith es'
goods or services. SE
Quo Contributions, ea
Form of acknowled~
is no prescribed forml
edgement, it must pro~
substantiate the amou
more information, ge
Charitable Contributi,
Disclosure Requireme~
Report of
Received
An exempt organizat
course of its activities,
in one transaction (or:
tions) that is not a ch;
report the transaction
Report of Cash Pay,
ceived in a Trade or
,,ed $5,000 per fund-rms- Annual return. An exempt organization must
~at the failure was due to
nent of
ttributions of
~aritable contribution of
the donor has a written
) the charitable organiza-
et the acknowledgement
r files the odginal return
ntribution is made, or
Jding extensions, for fil-
~le for requesting and ob-
:nowledgement from the
ution. If the donee pro-
:es to the donor in ex-
bution (a quid pro quo
nowledgement must in-
imate of the value of the
~ Disclosure of Quid Pro
tier.
sment. Although there
t for the written acknowl-
de enough information to
it of the contribution. For
IRS Publication 1771,
Ts - Substantiation and
its.
Cash
)n that receives, in the
more than $10,000 cash
: or more related transac-
ritable contribution, must
o the IRS on Form 8300,
~ents Over $10,000 Re-
Public Ins 3ection
of Exemption
Applications, Annual
Returns, and Political
Organization Reporting
Forms
The following rules apply to private foundations
as well as other tax-exempt organizations. Pri-
vate foundations filing annual returns are sub-
ject to the public disclosure requirements under
section 6104(d) of the Code.
Included in this section is a discussion on the
public inspection requirements for political orga-
nizations filing Forms 8871 and 8872.
make available for public insi)ection, upon re-
quest and without charge, a copy of its original
and emended annual information returns. Each
information return must be made available from
the data it is required to be filed (determined
without regard to any extensions), or is actually
filed, whichever is later. An original return does
not have to be made available if more than 3
years have passed from the date the return was
required to be filed (including any extensions) or
was filed, whichever is later. An amended return
does not have to be made available if more than
3 years have passed from the date it was filed.
An annual information return includes an ex-
act copy of the return (Form 990. 990-EZ,
990-BL, 990-PF, or 1065), and amended re-
turn if any, and all schedules, attachments, and
supporting documents filed with the IRS. It does
not include Schedule A of Form 990-BL, Form
990-T. Schedule K-1 of Form 1065, or Form
1120-POL. In the case of a tax-exempt organi-
zation other than a private foundation, an annual
information return does not include the names
and addresses of contributors to the organiza-
tion.
Exemption application. An exempt organiza-
tion must also make available for public inspec-
tion without charge its application for tax-exempt
status. An application for tax exemption includes
the application form (such as Form 1023 or
1024), all documents and statements the IRS
requires the organization to file with the form,
any statement or other supporting document
submitted by an organization in support of its
application, and any letter or other document
issued by the IRS concerning the application.
The application for exemption does not in-
clude:
· Any application from an organization that
is not yet recognized as exempt,
· Any material that is required to be withheld
from public inspection, see Material re-
quired to be withheld from public inspec-
t~on, next,
· In the case of a tax-exempt organization
other than a private foundation, the names
and addresses of contributors to the or-
ganization, or
· Any applications filed before July 15,
1987, if the organization did not have a
copy of the application on July 15, 1987.
If there is no prescribed application form, see
section 301.6104(d)-1(b)(3)(ii) of the regula-
tions for a list of the documents that must be
made available.
Material required to be withheld from pub-
Iic Inspection. Material that is required to be
withheld from public inspection includes:
· Trade secrets, patents, processes, styles
of work, or appa[a, tus for which withhold-
ing was requested and granted,
· National defense matarlal,
· Unfavorable rulings or determination let-
ters issued in response to applications for
tax exemption,
· Rulings or determination letters revoking
or modifying a favorable determination let-
· Technical advice memoranda relating to a
disapproved application for tax exemption
or the revocation or modification of a
favorable determination letter,
· Any letter or document filed with or issued
by the IRS relating to whether a proposed
or accomplished transaction is a prohib-
ited transaction under section 503,
· Any letter or document filed with or issued
by the IRS relating to an organization's
status as an organization described in
section 509(a) or 4942(j)(3), unless the let-
ter or document relates to the
organization's application for tax exemp-
tion, and
Any other letter or document filed with or
issued by the IRS which, although it re-
lates to an organization's tax-exempt sta-
tus as an organization described in section
501(c) or 501(d), does not relate to that
organization's application for tax exemp-
tion.
Time, place, and manner restrictions. The
annual returns and exemption application must
be made available for inspection, without
charge, at the organization's principal, regional,
and distdct offices during regular business
hours. The organization may have an employee
present during inspection, but must allow the
individual to take notes freely and to photocopy
at no charge if the individual provides the photo-
copying equipment. Generally, regional and dis-
trict offices are those that have paid employees
who together are normally paid at least 120
hours a week.
If the organization does not maintain a per-
manent office, it must make its application for tax
exemption and its annual information returns
available for inspection at a reasonable location
of its choice. It must permit public inspection
within a reasonable amount of time after receiv-
ing a request for inspection (normally not more
than 2 weeks) and at a reasonable time of day.
At its option, it may mail, within 2 weeks of
receiving the request, a copy of its application
for tax exemption and annual information re-
turns to the requester in lieu of allowing an
inspection. The organization may charge the
requester for copying and actual postage costs
only if the requester consents to the charge.
An organization that has a permanent office,
but has no office hours or very limited hours
during certain times of the year, must make its
documents available dudng those periods when
office hours are limited or not available as
though it were an organization without a perma-
nent office.
Furnishing copies. An exempt organization
also must provide a copy of all, or any specific
part or schedule, of its three most recent annual
information returns and/or exemption applica-
tion to anyone who requests a copy either in
person or in writing at its principal, regional or
district office dudng regular business hours. If
the individual made the request in person, the
copy must be provided on the same business
day the request is made unless there are unu-
sual circumstances. Unusual circumstances are
defined in section 301.6104(d)-1(d)(1)(ii) of the
regulations.
The organization must honor a written re--
quest for a copy of documents or specific parts
or schedules of documents that are required to
be disclosed. However, this rule only applies if
the request:
· Is addressed to the exempt organization's
principal, regional, or district office,
· Is sent to that address by mail, electronic
mail (e-mail), facsimile (fax), or a private
delivery service approved by the IRS, and
· Gives the address to where the copy of
the document should be sent.
The organization must mail the copy within 30
days from the date it receives the request. The
organization may request payment in advance
and must then provide the copies within 30 days
from the date it receives payment.
Fees for copies. The organization may
charge a reasonable fee for providing copies. It
can charge no more for the copies than the per
page rate the IRS charges for providing copies.
That rate is stated in section 601.702(f)(5)(iv)(B)
of the regulations. (As of June 2001, the rate
was $1.00 for the first page and 15 cents for
each additional page.) The organization can
also charge the actual postage costs it pays to
provide the copies.
Regional and district off/cee. Generally,
the same rules regarding public inspection and
providing copies of applications and annual re-
tums that apply to a principal office of an exempt
organization also apply to its regional and dis-
trict off;es. However, a regional or district office
is not required to make its annual information
return available for inspection or to provide cop-
ies until 30 days after the date the return is
required to be filed (including any extensions) or
is actually filed, whichever is later.
Local and subordinate organizations. A
local or subordinate organization is an exempt
organization that did not file its own application
for tax exemption because it is covered by a
group exemption letter. Generally, a local or
subordinate organization of an exempt organi-
zation must, upon request, make available for
public inspection, or provide copies of:
1) The application submitted to the IRS by
the central or parent organization to obtain
the group exemption letter, and
2) Those documents which were submitted
by the central or parent organization to in-
clude the local or subordinate organization
in the group exemption letter.
However, if the central or parent organization
submits to the IRS a list or directory of local or
subordinate organizations covered by the group
exemption letter, the local or subordinate organi-
zation is required to provide only the application
for the group exemption ruling and the pages of
the list or directory that specifically refer to iL
The local or subordinate organization must
permit public inspection or comply with a re-
quest for copies made in person, within a rea-
sonable amount of time (normally not more than
2 weeks) after receiving a request made in per-
son for public inspection or copies and at a
reasonable time of day. In lieu of allowing an
inspection, the local or subordinate organization
may mail a copy of the apprmable documents to
the person requesting inspection within the
same time period. In that case, the organization
may charge the requester for copying and actual
postage costs only if the requester consents to
the charge. If the local or subordinate organiza-
tion receives a written request for a copy of its
application for exemption, it must fulfill the re-
quest in the time and manner specified earlier.
The requester has the option of requesting
from the central or parent organization, at its
principal office, inspection or copies of the appli-
cation for group exemption and the matedal sub-
mitted by the central or parent organization to
include a local or subordinate organization in the
group ruling. If the central or parent organization
submits to the IRS a list or directory of local or
subordinate organizations covered by the group
exemption letter, it must make the list or direc-
tory available for public inspection, but it is re-
quired to provide copies only of those pages of
the list or directory that refer to particular local or
subordinate organizations specified by the re-
quester. The central or parent organization must
fulfill such requests in the time and manner
specified earlier.
A local or subordinate organization that does
not file its own annual information return (be-
cause it is affiliated with a central or parent
organization that files a group return) must,
upon request, make available for public inspec-
tion, or provide copies of, the group returns filed
by the central or parent organization. However,
if the group retum includes separate schedules
for each local or subordinate organization in-
cluded in the group return, the local or
subordinate organization receiving the request
may omit any schedules relating only to other
organizations included in the group return. The
local or subordinate organization must permit
public inspection, or comply with a request for
copies made in person, within a reasonable
amount of time (normally not more than 2
weeks) after receiving a request made in person
for public inspection or copies and at a reasona-
ble time of day.
In lieu of allowing an inspection, the local or
subordinate organization may mail a copy of the
applicable documents to the person requesting
inspection within the same time period. In this
case, the organization can charge the requester
for copying and actual postage costs only if the
requester consents to the charge. If the local or
subordinate organization receives a written re-
quest for a copy of its annual information return,
it must fulfill the request by providing a copy of
the group return in the time and manner speci-
fied earlier. The requester has the option of
requesting from the central or parent organiza-
tion, at its principal off.me, inspection or copies of
group returns filed by the central or parent or-
ganization. The central or parent organization
must fulfill such requests in the time and manner
specified earlier.
If an organization fails to comply, it may be
liable for a penalty. See Penates, later.
Making applications and returns .widely
available. An exempt organization does not
have to comply with requests for copies of its
annual returns or exemption application if it
makes them widely available. However, making
these dpcuments widely available does not re-
lieve the organization from making its docu-
ments available for public inspection.
The organization can make its application
and returns widely available by posting the ap-
plication and retums on a World Wide Web
page. For the rules to follow so that the Internet
posting will be considered widely available, see
section 301.6104(d)-2(b) of the regulations.
If the organization has made its application
for tax exemption and/or annual returns widely
available, it must inform any individual request-
ing a copy where the documents are available,
including the address on the World Wide Web, if
applicable. If the request is made in person, the
notice must be provided immediately. If the re-
quest is made in writing, the notice must be
provided within 7 days.
Harassment campaign. If the tax-exempt or-
ganization is the subject of a harassment cam-
paign, the organization may not have to fulfill
requests for information. For more information,
see section 301.6104(d)-3 of the regulations.
Political organization reporting forms.
Forms 8871 and 8872 (discussed earlier under
Reporting Requirements for a Political Organi-
zation) are open to public inspection.
Form 8871. Form 8871 (including any sup-
porting papers) and any letter or other document
the IRS issues with regard to Form 8871 is open
to public inspection at the IRS in Washington,
DC.
Copies of Form 8871 that have been filed will
be made available on the IRS Intemet web site
(www.irs.govlpolorgs) 48 hours after the no-
tice has been filed and are considered widely
available as long as the organization provides
the IRS web site address to the person making
the request. In addition, the organization must
make a copy of these materials available for
public inspection during regular business hours
at the organization's principal office and at each
of its regional or district offices having at least 3
paid employees.
Form 8872. Form 8872 (including Sched-
ules A and B) is open to public inspection. Cop-
les of Form 8872 that are required to be filed
electronically will be made available on the In-
temet web site (www.irs,gov/polorgs) within
48 hours after it has been filed.
An organization is required to file Form 8872
electronically if it has, or has reason to expect to
have, contributions or expenditures exceeding
$50,000 for the tax year.
In addition, the organization is required to
make a copy of this form available for public
inspection during regular business hours at the
organization's principal office and at each of its
regional or district offices having at least 3 paid
employees.
Penalties. The penalty forfailure to allow pub-
lic inspection of annual returns is $20 for each
day the failure continues. The maximum penalty
on all persons for failures involving any one
return is $10,000.
The penalty for failure to allow public inspec-
tion of exemption applications is $20 for each
day the failure continues.
The penalty for willful failure to allow public
inspection of a return or exemption application is
$5,000 for each retum or application. The pen-
alty also applies to a willful failure to provide
copies. ' '
The penalty for failure to allow public inspec-
lion of a political organization's section 527 no-
CI'TY OF
,.ASHLAND
Council Communication
TITLE:
DEPT:
DATE:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Synopsis:
Recommendation:
Background:
Adoption of Findings for Planning Action 2004-002 Approving an Application
for Physical Constraints Review within the Floodplain Corridor, a Tree Removal
Permit and Site Review for the Construction of a New Commercial Building on
Land in Downtown Ashland Located Along Ashland Creek and North offNorth
Main Street and West of Water Street in the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon.
APPLICANT: Lloyd Haines
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
August 17, 2004 m~t ~
John McLaughlin, Director of Co y Development
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator
On June 15, 2004, the City Council ultimately approved the above referenced
Planning action after holding several public hearings on the matter. The findings
for the approval were prepared by the applicant's representatives and reviewed
and edited by the City Attorney and Director of Community Development. The
findings document was made available to the Council members and parties
approximately eight days prior to the Council meeting
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the findings as presented.
The record supporting the decision of the Council is available for review at the
Planning Department.
BEFORE THE COUNCIL
FOR THE CITY OF ASHLAND
STATE OF OREGON
IN THE MA'I'rER OF APPLICATIONS FOR )
PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW )
WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN CORRIDOR, A )
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT AND SITE )
REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A )
NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON LAND )
IN DOWNTOWN ASHLAND LOCATED )
ALONG ASHLAND CREEK AND NORTH )
OFF NORTH MAIN STREET AND WEST )
OF WATER STREET IN THE CITY OF )
ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON )
)
)
Lloyd Haines: Applicant
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Applicant's Exhibit I
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION; ADDITIONAL PLANS
The subject land use applications are submitted by Applicant Lloyd Haines. The applications
are to permit the construction of a three story, mixed use, building in downtown Ashland on
property that is adjacent to Ashland Creek. The proposed development is within the C-1
Retail Commercial District and is covered by a Downtown Overlay District designation (C-l-
D). Development within the C-1-D district is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.72,
Site Design and Use Standards. Additionally, development located within the floodplain of
Ashland Creek is subject to the requirements of Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO)
Chapter 18.62, Physical Constraints Review with respect to flood plain and riparian
protection. Finally;Applicant's plans involve the removal of one tree and pruning of others.
Tree removal requires a special permit under ALUO 18.61.
The proposed building will house a restaurant, retail and office space and two residential
apartments. The apartments are intended to be on the upper-most floor. Applicant has
engaged expert architect Dave Richardson, Architectural Design Works Inc,, to undertake
architectural and site design for the project. Architect Richardson and his staff and
consultants have prepared a detailed site design plan and exterior elevations. Applicant's
expert landscape architect, John Galbraith, Galbraith & Associates Inc., have prepared
landscape and tree protection plans and Applicant's expert civil engineer, Greg Weston, Otak
Inc., has assessed the flood hazard in relation to municipal regulations and participated in the
architectural design of the project. Applicant's final plans ("the approved plans") are
included at Record p. 112 to 115, A-26, A-28, A-29 A-30, A-31, AA-16 and AA-17.
Page 1
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
II,
CHRONOLOGY OF PROCEEDINGS; EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
The following is a chronology of proceedings for municipal consideration of this application:
12-Dec-03
07-Jan-04
08-Jan-04
22-Jan-04
18-Feb-04
04-Mar-04
09-Mar-04
13-Apr-04
15-Apr-04
23-Apr-04
18-May-04
01-Jun-04
04-Jun-04
15-Jun-04
Application filed
Historic Commission review of Applicants proposal
Tree Commission review of Applicants proposal
Letter from Applicant's agent Craig Stone to Bill Molnar requesting
continuance and 30-day extension of the statutory decision making deadline
City deemed the application to be complete
Tree Commission review continued
Planning Commission public hearing on consolidated applications for Physical
Constraints Review for land within a floodplain and riparian corridor, site
review and a tree removal permit
Planning Commission adopted findings supporting approval
Planning Commission findings mailed to parties
Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the consolidated applications filed by
Randall Hopkins
Council public hearing. Hearing continued to June 1, 2004 with the public
record left open
Continued Council public hearing. Record left open for 7 days for Applicant's written
response and another 7 days for opponent's comments. Hearing continued to June 15,
2004 for Council's questions of Applicant
Letter extending the statutory decision making deadline. Extension to mn up to and
through July 22, 2004
Continued Council public hearing for Council to pose questions to Applicant. City
Council by unanimous vote upheld the decision of the Planning Commission and
imposed additional conditions as herein set forth
The following evidence was before the Council:
6-15-04
6-15-04
6-15-04
6-04-04
Council Communication
Email from Randall Hopkins, Motion to Disqualify
Email from Randall Hopkins, regarding Councilor Don Laws
Letter from Craig A. Stone dated June 4, 2004 extending the
statutory decision making deadline
Record Page
AA-1 - AA-2
AA-2.1
AA-2.2 - AA-2.3
Page 2
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
6-08-04
6-15-04
6-13-04
6-11-04
6-O8-04
6-01-04
5-31-04
5-31-04
6-01-04
6-01-04
5-26-04
5-25-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
Letter and attachments submitted by Craig A. Stone dated
June 8, 2004
Craig A. Stone response to Councilor Jackson questions
Revised Site Plan Sheet 101R dated June 8, 2004
Revised Floor Plan Sheet 107R dated June 8, 2004
Memorandum from Attorney John Hassen dated June 8, 2004
Otak Review Update dated June 7, 2004
Otak Map Enclosures
Letter from Lloyd Haines dated June 7, 2004
Attachments submitted by Lloyd Haines
Revised Site Use Summary submitted by Dave Richardson
R. Hopkins Final Response of Opponent
Email from Colin Swales to Gino Grimaldi regarding
Large Scale Development
Email from Colin Swales to Fran Berteau
Email from Mike Franell to Council Large Scale
Development Interpretation
Email from Cate Hartzell to the Council
Letter from Colin Swales to Mike Franell
Letter from Mike Franell to Colin Swales regarding Large
Scale Development Interpretation
Memo to Mayor and Council from Councilor Jackson
Council Minutes, Draft Copy
Council Communication from John McLoughlin
Letter in rebuttal from Craig A. Stone
Supplemental Brief from Randall Hopkins
Exhibit CC-1 Save the Alder flyer
Exhibit CC-2 Applicants Architect Drawing A- 101
Exhibit CC-3 Table- Overall Site Use Summary
for Shasta Building
Exhibit CC-4 Large color photo of deck area
Exhibit CC-5 Large color FEMA map and new three
story building
Exhibit CC-6 Randall Hopkins Exhibit 34
Exhibit CC-7 Randall Hopkins Exhibit 36
Exhibit CC-8 Randall Hopkins Exhibit 35
AA-4 - AA-35
AA-4- AA-15
AA-16
AA-17
AA-18- AA-19
AA-20 - AA-21
AA-22 - AA-30
AA-31 - AA-33
AA-34 - AA-35
AA-36- AA-37
AA-38 - AA-41
AA-42-AA-43
AA-44 - AA-45
AA-45.1-AA-45.2
AA-46
AA-47
AA-48 - AA-49
AA-50
AA-55
AA-62
AA-69
AA-77
AA-96
AA-97
AA-98
- AA-54
- AA-61
- AA-68
- AA-76
- AA-95
AA-99
AA-100
AA-101
AA-102
AA-103
Page 3
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-18-04
5-18-O4
5-18-04
6-01-04
6-01-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
6-01-04
5-29-O4
5-13-04
5-14-04
5-18-04
5-17-04
5-17-04
5-17-04
Exhibit CC-9 Randall Hopkins Exhibit 33 AA-104
Exhibit CC- 10 Enlargement of page 2 of the Applicants AA- 105
unsigned application
Exhibit CC-11 Foam board exhibit of proposed building AA- 106
Exhibit CC-12 Enlargement of ODOT tree dripline AA-107
Exhibit CC-13 Copy of architectural drawing A-101 Site Plan AA-108
Exhibit CC- 14 Copy of architectural drawing A-201 AA- 109
Elevation Plan
Exhibit CC- 15 Copy of architectural drawing A- 107 Floor Plan AA- 110
Exhibit CC-16 Architectural drawing of new dining deck AA-111
Exhibit CC-17 Sculptors drawing of proposed art work AA-112 - AA-115
Exhibit CC-18 Enlarged photo of subject property AA-116
Exhibit CC- 19 Enlarged photo of subject property AA- 117
Exhibit CC-20 Email from Mike Franell Council AA-118 - AA- 122
to Colin Swales
Exhibit CC-21 Councilor Kate Jackson's memo to Mayor AA-123 - AA-127
and Council dated May 31, 2004 ..
Architects table of cut and fill calculations AA- 128 - AA- 129
Large exhibit of new three story building AA-130
Basement and first floor plan AA- 131
Signed planning application AA-132
Exhibit CC-26 Large exhibit of architects drawing A-301 AA-133
Transparency- Ashland Creek Floodplain Corridor Map AA-134
Transparency - Figure 5 Floodway Schematic AA- 135
Transparency-Corridor Map Boundary and FEMA AA-136
Transparency- Building Cross Section AA- 13 7
Fax Transmittal copy of LUBA case, BTC Partnership vs. AA-138 - AA-150
City of Portland
Letter from David Richardson to Bill Molnar AA-151
Letter from Randall A. Hopkins to Mayor DeBoer and Council AA-152
Letter of transmittal from Dave Richardson to City of Ashland AA-153 - AA-154
Email from Colin Swales to Mike Franell regarding AA- 155 - AA- 160
Large Scale Development
Fax from John Galbraith to Bill Molnar revised tree inventory AA- 161 - AA- 162
Email in support from Marc Heller to Bill Molnar AA- 163
Email from Colin Swales to Gino Grimaldi AA-164 - 166
Exhibit CC-22
Exhibit CC-23
Exhibit CC-24
Exhibit CC-25
Page 4
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
5-16-04
5-14-04
5-14-04
5-12-04
5-12-04
5-18-04
5-13-04
5-18-04
5-12-04
4-23-04
4-23-04
4-15-04
3-12-04
3-09-04
3-09-04
3-09-04
3-05-04
2-13-04
1-09-04
1-07-04
Letter in opposition from Diane McDermott
Letter in support from Judy Howard dated May 12, 2004
Letter in support from Judy Howard dated February 26, 2004
Site Use Summary Table dated May 18, 2004
Letter in support from Michael C. Babcock
dated May 10,2004
Record For Planning Action 2004-002
Council Communication
Supplemental Record of Applicant
Letter from Atty. Alan D. B. Harper addressing grounds
for appeal dated 5-12-04
Letter from Atty. Lloyd M. Haines dated 5-10-04
Tidings Editorial dated 4-28-04
Letter from Arborist Tom Meyers dated 4-24-04
Letter and Packet from Landscape Architect John Galbraith
dated 5-12-04
Lines and encumbrances affecting title of property
dated 5-12-04
Revised Maps provided by Applicants representatives
Notice of Council Public Hearing and applicable
criteria mailed April 28, 2004
Memo from the Ashland Tree Commission
Written objections submitted by Randall Hopkins
Notice of Appeal submitted by Randall Hopkins
Letter of Approval and Planning Commission
Findings, Conclusions & Order dated March 9, 2004
ODOT Fax, landscape permit for new tree
Ashland Planning Commission Minutes
Staff Report & Staff Exhibit
Planning Commission Public Hearing Notice
and applicable criteria
Applicants revised drawings
Applicants Findings and Exhibits
Tree Commission Planning Application Review
Ashland Historic Commission Minutes
Miscellaneous Public Comments Cover Sheet
AA-167 - AA-168
AA-169
AA-170
AA-171
AA-172
AA-174
AA-175
A-1 -A-31
A-1 - A-4
A-5 - A-9
A-10
A-II
A-12- A-22
A-23 - A-24
A-25 - A-31
1-3
4-5
6-63
64-69
70-78
79-82
83-91
92-106
107-109
l10-119A
120-253
254
255-257
258
Page 5
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
3-09-04
3-09-04
3-09-04
3-08-04
3-08-04
3-08-04
3-08-04
3-08-04
3-08-04
Email
Email
Phone
Letter
Letter
Letter
Letter
Letter
from opponent Randall Hopkins to Bill Molnar
in opposition from Oriana Spratt to Bill Molnar
message in opposition from Beth Evonuik
from Arborist Tom Myers
from John Galbraith Landscape Architect
in opposition from Diane McDermott
in opposition from Richard Benson
in support from Billy Harto
Email in support from David and Patricia Sprague
to Bill Molnar
3-08-04 Letter in
3-04-04 Email in
3-04-04 Letter in
3-02-04 Letter in
3-02-04 Letter in
3-01-04 Letter in
3-01-04 Letter in
3-01-04 Letter in
3-02-04 Letter in
2-26-04 Letter in
1-25-04 Email in
Ashland
support from
support from
support from
support from
support from
support from
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
support from Robert Harvey 268
opposition from Oriana Spratt to Susan Yates 269-270
support from Ingrid Boldt 271
Peter Brunner and Cynthis White 272
Judith Ginsburg 273
Ken Silverman 274.
Frank and Nancy Phillips 275
Michael C. Babcock 276
Christopher R. Ashenbrener 277
support from Judy Howard 278
opposition from Oriana Spratt to 279
Council
III
.... ~'"'RELEVANT SUBSTANTIVE APPROVAL CRITERIA
The Council has determined that the below relevant substantive criteria constitute all of the
approval standards prerequisite to approving this Physical Constraints Review permit} Tree
Removal permit and Site Design and Use Review permit. A recitation of the relevant
standards and criteria in the Physical and Environmental Constraints, Tree Removal, Tree
Preservation and Protection and Site Design and Use Standards are contained in Section V
of this document. In Section V, each relevant standard or criterion (or groups of standards
and criteria) are followed by the conclusions of law and ultimate conclusions of the Council.
The conclusions of law and ultimate conclusions are based upon the findings of fact in
Section IV and the evidence enumerated in Section II.
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC))
Page 6
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
ALUO Chapter 18.62 Physical Constraints Review Permit
ALUO 18.62.040(I) Criteria for Approval. A Physical Constrains Review Permit shall be issued by the Staff
Advisor when the Applicant demonstrates the following:
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the
property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized.
2. That the Applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and
implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development.
3. That the Applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment.
Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or
Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the
maximum permitted development permitted by the Land Use Ordinance.
ALUO 18.62.070 Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. For all land use actions which
could result in development of the Flood plain corridor, the following is required in addition to any requirements
of Chapter 15.10.
A. Standards for fill in Flood plain Corridor lands:
1. Fill shall be designed as required by the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, where applicable.
2. The toe of the fill shall be kept at least ten feet outside of floodway channels, as defined in section
15.10, and the fill shall not exceed the angle of repose of the matedal used for fill.
3. The amount of fill in the Flood plain Corddor shall be kept to a minimum. Fill and other material
imported from off the lot that could displace floodwater shall be limited to the following:
a. Poured concrete and other materials necessary to build permitted structures on the lot.
b. Aggregate base and paving materials, and fill associated with approved public and private street
and driveway construction.
c. Plants and other landscaping and agricultural material.
d. A total of 50 cubic yards of other imported fill material.
e. The above limits on fill shall be measured from April 1989, and shall not exceed the above
amounts. These amounts are the maximum cumulative fill that can be imported onto the site,
regardless of the number of permits issued. ~.
4. If additional fill is necessary beyond the permitted amounts in (3) above, then fill materials must be
obtained on the lot from cutting or excavation only to the extent necessary to create an elevated site for
permitted development. All additional fill matedal shall be obtained from the portion of the lot in the
Flood plain Corridor.
5. Adequate drainage shall be provided for the stability of the fill.
6. Fill to raise elevations for a building site shall be located as close to the outside edge of the Flood plain
Corddor as feasible.
B. Culverting or bridging of any waterway or creek identified on the official maps adopted pursuant to section
18.62.060 must be designed by an engineer. Stream crossings shall be designed to the standards of
Chapter 15.10, or where no floodway has been identified, to pass a one hundred (100) year flood without
any increase in the upstream flood height elevation. The engineer shall consider in the design the
probability that the culvert will be blocked by debris in a severe flood, and accommodate expected overflow.
Fill for culverting and bridging shall be kept to the minimum necessary to achieve properly access, but is
exempt from the limitations in section (A) above. Culverting or bridging of streams identified as Riparian
Preservation are subject,to the requirements of 18,62.075.
Page 7
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
C,
U.
E,
F,
Go
H.
Non-residential structures shall be flood-proof to the standards in Chapter 15.10 to one foot above the
elevation contained.in the maps adopted by chapter 15.10, or up to the elevation contained in the official
maps adopted by section 18.62.060, whichever height is greater. Where no specific elevations exist, then
they must be floodproofed to an elevation of ten feet above the creek channel on Ashland, Bear or Nell
Creek; to five feet above the creek channel on all other Ripadan Preserve creeks defined in section
18.62.050.B; and three feet above the stream channel on all other drainage ways identified on the official
maps.
All residential structures shall be elevated so that the lowest habitable floor shall be raised to one foot
above the elevation contained in the maps adopted in chapter 15.10, or to the elevation contained in the
official maps adopted by section 18.62.060, whichever height is greater. Where no specific elevations
exist, then they must be constructed at an elevation of ten feet above the creek channel on Ashland, Bear,
or Nell Creek; to five feet above the creek channel on all other Riparian Preserve creeks defined in section
18.62.050.B; and three feet above the stream channel on all other drainage ways identified on the official
maps, or one foot above visible evidence of high flood water flow, whichever is greater. The elevation of the
finished lowest habitable floor shall be certified to the city by an engineer or surveyor prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy for the structure.
To the maximum extent feasible, structures shall be placed on other than Flood plain Corridor Lands. In the
case where development is permitted in the Flood plain corddor area, then development shall be
Existing lots with buildable land outside the Flood plain Corridor shall locate all residential structures outside
the Corddor land, unless 50% or more of the lot is within the Flood plain Corridor. For residential uses
proposed for existing lots that have more than 50% of the lot in Corridor land, structures may be located on
that portion of the Flood plain corddor that is two feet or less below the flood elevations on the official maps,
but in no case closer than 20 feet to the channel of a Ripadan Preservation Creek. Construction shall be
subject to the requirements in paragraph D above.
New non-residential uses may be located on that portion of Flood plain Corddor lands that equal to or
above the flood elevations on the official maps adopted in section 18.62.060. Second story construction
may be cantilevered over the Flood plain corridor for a distance of 20 feet if the clearance from finished
grade is at least ten feet in height, and is supported by pillars that will have minimal impact on the flow of
floodwaters. The finished floor elevation may not be more than two feet below the flood corddor elevations.
All lots modified by lot line adjustments, or new lots created from lots which contain Flood plain Corddor
land must contain a building envelope on all lot(s) which contain(s) buildable area of a sufficient size to
accommodate the uses permitted in the underling zone, unless the action is for open space or conservation
purposes. This section shall apply even if the effect is to prohibit further division of lots that are larger than
the minimum size permitted in the zoning ordinance.
I. Basements.
1. Habitable basements are not permitted for new or existing structures or additions located within the
Flood plain Corridor.
2. Non-habitable basements, used for storage, parking, and similar uses are permitted for residential
structures but must be flood-proofed to the standards of Chapter 15.10.
J. Storage of petroleum products, pesticides, or other hazardous or toxic chemicals is not permitted in Flood
plain Corddor lands.
Ko
Fences constructed within 20 feet of any Ripadan Preservation Creek designated by this chapter shall be
limited to wire or electric fence, or similar fence that will not collect debris or obstruct flood waters, but not
including wire mesh or chain link fencing. Fences shall not be constructed across any identified riparian
drainage or riparian preservation creek. Fences shall not be constructed within any designated floodway.
Decks and structures other than buildings, if constructed on Flood plain Corridor Lands and at or below the
levels specified in section 18.62.070.C and D, shall be flood-proofed to the standards contained in Chapter
15.10.
Page 8
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Mo
Local streets and utility connections to developments in and adjacent to the Flood plain Corridor shall be
located outside of the Flood plain Corridor, except for crossing the Corridor, and except in the Bear Creek
Flood plain corridor as outlined below:
Public street construction may be allowed within the Bear Creek Flood plain corridor as part of
development following the adopted North Mountain Neighborhood Plan. This exception shall only be
permitted for that section of the Bear Creek Flood plain corridor between North Mountain Avenue and
the Nevada Street right-of-way. The new street shall be constructed in the general location as
indicated on the neighborhood plan map, and in the area generally described as having the shallowest
potential for flooding within the corridor.
Proposed development that is not in accord with the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan shall not be
permitted to utilize this exception.
ALUO 18.62.075 Development Standards for Riparian Preservation Lands.
A.
All development in areas indicated for Ripadan Preservation, as defined in section 18.62.050(B), shall
comply with the following standards.
.
Development shall be subject to all Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. (18.62.070)
Any tree over six inches d.b.h, shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible.
Fill and Culverting shall be permitted only for streets, access or utilities. The crossing shall be at right
angels to the creek channel to the greatest extent possible. Fill shall be kept to a minimum.
4. The general topography of Riparian Preservation lands shall be retained.
SITE REVIEW
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter
ALUO Chapter 72 Site Design and Use Standards
ALUO 18.72.050 Detail Site Review Zone.
A. The Detail Site Review Zone is that area defined in the Site Design Standards adopted pursuant to Section
18.72.040(A).
B.
Co
Any development in the Detail Site Review Zone as defined in the Site Review Standards adopted pursuant
to this chapter, which exceeds 10,000 square feet or is longer than 100 feet in length~or width, shall be
reviewed according to the Type 2 procedure.
No new buildings or contiguous groups of buildings in the Detail Site Review Zone shall exceed a gross
square footage of 45,000 square feet or a combined contiguous building length of 300 feet. Any building or
contiguous group of buildings which exceed these limitations, which were in existence in 1992, may expand
up to 15% in area or length beyond their 1992 area or length. Neither the gross square footage or
combined contiguous building length, as set forth in this section shall be subject to any vadance authorized
in the Land Use Ordinance.
ALUO 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval.
The following criteda shall be used to approve or deny an application:
All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the Council for implementation of
this Chapter.
Page 9
Findings of FaCt and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
U.
That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development,
electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the
subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in
Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999)
ASHLAND SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTION !!: APPROVAL STANDARDS AND POLICIES
II-A. ORDINANCE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
II-C. COMMERCIAL, EMPLOYMENT, AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
II-C-1. BASIC SITE REVIEW STANDARDS
II-C-la) Orientation and Scale
Il-C-lb) Streetscape
II-C-lc) Landscaping
II-C-ld) Parking
II-C-la) Designated Creek Protection
II-C-lf) Noise and Glare
II-C-lg) Expansions of Existing Sites and Buildings
II-C-2, DETAIL SITE REVIEW
II-C-2a) Orientation and Scale
I I-C-2b) Streetscape
II-C-2c) Parking & On-Site Circulation
II-C-2d) Buffedng and Screening
II-C-2e) Lighting
II-C-2f) Building Materials
II-D. PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING STANDARDS
II-D-6. OTHER SCREENING
Refuse Container Screen: Refuse containers or disposal areas shall be screened from
view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall from five to eight feet in height.
All refuse materials shall be contained within the refuse area.
Service Corridor Screen: When adjacent to residential uses ....
