HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-1020 Council Mtg PACKET Imoortan[: Any citizen•attending council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is the II
subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you wish to.speak, please rill out the Speaker
Request form located 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
October 20, 1998
Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E.Main Street
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers.
II. ROLL CALL:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting minutes of October 6, 1998 and
minutes of Executive meeting of October 6, 1998.
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. Update and presentation by RVTD.
Mayor's Proclamation declaring October 23 through 31 as "Red Ribbon
Week."
Mayor's Proclamation declaring October 25 through 31 as "World
Population Awareness Week."
V. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Cor„nittees.
2. . Monthly Departmental Reports.
3. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Dale Shostrom to_Building
Appeals.Bcard'for a term to expire December 31, 1998.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony lim'ited.to 5 minutes per speaker. All hearings. .
must conclude by.9:30 p.m. or be continued to a subsequent meeting).
1. Public Hearing regarding Street Design Standards.
Council Meeting Pkt.
BARBARA CHRISTENSEN
I CITY RECORDER
VII. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda.
(Limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total.)
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(None)
IX. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Council Meeting Look Ahead.
X. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS:
econd readin y title only of "An Ordinance Amending the Ashland City
Band Chapter of the Ashland Municipal Code to Redefine the Band Board
and uties Including Duties of the Band Director."
x Second readri7ngDy title only of "An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Clover
Lane on roperty Owned by Vernon Ludwig Near Interstate 5 and
Highway 66."
3. First reading by title only of"An Ordinance Replacing Chapter 2.22 of the
Ashland Municipal Code to Change the Name of the Bicycle Commission
to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission and to Amend Its Powers and
Duties. "
4. First reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending the
Te ecommunications Title 16 of the Ashland Municipal Code to Add
Provisions Regulating Cable Service and to Simplify and Clarify
Requirements for Grantees." (POSTPONED)
XI. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS:
XII. ADJOURNMENT:
Reminder: A Study Session will be at 12:30 p.m.
on Wednesday, October 21 regarding 1)The Water
Plan; and, 2) Strategic Planning. .
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
October 6, 1998
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Chairperson Wheeldon called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m., in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon, and DeBoer were present. Mayor Shaw was absent.
Chairperson Wheeldon noted that the Mayor's absence is due to a family crisis. Chairperson Wheeldon also noted
her appreciation for all of the expressions of support from the Council and the community since Councilor Ken
Hagen passed away on September 21'.'
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting and executive session of September 15, 1998 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Update on the Proposed Regional Modernization Projects for the 2000-2003 Oregon State
Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP).
Public Works Director Paula Brown provided an update on the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)
projects. Noted that RVACT is now making recommendations to the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT),
and explained that the proposal would bring close to$19 million to the region over the four year period.
Brown stated that she serves as the staff liaison to the committee making recommendations to RVACT, and pointed
out that the Siskiyou bikelane project is still in the running to receive approximately $1.5 million in funding.
Explained that she is seeking Council support of the program of projects as a whole, with any changes made by the
Metropolitan Planning Organization(MPO).
Emphasized that transportation funding is a hot issue in the region, and noted a number of the projects proposed
including the Siskiyou bikelane, the south Medford interchange, unit I of Highway 238, Highway 62, the Fern
Valley Road intersection, two projects in Grants Pass, and Hamrick Road improvements. Explained that this is the
recommendation of the Jackson Josephine Transportation Commission(JJTC)and pending their final approval it will
go to the RVACT.
Chairperson Wheeldon asked Councilor DeBoer if the proposal is a good one for the region. Councilor DeBoer
indicated that there are significant needs in the region, noting that the Highway 62 project will cost roughly $30
million, and it is receiving only $2 million. Councilor Laws questioned the chances of getting funding for the
bikelane project, and DeBoer indicated that as the proposal is written, chances are 100%. Pointed out that the
proposal is written with a jurisdictional exchange so that the City would take over the maintenance of Siskiyou
Boulevard from ODOT.
Discussion of jurisdictional exchange concerns. Brown noted that funds would be available beginning in 2002, and
stated that the City would need to match some funds to complete the project. Explained that there would need to be
a discussion of jurisdictional exchange later. Councilor Reid confirmed that this would involve the portion of
Siskiyou from Fourth to Walker.
Chairperson Wheeldon noted the Transportation System Plan discussions last week, noting that the need for
multimodal equity was discussed. Stated that if the City wants this road to remain as it is, it must be willing to take
responsibility. Emphasized that Ashland's road character is unique on the west coast in that the state highway is not
City Council Meeting 10-06-98 1
"strip-developed". Councilor Reid questioned the debt that would be incurred in a jurisdictional exchange.
Councilor Hauck suggested that it would be difficult to accomplish anything on Siskiyou if the City did not take over
control. Councilor Laws pointed out that the City receives complaints for Siskiyou's maintenance now, and it would
be nice to be able to bring it up to standards. Brown noted that discussions with ODOT on a jurisdictional exchange
would begin soon. Councilor Laws stated that he is willing to proceed.
Brown confirmed for Chairperson Wheeldon that some preliminary designs have already been done on the Siskiyou
bikelane project, and that the remaining design costs are included in the proposal. Confirmed that the RVACT
meeting will be at 9 a.m. at the ODOT Auditorium, and while they will'not be taking public comments, there will
be some opportunity to allow for public input.
Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to accept the proposed Regional Modernization Projects for the 2000-2003 Oregon
State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) and direct staff to draft a letter for the Mayor's signature
indicating this acceptance to the RVACT. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
2. Mayor's Proclamation declaring October 4- 10, 1998, as "Fire Prevention Week."
Chairperson Wheeldon read this proclamation in its entirety. Fire Chief Keith Woodley noted that there were 54
fatalities in Oregon last year due to fires. Explained that the Fire Department will be participating in the "Great
Escape" program, and will be giving t-shirts to families who are practicing their escape plans on Wednesday,
October 7", at 7:00 p.m. Also stated that all three local television stations will be on hand to cover this event.
3. Mayor's Proclamation declaring the month of October, 1998, as "Crime Prevention Month in
Ashland."
Chairperson Wheeldon read this proclamation in its entirety.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Monthly Departmental Reports.
3. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Alexander Amarotico to Planning Commission for a term
to expire April 30, 2001.
4. Appointment of Mayor Shaw and Councilor Wheeldon as voting delegates to LOC Annual Business
Meeting.