Light and Glare Screen: Artificial lighting shall be so arranged and constructed as to not
produce direct glare on adjacent residential properties or streets.
II-E. STREETTREESTANDARDS
II-E-l) Location for Street Trees
II-E-2) Spacing, Placement, and Pruning of Street Trees
II-E-3) Replacement of Street Trees
II-E-4) Recommended Street Trees
VI-C. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS · Height
,, Scale
· Massing
· Setback
· Roof Shapes
· Rhythm of Openings
· Platforms
· Directional Expression
· Sense of Entry
· Imitations
Page 10
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
SECTION Vh DOWNTOWN ASHLAND
VI-l) Parking lots adjacent to the pedestrian path are prohibited.
VI-2) Pedestrian amenities such as a broad sidewalks, arcades, alcoves, colonnades, porticoes,
awnings and sidewalk seating shall be provided where possible and feasible.
VI-3) Weather protection on adjacent key pedestrian paths are required by all new development.
VI-4) Windows and other features of interest to pedestrians shall be provided adjacent to the sidewalk.
Blank walls adjacent to sidewalks are prohibited.
VI-5) Two-story development is encouraged downtown, with the second stodes in commercial,
residential, or parking areas.
VI-6)
Uses which are exclusively automotive such as service stations, drive-up windows, auto sales, and
tire stores are discouraged in the downtown. The city shall use its discretionary powers, such as
Conditional Use permits, to deny new uses. Although improvements to existing facilities may be
permitted.
SECTION Vh DOWNTOWN DESIGN STANDARDS. The following standards are adopted with this plan and
shall be used as part of the land use approval process.
VI-A) Height
VI-B) Openings
VI-C) Width
VI-D) Openings
VI-E) Horizontal Rhythms
VI-F) Vertical Rhythms
VI-G) Roof Forms
VI-H) Materials
VI-I) Awnings, Marquees or Similar, Pedestrian Shelters
VI-J) Other
VI-K) Exception to Standards
TREE PRESERVATION & PROTECTION PERMIT
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter
ALUO Chapter 18.61 Tree Preservation & Protectic~n
ALUO 18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit. An Applicant for a Tree Removal-
Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff Advisor maY ~require an
arborist's report to substantiate the cdteda for a permit.
ALUO 18.61.080(B) Tree that is not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a
hazard if the Applicant demonstrates all of the following:
.
The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the Applicant to be consistent with other applicable
Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, (e.g. other applicable Site Design and Use
Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to
allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface
waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies,
and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been
considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the
'zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted
Page 11
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans
or placement of structures or altemative landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so
long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the Applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant
to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
ALUO 18.61.200 Tree Protection. Tree Protection as required by this section is applicable to any planning
action or building permit.
A. Tree Protection Plan Required.
1. A Tree Protection Plan approved by the Staff Advisor shall be required prior to conducting any
development activities including, but not limited to clearing, grading, excavation, or demolition work on
a property or site, which requires a planning action or building permit.
2. In order to obtain approval of a Tree Protection Plan; an Applicant shall submit a plan to the City, which
clearly depicts all trees to be preserved and/or removed on the site. The plan must be drawn to scale
and include the following:
a. Location, species, and diameter of each tree on site and'within 15 feet of the site;
b. Location of the drip line of each tree;
c. Location of existing and proposed roads, water, sanitary and' storm sewer, irrigation, and other
utility lines/facilities and easements;
d. Location of dry wells, drain lines and soakage trenches;
e. Location of proposed and existing structures;
f. Grade change or cut and fill during or after construction;
g. Existing and proposed impervious surfaces;
h. Identification of a contact person and/or arborist who will be responsible for implementing and
maintaining the approved tree protection plan; and
i. Location and type of tree protection measures to be installed per AMC 18.61.230.
3. For development requiring a planning action, the Tree Preservation Plan shall include an inventory of
all trees on site, their health or hazard condition, and recommendations for treatment for each tree.
B. Tree Protection Measures Required.
1. Except as otherwise determined by the Staff Advisor, all required tree protection measures set forth in
this section shall be instituted prior to any development activities, including, but not limited to clearing,
grading, excavation or demolition work, and shall be removed only after completion of all construction
activity, including landscaping and irrigation installation.
2. Chain link fencing, a minimum of six feet tall with steel posts placed no farther than ten feet apart, shall
be installed at the edge of the tree protection zone or dripline, whichever is greater, and at the
boundary of any open space tracts, riparian areas, or conservation easements that abut the parcel
being developed.
3. The fencing shall be flush with the initial undisturbed grade.
4. Approved signs shall be attached to the chain link fencing stating that inside the fencing is a tree
protection zone, not to be disturbed unless prior approval has been obtained from the Staff Advisor for
the project.
5. No construction activity shall occur within the tree protection zone, including, but not limited to dumping
or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, waste items, equipment, or parked vehicles.
Page 12
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
.
The tree protection zone shall remain free of chemically injurious materials and liquids such as paints,
thinners, cleaning solutions, petroleum products, and concrete or dry wall excess, construction debds,
or m-off.
7. No excavation, trenching, grading, root pruning or other activity shall occur within the tree protection
zone unless approved by the Staff Advisor.
Co
Inspection. The Applicant shall not proceed with any construction activity, except installation of erosion
control measures, until the City has inspected and approved the installation of the required tree protection
measures and a building and/or grading permit has been issued by the City.
IV
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Council determines the following facts and finds them to be true with respect to this
matter. Where conflicts arose, the Council has resolved them as follows:
le
Property Description; Ownership: The owner of record is 88 North Main, LLC.
Applicant Haines is a member of 88 North Main, LLC. The legal description of the
subject property, according to the records of the Jackson County Assessor, is Tax Lot
9800 on map 39-1E-09BB. The shape and configuration of the property is shown on the
Assessor's Plat Map Record p. 225.
e
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Designations: The subject property is designated
Downtown on the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map. The property is within a
Retail Commercial (C-I) zoning district and subject to the City's Downtown Overlay
District (D); the overall zoning designation of the property is denoted on Ashland's
Official Zoning Map as C-1-D. The property is within Ashland's Commercial North
Main Historic District.
e
Public Facilities, Services and Utilities: The subject property is served with urban
public facilities and services, including municipal water, sanitary sewer service,
municipal electrical service, natural gas, and transportation facilities, which accommodate
the movement of motorized vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians to and through the subject
property. Representatives of Applicant testified that they had interviewed representatives
of the Ashland Engineering Department and, according to Engineering Department
representatives, the municipal infrastructure which serves this property, is sufficient for
the proposed development and contemplated land uses. However, connection to sanitary
sewer and water lines within North Main Street will require a permit through the State of
Oregon for the purpose of cutting the pavement to connect the underground infrastructure
to the proposed new building. Storm water mn off will be diverted directly to Ashland
Creek which runs through the subject property. According to representatives of the
Ashland Engineering Department, there appear to be no existing conditions that would
limit the ability to discharge storm water to the creek.
4. Nature of the Proposed Use; Applicant's Final Plans ("The Approved Plans"): The
development includes the construction of a mixed use building with an under-floor area,
Page13
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
realignment and replacement of the existing pedestrian bridge over Ashland Creek.
While Applicant's plans were revised during the municipal review process, the final plans
-- those which were approved bythe Council -- are included at Record p. 112 to 115, A-
26, A-28, A-29 A-30, A-31, AA-16 and AA-17. The following is a detailed description of
the uses proposed to occupy the subject building:
· Mixed Use Building
Underfloor. The underfloor will be used for the elevator foundation and mechanical
equipment. The underfloor will also be used to store floodwaters during significant
flood events, in accordance with the regulations of Ashland and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). By definition the underfloor of this
building is not considered habitable and therefore is not consider a "floor" under the
ordinary meaning of this term. Habitable Floor is defined in the Ashland Municipal
Code subsection 15.10.050(J) as follows:
"Habitable Floor means any floor usable for living purposes, which includes
working, sleeping, eating, cooking or recreation, or a combination thereof. A floor
used only for storage purposes is not a "habitable" floor."
Some of the underfloor is below the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) adopted by the City
of Ashland and below the FEMA BFE. The underfloor will be of flow-through
construction to accommodate floodwaters (during major flood events) and minimize
potential flood damage. See, Record p. A-28, Exterior Elevations Sheet A-201 and
Record p. A-29, Building Sections Sheet A-301. Any electrical, heating, ventilation,
plumbing and mechanical equipment to be located within this area will be flood-
proofed or elevated sufficiently to prevent floodwaters from entering or accumulating
within these components.
Level 1 Lower Floor. A restaurant will be located on this floor. The restaurant will
include indoor dining, a kitchen. On this floor is a planned outdoor dining and deck
area which will be accessed from a central reception area. The indoor dining area is
to be adjacent to the outdoor dining area and have views to Ashland Creek. An
outdoor reception area, accessed by a stairway from North Main Street, will be
located between the existing Ashland Creek Bar & Grill and the proposed new
building. See, Floor Plan Sheet A-107-R at Record p. AA-17. The Level 1 floor
elevation is at 1,877 feet, which is 1.50 feet above the Ashland BFE and 5.00 feet
above the FEMA BFE. See, Record p. A-28 (Exterior Elevations Sheet A-201) and
Record p. A-29 (Building Sections Sheet A-301). New decking will be constructed
along the east side of the proposed new building and adjacent to the existing Ashland
Creek Bar & Grill. The existing deck cover over a portion of the Ashland Creek Bar
& Grill outdoor seating and dining area will be removed. A decorative metal
guardrail will be installed at the north end of the new deck on the Ashland Creek side.
Level 2 Main Floor. Space for retail shops and office suites will be located on this
floor, which has access directly from North Main Street. See, Floor Plan Sheet A-
Page 14
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
107-R Record p. AA-17. The main floor elevation is measured at 1,889 feet. The
main floor is 13.50 feet above the Ashland BFE and 17 feet above the FEMA BFE.
See, Record p. A-28 (Exterior Elevations Sheet A-201) and Record p. A-29 (Building
Sections Sheet A-301).
Level 3 Upper Floor. Two residential apartments will occupy the upper-most floor.
The apartments will be 2 bedroom units with full kitchens. See, Record p. AA-17
(Floor Plan Sheet A-107-R). The upper floor elevation is measured at 1,901.50 feet.
The upper floor is 26.00 feet above the Ashland BFE and 29.50 feet above the FEMA
BFE. See, Record p. A-28 (Exterior Elevations Sheet A-201) and Record p. A-29
(Building Sections Sheet A-301).
Building Square Footage Breakdown: Based upon Applicant's final and approved
plans (Record p. 112 to 115, A-26, A-28, A-29 A-30, A-31, AA-16 and AA-17) the
below Table 1 is a statistical breakdown of the proposed development.
Table f
Building/Site Square Footage Breakdown
Source: Dave Richardson, Ashland Design Works
Site Area 4,201 100%
Coverage
3,501 83.35%
New Building (Including Decks)
Landscape Coverage (Including Creek)
Landscaping Required
700~ 16.65%~
0 0%
Parking 02 0%2
New Building Enclosed Areas
Underfloor 891
Lower Floor (Shell)
Main Floor (Shell)
Upper Floor (Finished)
Total New Building Enclosed Area
1,863
3,078
3,310
9,142
New Building Unenclosed Areas
Lower Floor 1,038
Main Floor 93
Upper Floor 40
Total New Building Unenclosed Areas
1,171
Page 15
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Residential Uses
Allowed Density 60/acre 5.79 units allowed
Actual number of units 2 units3
Table Notes:
1. Landscaped area figure does not include additional landscaping to be provided on the property located
on either side of the new bridge.
2. ALUO 18.32.050(A) provides that land within the "D" Downtown Overlay District is not required to provide
off-street parking or loading areas, except for hotels, motels or hostel uses.
3. Residential units will both have two bedrooms
Pedestrian Bridge: There is an existing pedestrian bridge which now permits people
to cross over Ashland Creek by foot in order to access the Ashland Creek Bar & Grill.
The existing bridge is proposed to be replaced and slightly realigned to meet Ashland
design and floodplain standards. Applicant testified that the final design of the bridge
will be carried out by a qualified Oregon-registered engineer and will be of a design to
be elevated above the FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE), specially at 1877 feet, and
otherwise designed and constructed to meet local, state and federal flood regulations.
See, Record p. AA-16 (Site Plan Sheet A101-R) and the conditions attached to this
approval in Section VI.
e
Proposed Method of Heating, Cooling and Lighting: At this time, Applicant proposes
to use electricity for heating and cooling throughout the building. However, Applicant
may later determine that a combination of electric and natural gas is more beneficial for
the proposed uses. The method of heating, cooling and lighting will be finally determined
at the time construction drawings are submitted for building permits.
®
Existing Land Use (Subject Property): The site is presently developed as an outdoor
seating and dining area for the Ashland Creek Bar & Grill restaurant. The existing
restaurant has indoor as well as outdoor dining areas. That portion of the outdoor dining
area which is adjacent to the existing building, is covered by a canopy that is attached to
the existing building; this area will remain and be available for outdoor dining for the
Ashland Creek Bar & Grill. The remainder of the existing outdoor seating and dining
area is of wood decking which is not covered by any structure and which is intended as
the site of the new building. As above mentioned, there is a wood pedestrian bridge
which crosses Ashland Creek and connects the Ashland Creek Bar & Grill to a paved
parking area located on the north side of Ashland Creek (and beneath the Lithia Way
viaduct).
7. Surrounding Area Development: Photographs of the surrounding area and existing
development are in Record p. 222 to 224, which includes a photograph key map that
shows the station points for each photo and the direction each was taken. All buildings
on the same block as the subject property, the proposed building and buildings across
North Main Street, all have flat roofs.
Page 16
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
ge
Characteristics of Surrounding Potential Impact Area: The physical characteristics of
the surrounding potential impact area are graphically depicted in photographs. See,
Record p. 222 through 224.
9. Floodplain Corridor Land: Floodplain Corridor Land is defined in ALUO 18.62 as
follows:
ALUO 18.62.050(A)
Flood plain Corridor Lands - Lands with potential stream flow and flood hazard. The following lands are
classified as Flood plain Corridor lands:
1. All land contained within the 100 year Flood plain as defined by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, in maps adopted by Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code.
2. All land within the area defined as Flood plain Corridor land in maps adopted by the Council as
provided for in section 18.62.060.
3. All lands which have physical or historical evidence of flooding in the historical past.
4. All areas within 20 feet (horizontal distance) of any creek designated for Ripadan Preservation in
18.62.050.B and depicted as such on maps adopted by the Council as provided for in section
18.62.060.
5. All areas within ten feet (horizontal distance) of any drainage channel depicted on maps adopted by
the Council but not designated as Ripadan Preservation.
The subject site contains land that is defined as Floodplain Corridor Land because:
A portion of site is within the floodplain and floodway boundary as illustrated on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps (Floodway). ALUO Chapter 15.10
adopted the Flood Insurance Maps dated June l, 1981 for establishing areas of special
flood hazard within incorporated Ashland. The FEMA floodplain and floodway
boundary are depicted at Record p. ll3 and 114, Sheets A-103 and 104. The FEMA
flood elevation for the subject property is 1,872 feet. The subject site ranges in
elevation from 1,886 feet at East Main Street to 1,863 feet at the approximate west
bank of Ashland Creek. The building, other than decks, is proposed to be sited on
land that is at an elevation of 1872 feet and higher.
Land within the floodplain corridor boundary as adopted by the Council in ALUO
Section 18.62.060 is shown at Record p. 112 Sheet A-102. The Ashland Base Flood
Elevation (BFE) for the adopted floodplain corridor is 1875.50 feet.
The floodplain corridor map adopted by the Ashland Council July 7, 1989 (the
Official Map) depicts a floodplain boundary based on historic flood events and field
survey conducted by the City of Ashland Planning Department. The Official Map as
adopted by the Council on July 7, 1989 also includes the FEMA floodplain boundary.
See Record p. 112 (Sheet A-102) and Otak Flood Hazard Assessment Record p. 191
through 194 and AA-20 through AA-21.
Page 17
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
· The site is adjacent to Ashland Creek and is subject to riparian preservation pursuant
to ALUO 18.62.050(B).
· The site is not within ten feet (horizontal distance) of any drainage channel that is not
designated as Riparian Preservation.
10. Riparian Preservation: The proposed development is adjacent to Ashland Creek.
ALUO 18.62.050(B) designates land along Ashland Creek for Riparian Preservation. As
such, the subject property and project are subject to the standards of the ALUO 18.62.075
which establish development standards for Riparian Preservation lands. The standards
and criteria for Riparian Preservation in ALUO 18.62.075 are:
A. All development in areas indicated for Riparian Preservation, as defined in section
18.62.050(B), shall comply with the following standards.
1. Development shall be subject to all Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor
Lands. (18.62.070)
2. Any tree over six inches d.b.h, shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible.
.
Fill and Culverting shall be permitted only for streets, access or utilities. The
crossing shall be at dght angels to the creek channel to the greatest extent possible.
Fill shall be kept to a minimum.
4. The general topography of Riparian Preservation lands shall be retained.
The proposed development is gubject to the standards for Flood Plain Corridor Lands
as set forth in ALUO 18.62.070 and these have been addressed in the Findings of Fact
(Section IV) and the Conclusions of Law (Section V) hereinbelow.
Trees on the subject site which are over 6-inches diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) are
identified on the Tree Preservation Plan at Record p. A-30. One tree which is within
the building envelope is proposed for removal, all other trees outside of the building
envelope have been retained. This application does not involve the removal of any
trees within the Riparian Preservation area. The triple-trunk maple tree (within the
Riparian Preservation Area) will be pruned although the evidence from Applicant's
expert landscape architect is that such pruning will not constitute removal under the
ALUO.
No streets or utilities are proposed in this project which would be within the flood
plain or riparian corridor. The only form of access to be within the flood/riparian
corridor, is the pedestrian bridge and the same does not require fill or culverts within
the boundaries of the floodplain corridor, other than the potential bridge footings to
anchor the bridge on the side of the creek opposite the proposed building.~ The only
~ There is an existing pedestrian bridge which in this application, is proposed to be realigned and reconstructed
at an elevation of 1877 feet, 5 feet above the FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 1,872 feet.
Page 18
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
elements of this project which are within the flood plan corridor are the pillars for the
patio area. The deck support pillars are not fill.2
The term Riparian is defined at ALUO 18.62.030(Q) as, "That area associated with a
natural water course including its wildlife and vegetation." The area on the subject
site and along Ashland Creek that contains vegetation and possibly wildlife is not
proposed for excavation or fill other than what is required for the planting of
vegetation for the enhancement of the riparian area. See, Record p. A-31.
11. Timeline for Development: Pursuant to ALUO 18.62.040(H)(1)(t), Applicant testified
that if the applications were approved in March 2004, project development would
proceed approximately according to the following milestones:
· June 2004: Preparation of architectural working drawings and contract documents;
submittal to city for building permits; contractor selection
· August 2004: Approval ofplans and issuance ofbuilding permits
· September 2004: Start of construction
· June 2005: Construction completed
· July 2005: Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy by City of Ashland
The dates listed above, of course, will change with reference to the date upon which these
applications are ultimately approved.
12. Tree Removal and Protection: Applicant's plans contemplate the removal of one tree
and the pruning of several others, including one on Applicant's property and others on
adjacent right-of-way of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT).
V
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Council reaches the following conclusions of law and ultimate conclusions under each of
the relevant substantive criteria. The conclusions of law are preceded by the standard,
criterion or criteria to which they relate and are supported by findings of fact as set forth in
Section IV hereinabove and by the evidence enumerated in Section II:
PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW PERMIT
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Title
ALUO CHAPTER 62 PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONTRAINTS
ALUO 18.62.040(I) Criteria for Approval. A Physical Constrains Review Permit shall be issued by the Staff
2 In this document, the terms pillars and piers are used interchangeably and mean the same thing.
Page 19
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Advisor when the Applicant demonstrates the following:
Criterion I
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property
and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that the development standards of "this
chapter" are the standards and criteria in ALUO Chapter 18.62, the standards which are
addressed below as Criterion 4 through 18. The findings of fact and conclusions of law for
Criterion 4 through 18 are incorporated and adopted and these demonstrate that the
development standards of ALUO Chapter 18.62 (including the standards in the Ashland Site
Design and Use Standards) have been properly observed. The Council also concludes that
the potential impacts to the subject property and nearby areas include: 1) the potential to
increase flooding and flood damage up and downstream, 2) the potential damage to the
riparian corridor and riparian vegetation and its related impacts to fish and wildlife habitat.
On these categories of potential impact, the Council concludes as follows:
.
Flooding/Flood Damage: Based upon Record p. 191 to 221, Record p. 235 to 237 and
Otak Letter Record p. AA-20 and 21 -- testimony from Applicant's expert engineers
from Otak -- this project (including removal of the existing deck) will add flood storage
volume along this portion of Ashland Creek and will, in accordance with AIVIC
15.10.08003)(1), allow the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters beneath the proposed
building? The amount of flood storage will more than offset the volume of fill and
support pillars that will be placed in the flood hazard area. The evidence also shows that
the proposed building (including decks which are permitted within the flood hazard area)
will be at an elevation of 1,877 feet, an elevation that is five feet higher than the 100-year
FEMA BFE which, on this property, is at an elevation of 1,872 feet. Moreover, the
building (not including the decks) will be constructed so that no portion of it lies within
the FEMA BFE topographic contour of 1,872 feet as the same is depicted at Record p.
AA-16. The Council concludes that the flood hazard area must be viewed as both a
vertical and horizontal area within which buildings should not be built. The evidence
shows that no portion of the building will violate either the horizontal or vertical
boundaries of the flood plain corridor of Ashland Creek.
Additionally, the existing pedestrian bridge is a fixed structure that exists at an elevation
lower than the 100-year FEMA BFE (an elevation of 1,872 feet). As such, the existing
bridge is susceptible to flood damage and the potential for it to be transported
downstream during a major flood event. Applicant proposed and the Council has
approved a new engineered bridge that will be realigned to meet Ashland design and
floodplain standards. Applicant testified that the final design of the bridge will be carded
3 Flood storage means areas on the property which can be excavated to store waters during large storm events
and is sometimes used to offset fill and other things placed within a flood plain which would otherwise displace
water and increase the amount of water that flows downstream during a major flood event. While good practice,
neither the ALUO nor Ashland Municipal Code (AlVlC) Chapter 15, require additional flood storage, although
the same has been provided for in this project.
Page 20
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
out by a qualified Oregon-registered engineer and will be constructed at an elevation of
1877 feet, 5 feet above the FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 1,872 feet and
otherwise designed and constructed to meet local, state and federal flood regulations.
Conditions attached to this approval require the bridge to be properly engineered and
Ashland regulations will require the realignment to meet all other municipal standards.
For these reasons, the Council concludes that this project will not increase areas subject
to flooding nor increase the potential for flood damage to this property or nearby areas
both upstream and downstream.
.
Riparian Corridor/Vegetation; Fish/Wildlife Habitat: As to the potential for damage
to the riparian corridor and its vegetation, this project proposed no removal of riparian
vegetation and, in fact, proposes to enhance the riparian vegetation along the new
+building's Ashland Creek frontage. However, while no riparian vegetation is to be
removed, an existing triple-trunk maple tree within the flood plain corridor must be
severely pruned to accommodate the building. During the CoUncil's public hearing of
May 18, 2004, Applicant's expert landscape architect testified that less than 50 percent of
the tree canopy will be removed and therefore the pruning does not constitute "removal"
under the ALUO. Applicant's expert arborist testified in writing at Record p. 262 that the
tree will survive this pruning. For these reasons, the Council concludes that this project
will not adversely impact the riparian corridor or its vegetation along Ashland Creek for
this property or nearby areas.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes that
the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 1 because, through the
application of the development standards of ALUO 18.62 and the Ashland Site Design and
Use Standards, the potential impacts to this property and nearby areas have been considered,
and the adVerse impacts have been minimized appropriately.
Criterion 2
2. That the Applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented
measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development.
Conclusions of Law: During the public hearing of June 1, 2004, Opponent Hopkins testified
that the support pillars for the deck could collect debris or cause increased velocities or
volume to the north and posed the rhetorical question whether this might produce flooding
that would not otherwise occur. The Council also considered the testimony of Applicant's
expert engineer from Otak who acknowledged that debris flow does occur during major
storm events but that the velocity of the storm flows in Ashland Creek at the subject property
are slow due to water that backs up at the culvert downstream from the subject property and
this causes the water to pool at the property and overflow the creek's banks on the lower,
opposite side of the creek. As such, debris that might wash into the pillars will do so at low
velocities that are not expected to cause damage to the pillars which, as required by the
ordinance, must be flood-proofed.
Page 21
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Opponent Hopkins testified during the public hearing of June 1, 2004 that Otak's flood
studies were based upon earlier building plans which had since been modified. The Council
concludes that to the extent earlier letters in evidence from Otak were based upon Applicant's
plans which have since changed, Otak reaffirmed its conclusions in a later letter dated June 7,
2004 at Record p. AA-20. To this letter of June 7, 2004, Otak attached copies of Applicant's
most recent plans and these are the plans approved by the Council. There being no evidence
to the contrary from any other qualified source, the Council concludes that the evidence from
Otak as to flood corridor/hazard matters to be reliable and the Council adOpts the Same as
fact.
The Council incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and conclusions of law for Criterion
1, and concludes that Applicant has considered the potential hazards this development might
potentially create and the same are limited to potential flood damage.
Criterion 3
3.
That the Applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment.
Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions.' The Staff Advisor or
Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum
permitted development permitted by the Land Use Ordinance.
Conclusions of Law: The Council incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and
conclusions of law for Criterion 1 and 2. The Council concludes that potential adverse
impacts on the environment which are connected to this project, include: 1) the potential to
increase flooding and flood damage up and downstream, 2) the potential damage to the
riparian corridor and riparian vegetation, and its related impacts to fish and wildlife habitat.
The Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and conclusions of law for
Criterion 1 and 2 and further concludes as follows:
Flooding/Flood--Damage: Based upon the evidence, Applicant here has taken the
following reasonable steps which will reduce the adverse impacts upon the environment
with respect tO flooding and flood damage:
Applicant has set the building (other than the permissible decks) back from Ashland
Creek such that it will not penetrate either the 1,872 foot FEMA BFE nor the 1,872
topographic contour and designed the building in such a way as to increase the flood
storage capacity in an amount that is greater than what will be taken by the support
pillars and fill.
Applicant intends to remove the existing 'deck which is of substandard construction
and subject to damage during flood events and intends its replacement with decking
that is further removed from the flood channel of Ashland Creek and will be of flood
proof construction pursuant to the ALUO and AMC. This will reduce potential
impediments to channel flow.
Page 22
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
The evidence shows that Applicant carefully studied the stream flooding
characteristics of Ashland Creek and designed this project to observe all requirements
of the ALUO, AMC 15.10 and the Ashland Site Design and Use Standards.
The existing pedestrian bridge is a fixed structure that exists at an elevation which is
beneath the 100-year FEMA BFE. As such, the existing bridge is susceptible to flood
damage and the potential for it to be transported downstream during a major flood
event. Applicant has proposed a new engineered bridge to replace the existing bridge
and the same will be slightly realigned to meet Ashland design and floodplain
standards. Applicant testified that the final design of the bridge will be carded out by
a qualified Oregon-registered engineer and will be constructed at an elevation of 1877
feet, 5 feet above the FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 1,872 feet and be
designed and constructed to meet local, state and federal flood regulations.
Conditions of the approval require the bridge to be properly engineered and Ashland
regulations will ensure that the realigned location will comply will all municipal
standards.
'2.
Riparian Corridor/Vegetation; Fish/Wildlife Habitat: Based upon the evidence,
Applicant has taken the following reasonable steps which will reduce the adverse impacts
upon the environment with respect to the riparian corridor of Ashland Creek and the
riparian vegetation therein:
Applicant does not propose to remove any riparian vegetation and, instead plans to
enhance the riparian landscape with compatible plant materials, supported by an
automatic underground irrigation system. The same will enhance fish and wildlife
habitat. See, Record p. A-31 (Planting Plan).
Applicant has taken steps to preserve the existing triple-trunk maple tree which exists
near the existing retaining wall adjacent to the riparian corridor. While the one of the
three trunks will be removed and the others pruned, the ~ee will provide continued
shading of the creek. Applicant's agent testified and the Council agrees that creek
shading helps control stream water temperatures and benefits fish species that occupy
the creek. The trees also provide habitat for birds which use the trees for perching
and nesting.
Applicant has set the new deck back further from the riparian corridor than the
existing deck, thereby providing additional space within which landscaping is
planned. Applicant's agent testified and the Council agrees that riparian landscaping
in a general way will enhance fish and wildlife habitat by providing cover which is an
important habitat component for fish and fur-bearing animals.
In its consideration of this project, the Council is required to consider, "the existing
development of the surrounding area, and the maximum permitted development permitted by
the Land Use Ordinance." Applicant's agent asserted and the Council agrees, that this means
that it must consider existing development in the surrounding area and, for vacant or
Page 23
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
underdeveloped properties, the environmental impacts as if these lands were developed to the
maximum levels permitted by the ALUO. In this regard, the Council concludes that virtually
all privately held land (except the subject property) is now fully developed (or very nearly so)
to the maximum levels permitted by the ALUO, and no further consideration of additional
development or the intensification of existing development needs to be considered in this
instRnce.4
There were no other objections based upon adverse impacts upon the environment and based
upon the foregoing findings of fact and Conclusions of law, the Council concludes that the
application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 3 because this Applicant has
taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment.
Criterion 4
ALUO 18.62.050 Land Classifications. The following factors shall be used to determine the classifications of
various lands and their constraints to building and development on them.
ALUO 18.62.050(B) Riparian Preservation. The following Flood plain Corridor Lands are also designated for
Riparian Preservation for the purposes of this section and as listed on the Physical and Environmental
Constraints Overlay Maps: Tolman, Hamilton, Clay, Bear, Kitchen, Ashland, Nell and Wrights Creeks.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that portions of the subject property are located
within the Flood Plain Corridor of Ashland Creek. Therefore, these portions of the property
are also subject to the riparian preservation standards in ALUO 18.62.075. The specific
standards for riparian preservation are addressed hereinbelow as Criterion 18. The Council
also concludes that Criterion 4 does not operate as an approval standard, but rather to
establish the applicability of Ashland's riparian preservation standards for any given parcel.
Criterion 5
ALUO 18.62.070 Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. For all land use actions which
could result in development of the Flood plain corridor, the following is required in addition to any requirements
of Chapter 15.10.
A. Standards for fill in Flood plain Corridor lands:
1. Fill shall be designed as required by the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, where applicable.
2. The toe of the fill shall be kept at least ten feet outside of floodway channels, as defined in section
15.10, and the fill shall not exceed the angle of repose of the material used for fill.
3. The amount of fill in the Flood plain Corridor shall be kept to a minimum. Fill and other material
imported from off the lot that could displace floodwater shall be limited to the following:
a. Poured concrete and other materials necessary to build permitted structures on the lot.
n While there is some vacant land in the vicinity of the subject property, this land either exists as public rights-
of-way or has been set aside for public parks.
Page 24
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
b. Aggregate base and paving materials, and fill associated with approved public and pdvate street
and ddveway construction.
c. Plants and other landscaping and agricultural material.
d. A total of 50 cubic yards of other imported fill material.
.
The above limits on fill shall be measured from April 1989, and shall not exceed the above
amounts. These amounts are the maximum cumulative fill that can be imported onto the site,
regardless of the number of permits issued.
If additional fill is necessarY beyond the 'permitted amounts in (3) above, then fill materials must be
obtained on the lot from cutting or excavation only to the extent necessarY to create an elevated site for
permitted development. All additional fill material shall be obtained from the portion of the lot in the Flood
plain Corridor.
5. Adequate drainage shall be provided for the stability of the fill.
6. Fill to raise elevations for a building site shall be located as close to the outside edge of the Flood plain
Corridor as feasible.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
The provisions of AMC Chapter 15.10 (Flood Damage Prevention Regulations) are
building code standards and requirements which are reviewed by Ashland's Building
Official at the time building permits are sought. The Council concludes that there is
nothing in AMC 15.10 that cannot be met in this project and compliance with AMC
15.10 will be assured through this land use process and Ashland's required review and
approval of the construction plans before the issuance of any building permits. Applicant
has agreed to stipulate, and the Council has required as a condition, that the construction
plans for this project will observe all of the standards of AMC 15.10 and the Council
concludes that these can and will be met.
Regarding #1 above, Applicant has agreed to stipulate, and the Council has required as a
condition, that he will observe the applicable standards of the Uniform Building Code,
Chapter 70, in compliance therewith.
Regarding #2 above and based upon Record p. 195 to 221, the concrete pillars for the
proposed building and deck are the closest part of'the project to the stream and floodway
channel. The pillars are located more than 10 feet from the FEMA Floodway boundary.
Concrete pillars are not fill and are permitted. Moreover, the concrete pillars will have no
"toe" and because concrete is a hardened material, it will also have no angle of repose.
Regarding #3 above and based upon Record p. AA-16 and 17 (Sheets 101-R and 107-R)
and Record p. 195 to 221, fill in the floodplain corridor associated with this project is
limited to the concrete used to form the structural support pillars for the deck. There are
no public or private streets or driveways associated with this project. There is less than
50 cubic yards of other imported material (material other than concrete or aggregate
base/paving material). The Council concludes that the amounts of fill (even including the
support pillars which are not fill) have been kept to a minimum.
Page 25
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Regarding ~4 above, and based upon Record p. 195 to 221 and Otak Letter Record p.
AA-20 and 21, no additional fill is necessary beyond the 50 cubic yard amount required
in #3.
Regarding #5 above, Applicant in Section VI has agreed to stipulate, and the Council has
required as a condition, that proper engineering will be required to address drainage. The
Council further concludes that adequate drainage can and will be provided for this project
in accordance with city standards.
Regarding #6 above, and based upon Record p. 195 to 221 and Otak Letter Record p.
AA-20 and AA-21, no fill has been specified in the plans for the purpose of raising the
elevation of the site to accommodate the proposed building.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 5.
Criterion 6
S.
Culverting or bridging of any waterway or creek identified on the official maps adopted pursuant to section
18.62.060 must be designed by an engineer. Stream crossings shall be designed to the standards of
Chapter 15.10, or where no floodway has been identified, to pass a one hundred (100) year flood without
any increase in the upstream flood height elevation. The engineer shall consider in the design the
probability that the culvert will be blocked by debris in a severe flood, and accommodate expected overflow.
Fill for culverting and bridging shall be kept to the minimum necessary to achieve property access, but is
exempt from the limitations in section (A) above. Culverting or bridging of streams identified as Riparian
Preservation are subject to the requirements of 18.62.075.
Conclusions of Law: The Council is aware that there is an existing pedestrian bridge that
crosses Ashland Creek on the subject property and provides pedestrian access thereto.
Applicant has proposed a new engineered bridge to replace the existing bridge and will be
slightly realigned to meet Ashland design and floodplain standards. Applicant testified that
the final design of the bridge will be carded out by a qualified Oregon-registered engineer
and will be constructed at an elevation of 1877 feet, 5 feet above the FEMA Base Flood
Elevation (BFE) of 1,872 feet and otherwise designed and constructed to meet local, state and
federal flood regulations. Conditions of the approval require the bridge to be properly
engineered and Ashland regulations will ensure that the realigned location will comply will
all municipal standards, including Criterion 6.
Criterion 7
C) Non-residential structures shall be flood-proof to the standards in Chapter 15.10 to one foot above the
elevation contained in the maps adopted by chapter 15.10, or up to the elevation contained in the
official maps adopted by section 18.62.060, whichever height is greater. Where no specific elevations
exist, then they must be floodproofed to an elevation of ten feet above the creek channel on Ashland,
Bear or Nell Creek; to five feet above the creek channel on all other Riparian Preserve creeks defined
in section 18.62.050.B; and three feet above the stream channel on all other drainage ways identified
on the official maps.
Page 26
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that Applicant, in Section VI, agreed to
stipulate to flood proofing in accordance ALUO 18.62.070(C) -- Criterion 7 -- and the
Council has required the same as a condition. The Council finds and concludes that
compliance with Criterion 7 can be met and conditions imposed on the approval of this
application, ensures that the requirements of Criterion 7 will be properly observed.
Criterion 8
D) All residential structures shall be elevated so that the lowest habitable floor shall be raised to one foot
above the elevation contained in the maps adopted in chapter 15.10, or to the elevation contained in
the official maps adopted by section 18.62.060, whichever height is greater. Where no specific
elevations exist, then they must be constructed at an elevation of ten feet above the creek channel on
Ashland, Bear, or Neil Creek; to five feet above the creek channel on all other Riparian Preserve
creeks defined in section 18.62.050.B; and three feet above the stream channel on all other drainage
ways identified on the official maps, or one foot above visible evidence of high flood water flow,
whichever is greater. The elevation of the finished lowest habitable floor shall be certified to the city by
an engineer or surveyor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the structure.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that the only residential structures which are a
part of this application are the two apartments to be located on the upper-most floor. The
approved plans show that the apartments are at an elevation substantially higher than the
elevation contained in the maps adopted in AMC Chapter 15.10 or the elevation contained in
official maps adopted as part of ALUO 18.62.060, in full compliance with Criterion 8. The
upper-most floor elevation is measured at 1,901.50 feet. The upper-most floor is 26.00 feet
above the Ashland BFE and 29.50 feet above the FEMA BFE. See, Record p. A-28 (Exterior
Elevations Sheet A-201) and Record p. A-29 (Building Sections Sheet A-301).
Criterion 8 also requires the elevation of the finished lowest habitable floor, to be certified to
the city by an engineer or surveyor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
structure and the same will ensure full compliance with Criterion 8. Applicant has agreed to
stipulate, and the Council has required as a condition, that proper flood hazard certifications
will accompany the construction plans. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and
conclusions of law, the City Council concludes that the application is consistent with the
requirements of Criterion 8.
Criterion 9
E.
To the maximum extent feasible, structures shall be placed on other than Flood plain Corridor Lands. In the
case where development is permitted in the Flood plain corridor area, then development shall be limited to
that area which would have the shallowest flooding.
Discussion and Conclusions of Law: The approved plans show that the building has been
placed outside the flood plain corridor M outside the horizontal and vertical boundaries of
the FEMA BFE and Ashland's designated Flood plain corridor lands. While portions of the
deck are within the flood plain corridor, decks are expressly permitted within the corridor
Page 27
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
pursuant to ALUO 18.62.070(L) and the Council interprets this criterion to exclude decks as
structures to be placed on other than flood plain corridor lands Furthermore, development
within the flood plain corridor is subject to all other requirements in ALUO 18.62.070 and
the same are addressed herein as Criterion 5 through 17. The Council herewith incorporates
and adopts its findings of fact and conclusions of law for Criterion 5 through 17. Based upon
the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes that the
application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 9.
Criterion 10
Fo
Existing lots with buildable land outside the Flood plain Corridor shall locate all residential structures outside
the Corddor land, unless 50% or more of the lot is within the Flood plain Corridor. For residential uses
proposed for existing lots that have more than 50% of the lot in Corridor land, structures may be located on
that portion of the Flood plain corridor that is two feet or less below the flood elevations on the official maps,
but in no case closer than 20 feet to the channel of a Ripadan Preservation Creek. Construction shall be
subject to the requirements in paragraph D above.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that the proposed residential uses are all on the
uppermost floor of the proposed building and, based upon the plans at Record p. AA-16 and
AA-17, the building is located outside the flood plain corridor and 20 or more feet from the
channel of Ashland Creek which is a Riparian Preservation Creek, in compliance with
Criterion 10.
Criterion
G. New non-residential uses may be located on that portion of Flood plain Corridor lands that equal to or
above the flood elevations on the official maps adopted in section 18.62.060. Second story construction
may be cantilevered over the Flood plain corridor for a distance of 20 feet if the clearance from finished
grade is at least ten feet in height, and is supported by pillars that will have minimal impact on the flow of
floodwaters. The finished floor elevation may not be more than two feet below the flood corridor elevations.
Discussion and Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that the lower floors of the
building are non-residential uses. During the proceeding, Opponent Hopkins testified that
neither the Applicant nor staff has provided a map showing the accurate Ashland Floodplain
Corridor (a limit based on actual events, rather than an hydraulic study), as required as part of
the original application. At Record p. AA-69 and AA-70 Applicant's agent testified that
Applicant's architect, Dave Richardson had worked closely with Applicant's engineers at
Otak to produce the design of this building. Mr. Richardson's testimony is at Record p. AA-
73 and AA-74 and that of Otak in the record. In summary, architect Richardson testified:
1. The Ashland Flood Corridor and FEMA Floodway are accurately depicted on the design
plans he has prepared. In plan view, the building is clearly shown to be outside both the
Ashland Flood Corridor and FEMA Floodway.
Page 28
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
.
There are two 100-year flood plain maps and two flood plain elevations -- FEMA's and
Ashland's- and these have been adopted by Ashland. Applicant commissioned Otak
engineers to undertake additional detailed flood analysis which verified the accuracy of
the FEMA BFE. There exists a discrepancy between the flood plain lines (both
Ashland's and FEMA's) and the respective flood plain elevations. However, the
evidence makes clear that the proposed building's first finished floor of the building is at
an elevation of 1,877, which is 1.5 feet above the Ashland flood elevation and 5 feet at or
above the FEMA BFE. See, Record p. A-28.
.
With respect to flood plain elevations, both are accurately represented on the elevations
for the building and show that the building's first finished floor is at or above both
Ashland's and FEMA's base flood elevations. See, Record p. A-28.
4. Because the opposite bank of Ashland Creek is lower than the flood plain elevation,
before the flood level can rise to a level that would affect this building, it will spill out on
the other side of the creek, running through the paved parking area and down Water Street
and the same has been attested to by Otak engineers. See, Record p. 199 and 201 and
AA-20 and AA-21.
5. The proposed bridge will be at an elevation of 1,877 feet, which is 5 feet above the
. FEIMA BFE for Ashland Creek. The bridge will be anchored to the building.
.
Mr. Richardson offered stipulations with respect to flooding and riparian enhancement
and the Council has made these conditions of the approval: 1) that applicant will enhance
the riparian area beneath both the existing and proposed bridges subject to city approval
of enhancement plans, and 2) applicant will eliminate the bridge support pier in Ashland
Creek flood corridor and instead anchor the bridge to the building deck.
The approved plans show that the proposed building and use has been elevated on support
pillars to an elevation of 1,877 feet which is five feet higher than the FEMA BFE which is the
elevation shown on the official maps adopted in ALUO 18.62.060. Moreover, the structure
complies with the requirements of the second sentence of the Criterion 11 with respect to
cantilevering.
During the proceeding, Opponent Hopkins testified that there will be walls for a large
mechanical room extending down to 1,868 feet within this floodplain. While the mechanical
room has a floor elevation of 1,868 feet, it is underground and outside of the vertical and
horizontal limits of the flood plain corridor and is, therefore, compliant With this criterion and
Criterion 13 which expressly permits non-habitable basements if flood proofed.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes that
the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 11.
Criterion f2
Page 29
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Ho
All lots modified by lot line adjustments, or new lots created from lots which contain Flood plain Corridor
land must contain a building envelope on all lot(s) which contain(s) buildable area of a sufficient size to
accommodate the uses permitted in the underling zone, unless the action is for open space or conservation
purposes. This section shall apply even if the effect is to prohibit further division of lots that are larger than
the minimum size permitted in the zoning ordinance.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that this application is consistent with Criterion
12 by reason of inapplicability because that the subject property is neither a new lot nor one
intended to be modified by lot line adjustment.
Criterion '13
I. Basements.
1. Habitable basements are not permitted for new or existing structures or additions located within the
Flood plain Corridor.
2. Non-habitable basements, used for storage, parking, and similar uses are permitted for residential
structures but must be flood-proofed to the standards of Chapter 15.10.
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the approved plans and Record p. 195 to 221 and AA-20
to 21, the Council concludes that no habitable basement is proposed for the new building.
The approved plans contemplate a non-habitable basement and the same is described in the
findings of fact in Section IV. Applicant has agreed to stipulate, and the Council has required
as a condition, that flood-proofing will be done in accordance with AMC Chapter 15.10.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes that
the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 13.
Criterion 14
J. Storage of petroleum products, pesticides, or other hazardous or toxic chemicals is not permitted in Flood
plain Corridor lands.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that in Section VI, Applicant agreed to
stipulate, and the Council has required as a condition, that neither he nor his tenants will store
petroleum products, pesticides, or other hazardous or toxic chemicals within the designated
Flood Plain Corridor, in compliance with Criterion 14.
Criterion 15
Ko
Fences constructed within 20 feet of any Riparian Preservation Creek designated by this chapter shall be
limited to wire or electdc fence, or similar fence that will not collect debds or obstruct flood waters, but not
including wire mesh or chain link fencing. Fences shall not be constructed across any identified dpadan
drainage or dpadan preservation creek. Fences shall not be constructed within any designated floodway.
Page 30
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Conclusions of Law: During the public hearing, Opponent Hopkins testified that the
application violates this approval standard because fencing is shown within portions of the
property where the same is prohibited under this standard. The Council finds that, reasonably
construed, the ordinance prohibits permanent fencing within designated areas of any riparian
preservation creek. Evidence educed during the public hearing showed that the only fencing
proposed by Applicant is temporary construction fencing, designed to protect existing trees
from damage during construction. No permanent fencing is proposed. The Council
concludes that the application does not violate this criterion by proposing only temporary
construction fencing. Since no permanent fencing is proposed, the Council concludes that the
application does not violate, and is consistent with Criterion 15.
Criterion 16
Lo
Decks and structures other than buildings, if constructed on Flood plain Corridor Lands and at or below the
levels specified in section 18.62.070.C and D, shall be fiood-pmofed to the standards contained in Chapter
15.10.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that Applicant, in Section VI, agreed to
stipulate, and the Council has required as a condition, to flood-proofing in accordance with
the standards in AMC 15.10. Therefore, the Council concludes that this application is
consistent with Criterion 16.
Criterion 17
M. Local streets and utility connections to developments in and adjacent to the Flood plain Corridor shall be
located outside of the Flood plain Corridor, except for crossing the Corridor, and except in the Bear Creek
Flood plain corridor as outlined below:
Public street construction may be allowed within the Bear Creek Flood plain corridor as part of
development following the adopted North Mountain Neighborhood Plan. This exception shall only be
permitted for that section of the Bear Creek Flood plain corridor between North Mountain Avenue and
the Nevada Street right-of-way. The new street shall be constructed in the general location as
indicated on the neighborhood plan map, and in the area generally described as having the shallowest
potential for flooding within the corridor.
2. Proposed development that is not in accord with the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan shall not be
permitted to utilize this exception.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes, based upon the approved plans, that no new
local streets are proposed or required as part of this application. Moreover, all utilities
available to this property (and which will be required for the new building) are all within the
right-of-way of North Main Street, and no utility connections are required to cross the Flood
Plain Corridor, in compliance with Criterion 17.
Criterion
Page 31
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
ALUO 18.62.075 Development Standards for Riparian Preservation Lands.
A. All development in areas indicated for Ripadan Preservation, as defined in section 18.62.050(B); shall
comply with the following standards.
1. Development shall be subject to all Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. (18.62.070)
2. Any tree over six inches d.b.h, shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible.
3. Fill and Culverting shall be permitted only for streets, access or utilities. The crossing shall be at right
angels to the creek channel to the greatest extent possible. Fill shall be kept to a minimum.
4, The general topography of Riparian Preservation lands shall be retained.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that the property is crossed by Ashland Creek
and portions of the property are subject to the Riparian Preservation standards pursuant to
relevant provisions in ALUO 18.62. The Council concludes as follows with respect to the
four standards in Criterion 18:
Regarding #1 above, the same does not operate as an independent approval standard, but
rather to establish that land subject to riparian preservation is also subject to the city's
flood plain ordinance (ALUO 18.62.070) and the same are addressed hereinabove as
Criterion 5 through 17, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of law for which are
herewith incorporated and adopted.
Regarding #2 above, the evidence shows that no trees over six inches d.b.h, are proposed
to be removed on lands designed for Riparian Preservation.
Regarding #3 above, no fill within the riparian corridor is proposed, other than the
support pillars (which are not "fill") and which are permitted by the ordinance to occur
within the floodplain. The only creek crossing is the pedestrian bridge. Applicant has
proposed a new engineered bridge to replace the existing bridge and the same will be
slightly realigned to meet Ashland design and floodplain standards. Applicant testified
that the final design of the bridge will be carded out by a qualified Oregon-registered
engineer and will be constructed at an elevation of 1877 feet, 5 feet above the FEMA Base
Flood Elevation (BFE) of 1,872 feet and otherwise designed and constructed to meet local,
state and federal flood regulations. Conditions of the approval require the bridge to be
properly engineered and Ashland regulations will ensure that the realigned location will
comply will all municipal standards. Based upon the evidence at Record p. 112 to 115, A-
26, A-28 and A-29 and Sheets 101R and 107R Record p. AA-16 and 17, the Council
concludes that the bridge location has been placed, to the greatest extent possible given
the physical limitations of this site (which relate to existing buildings and preservable
trees) at a right angle to the creek.
Regarding g4 above, Applicant's plans at Record p. 112 to 115, A-26, A-28 and A-29 and
Sheets 101-R and 107-R Record p. AA-16 and 17 show that the existing topography
within the regulated riparian area, has been retained.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
Page 32
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 18.
Criterion l g
SITE REVIEW
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 18)
ALUO Chapter 72 Site Design and Use Standards
ALUO 18.72.050 Detail Site Review Zone.
A. The Detail Site Review Zone is that area defined in the Site Design Standards adopted pursuant to Section
18.72.040(A).
Bo
Any development in the Detail Site Review Zone as defined in the Site Review Standards adopted
pursuant to this chapter, which exceeds 10,000 square feet or is longer than 100 feet in length or width,
shall be reviewed according to the Type 2 procedure.
C.
No new buildings or contiguous groups of buildings in the Detail Site Review Zone shall exceed a gross
square footage of 45,000 square feet or a combined contiguous building length of 300 feet. Any building
or contiguous group of buildings which exceed these limitations, which were in existence in 1992, may
expand up to 15% in area or length beyond their 1992 area or length. Neither the gross square footage or
combined contiguous building length, as set forth in this section shall be subject to any variance authorized
in the Land Use Ordinance.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that this project is subject to Ashland's Detail
Site Review standards. The Council also concludes that neither this building nor, in the
aggregate, the buildings to which this building is contiguous, exceed 45,000 square feet nor a
combined contiguous building length of 300 feet. Therefore, the Council concludes that this
application is consistent with Criterion 19.
Criterion 20
ALUO 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval.
The following criteda shall be used to approve or deny an application:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
Conclusions of Law: The Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of' fact and
conclusions of law for Criterion 1 through 52 inclusive (but not including this Criterion 20)
which, with Applicant's approved plans and the other evidence enumerated in Section II
hereinabove, demonstrate compliance with all relevant requirements of the ALUO, including
those of the Site Review Chapter -- ALUO 18.72. Therefore, the Council concludes that this
application is consistent with Criterion 20.
Page 33
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Criterion 21
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the Council for implementation of
this Chapter.
Conclusions of Law: The Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and
conclusions of law for Criterion 23 through 52 (inclusive). The Council concludes that these
demonstrate compliance with the Site Design Standards which were adopted by the Council
to implement ALUO Chapter 18.72. Therefore, the Council concludes that this application is
consistent with Criterion 21.
Criterion 22
Do
That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development,
electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the
subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in
Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999)
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the findings of fact in Section IV and Applicant's
approved plans, the Council concludes that adequate capacity of City facilities for water,
sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and
adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property.
Therefore, the Council concludes that this application is consistent with Criterion 22.
Criterion 23
CITY OF ASHLAND SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTION II
APPROVAL STANDARDS AND POLICIES
II-A. ORDINANCE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
The following percentages of landscaping are required for all properties falling under the Site Design and Use
Standards.
Zone % Landscaping
R-1-3.5 45%
R-2 35%
R-3 25%
C-1 15%
C-I-D 10%
E-1 15%
M-1 10%
These percentages are the minimum required. At times, more landscaping is required to meet the needs of
other sections of the Site Review Ordinance, such as screening of parking areas, landscaping of setback areas,
and providing usable outdoor space. In general, all areas which are not used for building or parking areas are
required to be landscaped. You should also be aware that, as a condition of approval of your project, you will be
required to submit a site and species specific landscape plan to the Planning Division for Staff Advisor approval.
Page 34
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Conclusions of Law: The subject property is zoned C-1-D. Pursuant to ALUO 18.72.110,
there are no area-landscape requirements for land in the C-1-D zone, other than for parking
areas and service stations. This project does not include off-street parking nor service
station(s). Therefore, this project is not required to observe the minimum landscaping
standards in Criterion 23. However, Applicant here has provided landscaping along Ashland
Creek which, based upon the findings of fact in Section IV, is in an amount greater than 10
percent. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council
concludes that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 23.
Criterion 24
II-C-1. BASIC SITE REVIEW STANDARDS
APPROVAL STANDARD: Development in all commercial and employment zones shall conform to the following
development standards:
Il-C-la) Orientation and Scale
1) Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street rather than the parking area. Building
entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. Public
sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street along the street frontage.
2)
Buildings that are within 30 feet of the street shall have an entrance for pedestrians directly from the street
to the building interior. This entrance shall be designed to be attractive and functional, and shall be open to
the public during all business hours.
3)
These requirements may be waived if the building is not accessed by pedestrians, such as warehouses and
industrial buildings without attached offices, and automotive service uses such as service stations and tire
stores.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that Applicant's approved plans clearly
demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Criterion 24.
Criterion 25
Il-C-lb) Streetscape
One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage for that portion of the
development fronting the street.
Conclusions of Law: The Council finds that photographs and photograph key map at Record
p. 222 to 224 shows the existence of street trees along the subject property's North Main
Street frontage. The Council concludes that no additional street trees are required to meet the
standard in Criterion 25. Therefore, the Council concludes that this application is consistent
with Criterion 25.
Page 35
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Criterion 26
Il-C-lc) Landscaping
1) Landscaping shall be designed so that 50% coverage occurs after one year and 90% coverage occurs after
5 years.
2) Landscaping design use a vadety of Iow water use deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and
flowering plant species.
3)
Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landscaped areas at least 10 feet in width, except in the
Ashland Histodc District. Outdoor storage areas shall be screened from view from adjacent public rights-of-
way, except in M-1 zones. Loading facilities shall be screened and buffered when adjacent to residentially
zoned land.
4) Irrigation systems shall be installed to assure landscaping success.
$) Efforts shall be made to save as many existing healthy trees and shrubs on the site as possible.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding #1 above, Record p. A-31 shows, according to Applicant's expert landscape
architect, that proposed landscaping has been designed to supply 50 percent coverage
after one year and 90 percent coverage after 5 years.
Regarding #2 above, and based upon Record p. A-31, the Council concludes that the
proposed landscaping design has used a variety of low water use deciduous and' evergreen
trees and shrubs and flowering plant species.
Regarding #3 above, the Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and
conclusions of law for Criterion 23, which concluded that this property is not subject to
landscaping requirements by virtue of its location within Ashland's C-1-D zoning district.
However, as also discussed in the Council's conclusions of law for Criterion 23,
Applicant here has provided proposed landscaping along Ashland Creek (and additional
landscaping that is not a part of this application, within adjacent rights-of-way owned by
the Oregon Department of Transportation). Additionally, as this property is within the
Ashland Historic District, the requirements of Criterion 26 (#3) do not apply.
Regarding fi4 above, Applicant in Section VI has agreed to stipulate, and the Council has
required as a condition, that the proposed living landscape areas will be served by an
automatic underground irrigation system.
Regarding #5, the Applicant contends and the Council concludes that efforts have been
made to save as many existing healthy trees and shrubs of the site as possible and all but
one has been preserved. However, in order to comply with other provisions of the ALUO
and Ashland Site Design and Use Standards, the removal of one tree is necessary. ALUO
18.61.080 governs the removal of trees and the same is addressed hereinbelow as
Criterion 53, the findings of fact and conclusions of law for which are herewith
incorporated and adopted.
Page 36
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 26.
Criterion 27
II-C-ld) Parking
1) Parking areas shall be located behind buildings or on one or both sides.
2) Parking areas shall be shaded by deciduous trees, buffered from adjacent non-residential uses and
screened from non-residential uses.
Conclusions of Law: The subject project is within the Retail Commercial (C-l) District and
within the Downtown Overlay District (C-l-D). Areas within the Downtown Overlay
District are not required to provide off-street parking or loading areas except for hotel, motel
or hostel uses. As the proposed uses are neither hotel, motel or hostel uses, the Council
concludes that this criterion is not applicable. Therefore, this application is consistent with
Criterion 27 by reason of inapplicability.
Criterion 28
II-C-le) Designated Creek Protection
1) Designated creek protection areas shall be considered positive design elements and incorporated in the
overall design of a given project.
2) Native dpadan plant materials shall be planted in and adjacent to the creek to enhance the creek habitat.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that Applicant's approved plans demonstrate
compliance with the requirements of Criterion 28. In reaching this conclusion, the Council
also finds and concludes that the plant materials specified at Record p. A-31 are native
riparian plant varieties which have been recommended to meet this standard by Applicant's
expert landscape architect.
Criterion 29
II-C-lf) Noise and Glare
Specific attention to glare (AMC 18.72.110) and noise (AMC 9.08.170(c) & AMC 9.08.175) shall be considered
in the project design to insure compliance with these standards.
Conclusions of Law: As to glare, the Council concludes that there is nothing in the design of
this project which will produce glare at levels inconsistent with the Ashland Municipal Code
(AMC). Regarding noise, the Council finds that this property is within a small city block
which is entirely occupied by commercial buildings and uses. Additionally, this block is
bounded on all sides by the following streets: North Main Street, Lithia Way and Water
Page 37
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Street. While outdoor dining is contemplated in the application, there is no proposal here for
the conduct of outdoor entertainment. Based upon these findings, the Council concludes that
· specific attention has been paid and consideration has been given to the potential for glare
and noise, pursuant to the standards in the Ashland Municipal Code and that the proposed
building and anticipated uses can and will comply. Therefore, the Council concludes that this
application is consistent with Criterion 29.
Criterion 30
II-C-lg) Expansions of Existing Sites and Buildings
1)
For sites which do not conform to these requirements, an equal percentage of the site must be made to
comply with these standards as the percentage of building expansion, e.g., if building area is to expand by
25%, then 25% of the site must be brought up to the standards required by this document.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that this application does not constitute an
"expansion" of an existing building because the proposal is for a new building. Therefore,
Criterion 30 is concluded to be inapplicable.
Criterion 31
I1-C-2. DETAIL SITE REVIEW
Developments that are within the Detail Site Review Zone shall, in addition to complying with the standards for
Basic Site Review, conform to the following standards:
II-C-2a) Orientation and Scale
1)
Developments shall have a minimum Floor Area Ratio of .35 and shall not exceed a maximum Floor Area
Ratio of .5 for all areas outside the Historic District. Plazas and pedestrian areas shall count as floor area
for the purposes of meeting the minimum Floor Area Ratio.
2)
3)
Building frontages greater than 200 feet in length shall have offsets, jogs, or have other distinctive changes
in the building facade.
Any wall which is within 30 feet of the street, plaza or other public open space shall contain at least 20% of
the wall area facing the street in display areas, windows, or doorways. Windows must allow views into
working areas or lobbies, pedestrian entrances or display areas. Blank walls within 30 feet of the street are
prohibited. Up to 40% of the length of the building perimeter can be exempted from this standard if oriented
toward loading or service areas.
4) Buildings shall incorporate lighting and changes in mass, surface or finish to give emphasis to entrances.
5) Infill of buildings, adjacent to public sidewalks, in existing parking lots is encouraged and desirable.
6) Buildings shall incorporate arcades, roofs, alcoves, porticoes and awnings that protect pedestrians from the
rain and sun.
Conclusions of Law: Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law for
the above Criterion 24 through 30 (inclusive) which are herewith incorporated and
adopted m the Council concludes that the application is consistent with all of the
Page 38
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
requirements for Basic Site Review. The subject property is within the Detail Site Review
Zone. Moreover, the Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and
conclusions of law for the below Criterion 37 through 40 (inclusive) in support of its
conclusion that the application is consistent with all of the standards and criteria for Detail
Site Review as required for land within the Detail Site Review Zone. Therefore, the Council
concludes that the application is consistent with Criterion 31.
The Council also concludes as follows:
· Regarding #1 above, this standard only applies to lands located outside the Historic
District. As this property is within the Historic District, this standard is inapplicable.
Regarding #2 above and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the proposed building
does not have building frontage greater than 200 feet in length. Therefore, the application
is consistent with #2 by reason of inapplicability.
Regarding #3 and based on Applicant's approved plans, the only wall within 30 feet of
any street is the front elevation wall, and it contains more than 20 percent in display areas,
windows, or doorways and these allow views into working areas or lobbies, pedestrian
entrances or display areas, consistent with #3.
Regarding ga, and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the building has incorporated
lighting and changes in mass, surface and finish and these emphasize the building
entrances. Materials are a combination of brick, smooth and dappled stucco and glass.
Regarding #5, this project represents an infill of an existing vacant parcel (improved now
only with decking). The existing parcel is adjacent to the public sidewalk on North Main
Street. While this project does not constitute infill within an existing parla'ng lot, the
standard in #5 is expressed only in permissive not mandatory terms and, therefore, is not
a required approval standard.
Regarding g6 and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the proposed building
incorporates a canopy along most of the building's front elevation which covers a portion
of the adjacent sidewalk and will protect pedestrians fi'om the rain and sun. Additionally,
Applicant's approved plans show that there are building overhangs above some of the
planned deck surfaces and these provide additional protection for pedestrians.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with all the requirements of Criterion 31.
Criterion 32
II-C-2b) Streetscape
Page 39
Findings ofF act and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
1) Hardscape (paving material) shall be utilized to designate "people" areas. Sample materials could be unit
masonry, scored and colored concrete, grasscrete, or combinations of the above.
2)
A building shall be setback not more than 20 feet from a public sidewalk unless the area is used for
pedestrian activities such as plazas or outside eating areas. If more than one structure is proposed for a
site, at least 25% of the aggregate building frontage shall be within 20 feet of the sidewalk.
Conclusions of Law: Regarding #1 above, the Council concludes that the planned decks (as
shown in Applicant's approved plans) will be "people" areas. While Applicant and his
architect have not yet determined the type of material to be used for the decking surface, it
will be a masonry material of some type, consistent with the requirements of #1. As to #2,
the only public sidewalk that exists near this property is the sidewalk on North Main Street,
to which the proposed building abuts. Therefore, the proposed building does not setback
more than 20 feet. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the
Council concludes that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 32.
Criterion 33
I1-C-2c) Parking & On-Site Circulation
1) Protected, raised walkways shall be installed through parking areas of 50 or more spaces or more than 100
feet in average width or depth.
2) Parking lots with 50 spaces or more shall be divided into separate areas and divided by landscaped areas
or walkways at least 10 feet in width, or by a building or group of buildings.
Developments of one acre or more must provide a pedestrian and bicycle circulation plan for the site. On-
site pedestrian walkways must be lighted to a level where the system can be used at night by employees,
residents and customers. Pedestrian walkways shall be directly linked to entrances and the internal
circulation of the building.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes that off-street parking is not required within the
C-1-D zone and no parking or parking lot is proposed. The Council also concludes that this
project does not equal one acre or more. As to the lighting and linking of pedestrian
walkways, Applicant's approved plans show complete pedestrian linkages, including a
linkage across Ashland Creek by way of the proposed (and existing) bride. The new bridge
will be lit and the same is evidenced by Applicant's approved plans. Therefore, the Council
concludes that this application is consistent with Criterion 33.
Criterion 34
II-C-2d) Buffering and Screening
1)
Landscape buffers and screening shall be located between incompatible uses on an adjacent lot. Those
buffers can consist of either plant material or building materials and must be compatible with proposed
buildings.
2) Parking lots shall be buffered from the main street, cross streets and screened from residentially zoned
land.
Page 40
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
The subject property is adjacent to only one existing land use, the existing building to
which the proposed building will very nearly abut and which is occupied by the Ashland
Bar & Grill, a restaurant which the Council deems to be compatible with the restaurant
and other uses to occupy the proposed building. As to the residential apartments to
occupy the uppermost floor of this building, the Council finds and concludes that these
are not incompatible with the commercial uses to be housed in this building and the
building next door. Upper floor residential uses in Ashland's downtown are desirable and
permitted. The Council also finds that the building materials used in the construction of
the new building (and its upper floor residential apartments) are an appropriate means to
buffer and screen the residential uses from nearby commercial uses. Therefore, the
Council concludes that no landscape buffer or screening is needed because there are no
incompatible uses on adjacent land.
Regarding #2, this application does not require parking nor is any parking proposed.
Therefore, the Council concludes that the application is consistent with #2 by reason of
inapplicability.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 34.
Criterion 35
II-C-2e) Lighting
1) Lighting shall include adequate lights that are scaled for pedestrians by including light standards or
placements of no greater than 14 feet in height along pedestrian path ways.
Conclusions of Law: Based upon Applicant's approVed plans, no free-standing lighting is
proposed. The only lighting will be that which is attached to the building, the p .ed~ostfiarj~
bridge or the canopies and which is for the purpose of illuminating entrances and outdoor
pedestrian/dining areas. In no instance, is lighting to be at a height of more than 14 feet.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes that
the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 35.
II-C-2f) Building Materials
Criterion 36
1) Buildings shall include changes in relief such as comices, bases, fenestration, fluted masonry, for at least
15% of the extedor wall area.
2) Bdght or neon paint colors used extensively to attract attention to the building or use are prohibited.
Buildings may not incorporate glass as a majodty of the building skin.
Page 41
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding # 1 and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the proposed building
incorporates architectural features of the types listed which cover more than 15 percent of
the exterior wall area.
Regarding #2 above, and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the colors to be used are
neither bright nor neon, nor does this building incorporate glass as a majority of the
building's skin.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 36.
Criterion 37
II-E. STREET TREE STANDARDS
APPROVAL STANDARD: All development fronting on public or private streets shall be required to plant street
trees in accordance with the following standards and chosen from the recommended list of street trees found in
this section.
II-E-l) Location for Street Trees
Street trees shall be located behind the sidewalk except in cases where there is a designated planting strip
in the right-of-way, or the sidewalk is greater than 9 feet wide. Street trees shall include irrigation, reot
barriers, and generally conform to the standard established by the Department of Community Development.
Conclusions of Law: Based upon Applicant's plans at Record p. 112 to 115, A-26, A-28
and A-29 and Sheets 101R and 107R Record p. AA-16 and 17, the sidewalk on North Main
Street is greater than 9 feet in width. Moreover, street trees have already been planted along
this block of North Main Street. Therefore, no new street trees are proposed or required to be
consistent with this standard. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of
law, the Council concludes that the application is consistent with the requirements of
Criterion 37.
Criterion 38
II-E-2) Spacing, Placement, and Pruning of Street Trees
All tree spacing may be made subject to special site conditions which may, for reasons such as safety, affect
the decision. Any such proposed special condition shall be subject to the Staff Advisor's review and approval.
The placement, spacing, and pruning of street trees shall be as follows:
a)
b)
Street trees shall be placed at the rate of one tree for every 30 feet of street frontage. Trees shall be evenly
spaced, with variations to the spacing permitted for specific site limitations, such as driveway approaches.
Trees shall not be planted closer than 25 feet from the curb line of intersections of streets or alleys, and not
closer than 10 feet from private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants, or
utility poles.
Page 42
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
c)
Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards. Except for public safety, no new light
standard location shall be positioned closer than 10 feet to any existing street tree, and preferably such
locations will be at least 20 feet distant.
d) Trees shall not be planted closer than 2-1/2 feet from the face of the curb except at intersections where it
shall be 5 feet from the curb, in a curb return area.
e) Where there are overhead power lines, tree species are to be chosen that will not interfere with those lines.
Trees shall not be planted within 2 feet of any permanent hard surface paving or walkway. Sidewalk cuts in
concrete for trees shall be at least 10 square feet, however, larger cuts are encouraged because they allow
additional air and water into the root system and add to the health of the tree. Space between the tree and
such hard surface may be covered by permeable non-permanent hard surfaces such as grates, bdcks on
sand, or paver blocks.
g) Trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least 8 feet of clearance above sidewalks and 12 feet
above street roadway surfaces.
h)
Existing trees may be used as street trees if there will be no damage from the development which will kill or
weaken the tree. Sidewalks of vadable width and elevation may be utilized to save existing street trees,
subject to approval by the Staff Advisor.
Conclusions of Law: The Council herewith incorporates and adopts is findings of fact and
conclusions of law for Criterion 37 and concludes that this property already has street trees in
amounts, types and locations which are consistent with Criterion 38 and the same is
evidenced in Applicant's approved plans.
Criterion 39
II-E-3) Replacement of Street Trees
Existing street trees removed by development projects shall be replaced by the developer with those from the
approved street tree list. The replacement trees shall be of size and species similar to the trees that are
approved by the Staff Advisor.
Conclusions of Law: Applicant does not anticipate the need to remove any existing street
tree during construction of this project. Therefore~-.-this application is consistent with
Criterion 39 by reason of inapplicability.
Criterion 40
II-E-4) Recommended Street Trees
Street trees shall conform to the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission.
Conclusions of Law: The Council herewith incorporates and adopts is findings of fact and
conclusions of law for Criterion 37 and concludes that this property already has street trees of
a type which are consistent with Criterion 40 and the same is evidenced in Applicant's
approved plans.
Page 43
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Criterion 41
CITY OF ASHLAND
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTION IV
HISTORIC DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT
IV-C) Histodc Distdct Design Standards
In addition to the standards found in Section II, the following Standards will be used by the Planning and Histodc
Commissions for new development and renovation of existing structures within the Histodc District:
Recommended:
IV-C-l) Height. Construct buildings to a height of existing buildings from the histodc pedods on and across the
street.
IV-C-2) Scale. Relate the size and proportions of new structures to the scale of adjacent buildings.
IV-C-3) Massing. Break up uninteresting boxlike forms into smaller, vaded masses which are common on
most buildings from the historic period.
IV-C-4) Setback. Maintain the historic fagade lines of streetscapes by locating front walls of new buildings in
the same plane as the facades of adjacent buildings.
IV-C-5) Roof Shapes. Relate the new roof forms of the building to those found in the area.
IV-C-6) Rhythm of Openings. Respect the alternation of wall areas with door and window elements in the
facade. Also consider the width-to-height ratio of bays in the facade.
IV-C-7) Platforms. The use of a raised platform is a traditional siting characteristic of most of the older
buildings in Ashland.
IV-C-S) Directional Expression. Relate the vertical, horizontal or nondirectional fac,,ade character of new
buildings to the predominant directional expression of nearby buildings.
IV-C-9) Sense of Entry. Articulate the main entrances to the building with covered porches, porticos, and other
pronounced architectural forms.
IV-C-10) Imitations. Utilize accurate restoration of, or visually compatible additions to, existing,buildings. For
new construction, traditional architecture that well represents our own time, yet enhances the nature and
character of the historic district should be used.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Standard #1 above, requires buildings to be of, "a height of existing buildings from the
historic periods on and across the street." Applicant's approved plans and Record p. 222
to 224 photographs show that the height of the proposed building is compatible in height
with buildings on the same block and those across North Main Street in compliance with
the requirements of #1.
Regarding #2 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the size and proportions of the
proposed building, relates well to adjacent structures on the same block because, even
though different in some respects, the scale of adjacent buildings is compatible with the
proposed building and consistent with other requirements in Ashland's Site Design and
Page 44
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Use Standards, which require diversity but in ways that make new buildings compatible
with historic ones. For these reasons, this application is consistent with #2.
Regarding #3 above and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the proposed building is
not an uninteresting boxlike form because it has varied masses and interesting
architectural features. Therefore, the Council concludes that this application is consistent
with #3.