Councilors Reid/DeBoer m/s to accept the consent agenda. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Public Hearing regarding Local Improvements for Waterline Road.
City Administrator Mike Freeman provided background on this item. Noted that the Alston had contacted the City
about paving, and that they have been meeting with the Planning Department for some time. Stated that staff has
been in contact with the Park Estates Homeowners' Association to work on an acceptable compromise. Late last
week, staff was informed that the Homeowners would remonstrate if anything other than the "three lot approach"
was used, and that approach is not acceptable to the Alston's.
In light of this situation, staff recommends that Council direct staff to draft a resolution to be brought back to the
April 6, 1999 meeting to order the formation of an LID. Also recommended that the City Recorder be authorized
to inform potential buyers and those requesting lien searches of the formation of the LID and the proposed lien
amounts. Freeman noted that this recommendation is a change from what was presented to Council in their packets,
because the previous recommendation was based on the belief that all parties could reach a satisfactory compromise.
Emphasized that the current recommendation would address the needs of all parties, and this option is preferred by
staff over the previous recommendation from the packet. Stated that the Alston are in agreement with this
recommendation as well.
City Council Meeting 10-06-98 2
Councilor Laws questioned that the previous recommendation was to form and LID and take no action until plans
for a development of three or more lots were submitted. Freeman confirmed, and explained that the new
recommendation was to trigger the improvements when any building permit was issued. City Attorney Paul Nolte
clarified for Councilor Laws that the tiling of a remonstrance by the time of the public hearing would start the six
month delay, and confirmed that a remonstrance signed by more than 2/3of the Park Estates Homeowners had been
filed. Nolte explained that this remonstrance was conditional, and would be in effect if the Council adopts any option
other than the three lot condition. Emphasized that the public hearing should be conducted with this conditional
remonstrance in mind.
Public Hearing Open: 7:38 p.m.
Hilary Alston Griffith/6598 Truax Rd./Central Point, OR/Read a prepared statement on behalf of her parents,
Robert and Mary Ann Alston. (A copy of this statement is included in the record.)
Dave Williams/1023 Morton Street/Park Estates Association, Inc./Thanked staff for their help and patience.
Gave a brief background of the situation, noting that the March 1985 agreement had obligated property owners to
pay for future curbs, gutters and paving, which were deferred because the City wanted to avoid the expense of
maintaining this street until development actually occurred. When this matter came up in July of 1998, the Park
Estates Homeowners objected to being obligated to pay for improvements in the absence of development. Pointed
out that 42 of 47 property owners have signed the conditional remonstrance which has been filed. Noted that while
the property owners are not happy with a prospective$3,600 debt, they were content with the previous three lot draft
resolution, which held them responsible for only the curbs, gutters and paving. Emphasized that being required to
pay for anything else would be beyond the scope of the previous agreement, and in effect 47 property owners would
be required to pay for an expensive driveway to one home. Noted that Park Estates requests the adoption of the draft
resolution as distributed in the Council packets with the staff's previous recommendation.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:45 p.m.
Councilor DeBoer questioned whether some of the cost of paving could be passed on to the residents at the end of
the road. Councilor Laws noted that the sub-divider must pay the costs to the edge of the property, regardless of
benefit, and explained that this policy had been suspended with this agreement as the likelihood of further
development was questionable. The agreement was that it would be paved in the future, if and when development
occurred, and the question is not whether the Alston's benefit, but the obligation of property owners in Park Estates.
Councilor DeBoer stated that he recognizes this obligation,but recommends charging the Alston for the costs from
the Park Estates open space to their property.
Councilor Reid stated that because the development is existing, it previously had the obligation to pay the full cost
of improvements to the property line. The developer chose to move this obligation onto the deeds, and was allowed
to do so by the City, but as time passes, the cost continues to increase. Emphasized that this situation is not fair,
and was a bad decision on the part of the Council that put it off in the past.
Council Chairperson Wheeldon noted that the recent discussion of the LID process had included a discussion of
citizen concerns over the idea of passing along obligation. Agreed with Councilor Reid that this issue will be relived
if it is not addressed now.
Councilor Laws stated that a deal is a deal, and the original agreement should be followed. Noted that the
homeowners' acceptance of their obligation is admirable. Questioned what should serve as a trigger to the
improvements, and noted that it is policy that any development occur on paved streets. Feels that the new
recommendation from staff is acceptable.
City Council Meeting 10-06-98 3
•J
Council discussion of what should trigger the improvements,with discussion of three-lot development versus a single
building permit being issued.
Councilor DeBoer pointed out that the Council can, at its discretion, place an assessment on the Alston lot as well.
City Attorney Nolte confirmed that the Council had this option, but emphasized that the previous agreement is the
reason this has not been suggested. Nolte confirmed that the encumbrance on the Park Estates deeds was for curbs,
gutters and paving to the boundary of the subdivision. Councilor DeBoer questioned whether costs beyond curbs,
gutters and pavings could be assessed to the Alstons. Public Works Director Paula Brown indicated that the Park
Estates homeowners are not being assessed costs beyond curbs, gutters, and paving.
Councilor Laws inquired as to whether lots developed from the Alston property could be charged based on benefit.
Councilor Reid said this discussion would lead to a discussion of SDCs, and urged that the issue of the street that
is before Council be dealt with.
Councilor DeBoer questioned what happened after the six month suspension, and Nolte confirmed that the item
would be dealt with in six months. Stated that the Council at that time would deal with the issue, but that they would
be under no obligation to adopt a resolution based on the decision reached tonight.
MOTION: Councilors Reid/Laws m/s not to form an LID tonight,but to direct staff to bring back a resolution
forming the LID in six months, for adoption on April 0', with the condition that the LID be formed with no
improvements to be made until the issuance of a building permit on the Alston property.
DISCUSSION: Nolte confirmed that a motion forming the LID cannot be adopted tonight due to the
remonstrance,so this is the only option. Discussion of whether any motion can be made when a remonstrance
has been received. Nolte indicated that there is room for debate, but that there is even a potential legal
interpretation that would allow adoption tonight.
Councilor Reid confirmed for Chairperson Wheeldon that the motion was not intended be conditioned on three
lot development,but on the issuance of a single building permit. Stated that the previous recommendation was
not an agreement, and emphasized that this issue should be dealt with and corrected now. Suggested that
Council accept the remonstrance, set a hearing in six months, and move on. Councilor Reid reiterated that
the agreement on a three lot development was not a consensual agreement of all parties, and pointed out that
a potential buyer may only want two houses.. Emphasized the need to deal with this issue now, rather than
having to relive the situation in the future.