Regarding ~4 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the front walls of adjacent
buildings and those on the same block, are at the North Main Street sidewalk, which is
the same location proposed for the new building, consistent with ~4.
Regarding #5 above, the new building is proposed to have a fiat roof similar to buildings
on the same block and others in Ashland's historic downtown area and the same is
evidenced in Applicant's approved plans.
Regarding #6 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the proposed building has
provided for the alternation of wall areas with doors and windows which have been
incorporated into the overall design of the wall facades.
Regarding #7 above, Applicant's approved plans show a raised platform at the North
Main Street building entrance, consistent with #7.
Regarding #8 above, Applicant's approved plans show the proposed building in relation
to those on the same block and demonstrate that its horizontal fagade character relates
appropriately to the predominant directional expression of nearby buildings in the same
block, consistent with #8.
Regarding #9 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the main entrance to the new
building off North Main Street is appropriately articulated with pronounced architectural
features which clearly denote the building entrance, consistent with #9.
Regarding gl0 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the proposed building
consists of traditional architecture which the Council concludes, well represents our own
time and enhances the nature and character of the adjacent historic buildings and historic
district in general, consistent with gl 0.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 41.
Criterion 42
CITY OF ASHLAND
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTION VI
Page 45
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES
VI-A) Height
1)
Building height shall vary from adjacent buildings, using either "stepped" parapets or slightly dissimilar
overall height to maintain the traditional 'staggered" streetscape appearance. An exception to this standard
would be buildings that have a distinctive vertical/facade treatment that "visually" separates it from adjacent
buildings. (Illustration: Recommend 1,5 & 10, Avoid 3)
2) Multi-story development is encouraged in the downtown. (Illustration: Recommend 1, 5, 6 & 10)
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding #1 above, and based upon Applicant's approved plans, stepped parapets have
been used and here produce buildings which have dissimilar, yet compatible heights t°
those in this same block.
· Regarding #2 above, although it is not expressed in mandatory terms, the proposed
building has multiple stories.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 42.
Criterion 43
VI-B) Setback
1)
2)
3)
Except for arcades, alcoves, and other recessed features, buildings shall maintain a zero setback from the
sidewalk or property line (Illustration: Recommend 2, 5 & 10). Areas having public utility easements or
similar restricting conditions shall be exempt from this standard.
Ground level entries are encouraged to be recessed from the public right-of-way to create a 'sense of entry"
through design or use of materials. (Illustration: Recommend 2, 5, 6 & 10; Avoid 3).
Recessed or projecting balconies, verandas or other useable space above the ground level on existing and
new buildings shall not be incorporated in a street facing elevation. (Illustration: Avoid 4 & 7).
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding # 1 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the proposed building
maintains a zero setback from the only sidewalk which exists near the property on North
Main Street and the same clearly demonstrates compliance with the requirements of #1.
· Regarding #2 above, and based upon Applicant's approved plans, the building's North
Main Street entry is recessed, consistent with #2.
Regarding #3' above, Applicant's approved plans show that the only cantilever is the
balcony which is located on the buildings rear elevation. The rear elevation is not a street
facing elevation. Therefore, this application is consistent with #3.
Page 46
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact'and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 43.
Criterion 44
VI-C) Width
1)
The width of a building shall extend from side lot line to side lot line (Illustration: Recommend 5). An
exception to this standard would be an area specifically designed as plaza space, courtyard space, dining
space or rear access for pedestrian walkways.
Lots greater than 80' in width shall respect the traditional width of buildings in the downtown ama by
incorporating a rhythmic division of the facade in the building's design. (Illustration: Recommend 5 & 10;
Avoid 3).
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding #1 above, Applicant's approved plans show that the proposed building will
extend from the northwesterly side property line and very nearly adjoin the existing
building to the southeast, forming a connected series of four buildings which extend
across the North Main Street streetscape within this downtown block, consistent with #1.5
Regarding #2 above, the evidence in Applicant's approved plans and the photographs of
the subject property and surrounding area (Record p. 222 to 224) do respect the
traditional width of buildings found in Ashland's downtown and has done so by
incorporating divisions in the facade in the building's design, which the Council
concludes from the evidence, are rhythmic.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 44.
Criterion 45
VI-D) Openings
1) Ground level elevations facing a street shall maintain a consistent proportion of transparency (i.e., windows)
compatible with the pattern found in the downtown area. (Illustration: Recommend 1, 5, 6 & 10).
2)
Scale and proportion of altered or added building elements, such as the size and relationship of new
windows, doom, entrances, columns and other building features shall be visually compatible with the
original architectural character of the building. (Illustration: Recommend 5 & 6; Avoid 4 & 9).
3) Upper floor window orientation shall pdmadly be vertical (height greater than width). (Illustration:
Recommend 1, 5 & 6; Avoid 8).
4) Except for transom windows, windows shall not break the front plane of the building. (Illustration:
Recommend 5).
5 Three of these four buildings are owned by this owner and, with the proposed building, these three buildings
will extend from side lot line to side lot line of the subject property.
Page 47
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
5) Ground level entry doors shall be primarily transparent. (Illustration: Recommend 10; Avoid 4).
6)
Windows and other features of interest to pedestrians such as decorative columns or decorative corbeling
shall be provided adjacent to the sidewalk. (Illustration: Recommend 1 & 5; Avoid 4 & 7). Blank walls
adjacent to a public sidewalk is prohibited.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding #1 above, Applicant's approved plans show a consistent pattem of windows
which are compatible with the pattern found in the downtown area and with buildings in
this same block. Applicant's plans are also consistent with illustrations 1, 5, 6 and 10 of
the Ashland Site Design and Use Standards and establish compliance with the
requirements of #1.
Regarding #2 above, this application involves a new building and does not involve altered
or added building elements. Therefore, this application is consistent with #2 by reason of
inapplicability.
· Regarding #3 above, Applicant's approved plans show and clearly demonstrate
compliance with the requirements of #3.
· Regarding g4 above, Applicant's approved plans show and clearly demonstrate
compliance with the requirements of
· Regarding #5 above, Applicant's approved plans show and clearly demonstrate
compliance with the requirements of #5.
· Regarding g6 above, Applicant's approved plans show windows and other interesting
architectural features which demonstrate compliance with the requirements of
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 45 ....
VI-E) Horizontal Rhythms
1)
2)
Criterion 46
Prominent horizontal lines at similar levels along the street's streetfront shall be maintained. (Illustration:
Recommend 1, 5, 6 & 10; Avoid 4 & 8).
A clear visual division shall be maintained between ground level floor and upper floors. (Illustration:
Recommend 1, 5, 6 & 10).
Buildings shall provide a foundation or base, typically from ground to the bottom of the lower window sills,
with changes in volume or material, in order to give the building a "sense of strength". (Illustration:
Recommend 1, 5 & 10; Avoid 4 & 8).
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Page 48
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
· Regarding # 1, Applicant's approved plans (which also show the streetfront of buildings
within this same block) show and demonstrate compliance with the requirements of #1
Regarding #2, Applicant's approved plans show a canopy which produces a clear visual
division between the ground floor and upper floors compliance with the requirements of
#2.
· Regarding #3, the proposed building has a base similar to buildings on this same block.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 46.
Criterion 47
VI-F) Vertical Rhythms
New construction or storefront remodels shall reflect a vertical orientation, either through actual volumes or
the use of surface details to divide large walls, so as to reflect the underlying histodc property lines.
(Illustration: Recommend 5 & 6; Avoid 3).
2)
Storefront remolding or upper-story additions shall reflect the traditional structural system of the volume by
matching the spacing and rhythm of historic openings and surface detailing. (Illustration: Recommend 6;
Avoid 4 & 9).
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding #1, Applicant's approved plans show that the front elevation has been broken
up by stepping back the sides from the middle section and the same promotes a vertical
orientation. The windows and doors of the building further produce a vertical emphasis.
The application is consistent with #1.
Regarding #2, the application involves a new building and not storefront remodeling nor
upper story additions. Therefore this application is consistent with #2 by reason of
inapplicability.
· Therefore, based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council
concludes that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 47.
Criterion 48
VI-G) Roof Forms
Sloped or residential style roof forms are discouraged in the downtown area unless visually screened from
the right-of-way by either a parapet or a false front. The false front shall incorporate a well defined cornice
line or "cap" along all primary elevations. (Illustration: Recommend 1, 5 & 10; Avoid 7).
Conclusions of Law: Applicant's approved plans show that the proposed roof will be flat
Page 49
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
and will be screened by a parapet which' contains a well defined cornice line on all sides of
the building, in compliance with the requirements of Criterion 48.
Cr/ter/on 49
VI-H) Materials
1)
2)
Exterior building materials shall consist of traditional building materials found in the downtown area
including block, brick, painted wood, smooth stucco, or natural stone. (Illustration: Avoid 4 & 9).
In order to add visual interest, buildings are encouraged to incorporate complex "paneled" exteriors with
columns, framed bays, transoms and windoWs to create multiple surface levels. (Illustration: Recommend
1,5 & 10; Avoid 7, 8 & 9).
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
· Regarding #1, Applicant's approved plans show that the exterior building materials will
be red brick and painted smooth and dappled stucco consistent with #1.
Regarding #2, Applicant's approved plans show transoms on lower floor doors and
windows and these, along with the doors and windows themselves, form complex panels
consistent with #2 (which in any event merely encourages and does not operate as an
approval standard).
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 49.
Criterion 50
Vl-I
1)
2)
3)
Awnings, Marquees or Similar Pedestrian Shelters
Awnings, marquees or similar pedestrian shelters shall be proportionate to the building and shall not
obscure the building's architectural details. If mezzanine or transom windows exist, awning placement shall
be placed below the mezzanine or transom windows where feasible. (Illustration: Recommend 1, 5, 6 & 10;
Avoid 4 & 9).
Except for marquees - similar pedestrian shelters such as awnings shall be placed between pilasters.
(Illustration: Recommend 1 & 5; Avoid 9).
Storefronts with prominent horizontal lines at similar levels along the street's streetfront shall be maintained
by their respective sidewalk coverings. (Illustration: Recommend 5; Avoid 8):
Conclusions of Law: Based upon Applicant's approved plans, the Council concludes as
follows:
· Regarding #1, the canopy to be located on the front building elevation is proportionate to
the building and does not obscure its architectural details.
· Regarding #2, the proposed canopy is placed between the pilasters.
Page 50
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Regarding #3, the subject property exists on a sloped street. However, as shown on the
approved plans (which also depict nearby buildings in the same block) the prominent
horizontal lines (including canopies) of the proposed building are at similar levels to
similar features on the nearby buildings within this street's streetfront. The proposed
. building has prominent horizontal lines which are similar to the levels of the horizontal
lines of the streetfront.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 50.
Criterion 51
VI-J) Other
1)
Non-street or alley facing elevations are less significant than street facing elevations. Rear and sidewalls of
buildings shall therefore be faidy simple, i.e., wood, block, brick, stucco, cast stone, masonry clad, with or
without windows.
2)
Visual integrity of the original building shall be maintained when altering or adding building elements. This
shall include such features as the vertical lines of columns, piers, the horizontal definition of spandrels and
cornices, and other primary structural and decorative elements. (Illustration: Recommend 6; Avoid 4 & 9).
3)
Restoration, rehabilitation or remodeling projects shall .incorporate, whenever possible, original design
elements that were previously removed, remodeled or covered over. (Illustration: Recommend 6; Avoid 4 &
9).
4)
Parking lots adjacent to the pedestrian path are prohibited. (Refer to Site Design and Use Standards,
Section II-D, for Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening Standards.) An exception to this standard would
be paths required for handicapped accessibility.
5) Pedestrian amenities such as broad sidewalks, surface details on sidewalks, arcades, alcoves, colonnades,
porticoes, awnings, and sidewalk seating shall be provided where possible and feasible.
6)
Uses which are exclusively automotive such as service stations, ddve-up windows, auto sales, and tire
stores are discouraged in the downtown. The city shall use its discretionary powers, such as Conditional
Use Permits, to deny new uses, although improvements to existing facilities may be permitted.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
Regarding #1, Applicant's approved plans show that the rear and sidewalls of the
proposed building are, in fact, fairly simple and consist of red brick, smooth and dappled
painted stucco, consistent with the requirements of#1.
Regarding #2 and #3, these appear to deal with changes to existing buildings. As the
application here is for a new building, it is consistent with #2 and #3 by reason of
inapplicability.
· Regarding g4, no parking lot proposed or required in this application. Therefore, the
application is consistent with g4 by reason of inapplicability.
Page 51
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Regarding #5, the Applicant's approved plans show the existence of broad sidewalks
which are more than 10 feet wide. The approved plans also show several pedestrian
amenities and details that are oriented to pedestrians consistent with #5. As to sidewalk
seating, none is proposed.
· Regarding /t6, the proposed building and uses intended to be housed in it, are not
exclusively automotive. Therefore, the application is consistent with #6.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 51.
Criterion 52
CITY OF ASHLAND
SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS
SECTION VI
DOWNTOWN ASHLAND AREA STANDARDS
The following criteria are adopted with this plan and shall be used as part of the land use approval process:
Approval Criteria for Downtown Area Development:
VI-l)
W-2)
VI-3)
VI-4)
v~-5)
VI-6)
Parking lots adjacent to the pedestrian path are prohibited.
Pedestrian amenities such as broad sidewalks, arcades, alcoves, colonnades, porticoes, awnings, and
sidewalk seating shall be provided where possible and feasible.
Weather protection on adjacent key pedestrian paths are reqt~ired by all new developments.
Windows and other features of interest to pedestrians shall be provided adjacent to the sidewalk. Blank
walls adjacent to sidewalks are prohibited.
Two-story development is encouraged downtown, with the second stories in commercial, residential, or
parking uses.
Uses which are exclusively automotive such as service stations, drive-up windows, auto sales, and tire
stores are discouraged in the downtown. The city shall use its discretionary powers, such as Conditional
Use permits, to deny new uses, although improvements to existing facilities may be permitted.
Conclusions of Law: The Council concludes as follows:
· Regarding VI-1 above, no parking lots are required or proposed
Regarding VI-2, the Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and
conclusions of law for/14 in Criterion 51 and concludes that this application is consistent
with #VI-2, above.
Regarding VI-3, the only key pedestrian path adjacent to the proposed building is the
sidewalk on North Main Street and it is protected from the weather by a canopy proposed
on the front building fagade, making this application consistent with # VI-3.
Page 52
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Regarding VI-4, Applicant's approved plans show that windows and other architectural
features of interest to pedestrians, have been provided on the building's front fagade,
adjacent to the North Main Street sidewalk, consistent with #VI-4. The Council also
concludes that no blank wall adjacent to sidewalk has been proposed.
Regarding VI-5, Applicant's approved plans and the findings of fact in Section IV, show
that the proposed building is of multiple stories with the upper floors devoted to
commercial and residential uses consistent with #VI-5.
Regarding VI-6 the Council herewith incorporates and adopts its findings of fact and
conclusions of law for #6 in Criterion 51 and concludes that this application is consistent
with #VI-6, above.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 52.
Criterion 53
TREE PRESERVATION & PROTECTION PERMIT
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 18)
ALUO Chapter 61 Tree Preservation & Protection
ALUO 18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit. An Applicant for a Tree Removal-
Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following cdteda are satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an
arborist's report to substantiate the cdteda for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the Applicant
demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
.
A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and
injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public dghts of
way and is causing damage to existing public or pdvate facilities or services and such facilities or
services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The Applicant must demonstrate that the
condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of
property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated
by treatment or pruning.
2. The City may require the Applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC
18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the
Applicant demonstrates all of the following:
The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other
applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site
Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to
be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface
waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
Page 53
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies,
and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this cdtedon when alternatives to the tree removal have been
considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the
zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted
density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans
or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so
long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the Applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant
to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
Conclusions of Law: This application involves the proposed removal of one tree which is
identified as Tree No. 1 on Applicant's Tree Preservation Plan (Record p. A-30). Tree No. 1
is a stand-alone tree. Based upon the evidence at Record p. A-12 to A-21 and A-11, the tree
is not considered a hazard at this time, although-according to Applicant's expert landscape
architect and arborist the tree would become a hazard because of the effect construction
would have on the root system. See, Record p. 229. While Applicant's experts agree that the
tree to be removed would become a hazard, it is not deemed a hazard at this time. Therefore,
the Council must consider the removal of this tree (Tree No. 1) pursuant to the four standards
in ALUO 18.61.080(B) -- trees that are not a hazard, and reaches the following conclusions
of law:
Regarding #B(1), the standard expressed in Section VI-C(1) of the Ashland Site Design
and Use Standards (ASDUS) requires buildings in the downtown to extend from side lot
line to Side lot line. Moreover, the standard in ASDUS VI-B(4) requires buildings to
maintain a zero setback from the sidewalk or property line (other than for arcades,
alcoves and other recessed features). The removal of Tree No. 1 is needed to permit this
application to be consistent with ASDUS VI-C(1) and VI-B(4). Additionally, ASDUS II-
C-2b(2) requires buildings to be setback not more than 20 feet from a public sidewalk.
Tree No. 1 is approximately 8 feet from the North Main Street sidewalk. By setting the
building back the maximum 20 feet, the building would still be within 12 feet of the
trunk. At Record p. A-11, Applicant's expert arborist testified: "If construction is to
occur closer than 20 feet from the trunk, it is very unlikely that the Alder would survive.?~' -
Therefore, the removal of Tree No. 1 is also needed to permit this application to be
consistent with ASDUS II-C-2b(2). For these reasons, the Council concludes that the
removal of Tree No. 1 is in order to permit the application to be consistent with other
applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other
applicable Site Design and Use Standards), consistent with #B(1) above. Moreover,
applicant has agreed, and the Council has required as a condition, to: 1) plant trees on the
adjacent ODOT property or other specified location, 2) produce community sculpture
from the removed Alder which, 3) might be located in an art park applicant desires to
create on nearby land. See, Record p. 173. Finally the Council agrees with the opinion of
its Assistant City Attorney that Ashland's tree regulations do not trump its
desigla/development standards.
· Regarding #B(2), the Council concludes that based upon Record p. A-12 to A-21 and the
expert testimony and opinion of Applicant's landscape architect, that removal of this tree
Page 54
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface
waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks because: l) This tree is within
the building footprint; erosion and soil stability will not be an issue beneath the building,
and because the flow of surface waters will be directed by the new drainage incorporated
into the proposed structure, and 2) this is a solitary tree and not part of a grove or a
windbreak and its removal will not have a negative impact on other trees.
Regarding #B(3), the Council concludes that based upon Record p. A-12 to A-21 and the
expert opinion of Applicant's landscape architect, that removal of this tree will not have a
significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity
within 200 feet of the subject property because: 1) the site is adjacent to Ashland Creek
and the existing riparian corridor along the creek contains a wide variety of sizes and
densities of wooded species with a varied tree canopy, and 2) species diversity will not be
negatively impacted because this tree is commonly found along Ashland Creek. For these
reasons, the Council concludes that removal of Tree No. 1 is consistent with #B(3) above.
Regarding #B(4), the Council concludes, based upon Record p. A-12 to A-21, that
Applicant will mitigate the removal of this tree and has agreed to stipulate in Section VI.
However, due to limited available space on the subject property, the Council concludes
that the location of mitigation planting will need to occur off-site at a location yet to be
determined. However, the location must be consistent with ALUO 18.61.084(2) or,
alternatively ALUO 18.61.084(3). The artist's sculpture from the trunk of Tree No. 1 and
the creation of benches from that trunk, have also been offered as additional (but not
required) mitigation and Applicant agreed to stipulate, and the Council has required as a
condition, that the said sculptures be donated to the city for display in an appropriate
location. See, Record p. AA-112 to 115. During the proceeding, Opponent Hopkins
argued at Record p. 259 that the proposed mitigation is inadequate under ALUO
18.61.080(B)(4) and 18.61.084. Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and
conclusions of law and conditions of approval, the Council concludes that the application
is consistent with the requirements of #B(4) and that mitigation required as a condition of
this approval is consistent with ALUO 18,61..084.
· Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council concludes
that the application is consistent with the requirements of Criterion 53.
Criterion 54
ALUO 18.61.200 Tree Protection. Tree Protection as required by this section is applicable to any planning
action or building permit.
A. Tree Protection Plan Required.
A Tree Protection Plan approved by the Staff Advisor shall be required pdor to conducting any
development activities including, but not limited to clearing, grading, excavation, or demolition work on
a property or site, which requires a planning action or building permit.
Page 55
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
In order to obtain approval of a Tree Protection Plan; an Applicant shall submit a plan to the City, which
cleady depicts all trees to be preserved and/or removed on the site. The plan must be drawn to scale
and include the following:
a. Location, species, and diameter of each tree on site and within 15 feet of the site;
b. Location of the ddp line of each tree;
c. Location of existing and proposed roads, water, sanitary and storm sewer, irrigation, and other
utility lines/facilities and easements;
d. Location of dry wellS, drain lines and soakage trenches;
e. Location of proposed and existing structures;
f. Grade change or cut and fill dudng or after construction;
g. Existing and proposed impervious surfaces;
h. Identification of a contact person and/or arborist who will be responsible for implementing and
maintaining the approved tree protection plan; and
i. Location and type of tree protection measures to be installed per AMC 18.61.230.
3. For development requiring a planning action, the Tree Preservation Plan shall include an inventory of
all trees on site, their health or hazard condition, and recommendations for treatment for each tree.
B. Tree Protection Measures Required.
.
Except as otherwise determined by the Staff Advisor, all required tree protection measures set forth in
this section shall be instituted prior to any development activities, including, but not limited to clearing,
grading, excavation or demolition work, and shall be removed only after completion of all construction
activity, including landscaping and irrigation installation.
.
Chain link fencing, a minimum of six feet tall with steel posts placed no farther than ten feet apart, shall
be installed at the edge of the tree protection zone or ddpline, whichever is greater, and at the
boundary of any open space tracts, dpadan areas, or conservation easements that abut the parcel
being developed.
3. The fencing shall be flush with the initial undisturbed grade.
.
Approved signs shall be attached to the chain link fencing stating that inside the fencing is a tree
protection zone, not to be disturbed unless prior approval has been obtained from the Staff Advisor for
the project.
5. No construction activity shall occur within the tree protection zone, including, but not limited to dumping
or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, waste items, equipment, or parked vehicles.
o
The tree protection zone shall remain free of chemically injurious materials and liquids such as paints,
thinners, cleaning solutions, petroleum products, and concrete or dry wall excess, construction debris,
or m-off.
7. No excavation, trenching, grading, root pruning or other activity shall occur within the tree protection
zone unless approved by the Staff Advisor.
C.
Inspection. The Applicant shall not proceed with any construction activity, except installation of erosion
control measures, until the City has inspected and approved the installation of the required tree protection
measures and a building and/or grading permit has been issued by the City.
Conclusions of Law: Opponent Hopkins at Record p. AA-82 and A-29 showed that not only
was the amount of excavation around the tree not being reduced, it was being increased.
Page 56
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Based upon Applicant's approved plans, there will be no excavation and the only disturbance
within the dripline of the triple-trunk maple (Tree #22) will be to establish footings for the
support pillars and these will not produce appreciable harm to the tree. Opponent Hopkins
also testified at Record p. 8 that the dripline of trees on the subject property and adjacent
property owned by ODOT are not shown and the same is required. The Council concludes
that the Tree Preservation Plan and Tree Protection Guidelines submitted by Applicant in
Record p. A-30 and A-12 to A-21, prepared by his expert landscape architect, fully complies
with Ashland's tree protection standards and accurately shows the dripline. While earlier
plans prepared by Applicant's landscape architect show areas of "critical root mass" rather
than driplines, the approved tree protection plan at Record p. A-30 illustrates driplines in
accordance with the ALUO. Therefore, the Council concludes that this application is
consistent with Criterion 54.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS (NOT TIED TO SPECIFIC APPROVAL CRITERIA)
The following general objections raised during the proceeding were not identified with any of
the relevant substantive approval criteria but are addressed by the Council as follows:
Objection: Opponent Hopkins at Record p. AA-79 argued that the application should be
denied on the basis of a failure to properly sign and certify the application either by the filing
date (December 12, 2003) or as of the deemed complete date (February 18, 2004).
Disposition: Applicant's attorney, John Hassen, cited BCT Partnership v. City of Portland,
27 Or LUBA 278 (1994), holding that a local government is not required to deny a land use
application where the application form is unsigned. Rather, if a local regulation does not
expressly state a signed application is necessary to confer jurisdiction, the local government
may consider the matter to be procedural and consider the application on the merits. Here,
Ashland's land use ordinance does not specify a signed application is a jurisdictional
necessity and the City Council holds that it is not.
Additionally, the application in this case was found by City Staff to be "complete" within the
meaning of ORS 227.178(2) on February 18, 2004. Applicant was not notified the city
considered the application to be incomplete for lack of a signature and the City Council finds
it would be inequitable at this point to refuse to consider the application on the merits.
Finally, the application has since been signed and the City Council can find no prejudice as a
result of the initial, unsigned, submission. The objection is denied.
Objection: Opponent Hopkins at Record p. AA-80 argued that portions of the planning
process have been denied to opponents, being swept along by the force of the 120 day rule.
Disposition: The Council concludes that all opponents were given a fair and even-handed
opportunity to present evidence and argument during all municipal proceedings on this
Page 57
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
matter, consistent with the procedures established in the ALUO and in ORS 197.763.
substantial fights were denied this or any party during the proceedings.
No
Objection: By written objection dated May 25, 2004, Opponent Hopkins, at Record p. AA-
85, objected to the submission of "further evidence," including any additional Staff Report,
on the ground that Opponents' time for testifying to the Council had expired. The Council
finds that all Opponents who wished to testify completed their testimony during the
continued hearing, June l, 2004. The public hearing was continued to June 15, 2004, for the
purpose of receiving Applicant's written rebuttal to Opponents' testimony and for the
Council to inquire of Applicants.
Disposition: During the continued hearing on June 1, 2004, neither Opponent Hopkins nor
any other Opponent or participant objected to any evidence, argument or response offered by
Applicant or member of the Planning Staff, nor did they request a further continuance of the
hearing or opportunity to respond to such evidence, argument or response. Had any such
objection or request for continuance been made the Council would have considered them in
accordance with ORS 197.763(4)(a) and (b). Mr. Hopkins' general, preemptive, objection
provided no basis for action by the Council.
Objection Opponent Hopkins argued that Applicant's drawings repeatedly used the "coarse
data" to create the appearance that the flood plain corridor and 100-year flood plain lines, are
the actual flood plain limits of 1872 and 1875.5 feet.
Disposition: The Council concludes that the official map which adopted the Flood Plain
Corridor shows the subject property as a small area approximately ~A inch square in size,
through which the flood plain corridor line was drawn. The corridor boundary was later
translated fi.om this map to Ashland'~s. GIS mapping database by the Ashland Planning
Department and this is all that exists; there is simply no map of greater accuracy which
depicts the location of the Ashland Creek flood plain corridor. As to FEMA data, the same is
based upon elevations and these were translated to applicants' plans by way of on-site survey
data. The FEMA flood plain elevation was accurately depicted on Applicant's plans. The
Council concludes that the both the FEMA BFE and Ashland Creek flood plain corridor were
accurately depicted and the Council has taken action on this application based upon the most
accurate information possible. Moreover, Applicant's expert engineers verified the accuracy
of the FEMA BFE and found it to be accurate.
Objection: Opponent Colin Swales testified at Record p. AA-164 that the aggregate group of
buildings on the subject property are in excess of 10,000 square feet and are therefore subject
of the provision of public open space or plaza.
Page 58
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
Disposition: The 10,000 square feet issue raised by Opponent Swales is set forth in Section
II-C-3 of the Ashland Site Design and Use Standards (ASDUS). The standard referred to
states:
"Developments (1) involving a gross floor area in excess of 10,000 square feet or a building frontage in
excess of 100 feet in length, (2) located within the Detail Site Review Zone shall, in addition to complying
to the standards for Basic and Detail Site review, shall conform to the following standards:"
For this criterion to apply, a project must fall within both of the numbered subparts. This
property is located within the Detail Site Review Zone, therefore, the project meets subpart 2
of the criterion. The question then becomes whether it meets subpart 1. That is, whether this
is a development which involves a gross floor area in excess of 10,000 square feet. As we
understand Mr. Swales' contention, he believes that because the aggregate of existing
buildings, together with the proposed building are in excess of 10,000 square feet, that
subpart 1 is also met and, therefore, the standards under ASDUS II-C-3 apply, and the same
cannot be met. However, the answer to the question hinges on what a "Development" is.
The SDUS does not contain any definitions to help resolve this question. Therefore, we must
go back to the ALUO to see if there is a definition of Development that helps resolve the
question.
The only place in the ALUO in which the term "development" is defined is in the Physical
and Environment Constraints Permit Chapter: ALUO 18.62.030(E) which provides the
following definition:
"E. Development - Alteration of the land surface by:
.
Earth-moving activities such as grading, filling, stripping, or cutting involving more than 20 cubic
yards on any lot, or earth-moving activity disturbing a surface area greater than 1000 sq. ft. on any lot;
Construction of a building, road, driveway, parking area, or other structure; except that additions to
existing buildings of less than 300 sq. ft. to the existing building footprint shall not be considered
development for section 18.62.080.
3. Culverting or diversion of any stream designated by this chapter."
Of key importance is subsection 2, which, in pertinent part, defines Development as the,
"construction of a building". There is nothing in the definition that ties Development to the
construction of an aggregate of buildings. Therefore, as long as the proposed project is a
building, and is not an addition to the existing buildings, the 10,000 square feet provision
needs to be applied only to the construction of the proposed building. In the approved plans,
the building will have its own foundation and its own walls. There are not any shared walls
with other buildings, although, there are abutting walls. Consequently, under the provisions
of the ADUS, this building has been reviewed as an independent building and, the approved
plans show the building to have less than the 10,000 square feet of gross floor area and less
than 100 feet of frontage. Therefore, this project not subject to the large scale project
standards in ASDUS II-C-3.
Page 59
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
The only instance in which the ALUO addresses an aggregate of buildings is in the 'big box'
provisions which limits the total frontage to no more than 300 lineal feet and total gross floor
area square footage to no more than 45,000. The evidence shows that the aggregate of the
proposed building, together with the existing buildings, does not violate the big box
provisions. Therefore the standards in ASDUS II-C-3 are not applicable and need not be
addressed.
Objection: During the proceeding before the City Council, Opponent Randall Hopkins
objected on the basis that the application would result in the removal of trees located on
adjacent land owned by Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT).
Disposition: The evidence showed that trees located on the adjacent ODOT property grow
over and onto the subject property and that one of these trees was either a hazard tree or of
insufficient caliper so as to require analysis. The Council also concluded that no special
permit to pnme these trees was required because they exist on land that is publicly owned.
Moreover, the proposed pruning would not constitute removal as defined by the ordinance
even if a permit were required.
VI
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The City Council herewith accepts the various stipulations of Applicant and attaches the
same as conditions of this approval, along with the additional conditions enumerated below:
Applicant Stipulations:
.
Heating/Cooling/Lighting: Applicant will provide the method of heating, cooling and
lighting of the building and the approximate annual amount of energy used per each
source and the methods used to make the approximation at the'time the construction
drawings are submitted and prior to issuance of building permits.'
2. Engineered Utility Plans: Applicant will provide engineered plans which show the
location and size of all public utilities in and adjacent to the proposed development.
.
Recycling: Pursuant to ALUO 18.72.115, Applicant will provide an opportunity-to-
recycle site for the use of the project occupants and said site will be located within the
interior of the proposed building.
.
Mitigation for Tree Removal: Applicant will mitigate the removal of Tree No. 1 as
shown on Record p. A-30. The said mitigation will be in accordance with ALUO
18.61.084. However, because space on the subject property is limited, the location of the
Page 60
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
mitigation planting will need to occur off-site at a location to be determined by the City of
Ashland. As further mitigation: 1) Applicant will commission an artist's sculpture (as
envisioned in Record p. AA-112 to 115) from the trunk of Tree No. 1 (and various
benches) for display in a location deemed appropriate by the city, 2) Applicant will plant
fems and other appropriate riparian vegetation within the riparian corridor of Ashland
Creek, and 3) also see Applicant's Intentions, Not A Part of this Application as
described in Section I hereinabove.
.
.
.
,
e
Tree Protection Measures: Applicant will fully observe and implement the tree
protection measures recommended by registered landscape architect, John Galbraith, in
the Tree Preservation Plan and Tree Protection Guidelines submitted by Applicant at
Record p. A-30 and A-12 to A-21.
Fill: Fill will be engineering and constructed in accord with applicable requirements of
the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70.
Pedestrian Bridge: The proposed pedestrian bridge will replace the existing bridge on
the subject property. Applicant has proposed a new engineered bridge to replace the
existing bridge and will be slightly realigned to meet Ashland 'design and floodplain
standards. Applicant testified that the final design of the bridge will be carried out by a
qualified Oregon-registered engineer and will be constructed at an elevation of 1877 feet,
5 feet above the FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) of 1,872 feet and otherwise designed
and constructed to meet local, state and federal flood regulations. Conditions of the
approval require the bridge to be properly engineered and Ashland regulations will ensure
that the realigned location will comply will all municipal standards, including ALUO
18.62.070(B).
Flood Proof'mg: All portions of the property required to be flood proofed, will conform
in all respects with the relevant provisions of ALUO 18.62.070(C) and AMC 15.10. The
elevation of the finished lowest habitable floor will be certified by a qualified engineer or
surveyor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the structure
Storage of Materials within Flood Plain Corridor: Neither Applicant nor Applicant's
tenants shall store petroleum products, pesticides, or other hazardous or toxic chemicals
on any part of the property located within the Flood Plain Corridor.
10. Irrigation System: All proposed living landscape areas on the property, will be served by
an automatic underground irrigation system.
11. Drainage: Applicant will provide plans prepared by a qualified engineer registered in
Oregon which address how adequate drainage will be provided for this project in
accordance with city standards.
Page 61
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
12.
Uses: Applicant will ensure that not less than 65 percent of the gross floor area of the
ground floor of the building will be occupied by uses that are permitted or special
permitted and excluding residential uses.
13.
Flood Damage Prevention Regulations: Applicant will comply fully with Ashland
Municipal Code (AMC) 15.10 (Flood Damage Prevention Regulations) in the preparation
and submittal of construction plans for the proposed building.
14. Riparian Enhancement: Applicant will enhance the riparian area beneath both the
'existing and proPosed new bridge. The riparian enhancement will be subject to city
approval of the enhancement plans.
15. Bridge Support: Applicant will eliminate the bridge support pier within the Ashland
Creek flood corridor and instead anchor the bridge to the building deck
Additional Conditions imposed by the City Council (which include the below conditions
imposed by the Planning Commission in its approval of this application:
1. That all proposals of the Applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise
modified here.
.
That the installation of plant materials within Riparian Preservation Lands (both sides of
the creek) shall be reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor in consultation with the
Oregon Fish & Wildlife Department and Ashland Tree Commission. Recommendations
on plant materials shall be incorporated into a revised landscaping plan. All planting
shall be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
.
That both sides of the bank be stabilized through .appropriate armoring, such as the
placement of medium to large boulders. The location of the creek armor shall be noted
on the revised landscaping plan and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to
commencement of building permit review, pursuant to the approval of appropriate
government agencies with jurisdiction (i.e. State & Federal).
.
That a metal street tree grate, consistent with the standards of the Public Works
Department, be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy around the
existing street tree along North Main Street.
.
That the color, texture, dimensions, shape and building materials for all exterior
components of the project be included at the time of submission of building permit. The
information shall be consistent with the colors, texture, dimensions and shape of
materials and building details proposed and approved as part of the land use.application.
6. That the recommendations of the Historic Commission be incorporated into the final
design and approved by the Staff Advisor. Building sections identifying the height,
Page 62
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
.
.
.
10.
11.
width, depth, material and texture of all exterior architectural features shall be provided
with the building permit to verify consistency with the approved building elevations.
That the Applicant submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and
locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all
other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric
Department prior to final planning approval and /or building permit issuance.
Transformers and cabinet shall be located in areas least visible from streets, while
considering the access needs of the Electric Company.
That the building setback from the creek channel shall be staked on-site, verified and
approved by the Staff Advisor prior to building permit issuance, and maintained
throughout the duration of the project.
That temporary erosion control measures shall be identified on the construction drawings,
approved by the Staff Advisor, and installed on-site prior to building permit issuance.
Temporary erosion control measures shall be maintained throughout the duration of the
project and until the final landscaping has been installed.
That the design of all storm water mn-off outfall locations be reviewed by the Public
Works Department and approved by the Staff Advisor. Outfall locations shall be situated
as close to the elevation of the creek channel as possible to reduce the potential for bank
erosion. Outfall locations shall be adequately armored and vegetated to reduce the
potential of bank erosion.
That a final utility plan for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering
Division and Building Divisions prior to issuance of a bUilding permit. The utility plan
shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the
development, including the location of water lines and meter sizes, sewers, manholes and
clean-outs, storm drainage and catch basins. Given the elevation of lower floor levels,
sanitary sewer service may require pumping to the sewer main located in North Main
Street. In addition, connecting to City water may require the cutting of North Main Street
due to the lines anticipated location on the opposite side of the street.
12. That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department, including but not limited to
hydrant placement and flow and apparatus access, shall be clearly identified on the
construction drawings and reviewed and approved by the Ashland Fire Department prior
to issuance of a building permit.
13. That all portions of the building located at an elevation of 1873 or below shall be flood-
proofed and designed to the standards identified in 15.10.080 and as suggested by FEMA
for non-residential construction. The flood-proofing measures shall be clearly identified
on the construction drawings, reviewed and approved by the Building Official, and
certified by an Oregon registered professional engineer that the design and methods of
Page 63
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting the
provisions of 15.10.080 and FEMA.
14.
That the covenant or similar deed restriction be recorded on the property prohibiting the
establishment or installation of any structure or similar element on the opposite side of
the creek (east side) that would in any way restrict the overflow of floodwaters into the
area beneath the viaduct. The legal instrument shall be prepared by the Applicant and
reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor and City Attorney prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy.
15.
That a sign, awning and marquee program for the development be included at the time of
building permit review. The program shall identify the anticipated number of signs,
locations and approximate square footage based upon the requirements described in the
Sign Code 18.96. Leases for commercial tenant spaces shall note that awnings, marquees
or similar pedestrian shelters shall be consistent with City Downtown Design Standards
(VI-l), reviewed by the Ashland Historic Commission and approved by the Planning
Department Staff Advisor.
16.
That all recommendations of the Ashland Tree Commission noted on their January 9,
2004 document be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit. The
recommendations shall be included on a revised landscaping plan and final irrigation plan
at the time of submission of building permits.
17.
That proposed Tree Protection measures address existing trees located immediately north
of the property within the State right-of-way. The approval of off-site mitigation on the
State right-of-way shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. The Applicant shall seek
ODOT's consent of the planting of a large specimen tree (one to two trees, depending on
the species and what canopy it will reach), two and one-half inches in caliper to mitigate
the loss of canopy from the removal of the alder tree. The landscape architect can make
the decision as to what type of tree(s). At maturity the tree should be considered a
signature tree.
18.
That an opportunity-to-recycle site for use by project residents shall be identified for the
project in accordance with the standards described in section 18.72.115 of the Ashland
Land Use Ordinance prior to issuance of a building permit.
19. That the construction drawings submitted at the time Building Permit review shall
demonstrate compliance with 18.62.070(G).
20. That wood clad windows be installed on the.. front windows with a four-inch mullion
(separation). Such revisions to be clearly identified on the building permit plans.
22. Submit complete new set of drawings, with engineer's stamp on architect's drawing (or
equivalent) to demonstrate that the flood storage calculations fit the design shown, and
acknowledge the tree protection requirements. Accurate flood plain and riparian setbacks
Page 64
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
must be shown. Accurate figures for calculation of storage volume must tie to actual
areas, number of pillars, etc.
23. An engineer is required to stamp the design and flood compliance of any creek crossing.
24. Restore the FEMA elevation certificate requirement at the higher elevation (//14 from pg
104).
25. Correct//13: FEMA flood eleVation plus one foot is 1873 not 1773 feet.
26. Plans and documents shall be reviewed and agreed to by Public Works for compliance
with City's strictest flood damage protection rules.
27. Utility and storm water plans shall reflect tree protection measures to the greatest extent
possible.
28. Applicant to pursue Art Park concept with ODOT and the City of Ashland (Parks, Public
Art Commission, Planning, etc.). If not possible in preferred location, mitigate tree loss
elsewhere on public land.
29. Tree Commission to be consulted prior to issuance of building permit for revised
comments and mitigation plans under Conditions//16 and//17.
30. Stipulation//9, page 173, of Applicants' submittal be brought forward and extended
beyond toxic materials to any materials that would reduce the flood storage volume
beneath the building.
31. Artist sculptures produced from the removed Alder tree shall be donated to the City of
Ashland.
VII
ULTIMATE CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Council affirms the
decision of the Planning Commission and concludes that this application is consistent with all
of the applicable relevant substantive criteria and development standards of the City of
Ashland. Therefore the application is approved and made subject to all of the stipulations and
conditions set forth in Section VI bove.
Dated:
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
Page 65
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
City of Ashland, Oregon
By: Cate Hartzell
Council Chairperson
Page 66
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Ashland Planning Action 2004-002
CiTY OF
-ASHLAND
Council Communication
TITLE:
DEPT:
DATE:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Synopsis:
Recommendation:
Background:
Adoption of Findings for Planning Action 2004-052, a Request for a Conditional
Use Permit and Site Review Approval to Convert a Portion of the Existing
Residence at 904 Garden Way into an Accessory Residential Unit.
APPLICANTS: Jane Cory-VanDyke and Dennis Gray
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
August 17, 2004
c ugh n, ~,irector ot'Com~ty Development~
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator C(
On July 20 and August 3, 2004, the City Council held public hearings regarding
the appeal of the above referenced planning action. The Council ultimately
approved the request, with conditions attached to that approval. The attached
findings documents that decision and provides the required findings.
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the findings as presented.
The record supporting the decision of the Council is available for review at the
Planning Department.
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE CITY OF ASHLAND
STATE OF OREGON
August 3, 2004
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2004-052, A REQUEST FOR
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE REVIEW APPROVAL TO
CONVERT A PORTION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 904 GARDEN
WAY INTO AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT.
APPLICANT: Jane Cory-VanDyke and Dennis Gray
)
) FINDINGS,
) CONCLUSIONS
)
)
)
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 5100 of 391E 15AC is located at 904 Garden Way and is zoned R-1-7.5: Single-Family
Residential.
2) The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review approval to convert 475 square
feet of the existing residence into an accessory residential unit.
3) The criteria for a Conditional Use Permit are described in Chapter 18.104 as follows:
A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use
is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are
not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation cao~. ~a~d will be provided
to and through the subject property.
C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact
area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When
evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors oflivability of
the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone:
1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage.
2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and
mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities.
3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
5. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
PA 2004-052
Page 1
.
use.
Other factors found to be relevant by the Heating Authority for review of the proposed
4) The following approval criteria for Site Review approval are described in 18.72.070:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed
development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council
for implementation of this Chapter.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will
be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-
way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards-
Options.
5) The Council, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on~[August 3, 2004, at which
time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The record made before the Hearings Board
was received and is made a part of the record for this proceeding. The Council approved the application
subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site.
Now, therefore, the Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and concludes as follows:
SECTION 1. EXHIBITS
For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony
will be used.
Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S"
Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P"
Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O"
Heating Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M"
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on
.the Staff Report, public heating testimony and.the exhibits received.
2.2 The Council finds that the proposal to convert 475 square feet of living space to an accessory
residential unit complies with the criteria for a Conditional Use Permit and the requirements for an
PA 2004-052
Page 2
accessory residential unit. The existing house contains 1,574 square feet of living area. Accessory
residential units are limited in size to a maximum of half of the gross habitable floor area of the
primary residence. The proposed accessory residential trait contains 475 square feet of living space.
Since the residence is being modified internally to allow for the accessory residential unit, 1,099
square feet of the original total square footage will be dedicated to the primary residence. The
proposal meets the size requirement because the accessory residential unit is less than half the size
of the primary residence.
A total of three parking spaces are required for the proposal with one space required for the
accessory residential unit and two spaces required for the primary residence. The requirement is
satisfied by two parking spaces which will be provided on site and two on-street spaces which will
be provided adjacent to the property on Garden Way for an off-street parking credit. A condition
has been added requiring the driveway apron to be shifted to the south so as to provide 48 lineal feet
of uninterrupted curb line adjacent to the property for an off-street parking credit. A total of 30%
of the site covered with impervious surface which is below the maximum of 45% allowed in the
zone. The footprint and height of the structure will not be altered, and as a result the setback will
not change.
2.3 The Council finds that City facilities are in place and have adequate capacity to provide service
to the proposed accessory residential unit. Public facilities including Water, sewer, electric and storm
sewer are located within Garden Way and are available to accommodate service needs of the project.
Garden Way is an improved city street, which provides paved access to and through the property.
Garden Way is a Neighborhood Street improved to City standards without continuous sidewalks.
A condition has been added requiting the applicant to sign in favor of a local improvement district
to install sidewalks at a future date. Bicycle traffic is accommodated in a shared lane in accordance
with the City street standards for a neighborhood street.
2.4 The property is a slightly oversized being 8,125 square feet with the minimum lot size in this
zone (R-1-7.5) being 7,500 square feet. The target use of the property is one single-family residence.
The parcel is within 1/3 of a mile from Siskiyou Boulevard and the bus route which makes walking,
bicycling and transit viable options for residents of the a .ccessory residential unit. Since the building
will not be altered except for interior remodeling and additions of windows and doors, the
appearance of the residence will be largely unchanged. As a result, the scale, bulk, lot coverage and
architectural compatibility will not change. The Council finds that the existing main entry to the
accessory residential unit on the side of the house will create more of a negative effect on the
adjacent property to the south than a single-family home. As a result, conditions have been added
requiring the main entry to the accessory residential unit to be removed from the side of the house
and replaced on the front of the house, and requiring additional screening along the south property
line. The Council finds that with the attached conditions the proposed accessory residential unit will
have 'no greater adverse affect on the livability of the neighborhood than the target use of the
property.
2.5 The Council finds that the project design is consistent with the City's Site Design Standards
including orientation, streetscape, landscaping, open space and building materials. The primary
PA 2004-052
Page 3
residence is existing and will remain largely unchanged on the exterior, and as a result the proposal
complies with the Site Design and Use Standards. The Council felt it was most appropriate to have
the site and structure continue to appear as a single-family residence given the low profile of the
Ranch Home architectural style as well as the general development pattern of the neighborhood. The
application includes a landscape plan. Most of the existing landscaping on the site is mature and will
remain in place. New plantings with an irrigation system are proposed in the front yard area. The
proposal does not include the removal of any trees on the property.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the foregoing findings of facts, conclusions of law and evidence contained in the whole record,
the Council finds and concludes that the application for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review approval
to construct has satisfied all relative substantive standards and criteria contained within the Ashland
Municipal Code and the Ashland Site Design and Use Standards.
The Council ultimately concludes, based upon the foregoing and following conditions, that planning
application 2004-052 complies with all requirements of the City of Ashland and of the State of Oregon.
Therefore, the City Council upholds the decision of the Ashland Heatings Board and approves planning
application 2004-052 and imposes the following conditions.
1) That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here.
2) That the driveway and edging for the second parking space on site shall be installed prior to
issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
3) That the property owners shall sign in favor of a local improvement district to install sidewalks on
Garden Way prior to issuance of the building permit for the accessory residential unit.
4) That a separate electric meter for the accessory residential unit shall be installed in accordance with
Ashland Electric Department requirements prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy..
5)
The landscaping plan shall be revised to eliminate additional plantings other than ground cover in
the street right-of-way (area behind curb); and to include street trees at 1 per 30 feet of street frontage
prior to issuance of the building permit. That a landscape plan shall be submitted for review and
approval of the Staff Advisor prior to issuance of the building permit. Landscaping and the irrigation
system shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans prior to issuance of the certificate of
occupancy.
6)
The street trees shall be installed behind the location of a future sidewalk prior to the issuance of
the certificate of occupancy for the primary residence. All street trees shall be chosen from the
adopted Street Tree List and shall be installed in accordance with the specificationS noted in Section
E of the Site Design and Use Standards. The street trees shall be irrigated.
PA 2004-052
Page zl
7)
8)
9)
That the irrigation plan shall be submitted with the building permit for the accessory residential
unit for review and approval by the Ashland Conservation Division.
That all requirements of the Ashland Fire Department shall be met including, but not limited to
installation of smoke alarms complying with current O.R.S. requirements, prior to issuance of the
certificate of occupancy.
That an opportunity to recycle site shall be located on the site, or an individual recycle bin shall be
provided to the accessory residential unit in conformance with 18.72.040 prior to issuance of the
certificate of occupancy for the accessory residential unit.
lO)
That all requirements of the Ashland Building Division shall be met including, but not limited to
separation requirements. A building permit shall be obtained as required by the Ashland Building
Division for modifications to create the accessory residential unit.
ll)
That the Systems Development Charges (SDC's) for transportation, parks, water and sewer shall be
paid in full with the building permit or prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy,
whichever is issued first.
12) That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not illuminate adjacent proprieties.
13) That the driveway apron shall be removed and replaced with a new driveway apron by shifting the
location to the south and centering a new apron to provide access to the two off-street parking spaces
and to provide 48 feet of adjacent uninterrupted curb necessary for one off-street parking credit. A
driveway apron plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Staff Advisor prior to installation.
A permit for work in the street right-of-way shall be obtained prior to installation from the Ashland
Engineering Division. The new driveway apron and curb replacement shall be installed in accordance
with the approved plan prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the accessory residential unit.
14) That the primary entrance to the accessory residential unit shall be relocated to the west side of the
structure facing Garden Way and the existing door on the south side of the building shall be removed
prior to occupancy of the accessory residential unit. The design of the primary entrance shall not
interfere with the parking space in the carport and shall be submitted for review and approval of the
Staff Advisor with the building permit submittals for the accessory residential unit. A floor plan of the
accessory residential unit shall be submitted with the building permit submittals.
15) That fencing in accordance with the height and design limitations of 18.68.010 shall be installed along
the southern property line in areas without fencing prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
accessory residential unit. The fencing shall screen the property to the south from the parking area,
lights and foot traffic associated with the accessory residential unit. A fence permit shall be obtained
prior to installation of any fencing.
16)
That the accessory residential unit shall not exceed 550 square feet unless a modification of the
conditional use permit is approved.
PA 2004-052
Page 5
17)
That the electric pole adjacent to the driveway shall be inspected by the Ashland Electric Department
to determine if safety measures are required prior to installation of a new driveway apron. Any required
safety measures shall be installed and inspected by the Ashland Electric Depam~ent prior to occupancy
of the accessory residential unit.
CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON
By: Alan DeBoer, Mayor Date
PA 2004-052
Page 6
CiTY OF
-ASHLAND
Council Communication
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Synopsis:
The Billings Ranch/l~iolf Course / Greenway
Administration fi} }
August 17, 2004
Gino Grimaldi Lfx
Councilor Hartzell has requested that the City Council discuss the possible development of the Billings
Ranch Golf Course and its impact on the Bear Creek Greenway.
Recommendation
None.
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Background:
The proposed Billings Ranch Golf Course is located on the northern end of town in the vicinity of
Jackson Road. The land for the proposed golf course is outside of the city limits of Ashland and outside
of the Urban Growth Boundary. The proposed golf course borders a portion of the Bear Creek
Greenway and is adjacent to the city limits. Developers of the golf course were seeking land use
approval from Jackson County. The developers withdrew their land use application and do not have a
current application filed with Jackson County.
This issue was presented to the City Council at its meeting of February 3, 2004.
At the City Council meeting of April 7, 2004, Public Works Director Paula Brown, presented issues
related to the reuse of effluent from the sewage treatment plant and water trading options with the
proposed Billings golf course. No additional work regarding the water trading options has taken place
since the City Council study session.
Staff will provide additional information regarding the status of the proposed golf course at the August
17th City Council meeting.
Attachments:
None.
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Council Communication
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
ApProved By:
Synopsis:
Discussion of Request for Proposals for the development of affordable housing
above downtown City owned public parking lots.
Planning Department
August 17, 2004
Brandon Goldman, Housing Program S~ialist
John McLaughlin, Director of Commu{t~ Development
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator
Last October, the Housing Commission was directed by the City Council to review a specific proposal
for develOpment of affordable housing above the Hargadine Parking Structure. The Housing
Commission reviewed the proposal presented by Alan Sandler to develop 20 low-income rental units
above the parking structure at their November 19th 2003 meeting. Through discussions at this and
subsequent meetings, the Housing Commission determined that in lieu of accepting Mr. Sandler's
proposal alone, other proposals should be solicited through an RFP process. Due to complications
related to the maximum building size ordinance for downtown, Mr. Sandler proposed changing his
housing proposal to the Pioneer parking lot (comer of Lithia Way and Pioneer).
The Housing Commission found that the concept of developing housing above public parking lots has
merit, and was supportive of the potential development of affordable housing above the Pioneer Lot, and
other lots within the downtown area, such as the small lot on Lithia Way across from Copeland Lumber,
and the lot on Second Street near the Monet restaurant.
For consideration by the Council, the Commission suggests that the City should include in an RFP a
period of affordability of not less than 40 years under lease, and perhaps contain a buy-back provision at
the conclusion of the period of affordability. Additionally the Housing Commission recommends that
the proposals 'should benefit households earning less than 80% of median income.
The City's Housing Action Plan identifies downtown parking lots as potential sites for affordable
housing projects, utilizing the airspace over the lots. For consideration by the Council staffhas
identified three city owned properties that could be potential sites for affordable housing above the
public parking lots. These sites include the Lithia Way lot, the Pioneer Street Lot, and the Second Street
lot. The Lithia Way lot has a potential of approximately 10 units, the Pioneer Street Lot (due to being
outside of the Downtown overlay) has a potential of approximately 17 units, and the Second Street lot
has a potential of 13 units. Due to size restrictions on the parking structure, it may not be possible under
the current ordinances to add housing to the top of this building.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to finalize the RFP based upon comments received at the
meeting, and distribute it for only the Lithia Way parking lot at this time (approx. 10 units). This will
allow the staff an opportunity to concentrate the efforts on one parcel within the downtown and work
closely with the ultimate housing provider.
Should the process prove successful, other lots can then utilize the same process.
The Council may also choose to maintain the public parking lots in their current state and not entertain
mY requests for further development at these locations at this time. However, this would tend to run
counter to the Housing Action plan and previous direction from the Council.
The Council may wish to also consider land use amendments which could allow for housing to be
developed over the parking structure, and a greater number of units over the Pioneer parking lot.
Fiscal Impact:
Dependent upon the Council's direction, sale or lease of the air space could result in revenue to the City.
However, the value of the airspace has not been determined for any of the three identified sites. The
City may be requested to provide the air space at a low cost, or no cost, to ensure the viability of an
affordable housing project.
Next Steps:
Assuming the Council directs staff to move forward with the RFP, the following represents the next
steps in the process:
.
.
e
Finalize revisions to RFP based upon Council input from 8/17 meeting, with review by
the City Administrator and City Attorney. (approximately 30-60 days) Early October,
2004
Distribute RFP to housing developers and non-profit housing providers. (45 - 60 days)
Early December, 2004
Staff Review and Recommendation (14 days) Late December, 2004
Housing Commission Review and Recommendation (30 days) Late January., 2005
Council Review and Decision- February, 2005
Attachment:
A draft RFP has been developed to illustrate how proposals could be evaluated. This draft RFP contains
site specific information and maps that describe each of the sites identified including their development
potential. It should be recognized that this document is still in draft form and is subject to further review
by the staffbased upon comments received at the meeting.
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
DRAFT
Request for Proposals and Qualifications
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PARKING LOTS
August 17, 2004
Offered by:
The City of Ashland City Council
& Housing Commission
Submittals due in the Department of Community Development office,
located at 51 Winbum Way, Ashland, OR 97520,
no later than
Questions on content please contact: Brandon Goldman, Department of Community Development,
541-552-2076 or goldmanb~ashland.or.us
CITY OF ASHLAND
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS and REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PARKING LOTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................ 4-5
Lithia Lot .................................................................................. 5
Pioneer Lot ................................................................................ 5
Second Street Lot ...................................................................... 5
II. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................ 6-7
III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS ......................................................................... 8-9
IV. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION .................................................................
10-11
Attachments
Application Cover sheet ............................................................ 13
RFP issuance and submittal guidelines ..................................... 14
Map .......................................................................................... 15
V. PROPOSAL EVALUATION & SELECTION .......................................... 12
The City of Ashland is seeking proposals from affordable housing developers to lease or
purchase the air rights for development above City owned parking lots within the
downtown vicinity. Each proposal should specifically address one of the three sites
identified in this proposal. Should a respondent have a proposal to develop more than
one of the sites, a separate proposal should be submitted for each with additional
narrative to describe the relationship, if any, between the two proposals. Sites include the
airspace above the Lithia Way Parking Lot, The Pioneer Lot airspace and the Second
Street air-space. Each site contains unique opportunities and unique constraints that are
generally 'described within this RFP. The City is soliciting proposals with the purpose of
creating and managing affordable housing. The City is seeking proposals that would
develop and manage affordable housing with provisions for the City to regain ownership
at the conclusion of the proposed period of affordability. The Housing Commission has
further identified that proposals should aim to provide housing units for a 40 year period,
to households earning 80% or less of the area median income.
This Request for Proposals ("RFP") invites proposals from not-for-profit and for-profit
developers to purchase or lease the air rights to a selected property, to oversee
development, and to carry out the development program. The City is seeking a
development proposal that will provide affordable housing for moderate, low, and very-
low income households. Respondents should determine the most realistic and feasible
uses for the chosen site(s), while recognizing the objective of maximizing the use of the
site to address Ashland's affordable housing goals. Proposals should emphasize economic
feasibility, affordability, livability, good design, sensitivity to adjacent residential uses,
responsiveness to Ashland's Downtown Design Standards and to the historic districts that
surround the subject properties.
The City of Ashland intends to select a development team that can demonstrate expertise
in affordable housing development, outline adequate financial capacity, describe a
compelling design concept and program, submit an offer for site-control of the selected
property, and describe how the proposed project will be managed and maintained during
the proposed period of affordability while meeting community objectives.
Specifically development proposals are sought that will:
1. Serve as a catalyst and model for the development of city owned airspace over parking
lots within the vicinity of the Downtown.
2. Support the concept of a high density, mixed-use character within the downtown
3. Provide affordable housing units at a cost and size that addresses the needs of Ashland
residents and employees.
4. Include a period of affordability (40 years or more) and/or recapture provisions that
addresses the long-term housing needs of the community.
5. Include provisions for the management and maintenance of the housing project
throughout the period of affordabi!ity.
3
I. PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS
Each of the three sites available for proposals are located within or adjacent to Ashland's
downtown core as shown on the attached Map (pg 15). Each of the four sites are within a
National Register Historic District. Within these districts specific design standards apply
which can be found in the City's Site Design and Use Standards. This document is
available at the Community Development building at 51 Winbum Way or online at:
http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Site_Design.pdf
General information on each site is provided below, however applicants are encouraged
to consult with the Ashland Planning Department with specific questions pertaining to
their proposed development.
In any property ownership where the airspace is owned or leased separately from the land
upon which it sits, the various owners must address the maintenance and liability of those
areas used in common. Consideration must be given to the approaches and access to be
used by the residents, including stairways, landings and elevators; the pipes, ducts, wires
and utilities necessary for construction and occupation of the housing; parking needs for
residents and the public; exterior maintenance requirements; and the allocation of liability
should any common element fail.
Lithia Lot
This parking lot sits mid block between Pioneer and First Street on the south side of
Lithia Way. The property is 7350sq.fLin size and is located within the Downtown
Commercial zone (C-l-D). At 60 units per acre in this zone the site has the l~otential for
approximately 10 dwelling units above the existing surface parking.
This site is surrounded on all sides by commercially zoned properties. To the south of the
property there is a paved Public Alley (Will Dodge Way).
Residential Use, as is the case with each of the subject parkinglots, is a special permitted
use within the zone. Chapter 18.32.025D of the Ashland Municipal Code outlines the
requirements for such residential use within the C-1-D zone. Within this section of the
Ashland Municipal code it notes that a minimum of 65% of the ground floor must be
used as a permitted or special permitted use. "Public Parking Lots" are listed as a
permitted use and therefore the retention of public parking on the ground floor will
satisfy this standard.
Additionally applicants should recognize that although no parking is required in the C-1-
D zone for residential uses, applicants should consider the parking impacts of their
proposed development.
Pioneer Lot
The Pioneer Lot is located north-east of the intersection of Pioneer Street and Lithia Way.
The property is approximately 26,000 sq. fi. in size and is zoned C-1, commercial.
Within this zone residential base density is 30 units per acre giving the lot the potential
for 17.9 dwellings.
The Site is bounded on three sides by commercially zoned property. To the north the
adjacent property is zoned multifamily residential. As this northern property is
residential, respondents to this RFP with the intention to develop this site need to
recognize implications of the Solar Ordinance (18.70) in developing their proposal.
Applicants should recognize that unlike the properties within the C-1-D zone, this sites
zoning (C- 1) does require parking for residential uses consistent with the off-street
parking chapter (18.92).
Second Street Lot
This property is located on the east side of Second Street between Hargadine Street and
East Main Street. The lot is approximately 10,000 sq.fi, in size and is zoned C-1-D.
The C-1-D zone has a residential development potential of 60 units per acre, thus
approximately 13 units for this property.
The property surrounded by commercially zoned property on all sides. To the south of
the lot (uphill) there exists an unimproved public alley.
II. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
Applicants are cautioned not to make any assumptions as the implied meaning or
intent of any part of the RFP. Applicants should request clarification if needed.
Every request for information on or clarification of the RFP, must be submitted to
Brandon Goldman in writing at least ten days prior to the date set for the deadline
for proposals.
Any prospective applicant who contends that the provisions of this RFP or any
aspect of the procurement process will encourage favoritism in the award of the
contract for services, or substantially diminish competition, must file a written
protest to the RFP at least ten days prior to the date set for the opening of
proposals. Failure to file a protest will be deemed a waiver of any claim by an
applicant that the procurement process violates any provision of ORS Chapter
279, the City of Ashland Local Contract Review Board Rules or the City's
procedures for screening and selection of personal service contractors.
The provisions of this RFP cannot be modified by oral interpretations or
statements. If inquiries or comments by applicants raise issues that require
clarification by the City, or the City decides to revise any part of this RFP,
addenda will be provided by all persons who receive the RFP. Receipt of an
addendum must be acknowledged by signing and returning it with the proposal.
A.
ASHLAND BUSINESS LICENSE
The selected developer must have a current City of Ashland businesS license
prior to conducting any work in the City of Ashland.
g.
C.
D.
EVALUATION CRITERIA and PROFFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
The selection of the development and management team for the project shall be
based on weighted criteria as cited in Section IV. Standard criteria includes, but
is not limited to; units provided, income affordability targets, period of
affordability, professional experience, references, and schedule.
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The development and management team shall perform the work using the
standards of care, skill and diligence normally provided by a professional in the
performance of such services in respect to similar work and shall comply with all
applicable codes and standards. The selected developer shall be responsible to
comply with any additional federal or state requirements that may apply to the
project.
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Upon selection of a developer and entering into a contract agreement the
developer shall, at its own expense, at all times during the term of the contract,
maintain in force:
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;
2. A professional errors and omissions liability policy; and
3. A comprehensive automobile liability policy including owned
and non-owned automobiles.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Certificates of insurance acceptable to the City shall be filed with City
prior to the commencement of any work by developer. 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 mail" written notice is unacceptable.
Eo
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
Final original documents prepared for this project shall be deemed to be owned
by the City of Ashland and shall be delivered to the City at the project close-out.
III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS
The consultant shall submit 10 copies of the proposal for consideration by the City. The
proposal shall address each of the following listed items and shall be organized in
accordance with this section. The proposal shall be less than 20 pages. Please provide
site-plans and conceptual designs on pages no larger than 11" x 17". Submission of
electronic documents will not satisfy the printed material submittal requirements,
however delivery of these computer files is encouraged to allow the City to reproduce
materials.
The consultant's proposal will be evaluated using criteria in section IV. At a minimum,
the proposal shall include the following information:
A. Information about Development entity
1. State the name, address, telephone number, FAX number, e-mail and
primary contact person of the lead organization or firm making the
proposal.
2. If a joint venture or team is submitting the proposal, state this
information for each of the firms and each firm's responsibility for the
completion of the project.
3. Describe the experience of each organization or firm and key personnel.
4. Describe recent and current projects the organization is engaged in,
especially as they relate to building and managing affordable housing.
B. Description of Project 1. Executive Summary
2. Number of units by size and level of affordability:
Medford-Ashland HUD Income Limits
Income Limits by Family Size: S/year
*For the Medford-Ashland Statistical Area as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development 2004.
Income Level Number of Persons in Family
Category
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+
Extremely Low 10950 12500 14050 15650 16900 18150 19400 20650
Income (30%
Median)
Low Income 18250 20850 23450 26050 28150 30200 32300 34400
(50% Median)
Moderate 29,20 33350 37500 41700 45000 48350 51700 55000
Income (80% 0
median)
Example: 100 unit project
· 50 three-bedroom units affordable to very low income households (below 50% of median
income); 25 two-bedroom units affordable to low income households (50-80% of median
income); 10 two-bedroom units at affordable at median income (100% of median); 10 two-
bedroom units at market rote
3. Proposed period of affordability and anticipated use at the conclusion of the
affordability period
4. Describe the City and/or other agency approvals necessary for this project.
5. Development plan with timeframe for project completion.
6. Provide a pro-forma for the project describing the source and use of funds
for construction and a 1 O-year operating cash flow on the project. Specify any
state or federal grants, tax credits, or other subsidies sought as funding for the
proposed project.
7. Property management program for project. Describe how the completed
project will be managed throughout the period of affordability.
8. Describe the proposed use of the property (including ownership,
maintenance, and management) after the proposed period of affordability has
expired.
· C. References
Provide information on the project team qualifications and experience.
Provide references (names, address, phone numbers, and contact persons) for
similar projects completed or underway.
IV. EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
Each proposal shall be evaluated as to how it addresses the following criteria:
1. PROJECT APPROACH AND VISION
MAX SCORE 50 PTS
This relates to the basic understanding of the requested development. Is
there a clear and concise understanding of the project objectives based on
the consultant's proposal?
} Number and type of units proposed efficiently utilizes space available
} Targets low-moderate income households that are in critical need of
housing.
} Period of affordability
} Plan maximizes public benefit
2. ORGANIZATIONAL CAPABILITIES & RESOURCES
MAX SCORE 15 PTS
This relates to the organizations capabilities in completing the proposed
development. The basic question is how well the team's qualifications and
experience relate to the requested services The response ,should address
the following:
Projects completed within the last five years that best characterize work
quality and cost control.
Management and organizational structure.
Applicant demonstrates ability to secure funding sources proposed
Experience and current duties of key members who will be performing the
work on this project.
Experience as a team on similar or related projects.
Other on going projects.
Readiness to proceed.
3. DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE
MAX SCORE 10 PTS
Provide a realistic development schedule for completion of the project.
} Project Benchmarks are well-defined and realistic
} Contingencies are planned and realistic
e
PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES
MAX SCORE 20 PTS
The proposal shall include a project pro-forma including identification of
all potential funding sources for the project development. Applicants are
encouraged to provide information on any competitive and/or non-
competitive Local, State or Federal low-income housing assistance sought
for the development. Should any of these funding streams require a
specific period of affordability and/or target income qualifications the
10
proposal should note those requirements and how they will be monitored
over the period of affordability.
5. REFERENCES
MAX SCORE 5 PTS
List former clients for whom the consultant has performed similar or
comparable services within the past five years. Identify like projects the
developer has completed. Include the name, mailing address and phone
number of their principle representation and a brief description of the
project.
11
IV. PROPOSAL EVALUATION & SELECTION
A. REVIEW
proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by the Housing Commission for recommendations to be
forwarded to the City Council. The City Council will receive public testimony regarding the
proposals and select the development proposal.
To assist the Housing Commission and City Council in their deliberations each proposal will be
evaluated on the completeness and quality of content as described in the preceding section.
Interviews may be conducted with the top ranking fn'ms if the City deems it necessary.
B. EVALUATION CR1TERIA
Each proposal will be judged as a demonstration of the applicants capabilities and understanding
of the type of development requested. Evaluation factors and points will be as follows:
Maximum
Criteria Score
1 Understanding of Project Approach and Vision 50
2 Firm's Capability & Resources 15
3 Development Schedule 10
4 Project Funding Sources 20
5 References 5
Total 100 Points
C. CITY RESERVATION
The City of Ashland reserves the right to waive irregularities or discrepancies in a proposal if the
City determines that the waiver is in the best interest of the City.
D. ADDENDA TO THE RFP
The provisions of this RFP cannot be modified by oral interpretations or statements. If inquiries.
or comments by offerors raise issues that require clarification by the City, or the City decides to
revise any part of this RFP, addenda will be provided to all persons known to the contact person
who have received or will subsequently receive the RFP. Receipt of addenda must be
acknowledged by signing and returning it with the proposal.
E. PROTEST
Any prospective developer who contends that the provisions of the RFP or any aspect of the
procurement process will encourage favoritism in the award of the contract, or substantially
diminish competition, must file a written protest to the RFP at least ten days prior to the date set
for the opening of proposals. Failure to file a protest will be deemed a waiver of any claim by an
offeror that the procurement process violates any provision of ORS Chapter 279, the City of
Ashland Local Contract Review Board Rules or the City's procedures for screening and selection
of persons to perform personal services.
F. CONTRACT
The developer selected by the City will be expected to enter into a written contract with the City
of Ashland. Unconditional refusal to accept the contract provisions proposed by the City without
offering acceptable altematives may result in disqualification of the offeror or a less favorable
evaluation of its proposal.
12
CITY OF
-AS H LAN D
Request for Proposals and Qualifications
DOWNTOWN PUBLIC PARKING LOTS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Request for Proposal
Application Form
(include as top-sheet of Proposal)
Project Name'
Project Location
Project Description:
Applicant:
Address:
City, State & Zip:
Contact Person:
Phone Number:
Fax Number:
Email Address'
[~Lithia Lot
~Pioneer Lot
~Second Lot
,13
The City of Ashland requests proposals for the development of affordable housing above
the City owned public parking lots.
Proposals must be received by , in the City of Ashland Community
Development Office located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. (Mailing
address is 20 East Main Street, Ashland OR 97520). Facsimile proposals are NOT
acceptable.
The respondent shall submit 10 copies of the proposal for consideration by the City. The
proposal shall be less than 20 pages. Please provide site-plans and conceptual designs on
pages no larger than 11" x 17". Submission of electronic documents will not satisfy the
printed material submittal requirements, however delivery of these computer files is
encouraged to allow the City to reproduce materials.
Contract award will be based on weighted criteria as cited in the Request for Proposal
document. Standard criteria include, but are not limited to: affordability, number of
units, experience, references, schedule, and cost.
The City of Ashland reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to waive
formalities or to accept any proposal that appears to serve the best interest of the City of
Ashland. Questions regarding this RFP should be directed to Brandon Goldman,
Housing Program, Department of Community Development at 541-552-2076 or
goldmanb~ashland.or.us
This request for proposals and request for qualifications has been initiated by the City of
Ashland Housing Commission and approved by the Ashland City Council.