City Attorney Nolte read from the charter that when a remonstrance is filed "action on any proposed public
improvement shall be suspended." Stated that based on this wording, the Council could adopt a resolution as
long as no action was taken on the improvements. At a minimum, Council can legally move to take up the
issue in six months. Councilor Laws stated that this interpretation was acceptable. City Administrator
Freeman noted that the City Recorder also needed to be directed to advise those requesting lien searches of the
potential formation of the LID and the proposed lien amounts.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Laws, Reid, Hauck, and Wheeldon, YES. DeBoer, NO. Motion passed 4-1.
2. Public Hearing regarding vacation of a portion of Clover Lane.
Public Works Director Paula Brown provided background information on this vacation and rededication. Noted
that to her knowledge, no calls have been received and no concerns raised about this item. Explained for
Chairperson Wheeldon that this is the road between the two gas stations near the interchange, and that it runs
parallel to the freeway. Brown confirmed for Councilor Hauck that when development starts, the new street will
be done prior to the vacation so that no access is blocked off.
City Council Meeting 10-06-98 4
Public Hearing Open: 8:12 p.m.
Rob Robertson/835 Alder Creek Dr., Medford/Pacific Western/Representing the proponents of the vacation.
Asked for Council's approval, noting that Planning had already approved the proposal. Explained that this
involves relocating an unimproved dirt street to make this property more developable. Noted that the Masonic
Lodge is re-locating from downtown on the plaza to parcel 3. Explained that Pacific Western owns property to
the south, and will grant an easement to the neighbor(Mrs. Vorhiss) and move her utilities through property.
Robertson provided a map for Council, noted that the zoning is E-1, and explained that the street width will be
fifty three feet, which includes traffic lanes, parking bays, and sidewalks.
Public Hearing Closed: 8:16 p.m.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to sign the deed. Roll call vote:
Laws, Reid, Hauck, DeBoer, and Wheeldon, YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM
Opened to public comments at 8:17 p.m.
John Huskey/173 Alder Lane/Director of Communications for the Associated Students of Southern Oregon
University (ASSOU)/Noted that the City and Southern Oregon University will be meeting to discuss bus service
at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, October 7'" in Room 314 at the University.
Closed to public comments at 8:18 p.m.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Council Meeting Look Ahead.
Councilor DeBoer questioned item#13,the October 21°study session,and noted that he would be unable to attend.
Councilor Hauck noted that in the future, he will be unable to attend daytime study sessions due to employment.
Stated that this could be dealt with in the future. Councilor Reid suggested dealing with this issue in Goal Setting.
Discussion of shifting study sessions to the hour before regular meetings, noting that this would create time
constraints to ensure items could be dealt with in a one-hour meeting.
Councilor Laws suggested going ahead with the scheduled"Friends of the Library" study session as scheduled, but
insisted on rescheduling future sessions around Councilors' schedules. Discussed the possibility of a daytime study
session on Friday, or a single evening study session each month that could be scheduled for a 3-4 hour period and
be less hurried. Councilor Laws questioned the scheduling of multiple items for each study session, and Freeman
noted that if sessions were limited to one item, it would slow the pace of the Council.
Councilor Reid stated that while she does not want to exclude those with conflicting schedules, scheduling meetings
to saiisfy everyone is impossible. Councilor Laws expressed concern that study sessions need to be scheduled in
such a way that all members can attend, as the information presented is vital to the role of Councilor. Chairperson
Wheeldon stated that Councilors must get their information together and have the opportunity for debate. Also noted
that her schedule might preclude daytime meetings in the Spring as well.
Discussed keeping the Library study session as scheduled, and considering rescheduling the later meetings.
Councilor Reid suggested waiting until a new member is in place before rescheduling. Staff was directed to leave
the Library session as scheduled, and reschedule future study sessions to Fridays.
City Council Meeting 10-06-98 5
Councilor Reid questioned the listing for the Transportation System Plan. Freeman explained that the public hearing
was scheduled for October 20", and the first reading of the ordinance would be on November 3rd.
Councilor Hauck inquired about the remanding of the Hillside Ordinance by the Land Use Board of Appeals
(LUBA). Noted that it was upheld with the exception of a few minor, procedural issues. Councilor Reid noted the
relationship between the Hillside Ordinance and the Transportation System Plan,and suggested that when the Council
deals with the Hillside decision, they look at more than just the minor details. Noted that slope concerns in the
Hillside Ordinance eliminate the possibility for accessory units near the University, and suggested that issues of this
sort need to be addressed.
2. Motion authorizing the City Administrator to sign contract for architectural services for the Civic
Center and Office Space Remodel Project.
Councilors Laws/Reid m/s to authorize the City Administrator to sign contract for architectural services
for the Civic Center and Office Space Remodel Project. DISCUSSION: Freeman noted that there are two
candidates, and that this authorization would leave the option open for negotiations. Also emphasized that
it leaves open the City's options downtown, and that the consultants are aware of this. Voice vote: All
AYES. Motion passed.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. First reading by title only of"An Ordinance Amending the Ashland City Band Chapter of the
Ashland Municipal Code to Redefine the Band Board and its Duties Including Duties of the Band
Director."
Councilors Hauck/DeBoer m/s to move the ordinance to a second reading. DISCUSSION: Clarified the
intention of the ordinance and discussed the history of the Ashland City Band. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid,
Hauck, Wheeldon, and DeBoer, YES. Motion passed.
2. Reading by title only of"A Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Local Improvements for
Waterline Road from Morton Street 500 Feet Easterly for the Waterline Road Local Improvement
District and Authorizing Assessment of the Cost of the Improvements against Property to be
Benefitted and Providing that Warrants Issued for the Cost of the Improvement be General
Obligations of the City of Ashland, and Authorizing the City to Borrow Money and Issue and Sell
Notes for the Purpose of Providing Interim Financing for the Actual Cost of the Local
Improvement."
(Dealt with under Public Hearings)
3. First reading of"An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Clover Lane on Property Owned by Vernon
Ludwig Near Interstate 5 and Highway 66."
Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s to move the ordinance to a second reading. Roll call vote: Hauck, Laws,
DeBoer, Reid and Wheeldon, YES. Motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Councilor DeBoer questioned the scheduling of the recent joint meeting on the Transportation System Plan. Stated
that he would like to see better coordination and communication in the scheduling of joint meetings.