By Order of the City Council
Ashland, Oregon
John Mclaughlin, Director
Dept. Community Development
14
/S NiYN"N
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Council Communication
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Approved By:
Synopsis:
AFN Franchise Renewal
Legal Department
August 11, 2004
Michael W. Fran~/ff~
Gino Grimaldi q/J/./'
Ashland granted Ashland Fiber Network a five-year franchise agreement in August 1999. The franchise
agreement is expiring and AFN has requested renewal of their franchise. Some amendments have been
made to basically mirror most of the provisions in the franchise renewal recently granted to Charter.
Attached is the proposed franchise renewal.
Recommendations:
By motion action authorize the execution of the franchise renewal agreement between the City of
Ashland and Ashland Fiber Network.
Fiscal Impact:
The City will receive 5% of the gross revenues from AFN in franchise fees and $0.75 per subscriber per
month in PEG access fees.
Background:
AFN applied for and received its initial franchise agreement for operating a cable TV service within
Ashland in 1999. The initial franchise agreement had a five year term and expires this month. AFN has
applied for a five year franchise renewal. The proposed agreement has been modified from the original
to basically mirror the agreement granted to Charter last year, with a couple of exceptions: 1) Charter
wanted some restricted language included within their franchise concerning limitations on how Ashland
may use the financial and customer data provided by Charter. Since AFN is a branch of City
government, the restrictions on the use of financial data was not appropriate. Finally, the City required
Charter to pay a $50,000 payment for the improvement of RVTV facilities in the City Council
chambers. We did not charge this fee to AFN since AFN had been paying franchise fees on cable
modems until May 2004. Charter never paid franchise fees on their cable modems.
Attachments:
Attached Proposed Franchise.
1- G:~legal~Mike\Council CommunicatJons~FN Franchise renewal.doc
CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
Cable Services Franchise Agreement ("agreement") dated August ,2004, between
the City of Ashland and Ashland Fiber Network, a division of the City of Ashland
Department of Electric Utilities ("Grantee").
Recitals:
A. AFN is a cable service provider in the City of Ashland and has requested a
renewal to the franchise dated August 3, 1999, to, operate and maintain a cable
television system within the City of Ashland;
B. City is authorized to grant one or more nonexclusive franchises to construct,
operate, and maintain a cable television system within the city limits; and
C. Grantee is willing to accept this agreement and to abide by the terms and
conditions;
City and Grantee agree:
1. Definitions. For the purposes of this agreement, the following terms, phrases, words
and their derivations shall have the meaning set forth below. When not inconsistent with
the context, words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural
include the singular, and words in the singular include the plural. Words not defined
shall be given their common and ordinary meaning. The word "shall" is always
mandatory and not merely directory.
1.1. Access means the availability for noncommercial use by various agencies,
institutions, organizations, groups and individuals in the community, including City and
its designees, of the Cable System to acquire, create, receive, and distribute video,
Cable Service, and signals as permitted under applicable law, including, but not
limited to:
1.1.1. Public Access which means Access where organizations, groups or
individual members of the general public, on a nondiscriminatory basis, are the
primary users;
1.1.2. Educational Access which means Access where schools and
educational institutions are the primary users of programming and service
1.1.3. Governmental Access which means Access where governmental
institutions are the primary users of programming and service; and
1.1.4. PEG Access which means Public Access, Educational Access, and
Governmental Access, collectively.
1.2. Access Channel means any Channel, or portion of any Channel,
designated for non-commercial Access purposes or otherwise made available to
facilitate or transmit Access programming or service.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 1
1.3. Basic Service means any service tier which includes the retransmission of
local television broadcast signals and PEG Access Channels.
1.4. Cable Acts means the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 and the
Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 and any
amendments, including those contained in the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
1.5. Cable Operator means any Person or group of Persons, including Grantee,
who provide Cable Service over a Cable System and directly owns a significant interest
in such Cable System, or who otherwise control or are responsible for, through any
arrangement, the management and operation of such a Cable System.
1.6. Cable Service means the one-way transmission to Subscribers of video
programming or other programming service and Subscriber interaction, if any, which is
required for the selection or use of such video programming or other programming
service.
1.7. Cable System means a facility, consisting of a set of closed transmission
paths and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is
designed to provide Cable Service which includes video programming and which is
provided to multiple Subscribers within a community, but such term does not include (1)
a facility that serves only to retransmit the television signals of one or more television
broadcast stations; (2) a facility that serves Subscribers without using any public
right-of-way; (3) a facility of a common carrier which is subject, in whole or in part, to the
provisions of Title II of the federal Communications Act (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), except
that such facility shall be considered a Cable System (other than for purposes of
Section 621(c) (47 U.S.C. 541(c)) to the extent such facility is used in the transmission
of video programming directly to Subscribers, unless the extent of such use is solely to
provide interactive on-demand service; (4) an open video system that complies with
federal statutes; or (5) any facilities of any electric utility used solely for operating its
electric utility systems.
1.8. Channel means a portion of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum which
is used in a cable system and which is capable of delivering video signal whether in an
analog or digital format. This definition does not restrict the use of any channel to the
transmission of analog video signals.
1.9. Downstream means the transmission from the Headend to remote points
on the Cable System.
1.10. FCC means the Federal Communications Commission.
1.11. Franchise Area means the area within the city limits of Ashland as they
now exist or as they may be amended in the future.
1.12. Gross Revenues means all revenues of Grantee, in any way derived from
the operation of the Cable System to provide Cable Services in the Agreement Area.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 2
Gross Revenues include, by way of illustration and not limitation, monthly fees charged
Subscribers for any Basic, optional, premium, per-channel, or per-program service;
installation, disconnection, reconnection, and change-in-service fees; leased channel
fees; late fees and administrative fees; revenues from rentals or sales of converters or
other equipment; advertising sales revenues; revenues from program guides; and
revenues from home shopping channels. The term "Gross Revenues" encompasses
any and all revenue of any kind, form or nature including franchise fees passed through
by Grantee to Subscribers, except that the term does not include sales taxes imposed
by law on Subscribers that the Grantee is obligated to collect. With the exception of
recovered bad debt, "Gross Revenues" shall not include bad debt. Gross Revenues
shall not include: 1. Any taxes, fee or assessment of general applicability collected by
the Grantee from Subscribers for pass-through to a government agency, including, the
FCC User Fee; and 2. Any PEG or I-Net amounts recovered from Subscribers.
1.13. Headend means a facility for signal reception and dissemination on a
Cable System, including cables, antennas, wires, satellite dishes, monitors, switches,
modulators, processors and all other related equipment and facilities.
1.14. Interconnection means the provision by Grantee of technical, engineering,
physical, and all other necessary components to maintain a physical linking of
Grantee's Cable System and Cable Service or any designated Channel or signal
pathway with neighboring Cable Systems, so that Cable Service of technically adequate
quality may be sent to, and received from, other systems in accordance with this
agreement.
1.15. Leased Access means the use of Channel capacity designated for
commercial use by Persons unaffiliated with Grantee as defined in Section 612 of the
Cable Act.
1.16. Origination Point means a location where Public, Educational, or
Govemmental use programming is delivered to the Grantee for Upstream transmission.
1.17. Person means any individual, natural Person, sole proprietorship,
partnership, association, or corporation, or any other form of entity or organization.
1.18. Public Rights of Way include, but are not limited to, streets, roads,
highways, bddges, alleys, sidewalks, trails, paths, public utility easements, and all other
public ways, including the subsurface under and air space over these areas, excluding
parks and parkways, but only to the extent of City's right, title, interest, or authority to
grant a franchise to occupy and use such streets and easements for a Cable System
and only to the extent that sufficient capacity exists for a Cable System. "Public rights of
way" shall also include any easement granted to or owned by City or County and
acquired, established, dedicated, or devoted for public utility purposes.
1.19. Quarterly, or quarter, means the standard calendar periods of January 1 -
March 31, April 1 - June 30, July 1 - September 30, and October 1 - December 31,
unless otherwise specified in this agreement.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 3
1.20. RVTV means Rogue Valley Community Television as administered by the
Extended Campus Program of Southern Oregon University.
1.21. School means any accredited educational institution, public or private,
including, but not limited to, primary and secondary schools, and colleges and
universities.
1.22. Street means each of the following which have been dedicated to the
public, or which may be dedicated to the public in the future, and maintained under
public authority or by others and located within the Franchise Area: Streets, roadways,
highways, avenues, lanes, alleys, sidewalks, easements, rights-of-way and other public
ways.
1.23. Subscriber means any Person who elects to subscribe to, for any
purpose, Cable Service provided by Grantee by means of, or in connection with, the
Cable System, and whose premises are physically wired and lawfully activated to
receive Cable Service from Grantee's Cable System.
1.23.1. Commercial Subscriber means any Subscriber other than a
Residential Subscriber.
1.23.2. Residential Subscriber means any Person who contracts
individually for Cable Service to a residence, whether that residence is a single
family unit or located in a multiple dwelling unit.
1.24. Telecommunications, Telecommunications Facilities and
Telecommunications Services have the same meaning as set forth in Ashland
Municipal Code Title 16.
1.25. Upstream means the carrying of a transmission to the Headend from
remote points on the Cable System.
2. Grant of Franchise.
2.1 Grant.
2.1.1. City grants to Grantee in the public interest a nonexclusive and
revocable authorization to make lawful use of the Streets and Public Rights of
Way within the Franchise Area to construct, operate, maintain, reconstruct, and
repair a Cable System for the purpose of providing Cable Services.
2.1.2. This agreement is intended to convey limited rights and interests
only as to those Streets and Public Rights of Way, in which the City has an
actual interest. It is not a warranty of title or interest in any right-of-way, it does
not provide the Grantee any interest in any particular location within the right-of-
way, and it does not confer dghts other than as expressly provided in this
agreement. This agreement does not depdve the City of any powers, rights, or
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~,FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 4
privileges it now has, or may acquire in the future, to use, perform work on, or
regulate the use and control of the City's Streets covered by this agreement,
including without limitation, the right to perform work on its roadways, rights-of-
way, or appurtenant drainage facilities, including constructing, altering, paving,
widening, grading, or excavating.
2.1.3. This agreement is subject to the general lawful police power of City
affecting matters of local government concern and not merely existing
contractual rights of Grantee. Nothing in this agreement shall be deemed to
waive the requirements of the other codes and ordinances of general
applicability enacted, or which may be enacted in the future, by City.
2.1.4. This agreement authorizes Grantee to engage in providing Cable
Service, as that term is defined in 47 U.S.C. Sec. 522(6) as amended. This
agreement shall not be interpreted to prevent the City from imposing lawful
additional conditions, including additional compensation conditions for use of the
rights-of-way should Grantee provide service other than Cable Service so long
as similar conditions are also imposed on other similarly situated rights-of-way
users. Nothing in this agreement shall be interpreted to prevent Grantee from
challenging the lawfulness or enforceability of any provisions ,of applicable law.
2.1.5. Grantee promises and guarantees as a condition of exercising the
privileges granted by this agreement, that any joint venture or partner of the
Grantee directly involved in the offering of Cable Service in the Franchise Area,
or directly involved in the management or operation of the Cable System in the
Franchise Area, will also comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement.
2.2. Use of Public Streets And Ways. Subject to City's supervision and control,
Grantee may erect, install, construct, repair, replace, reconstruct, and retain in, on,
over, under, upon, across, and along the public Streets, including rights-of-way and
public utility easements within the Franchise Area, such wires, cables, conductors,
ducts, conduits, vaults, amplifiers, pedestals, attachments, and other property and
equipment as are necessary and appurtenant to the operation of a Cable SYstem for
the provision .of Cable Service within the Franchise Area. Grantee shall comply with all
applicable construction codes, laws, ordinances, regulations and procedures now in
effect or enacted in the future, and must obtain any and all necessary permits from the
appropriate agencies of City prior to commencing any construction activities. Grantee,
through this agreement, is granted extensive and valuable rights to operate its Cable
System for profit using City's public rights-of-way and public utility easements within the
Franchise Area in compliance with all applicable City construction codes and
procedures. As trustee for the public, City is entitled to fair compensation to be paid for
these valuable rights throughout the term of this agreement.
2.3. Duration. The term of this agreement and all rights, privileges, obligations,
and restrictions pertaining to this agreement shall be from the effective date of this
agreement through June 30, 2009, unless extended or terminated sooner as provided
below.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 5
2.4. Effective Date. The effective date of this agreement shall be July 1, 2004,,
unless Grantee fails to file an unconditional wdtten acceptance of this agreement and
post any required bond or deposit within 45 days from Grantee's wdtten acceptance of
this agreement. In either event, this agreement shall be null and void, and any and all
dghts of Grantee to own or operate a Cable System within the Franchise Area under
this agreement shall be of no force or effect.
2.5. Franchise Nonexclusive. This agreement shall be nonexclusive, and is
subject to all prior rights, interests, agreements, permits, easements or licenses granted
by City to any Person to use any street, right-of-way, easements not otherwise
restricted, or property for any purpose whatsoever, including the right of City to use
same for any purpose it deems fit, including the same or similar purposes allowed
Grantee. City may, at any time, grant authorization to use the public rights-of-way for
any purpose not incompatible with Grantee's authority under this agreement, and for
such additional Franchises for Cable Systems as City deems appropriate, upon
substantially equivalent terms and conditions to those contained in this agreement as
City deems appropriate.
2.6. Grant of Other Franchises.
2.6.1. In the event the City enters into a franchise or other agreement of
any kind with any other Person or entity other than the Grantee to enter into the
City's public ways for the purpose of constructing or operating a Cable System,
or providing Cable Service to any part of the Service Area in which the Grantee
is actually providing Cable Service under the terms and conditions of this
agreement, or is required to extend Cable Service under the provisions of
section 11.2, 11.2, the matedal provisions of such other franchise or agreement
shall be reasonably comparable to those contained in this agreement, in order
that one operator not be granted an unfair competitive advantage over another.
2.6.2. If City grants a Franchise to a-third party for service to an area that
Grantee is not actually serving or required to extend service to, and which has
matedal provisions that are not reasonably comparable to those contained in this
agreement, City shall offer Grantee a franchise to serve the same area under
terms and conditions that are reasonably comparable to those set forth in the
franchise agreement entered into with the third party.
2.7. Police Powers. Grantee's rights under this agreement are subject to the
lawful police powers of City to adopt and enforce ordinances necessary to the safety,
health, and welfare of the general public and Grantee agrees to comply with all
applicable laws and ordinances enacted, or enacted in the future, by City or any other
legally-constituted governmental unit having lawful jurisdiction over the subject matter of
the enactment.
2.8. Relations to Other Provisions of Law. This agreement and all rights and
privileges granted under it are subject to, and the Grantee must exercise all rights in
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 6
accordance with, applicable law as amended over the Franchise term. This agreement
is a contract, subject to the City's exercise of its police and other regulatory powers and
such applicable law. This agreement does not confer dghts or immunities upon the
Grantee other than as expressly provided in the agreement. In cases of conflict
between this agreement and any ordinance of general application enacted pursuant to
the City's police power, the ordinance shall govern. Nothing in this agreement, however,
shall be interpreted to prevent Grantee from challenging the lawfulness or enforceability
of any provision of applicable law. The Franchise issued and the Franchise fee paid are
not in lieu of any other required permit, authorization, fee, charge, or tax, unless
expressly stated in' this agreement.
2.8.1. Without limiting the foregoing, by way of example and not limitation, this
agreement shall not include or be a substitute for:
2.8.1.1. Any other permit or authorization required for the privilege of
transacting and carrying on a business within the City that may be required by
the ordinances and laws of the City.
2.8.1.2. Any permit, agreement or authorization required in connection
with operations on or in public streets or property, including by way of example
and not limitation, street cut permits; or
2.8.1.3. Any permits or agreements for occupying any other property of
the City or pdvate entities to which access is not specifically granted by this
Agreement including, without limitation, permits and agreements for placing
devices on or in poles, conduits, other structures, or railroad easements, whether
owned by the City or a private entity.
2.8.2. This agreement does not authorize Grantee to provide
Telecommunications Services, or to construct, operate or maintain Telecommunications
Facilities. This Agreement is not a bar to imposition of any conditions on Grantee with
respect to Telecommunications, whether-similar, different or the same as conditions
specified herein. This Agreement does not relieve Grantee of its obligations to obtain an
authorization to provide Telecommunications Services, or to construct, operate or
maintain Telecommunications Facilities, or relieve Grantee of its obligation to comply
with any such authorizations.
2.9. Effect of Acceptance. By accepting the agreement the Grantee: (1)
acknowledges and accepts the City's legal right to issue and enforce the agreement; (2)
agrees that it will not oppose the City's intervening or other participation in any
proceeding affecting the Cable System; (3) accepts and agrees to comply with each
and every provision of this agreement; and (4) agrees that.the agreement was granted
pursuant to processes and procedures consistent with applicable law, and that it will not
raise any claim to the contrary.
2.10. Non-Discriminatory Access to Internet Access System. Grantee shall
provide non-discriminatory access to the Grantee's Internet Access System for internet
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable,Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 7
service providers, whether or not such providers are affiliated with Grantee. Grantee
may limit such access only in terms of requiring such providers to utilize the network
and technological standards developed by Grantee.
3. FRANCHISE FEE AND FINANCIAL CONTROLS.
3.1. Franchise Fees. As compensation for the benefits and privileges granted
under this agreement, and in consideration of permission to use City's Streets, Grantee
shall pay as a Franchise fee to City, throughout the duration of this agreement, an
amount equal to five percent of Grantee's Gross Revenues including the franchise fee
itself, derived from the operation of the Cable System to provide Cable Service in the
Franchise Area. Accrual of such Franchise fees shall commence as of the effective
date of this agreement. The Franchise fees are in addition to all other fees,
assessments, taxes, or payments of general applicability that the Grantee may be
required to pay under any federal, state, or local law to the extent not inconsistent with
applicable law. This agreement and the Franchise fees are not in lieu of any other
generally applicable required permit, authorization, fee, charge, or tax.
In the event any law or valid rule or regulation applicable to this franchise limits
franchise fees below the five percent of gross revenues, the Grantee agrees to and
shall pay the maximum permissible amount and, if such law or valid rule or regulation is
later repealed or amended to allow a higher permissible amount, then the Grantee shall
pay the higher amount up to the maximum allowable by law, not to exceed five percent
dudng all affected time periods.
3.2. Payments. Grantee's Franchise fee payments to City shall be computed
quarterly. Each quarterly payment shall be due and made available to City no later than
30 days after the last day of the preceding quarter.
3.3. Acceptance of Payment and Recomputation. No acceptance of any
payment shall be construed as an accord by City that the amount paid is, in fact, the
correct amount, nor shall any acceptance of payments be construed as a release of any
claim City may have for further or additional sums payable or for the performance of
any other obligation of Grantee.
3.4. Quarterly Franchise Fee Reports. Each payment shall be accompanied by
a wdtten report to City containing an accurate statement in summarized form, as well as
in detail, and in a form approved by City, of Grantee's Gross Revenues and the
computation of the payment amount.
3.5. Annual Franchise Fee Reports. Grantee shall, no later than 180 days after
the end of each calendar year, furnish to City a statement (Audited Gross Receipts
Report) stating the total amount of Gross Revenues and all payments, deductions, and
computations for the period covered by the payments.
3.6. Audits/reviews. On an annual basis, no more frequently than every 12
months, upon 30 days pdor wdtten notice, City shall have the fight to conduct an
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 8
independent audit or review of Grantee's records reasonably related to the
administration or enforcement of this agreement, in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles. For purposes of this section, records reasonably related to the
administration and enforcement of this agreement include those financial records
pertaining to the number and location of cable customers within City's Urban Growth
Boundary. The City may hire an independent certified public accountant to audit or
review the Grantee's financial records, in which case the Grantee shall provide all
necessary records to the certified public accountant. All such records shall be made
available in the local offices of the Grantee. If the audit or review' shows that Franchise
fees have been underpaid by 3% or more, Grantee-shall reimburse to City the total cost
of the audit or review and the underpayment plus interest, at the rate specified in
section 3.7 within 30 days of the City's written demand for same.
Records for audit/review purposes shall include without limitation:
3.6.1. Source documents, which demonstrate the original or beginning
amount, and the final amount shown on any report related to or included in the
determination of franchise fees, revenues or expenses.
3.6.2. Source documents that completely explain any and all calculations
related to any allocation of any amounts involving franchise fees, revenues, or
expenses.
3.6.3. Any and all accounting schedules, statements, and any other form
of representation, Which relate to, account for, or support or correlate to any
accounts involving franchise fees, revenues or expenses.
3.7. Interest on Late Payments. In the event that a franchise fee payment or
other sum is not received by the City on or before the due date, or is underpaid, the
Grantee shall pay in addition to the payment, or sum due, interest from the due date at
a rate equal to the legal interest rate on judgments in the State of Oregon.
3.8. Alternative Remedies. If any section, subsection, paragraph, term, or
provision of this Franchise agreement or any ordinance, law, or document incorporated
by reference is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, unconstitutional,
or unenforceable, such holding shall be confined in its operation to the section,
subsection, paragraph, term, or provision directly involved in the controversy in which
such holding shall have been rendered, and shall not in any way affect the validity of
any other section, subsection, paragraph, term, or provision. Under such a
circumstance the Grantee shall, upon the City's request, meet and confer with the City
to consider amendments to the Franchise agreement. The purpose of the amendments
shall be to place the parties, as nearly as possible, in the position that they were in prior
to such determination, consistent with applicable law. In the event the parties are
unable to agree to a modification of this agreement within 60 days either party may (1)
seek appropriate legal remedies to amend the agreement, or (2) shorten the agreement
to 36 months, at which point either party may invoke the renewal procedures under 47
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~,FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 9
U.S.C. Subsection 546. Each party agrees to participate in up to 16 hours of negotiation
during the 60 day pedod.
3.9. Additional Commitments Not Franchise Fees. No term or condition in this
agreement shall in any way modify or affect Grantee's obligation to pay Franchise fees
to City. Although the total sum of Franchise fee payments and additional commitments
set forth elsewhere in this agreement may total more than 5% of Grantee's Gross
Revenues in any 12-month period, Grantee agrees that the additional commitments are
not Franchise fees as defined under any federal law, to the extent not inconsistent with
applicable federal law, nor are they to be offset or credited against any Franchise fee
payments due to City.
3.10. Costs of Publication. Grantee shall pay the reasonable cost of newspaper
notices and publication pertaining to this agreement, and any amendments, including
changes in control or transfers of ownership, as such notice or publication is reasonably
required by City or applicable law.
3.11. Tax Liability. Payment of the Franchise fees under this agreement shall
not exempt Grantee from the payment of any generally applicable license, permit fee or
other generally applicable fee, tax or charge on the business, occupation, property or
income of Grantee that may be imposed by City.
3.12. Payment on Termination. If this agreement terminates for any reason, the
Grantee shall file with the City within 90 calendar days of the date of the termination, a
financial statement, certified by an independent certified public accountant, showing the
Gross Revenues received by the Grantee since the end of the previous fiscal year. The
City reserves the right to satisfy any remaining financial obligations of the Grantee to
the City by utilizing the funds available in a Letter of Credit or other secudty provided by
the Grantee.
4. ADMINISTRATION AND REGULATION
4.1. Authority. City is vested with the power and dght to regulate the exercise of
the privileges permitted by this agreement in the public interest, or to delegate that
power and right to the extent permitted under state and local law, to any agent, in its
sole discretion.
4.2. Rates and Charges. All of Grantee's rates and charges related to or
regarding Cable Service shall be subject to regulation by City to the full extent
authorized by applicable federal, state and local laws.
4.3. Rate Discrimination. All of Grantee's rates and charges shall be published
and shall be nondiscriminatory as to all Persons and organizations of similar classes,
under similar circumstances and conditions. Grantee shall apply its rates in accordance
with governing law, with similar rates and charges for all Subscribers receiving similar
Cable Service, without regard to race, color, familial, ethnic or national origin, religion,
age, sex, sexual orientation, madtal, military or economic status, or physical or mental
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 10
disability, or geographic location in the Franchise Area. Grantee shall provide equivalent
Cable Service to all Residential Subscribers at similar rates and to Commercial
Subscribers as authorized by applicable laws. Nothing in this section shall be construed
to prohibit:
4.3.1. The temporary reduction or waiving of rates or charges in
conjunction with valid promotional campaigns;
4.3.2. The offering of reasonable discounts to senior citizens or
economically disadvantaged citizens;
4.3.3. Grantee from establishing different and nondiscriminatory rates and
charges for commercial customers, as well as different nondiscriminator~
monthly rates for commercial customers as allowable by federal law and
regulations; or
4.3.4. Grantee from establishing different and nondiscriminatory rates and
charges for Residential Subscribers as allowable by federal law and regulations.
4.4. Filing of Rates and Charges. Throughout the term of this agreement,
Grantee shall maintain on file with City a complete schedule of applicable rates and
charges for Cable Service provided under this agreement. Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to require Grantee to file rates and charges under temporary
reductions or waivers of rates and charges in conjunction with promotional campaigns,
and rates for multiple dwelling units.
Grantee shall provide upon request from City a complete schedule of current
rates and charges for any and all Leased Access provided by Grantee. The schedule
shall include a description of the price, terms and conditions established by Grantee for
Leased Access.
4.5. Time' Limits Strictly Construed. Whenever this agreement sets forth a time
for any act to be performed by Grantee, such time shall be deemed to be of the
essence, and any failure of Grantee to perform within the allotted time may be
considered a material violation of this agreement and sufficient grounds for City to
invoke any relevant provision of this agreement. However, in the event that Grantee is
prevented or delayed in the performance of any of its obligations under this agreement
by reason of a force majeure occurrence, such as acts of God (for example, floods,
tornadoes, earthquakes or unusually severe weather conditions), Grantee's
performance shall be excused during the force majeure occurrence. After such
occurrence Grantee shall promptly perform the affected obligations under this
agreement or procure a substitute for performance which is satisfactory to City. Grantee
shall not be excused by mere economic hardship nor by misfeasance or malfeasance
· of its directors, officers, employees, or duly authorized agents. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, City shall utilize the procedure in section 13 to resolve any material breach
committed by Grantee.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~AFN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 11
5. INDEMNIFICATION. Grantee shall, at its sole cost and expense, indemnify, hold
harmless, and defend the City and its officers, boards, commissions, duly authorized
agents, and employees against any and all claims, including, but not limited to, third
party claims, suits, causes of action, proceedings, and judgments for damages or
equitable relief, to the extent such liability arises out of or through the acts or omissions
of the Grantee arising out of the const,ruction, operation or repair of its Cable System
regardless of whether the act or omission complained of is authorized, allowed, or
prohibited by this agreement, provided, however, the Grantee will not be obligated to
indemnify City should City interVene in any proceeding regarding the grant of this
agreement pursuant to section 7. Without limiting in any way the Grantee's obligation to
indemnify the City and its officers, boards, commissions, duly authorized agents, and
employees, as set forth above, this indemnity provision also includes damages and
liabilities such as:
5.1. To persons or property, to the extent such liability arises out of or through
the acts or omissions of the Grantee, its contractors, subcontractors, and
their officers, employees, or duly authorized agents, or to which the Grantee's
negligence or fault shall in any way contribute;
5.2. Arising out of any claim for invasion of the right of privacy; for defamation
of any Person, firm or corporation; for the violation or infringement of any
copyright, trademark, trade name, serVice mark, or patent; for a failure by the
Grantee to secure consents from the owners or authorized distributors of
programs to be delivered by the Cable System; or for violation of any other
right of any Person, to the extent such liability adses out of or through the
acts or omissions of the Grantee, provided, however, that Grantee will not be
required to indemnify City for any claims adsing out of use of PEG Access
Channels by City or RVTV;
5.3. Arising out of Grantee's failure to comply with the provisions of any federal,
state or local statute, ordinance, rule or regulation applicable to the Grantee with
respect to any aspect of its business to which this agreement applies, to the
extent such liability arises out of or through the acts or omissions of the Grantee;
and
5.4. Arising from any third party suit, action or litigation, whether brought by a
competitor to Grantee or by any other Person or entity, to the extent such liability
adses out of or through the acts or omissions of the Grantee, whether such
Person or entity does or does not have standing to bring such suit, action or
litigation if such action (1) challenges the authority of the City to issue this
agreement to Grantee; or (2) alleges that, in issuing this agreement to Grantee,
the City has acted in a disparate or discriminatory manner.
5.5. The City shall give the Grantee timely written notice of any claim or of the
commencement of any action, suit or other proceeding covered by the indemnity
obligation in this Section. In the event any such claim arises, the City or any
other indemnified party shall tender the defense to the Grantee and the Grantee
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 12
shall have the obligation and duty to defend, settle or compromise any claims
arising from the claim, and the City shall cooperate fully. Grantee shall accept or
decline the tender within 30 days. Grantee shall reimburse reasonable attorney
fees and costs incurred by the City during the 30 day period in which the Grantee
accepts or declines tender. In the event that the Grantee declines defense of the
claim in violation of section 11, the City may defend such claim and seek
recovery from Grantee its expenses for reasonable attorney fees and
disbursements, including expert witness fees, incurred by City for defense and in
seeking such recovery.
6. CUSTOMER SERVICE. Grantee shall render efficient service, make repairs promptly
and interrupt service only for good cause and for the shortest time possible. Such
interruptions, insofar as possible, shall be preceded by notice to subscribers affected
and occur during pedods of minimum use.
7. REPORTS AND RECORDS.
7.1. Open Records.
7.1.1. Grantee shall manage all of its operations in accordance with a
policy of keeping its documents and records directly concerning its gross
revenues, including customer identification numbers (e.g. account numbers) and
levels of service, open and accessible to City. City shall have access to, and the
right to inspect, any books and records of Grantee. Grantee shall not deny City
access to any of Grantee's records on the basis that Grantee's records are under
the control of any parent corporation, affiliated entity or a third party. City may, in
wdting, request copies of any such records or books and Grantee shall provide
such copies within ten business days of the transmittal of such request. If the
requested books and records are too voluminous, or for secudty reasons cannot
be copied or removed, then Grantee may request, in writing within ten business
days, that City inspect them at one of Grantee's local area offices. If any books
or records of Grantee are not kept in a local office, Grantee'will provide or
otherwise make such documents available for inspection and review at the local
office within ten business days.
7.1.2. Grantee shall at all times maintain and allow City, with reasonable
notice, access and the right to review a full and complete set of plans, records
and "as built" maps showing the exact location of all Cable System equipment
installed or in use in the Franchise Area, exclusive of electronics, Subscriber
drops and equipment provided in Subscribers' homes. These maps shall include
computer maps and shall be maintained in a standard format and medium
specified by the city, in sufficient detail to agreed'upon by the City and the
Grantee. City's review of the plans, records, and as-built maps, shall occur at the
Grantee's local office, or, if the Grantee has no office within the city, then at a
location within the city specified by the City.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 13
7.1.3. The ability for City to obtain records and information from Grantee
is critical to the administration of this agreement, Grantee's failure to comply with
the requirements of this section may result in fines as prescribed in section 13.2.
7.2. Confidentiality. Subject to the limits of the Oregon Public Records Law, City
agrees to treat as confidential any books and records that constitute proprietary or
confidential information under federal or state law, to the extent Grantee makes City
aware, whether verbally or in writing, of such confidentiality. If City believes it must
release any such confidential books and records in the course of enforcing this
agreement, or for any other reason, it shall advise Grantee in advance so that Grantee
may take appropriate steps to protect its interests. If City receives a demand from any
Person for disclosure of any information designated by Grantee as confidential, City
shall, so far as consistent with applicable law, advise Grantee and provide Grantee with
a copy of any wdtten request by the party demanding access to such information within
a reasonable time. Until otherwise ordered by a court or agency of competent
jurisdiction, City agrees that, to the extent permitted by state and federal law, it shall
deny access to any of Grantee's books and records that are deemed to be confidential
as set forth above to any Person.
7.3. Copies of Federal and State Documents. Grantee shall submit to City a
list, or copies of actual documents, of all pleadings, applications, notifications,
communications and documents of any kind, submitted by Grantee or its parent
corporations or affiliates to any federal, state or local courts; regulatory agencies or
other govemment bodies if such documents specifically relate to the operations of
Grantee's Cable System within the Franchise Area. Grantee shall submit such list or
documents to City no later than 30 days after their filing, mailing or publication. Grantee
shall not claim confidential, privileged or proprietary rights to such documents unless
under federal, state, or local law such documents have been determined to be
confidential by a court of competent jurisdiction, or by a federal or state agency. To the
extent allowed by law, any such confidential material determined to be exempt from
public disclosure shall be retained in confidence by City and its duly authorized agents
and shall not be made available for public inspection.
7.4. Inspection of Facilities. City may inspect upon request any of Grantee's
facilities and equipment to confirm performance under this agreement at any time upon
at least 24 hours notice, or, in case of an emergency, upon demand without prior
notice.
7.5. False Statements. Any intentional false or misleading statement or
representation in any report required by this agreement may be deemed a material
violation of this agreement and may subject Grantee to all remedies, legal or equitable,
which are available to City under this agreement or otherwise.
7.6. Report Expense. All reports and records required under this or any other
Section shall be furnished, without cost, to City.
8. PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND GOVERNMENTAL (PEG) ACCESS.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 14
8.1. General Definitions. With respect to purposes of this section, the following
definitions will apply with respect to PEG use of the Cable System.
8.1.1. "Access Channel" means any Channel, or portion of any Channel,
designated for non-commercial Access purposes or otherwise made available to
facilitate or transmit Access programming or service. Each Access Channel shall
be.six MHz and must be capable of transmitting a standard analog video signal.
The capacity can be used to transmit non-commercial signals in any format, and
can be used to transmit: audio only, video, or other information (including, by
way of example and not limitation, secondary audio, text, digital information,
high-definition signals, and compressed signals.) A non-standard NTSC use
shall be subject to the Grantee's prompt prior review and approval to ensure that
the use will not cause unreasonable technical interference with other Channels.
Such uses must be in furtherance of PEG uses. Additionally, there shall not be
commercial use or lease of such PEG capacity without the express written
permission of the Grantee.
8.1.2. "Digital Access Channel", as used in this Section, means a Channel
carrying PEG continuous full-motion video programming in a digital format.
Digital Access Channels shall have'the same compression ratio and
transmission quality as is used to carry any of the commercial Channels that
deliver programming to the City in a similar format for delivery to each
Subscriber.
8.1.3. "Origination Point" means a location, where PEG programming is
delivered to the Grantee for Downstream transmission.
8.2. Management And Control of Access Channels.
8.2.1. City may authorize RVTV to control and manage the use of any and
all Access Facilities provided by Grantee under this agreement, including,
without limitation,' the operation of Access Channels. To the' extent of such
designation by City,-as between RVTV and Grantee, RVTV shall have sole and
exclusive responsibility for operating and managing such Access Facilities. The
City or its designee may formulate rules for the operation of the PEG Access
Channels, consistent with this agreement; such rules shall not be designed to
control the content of Public Access programming. Nothing in this section shall
prohibit the City from authorizing itself or others to manage or co-manage PEG
Access Channels and facilities.
8.2.2. Grantee shall cooperate with the City and RVTV in the use of the
Cable System and Access facilities for the provision of PEG Access. Grantee
shall enter into such operating agreements with RVTV as may be necessary to
facilitate and coordinate the provision of PEG Access, provided that such
operating agreements shall not be inconsistent with the terms of this agreement
and shall be subject to approval by the City.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 15
8.2.3. Except as provided in this agreement, the City shall allocate Access
resources only to RVTV. The Grantee shall cooperate with the City in such
allocations, in such manner as the City shall direct.
8.2.4. Subject to written authorization from the City, the Grantee shall
have the right to use temporarily any Channel, or portion of any Channel, which
is allocated under this section for PEG uses pursuant to section 61 l(d) of the
Cable Act.
8.3. Channel Capacity And Use.
8.3.1. Upon the effective date of this agreement, all Access Channels
provided for in this agreement are administered by the City or designee.
8.3.2. Upon the effective date of this agreement, the Grantee shall provide
five Access Channels for distribution of PEG Access programming on the
residential Cable System with provisions for an additional channel for public and
government access uses. Such additional channel shall be made available
when all channels granted pursuant to this paragraph are used for access
purposes with locally produced programming 70% of the available broadcast
time. The programming of additional channels required shall be distinct and
non-repetitive of the previous channels. A program may be repeated no more
than three times for purposes of the tdgger calculation. For purposes of this
computation, all time allocated to character generated or similar programming
shall be excluded for the determination of when such channel is in use and
programmed with public and governmental access programming.
8.3.3. The Grantee shall provide connection of all PEG Access Channels
required by this agreement to and from the Grantee's Headend and RVTV's
Headends as of the effective date of this agreement. Grantee agrees to provide
reconnection for RVTV's Headend if it is relocated within 12 months of the
effective date of this agreement, at no charge to City or to RVTV.
8.3.4. If video programming is delivered in a digital format or the City
requests that PEG Channels be digitized, then, in lieu of the Access Channels
provided for in section 8.3.2, there shall be a maximum of 18 PEG continuous,
full-motion video programming Digital Channels ("Digital Access Channels"). The
City shall determine the number of Digital Access Channels to be activated, not
to exceed 18.
8.4. Relocation of Access Channels. Grantee shall provide City with a
minimum of 60 days' notice, and use its best efforts to provide 120 days notice, prior to
the time PEG Access Channel designations are changed. Grantee shall consult with
City prior to making a final determination regarding any changes in PEG Access
Channel designations/assignments. Any new Channel designations for the PEG Access
Channels Provided pursuant to this agreement shall be in full compliance with FCC
signal quality and proof of performance standards.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~,FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 16
8.5. Origination Points.
8.5.1. Additional permanent Origination Points required by the City
or RV-I'V shall be provided by Grantee within 90 days following receipt of
written notice from City at the expense of City or RVTV.
8.5.2. By mutual agreement by City and Grantee, upon six weeks written
notice in advance of the scheduled cablecast, and provided that an active drop is
available at the desired location, Grantee shall provide additional Origination
Points on a short term basis for the live cablecast of Access Programming. The
incremental, out-of-pocket costs to Grantee shall be paid for by City or RVTV.
Grantee shall not be required to facilitate more than one such Origination Points
in any one week period.
8.5.3. There shall be no charge to the City, nor to any other person for the
use of the upstream capacity from the program origination locations described in
this section, so long as the transmissions are designed for rerouting and
distribution on any PEG Channels.
8.6. Access Interconnections.
8.6.1. The Grantee shall maintain for the duration of this agreement any
and all existing Interconnections of Access Channels with contiguous cable
systems.
8.6.2. Grantee shall be capable of interconnection of PEG Access
Channels in the Cable System and Cable Systems in Franchise Areas that are
geographically adjacent to City, provided that City has secured the written
permission for such Interconnection from the regulatory authority for the adjacent
Franchise Area. The cost of such Interconnections shall be Grantee's so long as
Grantee or Grantee's affiliate owns the adjacent Cable System. If the adjacent
Cable SYstem is not owned by Grantee, the cost for interconnection shall be
equally shared by the two Cable Systems.
8.6.3. All Interconnections shall have the capability of transmitting and
receiving PEG programming. All Interconnections shall be accomplished in a
manner that permits the transmission of signals meeting the technical standards
of this agreement on all interconnected Channels, consistent with section 8.10.
Installation of all interconnect capacity shall be completed at the Grantee's
expense, except as otherwise provided in this agreement.
8.6.4. The City, or R .VTV, shall have the right to control and schedule the
operation of all interconnected Access Channels and capacity. In 'additiOn, the
City, or RVTV, shall have the right to use, at its sole discretion and at no cost,
any Access Channels and capacity provided under this agreement for non-
commercial purposes, in furtherance of PEG use. However, the requirement to
interconnect PEG programming with adjacent Cable Systems of willing franchise
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 17
authorities shall not result in an increase in the number of PEG Channels beyond
the number of Access Channels provided for in section 8.3.
8.6.5. The Grantee shall take all necessary steps to ensure that
technically adequate signal quality in compliance with FCC requirements are
initially and continuously provided for all Access Interconnections and Origination
Points.
8.7. Capital Support For Access Costs.
8.7.1 Grantee shall provide $0.75 per month, per Residential Subscriber
for capital support for PEG Access.
The contribution shall be payable by the Grantee to the City after
notice has been given to Grantee's subscribers and contribution
has been included on subscribers bills. The Grantee shall make its
best efforts to submit the content of notice to subscribers regarding
such changes to the City for review and comment at least 10 days
prior to its printing.
Except for the payment for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2004,
Grantee shall make such payments annually in advance on or
before June 30 of each year for the ensuing fiscal year. The
payment for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2004, shall be made.
within 45 days from Grantee's wdtten acceptance The advance
shall be based upon an estimation of the fees for the ensuing fiscal
year. Any difference in the advance fees and the actual fees will
be reconciled at the end of the fiscal year for which the advance
was made.
8.8. Access Support Not Franchise Fees.
8.8.1. The Grantee agrees that support for Access shall in no way modify
or otherwise affect the Grantee's obligations to pay franchise fees to the City.
The Grantee agrees that although the sum of Franchise fees and the payments
set forth in this section may total more than 5% of the Grantee's Gross
Revenues in any 12 month pedod, the additional commitments shall not be offset
or otherwise credited in any way against any franchise fee payments under this
agreement.
8.8.2. The City recognizes Franchise fees and certain additional
commitments are external costs as defined under the FCC rate regulations in
force at the time of adoption of this agreement and the Grantee has the dght and
ability to include franchise fees and certain other commitments on the bills of
cable customers.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 18
8.9. Access Channels on Lowest Available Tier. All Access Channels
provided to Subscribers under this agreement shall be included by the Grantee, without
limitation, as a part of the lowest available tier offered by the Grantee on its Cable
System.
8.10. Change in Technology. In the event the Grantee makes any change in
the Cable System and related equipment and Facilities or in the Grantee's signal
delivery technology, which directlY or indirectly substantially affects the signal quality or
transmission of Access serviCes or programming, the Grantee shalll at its own expense,
take necessary technical steps or provide necessary technical assistance, including the
acquisition of all necessary equipment, and full training of the City's or Access
personnel to ensure that the capabilities of Access services are not diminished or
adversely affected by such change.
8.11. Technical Quality. The Grantee shall maintain all Upstream and
Downstream Access services, Channels and Interconnections at the same level of
technical quality and reliability required by this agreement and all other applicable laws,
rules and regulations for Residential Subscriber Channels. The Grantee shall provide
routine maintenance and shall repair and replace all transmission equipment, including
associated cable and equipment in use upon the effective date of this agreement,
necessary to carry a quality signal to and from the City's or RVTV's facilities. City and
Grantee agree that the point of demarcation will be the input RF connection to
Grantee's Fiber Optics Laser Transmitter, with Grantee responsible for repair and
maintenance from the point of demarcation to Grantee's headend.
8.12. Promotional Services. The Grantee shall allow the City to include two bill
stuffers per year. The City or RVTV shall be responsible for the cost of printing its bill
stuffers, the costs of inserting the information into Grantee's bills, and for any
incremental postage costs. Bill stuffers must conform to Grantee's mailing
requirements. Grantee shall be provided an opportunity to review and approve all PEG
bill stuffers.
8.13. Channel Identification. If requested, by the City or RVTV, at City or RVTV
costs, the Grantee will identify the PEG Channels in its printed and electronic
programming guides, by the general type of programming carried on the Channel.
Grantee will bill the City or RVTV for the costs of these listings.
9. GENERAL STREET USE AND CONSTRUCTION.
9.1. Construction.
9.1.1. Subject to applicable laws, regulations and ordinances of City and
the provisions of this agreement, Grantee may perform all construction
necessary for the operation of its Cable System. All construction and
maintenance of any and all facilities within Streets incident to Grantee's Cable
System shall, regardless of who performs the construction, be and remain
Grantee's responsibility. Grantee shall apply for, and obtain, all permits
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 19
necessary for construction or installation of any facilities, and for excavating and
laying any facilities within the Streets. Grantee shall pay, prior to issuance, all
applicable fees of the requisite construction permits.
9.1.2. Prior to beginning any construction, Grantee shall provide City's
Department of Public Works with a construction schedule for work in the Streets.
All construction shall be performed in compliance with this agreement and all
applicable City Ordinances and Codes, especially AMC Chapter 16.12 and
section 16.12.090. When obtaining a permit, Grantee shall inquire in writing
about other construction currently in progress, planned or proposed, in order to ·
investigate thoroughly all opportunities for joint trenching or boring. Whenever it
is possible and reasonably practicable to joint trench or share bores or cuts,
Grantee shall work with other providers, grantees, permittees and franchisees so
as to reduce as far as possible the number of Street cuts.
9.1.3. City shall have the dght to inspect all construction or installation
work performed within the franchise area as it shall find necessary to ensure
compliance with the terms of this agreement and other pertinent provisions of
law,
9.2. Location of Facilities. Within 48 hours after notification of any proposed
Street excavation, Grantee shall, at Grantee's expense:
9.2.1. Mark on the surface all of its underground facilities within the area
of the proposed excavation;
9.2.2. Notify the excavator of any unlocated underground facilities in the
area of the proposed excavation; or
9.2.3. Notify the excavator that Grantee does not have any underground
facilities in the vicinity of the proposed excavation.
9.3. Relocation. City shall have the dght to require Grantee to change the
location of any part of Grantee's Cable System within the Streets when the public
convenience requires such change, and the expense shall be paid by Grantee. Should
Grantee fail to remove or relocate any such facilities by the date established by City,
City may effect such removal or relocation, and the expense shall be paid by Grantee,
including all costs and expenses incurred by City due to Grantee's delay. If City requires
Grantee to relocate its facilities located within the Streets, City shall make a reasonable
effort to provide Grantee with an alternate location within the Streets.
9.4. Restoration of Streets.
9.4.1. Whenever Grantee disturbs the surface of any Street for any
purpose, Grantee shall promptly restore the Street to at least its prior condition.
When any opening is made by Grantee in a hard surface pavement in any
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 20
Street, Grantee shall refill within 24 hours the opening and restore the surface to
a condition satisfactory to City.
9.4.2. If Grantee excavates the surface of any Street, Grantee shall be
responsible for restoration in accordance with applicable regulations of the
jurisdiction within the area affected by the excavation. City may, after providing
notice to Grantee, refill or repave any opening made by Grantee in the.Street,
and the expense shall be paid by Grantee. City may, after providing notice to
Grantee, remove or repair any work done by Grantee that, in the determination
of City, is inadequate. The cost, including the costs of inspection and
supervision, shall be paid by Grantee. All excavations made by Grantee in the
Streets shall be properly safeguarded for the prevention of accidents. All of
Grantee's work under this agreement, and this section in particular, shall be
done in strict compliance with all rules, regulations and ordinances of City. Prior
to making any Street or right-of-way cuts or openings, Grantee shall provide
written notice to City.
9.5. Maintenance and Workmanship.
9.5.1. Grantee's Cable System shall be constructed and maintained in
such manner as not to interfere with sewers, water pipes, or any other property
of City, or with any other pipes, wires, conduits, pedestals, structures, equipment
or other facilities that may have been laid in the Streets by, or under, City's
authority.
9.5.2. Grantee shall provide and use any equipment necessary to control
and carry Grantee's cable television signals so as to prevent injury to City's
property or property belonging to any Person. Grantee, at its own expense, shall
repair, change and improve its facilities to keep them in good repair, and safe
and presentable condition.
9.6. Reservation of City Street Rights, Nothing in this agreement shall prevent
City or utilities owned, maintained or operated by public entities other than City, from
constructing sewers; grading, paving, repairing or altedng any Street; repairing or
removing water mains; or constructing or establishing any other public work or
improvement. All such work shall be done, insofar as practicable, so as not to obstruct,
injure or prevent the use and operation of Grantee's Cable System. However, if any of
Grantee's Cable System interferes with the construction or repair of any Street or public
improvement, including construction, repair or removal of a sewer or water main,
Grantee's Cable System shall be removed or replaced in the manner City shall direct,
and City shall in no event be liable for any damage to any portion of Grantee's Cable
System. Any and all such removal or replacement shall be at the expense of Grantee.
Should Grantee fail to remove, adjust or relocate its facilities by the date established by
City's written notice to Grantee, City may effect such removal, adjustment or relocation,
and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee, including all reasonable costs and
expenses incurred by City due to Grantee's delay.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~,FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 21
9.7. Street Vacation. If any Street or portion of any Street used by Grantee is
vacated by City during the term of this agreement, unless City specifically reserves to
Grantee the right to continue its installation in the vacated Street, Grantee shall, without
delay or expense to City, remove its facilities from such Street, and restore, repair or
reconstruct the Street where such removal has occurred, and place the Street in such
condition as may be required by City. In the event of failure, neglect or refuSal of
Grantee, after 30 days' notice by City, to restore, repair or reconstruct such Street, City
may do such work or cause it to be done, and the reasonable cost, as found and
declared by City, shall be paid by Grantee within 30 days of receipt of an invoice and
documentation, and failure to make such payment shall be considered a material
violation of this agreement.
9.8. Discontinuing Use of Facilities. Whenever Grantee intends to discontinue
using any facility within the Streets, Grantee shall submit for City's approval a complete
description of the facility and the date on which Grantee intends to discontinue using
the facility. Grantee may remove the facility or request that City allow it to remain in
place. Notwithstanding Grantee's request that any such facility remain in place, City
may require Grantee to remove the facility from the Street or modify, the facility to
protect the public health, welfare, safety, and convenience, or otherwise serve the
public interest. City may require Grantee to perform a combination of modification and
removal of the facility. Grantee shall complete such removal or modification in
accordance with a reasonable schedule set by City. Until such time as Grantee
removes or modifies the facility as directed by City, or until the rights to and
responsibility for the facility are accepted by another Person having authority to
construct and maintain such facility, Grantee shall be responsible for all necessary
repairs and relocations of the facility, as well as maintenance of the Street, in the same
manner and degree as if the facility were in active use, and Grantee shall retain all
liability for such facility. If Grantee abandons its facilities, City may choose to use such
facilities for any purpose whatsoever including, but not limited to, public, governmental,
or educational purposes.
9.9. Hazardous Substances.
9.6.1. Grantee shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal
laws, statutes, regulations and orders conceming hazardous substances relating
to Grantee's Cable System in the Streets.
9.6.2. Grantee shall maintain and inspect its Cable System located in the
Streets. Upon reasonable notice to Grantee, City may inspect Grantee's facilities
in the .Streets to determine if any release of hazardous substances has occurred,
or may occur, from or related to Grantee's Cable System. In removing or
modifying Grantee's facilities as provided in this agreement, Grantee shall also
remove all residue of hazardous substances.
9.10. Undergrounding of Cable.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 22
9.10.1. Wiring.
A. Where all utility lines are installed underground at the time of
Cable System construction, or when such lines are subsequently placed
underground, all Cable System lines or wiring and equipment shall also be
placed underground on a nondiscriminatory basis with other utility lines
services at no additional expense to the City or Subscribers, to the extent
permitted by law and applicable safety codes. Cable must be installed
underground where: (1) all existing utilities are placed underground, (2)
statute, ordinance, policy, or other regulation requires utilities to be placed
underground, or (3) all overhead utility lines are placed underground.
Related Cable System equipment such as pedestals must be
placed in accordance with applicable Code requirements and
underground utility rules as interpreted by each City's appropriate public
works official. In areas where electric or telephone utility wiring is aerial,
the Grantee may install aerial cable, except when a property owner or
resident requests underground installation and agrees to bear the
reasonable additional cost in excess of aerial installation.
B. The Grantee shall utilize existing poles and conduit wherever
possible.
C. This agreement does not grant, give or convey to the Grantee
the right or privilege to install its facilities in any manner on specific utility
poles or equipment of the City or any other Person without their
permission. Copies of agreements for use of poles, conduits or other utility
· facilities must be provided upon request by the City upon demonstrated
need and subject to protecting Grantee's proprietary information from
disclosure to third parties.
9.10.2. Repair and Restoration of Property.
A. Grantee shall protect public and pdvate property from damage. If
damage Occurs the Grantee shall promptly notify the property owner
within 24 hours in writing.
B. If public or private property is disturbed or damaged, the
Grantee shall restore the property to its former condition, normal wear and
tear excepted. Public right-of-way or other City property shall be restored,
in a manner and within a timeframe approved.by the City's Director. of
Public Works or other appropriate designated official. If restoration of
public right-of-way or other property of the City is not satisfactorily
performed within a reasonable time, the Director of Public Works or other
appropriate designated official may, after prior notice to the Grantee, or
without notice where the disturbance or damage may create a risk to
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~AFN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 23
public health or safety, or cause delay or added expense to a public
project or activity, cause the repairs to be made at the Grantee's expense
and recover the cost of those repairs from the Grantee. Within 30 days of
receipt of an itemized list of those costs, including the costs of labor,
materials and equipment, the Grantee shall pay the City. If suit is brought
upon Grantee's failure to pay for repair or restoration, and if judgment in
such a suit is entered in favor of the City, then the Grantee shall pay all of
the City's actual costs and expenses resulting from the non-payment,
including penalties, interest from the date the bill was presented,
disbursements, attorneys' fees and litigation-related costs. Private
property must be restored promptly, considering the nature of the work
that must be performed and in no event later than 72 hours.
C. Prior to entering onto private property to construct, operate or
repair its Cable System in a manner in which it is assumed that temporary
property damage will occur or the work will be of a duration exceeding four
hours, Grantee shall give the Person residing on or using the property
adequate wdtten notice (such as a door hanger which clearly identifies the
anticipated construction) that it intends to work on the property, a
description of the work it intends to perform and a name and phone
number the Person can call to protest or seek modification of the work.
Work shall be' done in a manner that causes the least interference with
the rights and reasonable convenience of property owners, residents and
users. Such notification is not required when Grantee is performing
connection, disconnection and/or repair of its drop system or in times of
emergency restorations of its plant.
9.10.3. Movement of Cable System For and By City. The City may
remove, replace, modify or disconnect Grantee's facilities and equipment located
in the public right-of-way or on any other property of the City in the case of fire,
disaster, or other emergency, or when a project or activity of the City's makes the
removal, replacement, modification or disconnection necessary or less
expensive for the City. Except dudng an emergency, the City shall provide
reasonable notice to Grantee pdor to taking such action and shall, when feasible,
provide Grantee with the opportunity to perform such action. Reasonable notice
to Grantee includes notice by telephone. Following notice by the City, Grantee
shall remove, replace, modify or disconnect any of its facilities or equipment
within any public right-of-way, or on any other property of the City, except that
the City shall provide at least 60 days' wdtten notice of any major capital
improvement project which would require the removal, replacement, modification
or disconnection of Grantee's facilities or equipment. If the Grantee fails to
complete this work within the time prescribed and to the City's satisfaction, the
City may cause such work to be done and bill the cost of the work to the
Grantee. Within 30 days of receipt of an itemized list of those costs, the Grantee
shall pay the City.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 24
9.10.4. Movement for Other Franchise Holders. If any removal,
replacement, modification or disconnection is required to accommodate the
construction, operation or repair of the facilities or equipment of another
Franchise holder, Grantee shall, after at least 30 days' advance written notice,
take action to effect the necessary changes requested by the responsible entity.
Those Persons shall determine how costs associated with the removal or
relocation shall be allocated.
9.10.5. Movement for Other Permittees. At the request of any Person
holding a valid' permit and upon reasonable advance notice, Grantee shall
temporarily raise, lower or remove its wires as necessary to permit the moving of
a building, vehicle, equipment or other item. The permit holder must pay the
expense of such temporary changes, and Grantee may require a reasonable
deposit of the estimated payment in advance.
9.10.6. Tree Trimming. Subject to acquiring prior written permission of the
City, the Grantee shall have the authority to trim trees that overhang a public
right-of-way of the City so as to prevent the branches Of such trees from coming
in contact with its Cable System, in accordance with applicable codes and
regulations and current, accepted professional tree tdmming practices.
9.11. Codes. Grantee shall stdctly adhere to all building and zoning codes
currently in effect or in effect in the future. Grantee shall arrange its lines, cables and
other appurtenances, on both public and private property, in such a manner as to not
cause unreasonable interference with the use of said public or private property by any
Person. In the event of such interference, City may require the removal or relocation of
Grantee's lines, cables, and other appurtenances, at Grantee's cost, from the property
in question.
9.12. Standards.
9.12.1. All work authorized and required shall be done in a safe, thorough
and workedike manner. The Grantee must comply with all safety requirements,
rules, and practices and employ all necessary devices as required by applicable
law dudng construction, operation and repair of its Cable System. By way of
illustration and not limitation, the Grantee must comply with the National Electric
Code, National Electrical Safety Code and Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) Standards.
9.12.2. Grantee shall ensure that individual Cable System drops are
propedy bonded to the electrical power ground at the home, and are consistent,
in all respects, with the requirements of the National Electric Code and the
National Electrical Safety Code.
10. TEST AND COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES. Upon request, Grantee shall advise
City of schedules and methods for testing the Cable System on a regular basis to
determine compliance with the provisions of applicable FCC technical standards.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 25
Representatives of City may witness tests, and written test reports may be made
available to City upon request.
As required by FCC Rules, Grantee shall conduct proof of performance tests and
cumulative leakage index tests designed to demonstrate compliance with FCC
requirements. Grantee shall provide City summary written reports of the results of such
tests.
11. SERVICE EXTENSION, CONSTRUCTION, AND INTERCONNECTION
11.1. Equivalent Service. It is Grantee's general policy that all residential
dwelling units in the Franchise Area have equivalent availability to Cable Service from
Grantee's Cable System under nondiscriminatory rates and reasonable terms and
conditions. Grantee shall not arbitrarily refuse to provide Cable Service to any Person
within its Franchise Area.
11.2. Service Availability.
11.2.1. Grantee shall provide Cable Service in new subdivisions upon the
eadier of either of the following occurrences: (A) Within 60 days of the time when
foundations have been installed in 50% percent of the dwelling units in any
individual subdivision; or (B) Within 30 days following a request from a'resident.
For purposes of this section, a receipt shall be deemed to be made on the
signing of a service agreement, receipt of funds by the Grantee, receipt of a
wdtten request by Grantee, or receipt by Grantee of a verified verbal request.
Grantee shall provide such service: (i) With no line extension charge except as
specifically authorized elsewhere in this agreement; (ii) At a nondiscriminatory
installation charge for a standard installation, consisting of a drop no longer
than125 feet, with additional charges for non-standard installations computed
according to a nondiscriminatory methodology for such installations, adopted by
Grantee and provided in wdting to City; and at nondiscriminatory monthly rates
for Residential Subscribers.
11.3. Required Extensions of Service. Whenever the Grantee shall receive a
request for service from at least ten residences within 1320 cable-bearing strand feet
(one-quarter cable mile) of its trunk or distribution cable, it shall extend its Cable
System to such Customers at no cost to the Customers for Cable System extension,
other than the usual connection fees for all Customers within 90 days, provided that
such extension is technically feasible, and if it will not adversely affect the operation, of
the Cable System, or as provided under section 2.6.
11.3.1. No Customer shall be refused service 'arbitrarily. However, for
unusual circumstances, such as a Customer's request to locate a cable drop
underground, existence of more than 125 feet of distance from distribution cable
to connection of service to Customers, or a density of less than ten residences
per 1320 cable-bearing strand feet of trunk or distribution cable, service may be
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 26
made available on the basis of a capital contribution in aid of construction,
including cost of material, labor, and easements. For the purpose of determining
the amount of capital contribution in aid of construction to be borne by the
Grantee and Customers in the area in which service may be expanded, the
Grantee will contribute an amount equal to the construction and other costs per
mile, multiplied by a fraction whose numerator equals the actual number of
residences per 1320 cable-bearing strand feet of its trunks or distribution cable
and whose denominator equals ten residences. Customers who request such
service will bear the remainder of the construction and.other costs on a pro rata
basis. The Grantee may require that the payment of the capital contribution in
aid of construction borne by such potential Customers be paid in advance.
11.3.2. Failure to meet these standards shall subject grantee to
enforcement actions on a per Subscriber basis in section 13.
11.3.3. Connection of Public Facilities. Grantee shall, at no cost to City,
provide one outlet of Basic and expanded basic programming to City' public use
buildings, as designated by City, and all libraries and Schools. In addition, Grantee
agrees to provide, at no cost, one outlet of Basic and expanded basic programming to
all such future public buildings if the drop line to such building does not exceed 125
cable feet or if City agrees to pay the incremental cost of.such drop line in excess of
125 feet, including the cost of such excess labor and materials. Outlets of Basic and
expanded basic programming provided in accordance with this subsection may be used
to distribute Cable Service throughout such buildings, provided such distribution can be
accomplished without causing Cable System disruption and general technical standards
are maintained. Cost for any additional outlets shall be the responsibility of City.
12. STANDBY POWER. Grantee shall provide standby power generating capacity at
the Cable System Headend capable of providing at least 12 hours of emergency
operation. Grantee shall maintain standby power system supplies, to the node, rated for
at least two hours duration. In addition, throughout the term of this agreement, Grantee
shall have a plan in place, along with all resources necessary for implementing~,such
plan, for dealing with outages of more than two hours. This outage plan and evidence of
requisite implementation resources shall be presented to City no later than 90 days
following the effective date of this agreement.
13. FRANCHISE VIOLATIONS; REVOCATION OF FRANCHISE.
13.1. Procedure For Remedying Franchise Violations.
13.1.1. If City believes that Grantee has failed to perform any obligation
under this agreement or has failed to perform in a timely manner, City shall notify
Grantee in writing, stating with reasonable specificity the nature of the alleged
violation.
13.1.2. The City must provide written notice of a violation. Upon receipt of
notice, the Grantee will have a period of 30 days to cure the violation or 30 days
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 27
to present to the City a reasonable remedial plan. The City shall, with Grantee's
consent, decide whether to accept, reject, or modify the remedial plan presented
by the Grantee. Fines shall be assessed only in the event that either a cure has
not occurred within 30 days or the City rejects the remedial plan. The procedures
provided in section 13 shall be utilized to impose any fines. The date of violation
will be the date of the event and not the date Grantee receives notice of the
violation provided, however, that if City has actual knowledge of the violation and
fails to give the Grantee the notice, then the date of the violation shall be no
earlier than ten business days before the City gives Grantee the notice of the
violation.
Grantee shall have 30 calendar days from the date of receipt of such notice to:
13.1.2.1. Respond to City, contesting City's assertion that a violation has
occurred, and requesting a headng in accordance with subsection 13.1.5, or;
13.1.2.2. Cure the violation, or;
13.1.2.3. Notify City that Grantee cannot cure the violation within the thirty
30 days, and notify the City in writing of what steps the Grantee shall take to cure
the violation including the Grantee's projected completion date for such cure. In
such case, City shall set a hearing date within 30 days of receipt of such
response in accordance with section 13.1.3.
13.1.3. In the event that the Grantee notifies the City that it cannot cure
the violation within the 30 day cure pedod, City shall, within thirty 30 days of
City's receipt of such notice, set a hearing. At the headng, City shall review and
determine whether the Grantee has taken reasonable steps to cure the violation
and whether the Grantee's proposed plan and completion date for cure are
reasonable. In the event such plan and completion date are determined by
mutual consent to be reasonable, the same may be approved by the City, who
may waive all or part of the fines for such extended cure period in accordance
with the criteda set forth in section 13.1.7.
13.1.4. In the event that the Grantee fails to cure the violation, within the
30 day basic cure period, or within an extended cure period approved by the City
pursuant to section 13.1.3, the City shall set a hearing to determine what fines, if
any, shall be applied.
13.1.5. In the event that the Grantee contests the City's assertion that a '
violation has occurred, and requests a hearing in accordance with section
13.1.2.1., the City. shall set. a hearing within 60 days of the City's receipt of the .
hearing request to determine whether the violation has occurred, and if a
violation is found, what fines shall be applied.
13.1.6. In the case of any hearing pursuant to this section, City shall notify
Grantee of the hearing in writing and at the hearing, Grantee shall be provided
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 28
an opportunity to be heard, examine City's witnesses, and to present evidence in
its defense. The City may also hear any other person interested in the subject,
and may provide additional hearing procedures as City deems appropriate.
13.1.7. The fines set forth in section 13.2 may be reduced at the
discretion of the City, taking into consideration the nature, circumstances, extent
and gravity of the violation as reflected by one or more of the following factors:
(A) Whether the violation was unintentional;
(B) The nature of the harm which resulted;
(C) Whether there is a history of prior violations of the same or
other requirements;
(D) Whether there is a history of overall compliance, or;
(E) Whether the violation was voluntarily disclosed, admitted or
cured.
13.1.8. If, after the hearing, City determines that a violation exists, City
may use one or more of the following remedies:
(A) Order Grantee to correct or remedy the violation within a
reasonable time frame as City shall determine;
(B) Establish the amount of fine set forth in section 13.2, taking into
consideration the criteria provided for in section 13.1.7 of this
section as appropriate in City's discretion;
(C) Revoke this agreement, or;
(D) Pursue any other legal or equitable remedy available under this
agreement or any applicable law.
13.2. Fines.
13.2.1. Failure to comply with provisions of the agreement may result in
injury to City. It will be difficult to accurately estimate the extent of such injury.
Therefore, the financial penalty provisions of this agreement are intended as a
reasonable forecast of compensation to City for the harm caused by violation of
this agreement, including but not limited to administrative expense, legal fees,
publication of notices, and holding of a hearing or hearings as provided in this
agreement. The fine for violating any provision of this agreement shall be $250 per day
for every day the violation continues with a cap of $10,000.
13.2.2. Collection of Fines. The collection of fines by the City shall in no
respect affect:
(A) Compensation owed to Subscribers; or
(B) The Grantee's obligation to comply with all of the provisions of
this agreement or applicable law; or
(C) Other remedies available to the City.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 29
13.3. Revocation. In addition to all other rights and powers retained by the
City under this agreement or otherwise, the City reserves the right to forfeit and
terminate this agreement and all rights and privileges of the Grantee, in whole or in
part, in the event of a material violation of its terms and conditions. A material
violation by the Grantee shall include, but shall not be limited to the following'
13.3.1. Violation of any material provision of this agreement or any
other agreement between City and Grantee, or any material rule, order,
regulation, standard or determination of the City or authorized agent made '
pursuant to this agreement or other agreement;
13.3.2. Attempt to evade any material provision of this agreement or to
practice any fraud or deceit upon the City or its Subscribers or customers;
13.3.3. Failure to restore service after 48 consecutive hours of
interrupted service system-wide, except when approval of such interruption is
obtained from the City;
13.3.4. Material misrepresentation of fact in the application for or
negotiation of this agreement, or;
13.4. Relationship of Remedies.
13.4.1. Remedies are Non-exclusive. The remedies provided for in this
agreement are cumulative and not exclusive; the exercise of one remedy shall
not prevent the exercise of another remedy, or the exercise of any rights of the
City at law or equity provided that the cumulative remedies may not be
disproportionate to the magnitude and sevedty for the breach for which they are
imposed. By way of example and not limitation, the collection of fines by City
shall in no respect affect:
(A) Compensation owed to subscribers; or
(B) Grantee's obligation to comply with the provisions of this
agreement or applicable law.
13.4.2. No Election of Remedies. Without limitation, the recovery of
amounts under the insurance, indemnity or penalty provisions of this agreement
shall not be construed as any of the following: an election of remedies; a limit on
the liability of Grantee under the agreement for fines or otherwise; or an excuse
of faithful performance by Grantee.
13.5. Removal.
13.5.1. In the event of termination, expiration or revocation of this
agreement, City may order the removal of the above-ground Cable System
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~,FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 30
facilities and such underground facilities as required by City in order to achieve
reasonable engineering or Street-use purposes, from the Franchise Area at
Grantee's sole expense within a reasonable period of time as determined by
City. In removing its plant, structures and equipment, Grantee shall refill, at its
own expense, any excavation that is made by it and shall leave all Streets, public
places and pdvate property in as good a condition as that prevailing prior to
Grantee's removal of its equipment.
13.5.2. If Grantee fails to complete any required removal to the
satisfaction of City, City may cause the work to be done and Grantee shall
reimburse City for the reasonable costs incurred within 30 days after receipt of
an itemized list of the costs.
13.6. No Recourse Against City. Grantee shall not have any monetary recourse
against City or its officials, boards, commissions, agents or employees for any loss,
costs, expenses or damages arising out of any provision or requirement of this
agreement or its enforcement, in accordance with the provisions of applicable federal,
state and local law. The rights of the City under this agreement are in addition to, and
shall not be read to limit, any rights or immunities the City may enjoy under federal,
state or local law.
13.7. Nonenforcement by City, Grantee is not relieved of its obligation to
comply with any of the provisions of this agreement by reason of any failure of City to
enforce prompt compliance. City's forbearance or failure to enforce any provision of this
agreement shall not serve as a basis to stop any subsequent enforcement. The failure
of the City on one or more occasions to exercise a right or to require compliance or
performance under this agreement or any applicable law shall not be deemed to
constitute a waiver of such right or a waiver of compliance or performance, unless such
right has been specifically waived in writing. Any waiver of a violation is not a waiver of
any other violation, whether similar or different from that waived.
14, ABANDONMENT
14.1. Effect of Abandonment. If the Grantee abandons its System during the
agreement term, or fails to operate its Cable System in accordance with its duty to
provide continuous service, the City, at its option, may operate the Cable System;
designate another entity to operate the Cable System temporarily until the Grantee
restores service under conditions acceptable to the City or until the agreement is
revoked and a new Franchise is selected by the City; or obtain an injunction requiring
the Grantee to continue operations. If the City is required to operate or designate
another entity to operate-the Cable System, the Grantee shall reimburse the City or. its.
designee for all reasonable costs, expenses and damages incurred.
14.2. What Constitutes Abandonment. The City shall be entitled to exercise its
options and obtain any required injunctive relief if:
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 31
14.2.1. The Grantee fails to provide Cable Service in accordance with this
agreement to the Franchise Area for 96 consecutive hours, unless the City
authorizes a longer interruption of service, except if such failure to provide
service is due to a force majeure occurrence, as described in section 4.5; or
14.2.2. The Grantee, for any period, willfully and without cause refuses to
provide Cable Service in accordance with this agreement.
15. FRANCHISE RENEWAL AND TRANSFER.
15.1. Renewal.
15.1.1. Any proceedings undertaken by the City that relate to the renewal
of Grantee's agreement shall be governed by and comply with the provisions of
the Cable Act (47 USC §546), unless the procedures and substantive protections
there set forth shall be deemed to be preempted and superseded by the
provisions of any subsequent provision of federal or state law.
15.1.2. In addition to the procedures set forth in the Cable Act, the City
agrees to notify Grantee of the completion of its assessments regarding the
identification of future cable-related community needs and interests, as well as
the past performance of Grantee under the then current Franchise term.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in this agreement, City and
Grantee agree, that at any time during the term of the then current agreement,
while affording the public adequate notice and opportunity for comment, City and
Grantee may agree to undertake and finalize negotiations regarding renewal of
the then current agreement and the City may grant a renewal. Grantee and City
consider the terms set forth in this section to be consistent with the express
provisions of the Cable Act.
15.2. Transfer of Ownership or Control.
15.2.1. The Cable System and this agreement shall not be sold, assigned,
transferred, leased, or disposed of, either in whole or in part, either by
involuntary sale or by voluntary sale, merger, consolidation, nor shall the title,
either legal or equitable, or any dght, interest, or property pass to or vest in any
Person or entity, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall
not be unreasonably withheld. Grantee shall reimburse the City for all direct and
indirect fees, costs, and expenses reasonably incurred by the City in considering
a request to transfer or assign the Cable System or this agreement.
15.2.2. The Grantee shall promptly notify the City of.any actual, or --.
proposed change in, or transfer of, or acquisition by any other party of control' of
the Grantee. The word "control" as used is this section is not limited to majority
stockholders but includes actual working control in whatever manner exercised.
A rebuttable presumption that a transfer of control has occurred shall arise on
the acquisition or accumulation by any Person or group of Persons of 10% of the
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004V~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 32
shares or the general partnership interest in the Grantee, except that this
sentence shall not apply in the case of a transfer to any Person or group already
owning at least a 10% interest of the shares or the general partnership interest in
the Grantee. Every change, transfer or acquisition of control of the Grantee shall
make this agreement subject to cancellation unless and until the City shall have
consented.