Councilor Hauck stated that he can no longer represent the City on the Rogue Valley Council of Governments
(RVCOG) due to his work schedule. Chairperson Wheeldon noted that the issue of appointing a replacement to
represent the City on the RVCOG would be referred to the Mayor.
City Council Meeting 10-06-98 6
Chairperson Wheeldon suggested that Councilors prepare regular reports detailing their regional work, and
questioned the best means to accomplish this. Stated that Councilors should call to have reports put onto the agenda
when they have information. Discussion of the interest in this information, with the suggestion that it not be routine
detail but rather that it be information that may affect decision making.
Councilors and viewers were reminded that a dedication ceremony for the new bike lockers at the City's Lithia Way
parking lot will be held on October 7" at 10:00 a.m.
Councilors and viewers were reminded of the City Council study session scheduled for Wednesday, October 7'at
1:30 p.m. to discuss the LID Committee Report. Councilors were also reminded that an executive session will be
held on Tuesday, October 20 at 6:00 p.m. to discuss the City Administrator's Six-Month Evaluation.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned to an executive session at 8:45 p.m., to discuss the acquisition of real property
pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(e).
Barbara Christensen, Cary Recorder Carole Wheeldon, Council Chairperson
City Council Meeting 10-0698 7
...........
..........
PROCLAMATION
' 'f!s WHEREAS, the 1998 National Red Ribbon Celebration is October 23 AY21 v
through 31 and
WHEREAS, today the Red Ribbon symbolizes the commitment of countless
citizens across America working to eliminate substance abuse in
their communities, and;
WHEREAS, this campaign is designed to:
n;l
Create awareness concerning the alcohol and other drug problems
facing every community.
Increase resiliency through opportunities for meaningful participation
by showing care and support.
ldM
Build community coalitions to implement comprehensive alcohol and
other drug prevention strategies.
RINI Support healthy, drug-free lifestyles. _ r
THEREFORE, we urge the citizens of Ashland to join your children, friends,
neighbors and community in this exciting celebration by wearing a red ribbon,
plant red tulips, listening to a drug awareness presentation, sharing substance
abuse information with your children, helping a friend who is abusing drugs or
kv
by seeking help for yourself if you have a drug dependency problem during this
week to demonstrate to others that you are committed to a drug-free, healthy
lifestyle; and
lit)..fl"ifl
rli i I
,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland do ii 3I:
hereby proclaim October twenty-first through thirty-first as
1998 National Red Ribbon Celebration Week
Dated this 20" day of October, 1998.
Ip Barbara Christensen, Record&
I&.
Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor
O/N ...... ...
5,
Ph
....... ... .
xr
............ ... ...1, ..........
M(jE_-
_ta
5,
FZ}rrw TROCLAM TION r.,
A
04
WHEREAS, more than half of the world's population will live in urban agglomerations
ill)? 0 by the turn of the century; and
WHEREAS, within the first quarter of the 21" Century urban population alone will
grow by 93 million per year, the equivalent of all annual population growth in the
Mc
world today; and
WHEREAS, urban poverty is already as high as 60 percent in some metropolitan areas;
more than one-third of the urban population have substandard housing; 40 percent lack
access to safe drinking water or adequate sanitation; and
,fit y WHEREAS, in all regions of the world, rapid urbanization has spawned a number. of
common problems, including unemployment; a shortage of adequate housing; traffic
congestion; declining infrastructure, and lack of funds to provide for basic services; RIP
and
p
the challenges of rapid opulatiori"growth'imd tirbanizAti6ii call for
-tWHEREAS,
ifinovative leadership to ensure resource conservation, protection'6f open space, waste
pre-verition,-'sanitation 'management and a higher quality of life.
"NOW, THEREFORE, I, Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor of Ashland, Oregon, proclaim
ANN: ugh'October 31, 19
M.
'October 25 thro 98
WORLD POPULATION AWARENESS WEEK
and up�dh_all citizens of this State to reflect on th�se chilleng6s and seek atiorial
Z-414 r
UP
humanitarian, community-based solutions.
(Ill, V,
Dated this 20" day of October, 1998
14
lie AIJK
Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor
.Qi,
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
N'.Nftf
M
MxQ`jVP'1V
0Y
MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
October 6, 1998
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chairperson Wheeldon called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
IN ATTENDANCE
Councilors Laws, Reid, Wheeldon,and DeBoer were present. Councilor Hauck arrived late. Mayor Shaw was
absent. Staff present included: City Administrator Mike Freeman,Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles, City
Attorney Paul Nolte,and Fire Chief Keith Woodley.
DISCUSSION OF FIRE STATION PLANNING EFFORTS
Fire Chief Keith Woodley presented Council with a"Fire Station Construction Project History"handout,and gave a
brief overview of the fifteen year history of discussions concerning the number and locations of fire stations within
the City and the need for new facilities.
Woodley noted that when he accepted his position in 1991,he had recommended that a consultant be retained to
look at the Fire Department's response times and the need for two stations. This study was based on a full build-out
to the City's urban growth boundaries. The consultant determined that a single station configuration would not
meet the City's response time criteria,which had been set at 97%of the citizenry receiving a response within three
minutes, and the remaining 3%seeing responses within four minutes. Emphasized that in that study, it was
indicated that the existing fire station locations were ideally situated to meet the response time criteria.
Noted that architect Ted Malarz began a space needs study in September of 1995, looking at a thirty year planning
horizon. At that time,the City began to consider expansion to other sites, and entered into discussions about
acquiring property from the Elks, Safeway or the Post Office. It was determined that none of these properties were
available.
Explained that it is now a 1998 Council Goal to address fire station facility needs,and the Fire Department began to
reassess the previous study,again using architect Ted Malarz,and taking into account the additional factor that the
City is now providing ambulance service. Malarz determined that the existing lots were not large enough. The
Portland firm of Peck, Smiley, Ettlin Architects,which specializes in fire station planning,was hired to review the
study, and they concur that additional land will need to be purchased to address space needs.
Woodley emphasized that an architect has not been retained for station design,and no architectural drawings have
been prepared. They have merely been looking at concepts,and preparing footprints that accommodate space needs
on existing lots with additional adjacent lands that will be needed.
Woodley noted the need to have access to arterial streets from the fire station,and the desire to maintain current
response time standards. Also emphasized that they have looked into the orientation of the stations relative to the
urban growth boundaries,and moving either of the stations to a different site could necessitate building a third,and
possibly a fourth, station in order to maintain standards.
Woodley introduced Hans Ettlin, an architect with Peck, Smiley, Ettlin Architects. Ettlin noted that they have
prepared a preliminary assessment of space needs for the Fire Department and reviewed previous materials,
including the previous space needs study. Ettlin stated that his firms findings are very close to the previous study,
and he complimented the initial study. Stated that the issue is to determine whether space needs can be
accommodated at the existing sites. Stated that the existing lot on East Main is inadequate for either design
Discussed possible orientation of a station on East Main,which would be laid out toward downtown with primary
access off of Siskiyou. Woodley noted that they have discussed the need to improve the line of sight for drivers
Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes 10-06-98
1
I '
turning from East Main onto Siskiyou, citing safety concerns raised by the Traffic Safety Commission and the
occurrence of accidents at this location. Emphasized that this makes the tip of the property unusable. Also noted
that the grade of the lot is a factor.
Ettlin discussed the methodology used in determining the lay out and orientation illustrated in the footprints,based
on space needs,site limitations,traffic,site grade, and other factors. Emphasized that the site dictates drive-through
bays for apparatus,and that combined with the space available leaves few options. Discussed the need for daily
meetings between both fire crews, and the fact that vehicles must stay with the crew.Currently,there is no space
available for temporary garaging,but the design under consideration allows for temporary garaging without
obstructing access to the response corridor.
Emphasized that efforts have been made to look at designs which would allow expansion on the existing lot, but that
it would not be possible,even with two stories,or the use of underground space,to meet program requirements.To
meet space needs,the station would need to expand to adjacent properties. If this were done,there would be
adequate space for meeting rooms that would be available for public use. Also noted that school children and
families frequently visit the current station,and the present arrangement is not friendly to these visitors. Woodley
noted that both architects who have looked at potential designs say that expansion of the current site is not the
optimum solution,but that it would be workable for the 30 year timeframe being considered.
Discussed Station#2 on Ashland Street,noting similar constraints. Explained that it would be possible to expand
here if the City were to absorb fifty feet from the park and vacate the end of Sherwood Street. Emphasized that
there are two other streets nearby to serve the neighborhood,and the vacation would quiet the area, lessen traffic,
and give right of way for access to the proposed footprint. This would not affect the end of the park which is used
by the public. Woodley stated that he has had informal conversations with Ken Mickelsen, Director of the Parks
Department,and they are not opposed to this suggestion. Also stated that he had met with Director of Community
Development John McLaughlin, and that McLaughlin indicated that Sherwood is overdeveloped for current traffic
counts, and lessening it's size from the present boulevard status would be acceptable. Woodley confirmed for
Wheeldon that the amount proposed to be taken from the park was fifty feet of grass,proceeding from the retaining
wall, and that the north end of Sherwood Street would be vacated. The public would still have a turn-around.
Discussed the operational issue of razing a building during operation. Woodley stated that it would be his hope to
build next to the existing structures, moving operations and demolishing the older structures when the new
structures were complete. Noted that this plan would, however,require acquisition of the Ross Johnson property
for Station#2. Woodley noted that other cities have operated out of tents and motor homes during construction,but
that this opportunity does not exist here due to space constraints. Emphasized the need to acquire additional land to
keep to present standards,stating that the Fire Department could not maintain standards with only one station
I operational at a time. Stated that this would necessitate a modification of the standards by changing the ordinance.
I' Councilor Reid questioned the presumption of absorbing private property adjacent to Station#1 and not near#2.
Woodley confirmed that Reid's assessment was correct. Noted that both stations could operate during construction
with no loss of efficiency if adjacent properties were acquired, and stated that he recommends, from an operational
standpoint,building next to and moving in after complete in both cases. Councilor Reid stated that she is open to
the vacation of Sherwood, but noted that in the past the Council has been against the creation of cul-de-sacs.
Suggested that consultant look at moving Station#2 footprint eastward on the property rather than closing
Sherwood.
City Administrator Mike Freeman noted that there are different circumstances for each station. Explained that staff
was attempting to keep the amount of property to be purchased to a minimum. Emphasized that this was not an
attempt at pre-judgement or making a decision, but that it simply seemed logical to use the City's right-of-way
where it was available,rather than seeking to purchase additional property..
Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes 10-W98
2
Councilor Laws stated that Sherwood is one of the least-used streets in the City,and that the vacation should not
create any problem. Stated that it was great that staff is seeking to minimize costs. Councilor Wheeldon
emphasized that using the right-of-way in the case of Station 42 had created another option,as it is difficult to
acquire real property when it is not for sale.
Discussed the possibility of using three or four stories on the Station#I site. Ettlin stated that this had been looked
at and discussed, and that even if they were to stack administrative functions, living spaces,and meeting rooms over
the bays,just the need for the bays and required parking were too much for the site. Councilor DeBoer suggested
parking underground off of East Main with four stories.
Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles explained that these options have been considered,but it was found to be
impossible to place the eight bays needed given space limitations and site grade. Ettlin re-emphasized that just the
bays and on-site parking by themselves would not fit the present site.
Councilor Reid suggested that the City could wait to acquire the site adjacent to Station#1, rather than rushing to
condemn. Councilor DeBoer stated that he is against condemnation. Councilor Reid suggested starting with Station
#2 first and waiting for the other site adjacent to Station#1 to become available.
Councilor Laws suggested moving administrative functions to Station#2,thus reducing the size needed for Station
#t and helping with footprint.Chief Woodley indicated that switching these functions would not work well
operationally,citing delays in response time that would be created by daily meetings. Also cited the need to
accommodate walk-in traffic at Station#1. Stated that parking and staffs daily commute to City Hall would also
make this option unacceptable. Councilor Reid noted that she was opposed to the idea that walk-in traffic and staff
commute time were determining factors in this planning effort, and suggested that it is more important to build
looking to the future. Stated that build-out to the urban growth boundary will be on the south-end of town, and
suggested that perhaps moving certain functions to Station 92 might be appropriate.
Councilor Hauck stated that his understanding was that even if functions were switched,there was not sufficient
room for the functions of either station on the East Main site.
City Administrator Mike Freeman stated that he had hoped this meeting would serve to point out the space needs
issues to be discussed,and to asked if it would be acceptable to bring an item back to the next regular meeting of the
Council to authorize the City Administrator to explore the acquisition of adjacent properties with the property
owners.