15.2.3. The parties to the sale or transfer shall make a written request to
the City for its approval of a sale or transfer and furnish all information required
by law and the City.
15.2.4. The City shall render a final written decision on the request within
120 days of the request, provided it has received all requested information.
Subject to the foregoing, if the City fails to render a final decision on the request
within 120 days, such request shall be deemed granted unless the requesting
party and the City agree to an extension of time.
15.2.5. Within 30 days of any transfer or sale, if approved or deemed
granted by the City, Grantee shall file with the City a copy of the deed,
agreement, lease or other written instrument evidencing such sale or transfer of
ownership or control, certified and sworn to 'as correct by Grantee and the
transferee.
15.2.6. In reviewing a request for sale or transfer, the City may inquire into
the legal, technical and financial qualifications of the prospective controlling party
or transferee, and Grantee shall assist the City in so inquiring. The City may
condition said sale or transfer upon such terms and conditions as it deems
reasonably appropriate, provided, however, any such terms and conditions so
attached shall be related to the legal, technical, and financial qualifications of the
prospective controlling party or transferee and to the resolution of outstanding
and unresolved issues of noncompliance with the terms and conditions of this
agreement by Grantee.
15.2.7. The consent or approval of the City to any transfer by the Grantee
shall not constitute a waiver or release of any rights of the City, and any transfer
shall, by its terms, be expressly subordinate to the terms and conditions of this
agreement.
15.2.8. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this section, the prior
approval of the City shall not be required for any sale, assignment or transfer of
the agreement or Cable System for cable television system usage to an entity
controlling~ controlled by or under the same common control as Grantee
prbvided that'~he proposed assignee or'transferee must show financial
responsibility as may be determined necessary by the City and must agree in
writing to comply with all provisions of the agreement.
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 33
16. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, paragraph, term or provision of this
agreement is determined to be illegal, invalid or unconstitutional by any court of
competent jurisdiction or by any state or federal regulatory authority having jurisdiction,
such determination shall have no effect on the validity of any other section, subsection,
paragraph, term or provision of this agreement, all of which will remain in full force and
effect for the term of the agreement.
17. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
17.1. Preferential or Discriminatory Practices Prohibited. Grantee shall not
discriminate in hiring, employment or promotion on the basis of race, color, creed,
ethnic or national origin, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, or physical
or mental disability. Throughout the term of this agreement, Grantee shall fully comply
with all equal employment or nondiscrimination provisions and requirements of federal,
state and local law and, in particular, FCC rules and regulations.
17.2. Dispute Resolution. Should a dispute arise between the parties
concerning any aspect of this agreement which is not resolved by mutual agreement of
the parties, and unless either party believes in good faith that injunctive relief is
warranted, the dispute will be submitted to mediated negotiation prior to any party
commencing litigation. In such event, the City and Grantee agree to participate in good
faith in a non-binding mediation process. The mediator shall be selected by mutual
agreement of the parties. In the absence of such mutual agreement, each party shall
select a temporary mediator, and those mediators shall jointly select a permanent
mediator.
If the parties are unable to successfully conclude the mediation within 45 days
from the date of the selection of the mediator, either party may terminate further
mediation by sending written notice to the other. After wdtten notice has been received
by the other party, either party may pursue whatever legal remedies exist. All costs
associated with mediation shall be borne, equally and separately, by the parties.
17.3. Notices. Throughout the term of the agreement, Grantee shall maintain
and file with City a designated legal or local address for the service of notices by mail. A
copy of all notices from City to Grantee shall be sent, postage prepaid, to such address
and such notices shall be effective upon the date of mailing. At the effective date of this
agreement, such addresses shall be:
AFN Television
90 North Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
All notices to be sent by Grantee to City under this agreement shall be sent,
postage prepaid, and such notices shall be effective upon the date of mailing. At the
effective date of this agreement, such address shall be:
City Administrator
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 34
City of Ashland
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Either party may with 30 days prior written notice to the other party, change the
address(es) to which notice shall be sent pursuant to this section 17.3.
17.4. Binding Effect. This agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their
successors and assigns.
17.5. Authority to Amend. This agreement may be amended at any time by
written agreement between the parties.
17.6. Governing Law. This agreement shall be governed in all respects by the
laws of the State of Oregon.
17.7. Captions. The captions and headings of this agreement are for
convenience and reference purposes only and shall not affect in any way the meaning
or interpretation of any provisions of this agreement.
17.8. Entire Agreement. This agreement contains the entire agreement
between the parties, supersedes all prior agreements or proposals except as
specifically set forth in this agreement, and cannot be changed orally but only by an
instrument in wdting executed by the parties.
17.9. Construction of Agreement. The provisions of this agreement shall be
liberally construed to promote the public interest.
Agreed to this
day of August, 2004.
AFN City of Ashland
By: By:
Title: Mayor
By: Attest:
Title: City Recorder
G:\legal\PAUL\Telecommunications\Cable\Cable Renewal AFN 2004~Z~,FN 2004 franchise.wpd Pg - 35
CITY OF
SHLAND
Council Communication
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Approved By:
Synopsis:
Report on August 2004 AFN Full Faith and Credit Bond Sale
Finance Department
August 17, 2004
Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director zf~z)
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator Ut,/~
On August 11 of this year the city issued $15,500,000 in full faith and credit bonds to refinance capital
and operating costs for the Ashland Fiber Network (AFN). The sale provided $6,817,997 to pay off the
two bank loans, $246,484 for issue costs and discounts and $8,435,519 for internal borrowings and a
small reserve. The internal borrowing amount is higher and bank loans amount lower than at June 30
due to significant debt service payments being made the first 40 days of FY 2004-05.
The bonds were well received in the taxable market with interest ranging from 3.70% to 6.02% for a
total interest cost for all maturities calculated at 5.91%. In comparison, the existing taxable loan was at
7.01%. The original tax exempt borrowing was at 5.14% and internal borrowing ranged from 1.75% to
5.00% in the last four years (depending upon when it was borrowed or paid back) with no cap in the
years to come.
Recommendation:
This is a staff report. No action is required since the bond sale of up to $16,000,000 was approved by
Council in July under Resolution 2004-27.
Fiscal Impact:
The bond sale follows what was discussed and approved in the budget process for FY 2004-05. The
budget included a $15,000,000 bond issue but that amount was increased to include all issue costs and to
incorporate a small reserve. A supplemental budget will be proposed in September to recognize the
additional monies received and unbudgeted issuance costs paid from the proceeds.
The 2004 bonds change the way the City funds past AFN operations. The total debt is now a long term
payable on the Telecommunications Fund balance sheet and the annual debt service is more consistent
and predictable than was possible with the interim financing through interfund loans utilizing adjustable
interest rates.
Monies loaned from other funds have been restored and the debt service has been leveled for the next 20
years.
Background:
AFN's debt load and the impact of internal borrowing has been discussed many times. The City's
financial advisor and bond counsel helped staff to craft an acceptable financing to best fit AFN
operations and to restore monies loaned from other funds.
In one respect the achieved interest rate is less than the 2001 bank loan providing some savings.
Replacing the first loan's 5.14% financing is more costly but the bonds better match the City's
operation, stretch out the debt service and limits the interest cost. This is done by replacing the growing
internal borrowing (including a floating interest rate) that could very easily climb to unacceptable levels
in the next 10 to 20 years.
Debt service payments begin July 15, 2005.
Attachments:
None
.o' Pa~e 1 of 1
Message /'~~ 0 ~ ' '-
RUSS, Silbiger ,Qr.,O.,~
the resolution and allocate $5,925 to the PAC
1) Approve modificatio~of .
2) Modify the resolution to allow the PAC to apply for and to receive funds and ask the TOT sub-
committee to meet and bring a recommendation back to the full council regarding the allocation of
the funds to the PAC.
3) Refer the entire issue to the TOT sub-committee.
4) Do not modify the resolution and deny the request for funds.
1) If the resolution is to be modified it should be done in an orderly
fashion, allowing the Public Arts Commission an equal oppurtunity
to go througL~ o ~!~ the:~ s~ne__oc proces,s~~/c_~..__b~~cs ~. cas all the other~,~,org~izations
2) If money is not allocated or otherwise granted
from the Economic Devlopment or the Social Service funds it
should be carried over to the next year, not returned to the general
fund.
3) As a matter of record, 2 years ago the Budget Grant
Subcommitee declined to fund a "public art" project proposed by
the Friends of the Library. I believe the consensus was that a public
art piece was not "cultural development" as defined.
8/17/2004
...
Barbara christensen - Letter in support of PAC funding.doc
SCHNEIDER MUSEUM OF ART
Southern Oregon University
August 16, 2004
Ashland City Council
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Council Members,
This letter is written in support of modifying Resolution 2004-11 to allow the Public Arts Commission
(PAC) to receive Transient Occupancy Tax funds, and the remaining $5,925 from this years Economic
and Cultural Development grants. The PAC was formed as a city commission but did not receive
funding or a course of action to be a part of the current funding process. The commission has worked
hard to develop the framework and policies surrounding the issue of public art, and now is an excellent
time for the city to step up and acknowledge their hard work and contributions on this issue. Granting
them the ECD monies would not affect this year's budget, as the money has already been allocated for
the year. Demonstration of financial support by the city to the PAC will strengthen their ability to
move forward to solicit funds from granting agencies and private donations.
The performing arts are well represented in our community and have received funding from city grants
for many years (OSF most prominently). The visual arts tend to be overlooked and less tangible. This
is an opportunity to make a formal commitment to enhance our public spaces. Public art will continue
to define the identity of our city as well as educate, inspire and create a sense of pride in our citizens.
In response to the economic impact of public art I would recommend reading information supplied by
the Project for Public Spaces organization who has done extensive research on the topic of public art
and its emotional and economic impact on communities. Americans for the Arts is also a good
resource for information. Public art enhances the livability of communities and has been shown to
increase their economic well being. The creation of a Public Arts Commission was the first step in the
process and establishing a means for seeking financial support will help ensure its success. Thank you
for considering this request.
Sincerely,
Mary N. Gardiner
Director
1250 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD / ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
Barbara christ~h§e6: PAC lette~ 0f SUpport re:fund allocation : ............. '?-? ..........
F rom:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Sharon Dvora <dvoras@sou.edu>
Ann seltzer <seltzera@ashland.or. us>
8/17/04 10:00:32 AM
PAC letter of support re:fund allocation
Ann .... I won't be able to attend the City Council meeting tonight, but
wanted to send a letter of support... Sharon Dvora
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing this letter in support of the Public Arts Commission's
request to modify Resolution 2004-11 to allow PAC to be a recipient of
TOT funds and to encourage the allocation of the surplus $5,925 from
the Economic and Cultural Development funds to the PAC at this time. By
taking these actions, the City will be setting this new commission off
to a great start in successfully creating public art projects in
Ashland that will enhance both the economic and cultural health of our
beautiful town.
Sincerely,
Sharon Dvora, Art Educator and Community Artist
I:~arbara christensen - City Public Arts CommiSsion
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
John Enders <director@sohs.org>
'"katejackson@opendoor.com'" <katejackson@opendoor. com>
8/16/04 9:59:03 AM
City Public Arts Commission
Dear Kate:
As a cultural and educational institution, the Southern Oregon Historical
Society has long supported and benefited from public funding for heritage,
arts and culture. It is through such public funding that the arts and other
cultural activities often are maintained.
It is my understanding that the City of Ashland will soon consider providing
a minimum level of funding for the recently established Public Arts
Commission's work. I support and encourage the city to do so.
Sincerely,
John Enders
Executive Director
CC: '"ann@ashland.or. us'" <ann@ashland.or. us>
Council Communication
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
Title:
Dept:
Date:
Submitted By:
Approved By:
Synopsis:
Public Arts Commission request for remaining TOT funds.
Administration
Augustl7, 2004 ~a
Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, ison to the Public Art Commission
Gino Grimaldi, City Administrator
In FY 2004-05 $445,600 of transient occupancy tax was appropriated for Economic and Cultural Development
(ECD) grants. Of that amount, the ECD sub-committee did not allocate $5,925. If not spent, the funds will revert
to the ending fund balance of the general fund.
The Public Arts Commission (PAC) requests that Resolution 2004-11 be modified to allow the PAC to receive
TOT funds and that the remaining $5,925 be dedicated to PAC for the acquisition, installation and maintenance of
public art in Ashland.
The PAC is directed by ordinance "to enhance the cultural and aesthetic quality of life in Ashland..." though no
financial support was provided to enable the commission to implement their work. While the city has a
mechanism in place, the ECD grant process, to provide financial assistance to other organizations that provide
cultural development in Ashland, the process currently prohibits the PAC from receiving any of those funds.
Funds allocated through the ECD grant process enable grant recipients to leverage dollars through other granting
organizations by illustrating support at a local level. Amending the resolution gives the PAC the same
opportunity as other organizations to apply for local support and would enable the PAC to leverage additional
dollars through other granting organizations.
The council formally recognized the importance of public art to the community when it adopted Ordinance 2890
in November of 2002 and created the Public Arts Commission. The cultural contributions to the community
through public art are no less deserving of financial support than other cultural grant recipients.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends supporting the request of the Public Arts Commission by: 1) Modifying Resolution 2004-11 to allow PAC to be a recipient of TOT funds and
2) Allocating $5,925 to the Public Arts Commission for the development of public art in Ashland.
Staff suggests adding subparagraph 'g' under Section 4, in the resolution to read: "Irrespective of sub paragraph
'b', the City of Ashland Public Arts Commission may apply for and receive funds."
Options:
1) Approve modification of the resolution and allocate $5,925 to the PAC.
2) Modify the resolution to allow the PAC to apply for and to receive funds and ask the TOT sub-
committee to meet and bring a recommendation back to the full council regarding the allocation
of the funds to the PAC.
3) Refer the entire issue to the TOT sub-committee.
4) Do not modify the resolution and deny the request for funds.
Fiscal Impact:
Allocating these funds to the PAC will not negatively impact the budget.
Background:
The PAC has initiated numerous activities to call attention to public art and to raise funds for the public art
components of the staircase being construction in Calle Guanjuato. The PAC has developed informational and
fundraising brochures, manned a booth on two different weekends in the Calle as a part of the Lithia Artisan
Market, hosted a neighborhood event at Pilaf Restaurant and continue to conduct face-to-face solicitation of funds
from residents. Invitations to the neighborhood event were designed and printed by the PAC and mailed to all
residents in the Granite Street neighborhood, all businesses on the Plaza and all elected and appointed officials.
There are three public art components to the Calle Guanajuato staircase: the overlook at the top of the stairs
adjacent to Granite Street, the Amie Krigel memorial sculpture garden at the mid-point of the staircase and the
staircase railing inserts. Current efforts of the PAC are directed to the overlook component, as it is an integral
piece of the staircase construction and must be completed first.
To date, the PAC has raised approximately $2,000 in non-dedicated funds for public art, which will be used
towards the overlook public art component. An additional $10,500 has been raised and is dedicated to the
memorial sculpture garden and $19,000, which was bequeathed to the city for a memorial honoring the McGee
family.
The PAC has made presentations to the Parks Commission keeping them abreast of the proceedings for the
staircase and has requested funds from the Parks Foundation.
The PAC has been in communication with a number of granting agencies including the Oregon Arts Commission,
the Meyer Memorial Trust, the Collins Foundation and PGE Foundation and has conducted preliminary research
on-line with other agencies at the state and federal level. All encourage the PAC to apply for funds once it can
illustrate financial support from the local government and from individual citizens.
Funds are needed to pay the artist for their work, to pay for the installation of art and in the long term, to pay for
periodic maintenance of the piece.
Section 2 of Resolution 2004-11 lists the goals the Economic and Cultural Development Committee attempts to
meet by granting funds to Economic and Cultural Development grant applicants. It clearly lists items specific to
Economic Development but does not elaborate on Cultural Development. While cultural development is not
defined in the resolution, the PAC believes the acquisition and placement of art is cultural devdopment.
Item 'a' under Section 4, Guidelines and Criteria of the resolution, states that "grantee shall be a 501 (c) non-
profit agency, item 'b' states "grantee shall be a non-governmental agency". The Pubic Arts Commission is an
appointed body of the City of Ashland, which is designated by the IRS as a 501 (c) agency. Specifically it is a
501 (c) 1 as compared to a 501 (c) 3 which is the designation for most non-profits.
From time to time there has been talk about the PAC forming a non-profit. However, the challenges associated
with doing so are daunting at this time. It has been estimated that forming the non-profit would require
approximately 60 hours of legal work. This is an expensive route though it may be possible to solicit pro bono
work. However, should the non-profit be formed, it would need to raise funds for basic operational support and
minimal staffing in addition to raising funds for public art.
Attachments:
1. Letter from Kip Todd, Chair Public Arts Commission
2. DRAFT resolution amending resolution 2004-11 (suggested change appears in bold)
3. AMC Section 2.17.005
4. Draft minutes from the May 20 and 21 ECD committee meetings.
Attachment I
City of Ashland
Public Arts Commission
August 17, 2004
Dear Mayor and Council:
The City of Ashland Public Arts Commission has launched a grassroots fundraising campaign for
public art. These funds will be used to offset the costs associated with public art, including the
artist/artwork, installation and maintenance. To date, in-kind and cash contributions ranging from
$10 to $1,000 total $2,000.
In addition to fundraising, the commission is finalizing the Request for Proposal for the public art
area at the top of the Granite Street staircase from the Calle, known as the Overlook. Conservative
estimates indicate that $15,000 is needed to complete the project, $3,000 for the artist and $12,000
for materials and installation.
We have been in contact with some of the primary granting organizations in Oregon. All encourage
us to apply for funding once we can illustrate financial support from our local government and
citizenry. To that end, the PAC respectfully requests the City Council allocate the remaining $5,695
from the Cultural and Economic Development Grant funds to the Public Art Commission to be used
towards public art and to modify the existing Resolution, 2004-11, to allow the Public Arts
Commission to apply for these grants and/or receive an annual allocation from the TOT for the
purpose of public art.
We would submit to the Council that funds from the TOT fund were intended precisely for this kind
of use. Public art is cultural development and indirectly enhances economic development. Public art
adds an aesthetic element to a community. An aesthetically appealing community is beneficial to
existing businesses and to potential new businesses and is pleasing to residents and visitors alike.
The council formally recognized the important contribution of public art toward the economic and
cultural vitality of a community when it adopted Ordinance 2890 (codified as AMC 2.17) which
states "...the arts are an important part of the cultural and economic life of the entire community of
Ashland and enrich the participants in the arts as well as those that observe them..."
The PAC is firmly committed to its mission as stated in the ordinance "...to enhance the cultural and
aesthetic quality of life in Ashland by actively pursuing the placement of public art in public
spaces..." The commission has worked extremely hard these past many months and will continue to
seek funds from a variety of sources. An allocation from the Council, especially an annual
commitment to fund Public Art, will assist fundraising efforts tremendously.
Public art is available to everyone 365 days a year in the open air. It does not have a performance
schedule, does not need to sell tickets or to market an event and it is not located behind walls. It is
the most accessible cultural entity possible.
Please help us to make public art a reality in Ashland.
Respectfully,
Kip Todd, Chair, Public Arts Commission
The attached is provided for your information.
Attachment I page 2
Examples of funding for public art in other Oregon cities.
City
Population Funding for Public Art
Medford 64,643
$25,000 per year from annual budget plus private donation
Lake Oswego 35,839
Grant Pass 24,843
$20,000 per year from annual budget plus 1.5% of capital projects
Small trust fund from sale of art
West Linn 24,172
$12-$15,000 per year plus 1% of capital projects
Tualitin 23,877
$8,5000 per year plus private fundraising and events
Ashland 20,215
Private donations
Summary of existing funds for public art in Ashland
McGee memorial
$19,000
Amie Krigel Memorial $10,500
Other $2,000
Attachment II
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND
REITERATING ITS POLICY OF RELATING THE EXPENDITURE OF
MONIES FOR ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE
HOTEL/MOTEL (Transient Occupancy) TAX AND REPEALING
RESOLUTION 2004-11
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the city council recognizes that the source of monies for the Economic
and Cultural Development Grant program is the Hotel/Motel Tax.
SECTION 2. The following are the goals which the Economic and Cultural Development
Committee is attempting to meet by granting money to applicants:
a) Tourism Promotion.
b) Economic Development by:
1) Responding to general inquiries about business in the city;
2) Providing assistance to existing small businesses;
3) Providing technical and financial assistance for the expansion of existing
businesses;
4) Providing technical and financial assistance for the development of new
businesses; or
5) Providing such other services and support to business as the city council may
deem beneficial.
c) Cultural Development.
SECTION 3. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2004/2005, the city council will appropriate thirty-
three and one-third percent (33.3%) of the anticipated Hotel/Motel tax monies for Economic
and Cultural Development. The City of Ashland has determined that as of July 1, 2003,
$186,657 or 14.23% of total Hotel/Motel tax revenues were expended on tourism promotion,
as defined in Chapter 818 of the 2003 Oregon Laws, and will continue to be spent on tourism
promotion increased or decreased annually consistent with the estimated TOT revenues
budgeted.
The amount to be allocated annually to Ashland Chamber of Commerce (COC) and Oregon
Shakespeare Festival (OSF) for promoting tourism per the state definition shall be $80,432
and $110,000, respectively, adjusted each year by the amount of inflation or deflation
established in the Budget process. An additional amount of $160,000, adjusted each year by
the amount of inflation or deflation established in the Budget process, will be granted
annually to COC for economic development projects in cooperation with City staff. The
allocations in this paragraph shall sunset after three years.
Any additional amount for tourism required by Chapter 818 shall be allocated to COC, OSF
or other group during the budget process. The remainder of the monies budgeted for these
grants may be allocated to grantees for activities fitting in any of the three categories set forth
in Section 2 of this Resolution.
By January 31 of each year each recipient of grants under this resolution shall submit a report
to the city council setting forth how the grant funds received were expended in furtherance of
the goals set forth in Section 2.
SECTION 4. The following guidelines and criteria are established for the Economic and
Cultural Development Grants:
a) Grantee shall be a 501 (c) non-profit agency.
b) Grantee shall be a non-governmental agency.
c) Grantee shall promote livability for the citizens of Ashland.
d) The minimum grant proposal will be $1,000.
e) The grant will benefit Ashland in regards to enrichment and activities of an
economic nature.
f) Grantee shall serve the population in Ashland but may encompass other venues in
the Rogue Valley.
g) Irrespective of sub-paragraph 'b', the City of Ashland Public Arts Commission may
apply for and receive funds.
SECTION 5. Resolution 2004-11 is repealed upon passage of this resolution.
SECTION 6. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the mayor.
This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code Section
2.04.090 duly
PASSED and ADOPTED this 19th day of August 2004
SIGNED and APPROVED this 20th day of August 2004:
Reviewed as to form:
Attachment III
AMC 2.1. 7 Public Arts Commission
2.17.005 Purpose
The mission of the Public Arts Commission is to enhance the cultural and
·
aesthetic quality of life in Ashland by actively pursuing the placement of
public art in public spaces and serving to preserve and develop public access
to the arts. The continued vitality of the arts in the City of Ashland is a vital
part of the future of the city as well as of its citizens. The arts are an
important part of the cultural and economic life of the entire community of
Ashland and enrich the participants in the arts as well as those who observe
them. Several organizations which exist in Ashland are active in the arts and
provide leadership to the community on arts related matters. The creation of
a Public Arts Commission for the City of Ashland will assist those
organizations, and other organizations and individuals, to make arts a more
important part of the city's life.
(ORD 2890, added 11/19/02)
Attachment IV
Minutes
Citizens' Budget Committee
05/20/2004
.Economic and Cultural Development Grant Presentations
Draft Minutes
May 20, 2004, 7:00pm
Civic Center, Council Chambers, :[:t75 East Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
The Economic and Cultural Development meeting was called to
order at 7:03 p.m. on May 20, 2004, in the Civic Center Council
Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon.
ROLL CALL: Councilor Hartzell, Laws, and Jackson were present.
Budget Committee Members Olsen, Stepahin, Silbiger, and Williams
were present.
STAFF
PRESENT:
LEE TUNEBERG, FINANCE DIRECTOR, BUDGET
OFFICER
CINDY HANKS, PROJECT COORDINATOR
BRYN MORRISON, ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY
Williams/Olsen m/s for Silbiger to chair the meeting. All
Ayes.
Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director spoke that $95, 168 will be
allocated and proposed to set time limit for presentations to 5
minutes. Committee agreed.
PRESENTATZONS: In order of receipt.
Grant Ao~licant
SOEDC
Grant Requested
$9,000
Rob Hambleton spoke to the goal of building the local economy
with producers and buyers. They want to build a campaign and
$6,000 is to continue the creation of material to educate
community, and $3,000 will be for the Siskiyou Sustainable
Cooperative directory. The Committee asked if they will be
sustainable and what the criteria was for the directory. Mr.
Hambleton replied that it would be sustainable and they promote
businesses that want to be economically stable and that pay and
treat employees well. He explained that the Shared Use commercial
kitchen program is more successful in the Ashland area. The
Committee asked about going to the Chamber in Ashland and
Medford for support. IVlr. Hambleton responded that they already
have started the plan to use networks.
Grant Applicant
Artattack
Grant Requested
$11,200
.ludd Robbins, Nicole Isaacson-Hill, spoke regarding the theatre
group. They are flexible to reduce costs to enable choice for people
in the community to go to the theatre. The Committee asked if
they received donations and they replied that they do not receive
donations from the businesses that they will offer the reduced
tickets to their employees. The Committee asked if there is a way
that the Chamber or the City would be able to help with filling the
empty seats, if they do not receive all the funds requested. The
Committee asked about the businesses selected to receive the
discounted tickets. They responded that all businesses are limited
to ten tickets per night at half price and they will ask for
identification proving they are employees from the downtown area.
Dave Williams, Budget Committee IVlember stated that he thinks
they should make the discount available to more people.
Grant Applicant
Rogue Valley Symphony
Grant Requested
$13,600
Francis Van Ausdal, Tom O'Rourke explained how the Symphony
will expand their season. They will increase by two concerts at
SOU, and fund raising concerts. They will bus Ashland students to
the full concert in Medford. The Committee asked about the
increasing salaries and it was explained that it was due to the
additional concerts.
Grant Applicant
SOWAC
Grant Requested
$8,500
Helen Wallace spoke to the function of the organization. She spoke
to the categories of Resolution that the organization fulfills with
grant. They are supported from community, and have to raise the
same amount from non-federal funded agencies to receive federal
grants. She stated that the grant will be a small portion of the total
expense of the classes and that they have changed their name to
the Microenterprise Development Center.
Grant Applicant
Rogue Opera
Grant Requested
$10,000
Lorrie Hall spoke to four programs that the grant will fund. They
will extend season to an eight week season and they hope to
donate more tickets this next year. They also hope to do mentoring
for students. The Committee asked what portion of the grant would
go towards an Ashland program. Ms. Hall responded that the Amahl
production would be the only one. The Committee questioned the
short terms of the Board of Directors, 7 of 11 have been on less
than 2 years. IVls. Hall explained that they did an organizational
assessment and reorganized and added several people.
Grant Applicant
Arts Council of Southern Oregon
Grant Requested
$3,000
Lyn Godsey, Steve Preston spoke to the goals of the organization.
Online arts directory will be established with grant and will be for
artists to belong to at the $50 dollar level for only $35. The City
would be subsidizing the artists to be able to join at that level.
They have 50 people or organizations that would receive a $50
membership. They explained that the grant will help with
administrative costs.
Grant Applicant
Youth Symphony of Southern Oregon
Grant Requested
$4,000
Larry Cooper spoke to the function of the organization. They
provide students with a rare opportunity that is usually not
available in small communities. The grant will be used for 3
performances in the off-season to bring tourists in. 70% will be
from Ashland and 30% from elsewhere. The students that
participate are required to be in orchestra in school and the largest
expense is the performance space.
Grant Applicant
Ashland Gallery Association
Grant Requested
$8,000
Mickie IvlcCormic, .lason Couch spoke to the mission of the
association. They spoke to the achievements and the need for
funding. They want to market Ashland as an art destination. The
grant would help to maintain the website and promote it nationally.
One goal is to attract people from 500 miles away and show
Ashland as a total vacation destination.
Grant Applicant
Peace House
Grant Requested
$5,000
Linda Richards, Kevin Preister would like to promote multi cultural
events. They have four events with different themes. They would
like to produce brochure to promote Ashland. The events will be
held in Ashland and people will be coming from around the region
and would be promoted toward people that would participate in this
level of peacekeeping. They would only produce pure cultural
programs.
Grant Applicant
Siskiyou Singers
Grant Requested
$6,000
Alison Elliot, Lezley Sanders spoke to the history of the
organization. They spoke to the need for funding. The grant will be
for enhancement of website and the production of a CD. They have
discussed raising ticket prices and the fee to participate. They do
not want to have to do that.
Grant Applicant
Ballet Rogue
Grant Requested
$6,000
Glenn Hill spoke that the City has helped to fund the performances
for the last 17 years. This year they will do 3 performances. They
are asking for 40% of their costs.
Grant Applicant
Southern Oregon Film Society
Grant Requested
$1o,oo0
Tom Olbrich, Darrel Pearce spoke to the festival history. They
spoke to the demographic categories that the festival draws. The
grant will be used to supplement the volunteers and increase staff.
They will use the grant to promote the festival and reach out to
other areas. They are requesting a grant from the Carpenter
Foundation for $17,500.
Grant Applicant
St. Clair Productions
Grant Requested
$s,o00
Ariella St. Clair, IVlaureen Hicks spoke to the history of the
organization. The grant would help with advertising. They have a
grant request with Carpenter and Celebration Foundations. Income
statement will need to include a raffle netted at $600.
Grant Applicant
SOU Native American Studies Program
Grant Requested
Ss,ooo
David West spoke to the history of the academy. He spoke of the
possible use of the grant funds and the theatre programs. They are
working with many other regions to improve schools in cultural
development.
Grant Applicant
Science Works
Grant Requested
$20,000
Christy Hostetler, spoke to the educational programs and the
services they provide. They have expanded their days from two to
five this year. The grant funds will help to market the museum.
Grant Applicant
Southern Oregon Historical Society
Grant Requested
$2,143
Richard Seidman spoke to the use of the grant request. He stated
that they would comply within the City's code requirements for the
signage. The panels would take minimum maintenance and Parks
would be responsible for it.
Grant Applicant
Community Works
Grant Requested
Szo,ooo
Arnie Green spoke that the grant would help in their existing
business. They are trying to diversify their funding due to cutbacks.
They have been donated a candle factory and are working toward
marketing the products, lit will cost $35,000 to hire an individual to
research marketing and promotion and would be an employee of
the business.
Grant Applicant
Lithia Arts Guild of Oregon
Grant Requested
$8,000
No Presentation
Grant ADDlicant
The Green Room of Ashland
Grant Requested
$5,ooo
.losuah Heuertz, Laura Henneman spoke to productions and need
for funds. They feel that they fulfill the categories in the Resolution
for the funds.
Total $149,443
The estimated 2004-2005 budget allocation is $95t000.
PUBLIC INPUT None
ALLOCATIONS
Postponed until the meeting on May 21, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
The Finance Department will email the Committee a spreadsheet of
allocations to complete and return before the May 21 meeting. The
'Committee made suggestions for the next year application form.
AD.1OURNI~IENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bryn Morrison, Administrative Secretary
Finance Department
Minutes
Citizens' Budget Committee
05/21/2004
Economic and Cultural Development Grant Presentations
Draft I~linutes
t4ay 21t 2004~ 7:00pm
Civic Center, Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
The Economic and Cultural Development meeting was called to
order at 7:02 p.m. on May 21, 2004, in the Civic Center Council
Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon.
ROLL CALL: Councilor Hartzell, Laws, and 3ackson were present.
Budget Committee Members Olsen, Stepahin, Silbiger, and Williams
were present.
STAFF
PRESENT:
GINO GRIMALDI, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
CINDY HANKS, PROJECT COORDINATOR
BRYN MORRISON, ADMINISTRATIVE
SECRETARY
PUBLIC INPUT
The Lithia Arts Guild asked to present their grant request.
Laws/Hartzell m/s to allow to present. Debbie Lorray, .lim Young
spoke to the project at Briscoe School. They spoke to the event
that they are requesting funding for. Kate Jackson, Councilor
clarified that they do not have a contract yet with the School
District; they only have an agreement in principle. They will also
need to apply for a conditional use permit. Ms. Jackson also
clarified that the Public Arts Commission has not been involved in
this project. Mr. Young explained that they talked to three people
on the Commission about it and they showed interest. They
explained that the School district would receive 4% of sales and
they are working on networking support but do not have any
contracts yet. Ms. Jackson feels that the money should be allocated
to them but if they do not obtain a contract, the funds would come
back to the City. The Committee asked to clarify whom the artists
would be and how would they be chosen. They responded there are
five rooms that will be rented by artists. One space will be a
working space for artists.
Ms. Jackson spoke to the new Resolution for TOT. She spoke to the
change for tourism and the economic and cultural development
emphasis. Don Laws, Councilor doesn't think that they could expect
the change this year due to the grant applications were completed
before the Resolution took place. He sees the need for events that
enhance the City for both residents and tourists. Cate Hartzell,
Councilor hopes by next year that the partnership with the
Chamber grows to help the smaller grantees.
ALLOCATIONS
Ns. Hartzell proposed looking at the grantees that have been
funded for several years and seeing if they need these funds should
be cut back. The Committee expressed the need to have the
grantees present what they accomplish with the funds that they are
granted from the City from the previous year. Dave Williams,
Budget Committee Member feels that the organizations that
promote the arts are an important part of Ashland and need the
funds. The Committee had concerns regarding the association with
the SOU Native American Academy and the college and voiced that
they support all the multi cultural events that were applied for.
Southern Oregon Historical Society's funding is contingent on the
signage being approved by the Council and meeting the City Code.
Mr. Laws does not support the City funding groups that he sees are
political interest groups as he feels the Peace House is. Ms. Hartzell
suggested not funding the Peace House and asking them to come
back next year and address concerns that they may be for political
interest. The Committee allocated $1,500 for the Ashland Gallery
Association only for the advertising for the directory. The
Committee stated that they did not agree with the program that
Artattack presented and needed funding for and chose not to fund.
The allocations were made as follows:
Science Works $12,000
$OWAC 8,500
$.O. Film Society 8,500
Community Works
SOEDC
Rogue Valley Symphony
Rogue Opera
Ashland Gallery Association
Ballet Rogue
Siskiyou Singers
Youth Symphony of Oregon
Lithia Arts Guild of Oregon
St. Clair Productions
The Green Room
SOU, Native American Studies Program
Southern Oregon Historical Society
Arts Council of Southern Oregon
Peace House
Artattack
7,000
6,500
6,000
6,000
5,000
4,500
4,100
4,000
4,000
4,000
3,000
2,500
2,143
1,500
0
0
Total $ 89,243
This leaves $5,925 unallocated.
Ms. Hartzell propos, ed to add $2000 to $OEDC and $1000 to the
Southern Oregon Film Society. Mr. Laws did not want to give more
to SOEDC and Ms. 3ackson did not want to give more to Science
Works. Williams/Laws m/s to leave balance in reserve. Hartzell
would like to add $500 to SOEDC.
· Williams/3ackson m/s to approve allocations. Williams, Laws,
3ackson, $ilbiger, Stepahin, and Olsen, yes. Hartzell, no. Motion
passed 6 to 1.
DISCUSSION
The Committee would like the Finance Department to keep the
bylaws and 501 c3 and tract within the City and not distribute to
the subcommittee. The Committee would like the Finance
Department to produce a policy for financial reporting. Ray Olsen,
Budget Committee Member would like to raise minimum and be
more specific of expectations of grantees. Russ Silbiger, Budget
Committee Member would like to see the City have on file the 990
]:RS documents of applicants. Ms. Hartzell would like to see the
program budget be more specific for what the funds will go towards
and is not in favor of raising minimum.
AD.1OURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:54 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bryn Morrison, Administrative Secretary
Finance Department
End of Document - Back to Top