Councilor DeBoer stated that staff should meet with all three property owners, including Ross Johnson. Councilor
Laws stated that he would have no problem with condemnation if it were for public safety,and he favors bringing
information back to the Council after meeting with property owners. Councilor Hauck concurred with Councilor
Laws. Councilor DeBoer stated that he was opposed to any condemnation. Council Chairperson Wheeldon
suggested starting discussions with property owners. Council consensus that staff should move ahead with
discussions with property owners.
Freeman clarified for Council that Station 91 program requirements would not work given the site issues present.
Even-with multi-stories,the bays alone must be 16'high,and a two-story building with these heights would be very
high. Ettlin concurred,stated that underground parking would be difficult given the slope and orientation,and re-
iterated that bays,support and parking would not fit by themselves, let alone in combination with other functions.
ADJOURNED
The meeting was adjourned at 6:56 p.m.
Submitted by Derek Severson,Assistant to the City Recorder
Astdand City Council Study Session Minutes 10-06-98
3
MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
October 7, 1998
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Wheeldon called the meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
IN ATTENDANCE
Councilors Laws, Wheeldon, DeBoer,and Reid. Mayor Shaw and Councilor Hauck were absent. Staff present
included: City Administrator Mike Freeman,Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles, Director of Finance Jill
Turner, City Attorney Paul Nolte, and Public Works Director Paula Brown.
DISCUSSION OF LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT(LID)PROCESS
Council went through the committee recommendations as prepared by staff step-by-step. With regard to the first
recommendation,that the City participate in the costs associated with local street improvements,further
clarification was made and implementation measures were considered based on examples. Noted that the actual
percentage of City participation would be dependent on the scope of improvements included in each project.
Members of the LID Committee requested justification of how the percentage was determined for the total cost to
the City,and expressed their concerns that the figures discussed at the committee level were different than those
presented in the recommendations currently before the Council.
Public Works Director Paula Brown explained that the figures she had used for City participation were based on the
actual project elements at 60%City participation for sidewalks,20%for street surface, 75%for storm drains, and
50%for engineering and administration. When looked at in this way,the City's participation came out to 33'/:%
rather than the 40%that was discussed by the committee. Councilor Laws clarified that the committee tried to find
a way for the City to participate in a significant amount of the costs for LIDS, and the methodology of determining
percentages for different elements of the improvements was formulated to justify the City's participation in the costs
of street improvement. 40%was the original target,but the committee felt that these percentages made sense,were
justifiable,and led to significant City participation. As there was no consensus on this first recommendation
regarding the percentage breakdown, it was determined that the item would be set aside for additional work later.
Chairperson Wheeldon stated that there was a misconceived idea that points were being negotiated in committee,
and explained that when she was on the committee,she did not have the power to negotiate on behalf of the
Council. Emphasized that she did not represent the Council when she was on the committee,that she was merely
another member.
Councilor Laws suggested the following alternatives 1) Stick with the individual percentage for the four portions of
the street projects.2)Put to Council that the City is to pay 40%on each individual project,regardless of
circumstances. 3) Leave the recommendation as it is, and move forward.
Jack Blackburn/805 Oak Street/Ad Hoc LLD Committee memberiStated that committee members understood that
their recommendations had to go before the Council,but that it was believed that those supporting the
recommendations in the committee meetings would continue to do so before the Council.
Looking at recommendation two,that the assessment method for local street improvements be based on a
"potential unit"method rather than the 'frontage foot"method,Councilor Reid stated that this recommendation
relates to recommendations#3 and#5. Used Strawberry Lane as an example to discuss implementation details.
Councilor DeBoer clarified the committee's intention in choosing between"frontage foot"and"potential units"
methodology,and explained that assessments for potential units would be deferred until the potential units were
actually developed. Discussion of deferring costs for potential units.
Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes 10-07-98 1
i
City Administrator Freeman asked to clarify the options discussed for recommendation one for staff to use in
drafting changes to the ordinance. It was confirmed that percentages could either be left as they now stand in the
staff report or adjusted to a full 40%City participation.
For recommendation three, that the total number of"potential units"within a local improvement district be
determined based on underlying zoning,Councilor Reid questioned whether the City now has a stipulation on
future plans for the number of potential units. Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles explained that building
permits are based only on the building permit submitted,but that if a partition is occurring,the City requests a
master plan for the property. Further clarified that density requirements would be considered in determining
"potential units",but that this would involve some judgement on the part of the Community Development
Department in order to take into account factors such as topography,unit size, and etc.
Discussion of deferring assessments until development occurs as providing incentive not to develop to full density.
Chairperson Wheeldon expressed concern that the City would provide an incentive to less development when the
N Planning Department is trying to encourage density. Questioned whether development has been defined.
David Fine/735 Frances Lane/Asked whether the City has legal authority to defer assessment on potential units
until they are developed,when this is in effect the City providing a long-term, zero interest loan of public funds.
Council indicated that the wording of this recommendation needs to be worked out more specifically by staff.
For recommendation four,that the maximum assessment for individual units should be$4,000, excluding City
participation and no maximum or participation by the City should be allowed for "development property"or city-
owned parcels, it was noted that if the City were to stick with only 33'/:%participation,the$4,000 cap would not be
effective. Chairperson Wheeldon explained that the$4,000 cap was determined to be a reasonable amount for an
individual to pay before figures were available,but that when figures were provided it became apparent that there
was a difficulty with the City picking up 40%plus any amount over the$4,000 cap as these projects need to be
balanced with the City's other transportation priorities. Councilor Reid questioned the differences between
individual streets,noting both the physical differences and the varied levels of citizen participation in the
improvements as factors affecting the City's participation in the improvements. It was determined that the figures
Chairperson Wheeldon had been referring to did not include the"potential units" methodology in their calculations.
Councilor Laws explained that the committee was charged with finding ways to overcome the objections to the LID
issue,and that they came down to the issue of costs. This recommendation was set aside.
Recommendation five,that the large, existing parcels with potential for further development would only be
assessedfor the existing unit, and assessments for potential lots would be deferred, was agreeable to the Council.
Recommendation six,that the City require full payment for LID assessments at the time of the sale of lots, was also
agreeable to the Council.
For recommendation seven, that the "pre-signed"agreement process be revised to allow for the option of early
pay-off and requiring full pay-off when agreement is required for new development,Councilor DeBoer noted that
when drafting the ordinance,the formula to be used would have to be dealt with to determine whether units charged
at the time of development would be those actually developed or the"potential units"used for initial assessments.
Discussion of whether to allow remonstrances even for those who have paid,with the general agreement that it
should be allowed as written in the recommendations.
For recommendation eight,to maintain neighborhood involvement in the local street improvement process, it was
discussed that the last sentence of the background information/implementation measures prepared by staff might be
Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes 10-07-98 2
changed to read"It should also be recognized that minimum street standards will be maintained(full paving,
sidewalks, storm drains)but that modifications where possib(rnecessary will be accommodated." Council agreed
to leave the sentence with"possible". Chairperson Wheeldon expressed concern over the message sent by literal
interpretation of specific wording. Councilor Laws indicated that the need was for something in between a literal
interpretation of possible and a literal interpretation of necessary.
Jack Blackburn/805 Oak Street/Noted that Strawberry Lane figures in the illustrative report from staff was
misleading as most of these improvements would be paid by a developer.
Discussion of the potential situation if money were pre-paid and a developer chose to develop the street privately,
how would the money be turned over. Councilor Reid stated that monies pre-paid would go into a fund to improve
the street,and regardless of who was doing the improvements,those funds would go to the improvements of the
street. Scoles explained that this could be done through a reimbursement agreement process.
Questioned if the LID process is driven by PUD, how this would be handled. Chairperson Wheeldon stated that
this issue is dealt with as part of recommendation four.
Council then turned their attention to the financing issue. Chairperson Wheeldon suggested that the Council needed
to clear up the issue of"potential units"and look at some more accurate figures before the issue of financing can be
dealt with.
Councilor Laws commented that many projects are adopted in the Capital Improvements Plan without a specific
funding mechanism being set forth in advance. Councilor Laws stated that this is also in the Transportation System
Plan. Suggested that unimproved streets fall under the same category. Emphasized that the plan should be adopted
even if financing has not been determined. At budget time,on an annual basis, would be the time to determine what
projects need to be done. And doing all of this through the budget process would determine what funds are needed
year-by-year. Feels that these improvements are a high enough priority that funding will be found,and stated that
this is what is done with all capital improvement plans. The proposal to predetermine financing for street
improvements is not consistent with how things have been done with other plans in the past, and would be difficult
given that the projects on hand each year would determine how much funding was needed. Chairperson Wheeldon
stated that if no financing is attached to the plan,and projects are left to be dependent on the availability of funds, it
does not set enough of a priority.
City Administrator Mike Freeman suggested tabling the discussion until Director of Community Development John
McLaughlin returns and can recalculate figures relative to the potential lots and the proposed cap. This information
would be brought back to Councilors and Committee members at a later date. Council agreed to this suggestion.
Chairperson Wheeldon noted that the funding available nearly matches the 33'/2%that was discussed,and
questioned at what percentage the City's participation should be set. Director of Finance Jill Turner suggested
putting together a"mini-plan"as is currently done with the capital improvement plans and bringing back
information for further discussion. It was agreed that more information from staff would be helpful. Councilor
DeBoer questioned whether Chairperson Wheeldon could accept a 33%2%City participation and$4,000 cap.
Councilor Wheeldon said that she would need to see the numbers on potential units first.
Council noted that the previous discussion of giving a 10%discount to those current Local Improvement Districts
that are underway but have not yet been billed for their improvements would not be a matter for the policy being
created and would be kept in mind separately. Public Works Director Paul Brown commented that the billing of
costs for five LIDS is being held pending a Council decision on this matter. Councilor DeBoer indicated that he
feels these should be sent now. Brown noted that these were held because staff was reluctant to send these out
without the 10%discount that was expected. Staff felt that this would upset those being billed,and the issue would
be coming before Council anyway through the public hearing process. Councilor Laws stated that he would like to
see staff prepare information on up-front costs, and that this 10%would need to come from that up-front money.
Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes 10-07-98 3
Turner noted that there was roughly$50,000 available in the budget for sidewalk LIDS, and another$233,000 in un-
designated transportation related capital improvement projects. Turner stated that this might be adequate to meet
costs for a year,or even two.
Consensus was that the 10%discount to current LIDS needs to be considered separately, but at the same time as,the
up-front money issue for implementing the LID recommendations. Concluded that this issue needs to be taken up
again on the next agenda.
ADJOURNED
The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.
Submitted by Barbara Christensen, Crry Recorder
I
I
it
i
Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes 10-07-98 4
I
i
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8, 1998
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Steve Armitage called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were
Mike Gardiner, John Fields, Marilyn Briggs, Russ Chapman, Mike Morris, Anna Howe, and Chris Hearn.
Ron Bass was absent. Staff present were John McLaughlin, Bill Molnar, Mark Knox and Susan Yates.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AND FINDINGS
August 11, 1998 Regular Meeting Minutes-On Page 8, strike"John Fields stated: He agrees with Kramer
that this 1541 A Street] is the tear down of a classic building". Howe moved to approve as corrected, Briggs
seconded and the minutes were approved.
August 11, 1998 Regular Meeting Findings
PA97-072- Briggs moved to approve, Fields seconded, and approved.
PA98-001 - Hearn moved to approve, Briggs seconded, and approved.
August 11, 1998 Hearings Board - Briggs moved to approve, Howe seconded and the minutes were
approved.
August 11, 1998 Hearings Board Findings
PA98-041 -Chapman moved to approve, Briggs seconded and approved.
PA98-070- Briggs moved to approve, Chapman seconded and approved.
PA98-077-Chapman moved to approve, Briggs seconded and approved.
PUBLIC FORUM- No one came forth to speak.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 98-091
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING HOTEL AND CONSTRUCT A 10,901
SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING,AND CONVERT THE EXISTING 24 HOTEL UNITS TO STUDIO
APARTMENTS.
1520 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD
APPLICANT: ALEX JANSEN
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Site visits were made by all but Gardiner and Armitage, however, Armitage stated he is familiar with the
site.
STAFF REPORT
Molnar said the property, a mature site with heavy vegetation, is located at Siskiyou and Walker Avenue
and there are presently seven structures on the property with the the three newest buildings at the rear of
the property consisting of 24 motel units. The proposal involves
retaining the three structures at the rear of the property with those units being converted to 24 studio
apartments with the remaining four buildings to be demolished and a new commercial structure constructed
along Siskiyou Boulevard.
The current access and parking to the new project will be somewhat modified with the driveway closest to
Walker being eliminated and a new driveway opening constructed on Walker Avenue. A total of 55 parking
spaces, including on-street parking on Walker will be provided.
The commercial building will be single story with a covered walkway separating the walls of the structure
that will lead from the sidewalk on Siskiyou Boulevard back to the parking area and the rear units.
Staff believes there many elements to the project positively representing an infill project right on Siskiyou
Boulevard in the Detailed Site Review Zone, incorporating many of the standards in the DSR, as well as
maintaining a residential component on the property with an appropriate density near commercial areas
and transit and the University.
Existing Trees- With an overhead, Molnar showed the trees proposed for retention and removal. There is
an abundance of smaller stature trees that have not been identified. The Site Review requires that efforts
be made to incorporate significant trees into the project design, at the same time, looking for a balance
between the project design, parking, and accommodation of more intense development allowed in the
commercial zone. Staff believes there are some opportunities to retain one or two of the larger trees in the
project by making some slight changes to the building footprint(refer to overhead exhibits), however, one
of the trees marked for retention may not survive, due to grading during construction.
Entrance from Walker-The applicant states the new entrance off Walker Avenue meets the minimum
standards from the intersection, however, Staff is concerned that since the creation by ODOT of the wider
radius at the intersection which facilitates the movement of autos off Siskiyou Boulevard at higher speeds,
it would be safer to shift the Walker entrance up another 25 to 30 feet or as far up the property as possible.
I
Public Space- In the Detailed Site Review zone for buildings in excess of 10,000 square feet, there is a
i minimum requirement for public space. The purpose is to incorporate outdoor public areas along the
frontage of the building giving employees or patrons a place to congregate with a minimum requirement of
1, 100 square feet. Some of the smaller areas are scored concrete leading to building entrances and Staff
feels will only marginally function as outdoor space. Some subtle changes such as widening the scored
concrete areas into some of the building offset areas would more clearly meet the public space
requirement.
Building Entrances -The design standard in the DSR specifically states around entrances either lighting,
changes in the mass surface or texture should be incorporated to highlight entrances to the building. As
proposed, the entrances match in proportion to window areas (size, awning covering, and texture)with not
even a subtle change to highlight the entrance. There could be a change in relief in the exterior of the wall
or change in the type of covering.
Transit Route -The applicant is proposing along Siskiyou Boulevard a number of cutouts for incorporation
of benches. Given the size of the project and the number of trips it could ultimately generate, perhaps
some of the alcoves could be deepened and serve as a bus shelter.
Molnar read the Tree Commission's comments into the record.
Briggs said when she walked the property she found many more trees and changes in location that are
indicated on the site plan.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
r
PUBLIC HEARING
DAVE RICHARDSON, Architectural Design Works, 1105 Siskiyou Blvd. said many hours have been spent
working on this project.
ALEX JANSEN, 12466 S. E. Spring Mountain Drive, Portland, OR 97236, said the impetus for the project
has been a decline in revenues in the hotel business due to the increased room counts in Ashland and
deterioration in some of the front buildings. They decided to consider a commercial element. The main
issue they have because parking is in the rear is the accessibility to the front areas. He is concerned with
the steep incline entrance near Dairy Queen. He believes that it needs to be graded out with one
consistent incline and add a handicap ramping system.
Jansen believes they need between four and five spaces per 1,000 square feet. They are now at the
minimum according to the ordinance. He is concerned that by moving the Walker entrance up they may
lose two parking spaces.
Richardson said the public space can be reconfigured to make it work as well as the building entrances.
They will do whatever is required for street trees. They would prefer the trees be behind the sidewalk as
there is a better chance for survival.
It will be difficult to save certain significant trees. If they jog the building around the tree, they will lose a
significant corner. He is also concerned about losing the trees during grading. They can do some
reconfiguring of the building but they cannot afford to lose floor area.
Briggs noticed the tree level is about three to four feet higher than the sidewalk. Is the applicant going to
make the retail shops on the same plane as the sidewalk and the area will be graded out? Richardson
said they will be cutting into the site and on the back side of the site will be a retaining wall.
Richardson said the Tree Commission pretty much conceded that the tree nearest the Dairy Queen is
doomed. He is concerned about the tree in the center of the property but believes there is enough space
around it that it may have a chance to survive.
Howe noted that the City's minimum parking requirement is 32 spaces.
Chapman wondered how individuals using the handicap spaces could access the retail spaces. Jansen
believes the handicap spaces should be moved.
Fields expressed a concern about servicing the building; there is no place to off load on the street and up
to an eight foot grade elevation in the parking. The trash enclosure is up the stairs way to the back(300
feet)with deliveries happening in the back. He is having a hard time seeing the split elevation working. It
would seem a rear access is needed. Richardson said it will be difficult. Jansen said they considered
having a second retaining wall and creating a well area giving a rear entrance.
The applicants agreed to move the Walker entrance at least 20 feet to the south (Condition 9).
Richardson asked if the fixed street lighting can be eliminated.
McLaughlin said the light at the corner has to remain but he would check on the others. Richardson
wondered if the City had a standard for lights or can they make suggestions on what they can be as well
as the spacing of the lights. Molnar said there is some flexibility in the Conditions in order to explore the
appropriate standard for the location. On "A" Street, the spacing is about 60 feet. The applicant was
agreeable to the wording of Condition 14.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
v
LEO JANSEN, 1520 Siskiyou Boulevard, said they have tried to keep the property as green as possible.
They will have to remove some trees and he assured the Commission that any trees that are planted will
be cared for. He is very concerned about site vegetation.
Briggs wondered if the flat metal roof will cause a glare. Richardson said there is no metal roof and there
will be no glare. Fields said it is stated so in the packet.
Howe said they have nothing identifying all the trees and which ones will be saved. In order to know
which trees have died, it is important to have them identified.
Jansen agreed to provide a bench for the bus stop as long as it can be incorporated. He would rather not
have to build a structure. Molnar said the building at Siskiyou and Highway 66 provided a concrete slab
covered with a fabric awning.
Howe suggested modifying Condition 2 to include all existing trees. McLaughlin said the landscaped
areas that are going to be disturbed need to be clearly indicated, especially the regrading of the western
approach.
Fields does not see any private or combined outdoor use for the studio apartments. Molnar said there is
no outdoor recreation space required in C-1 for multi-family. Jansen said they could make use of the
areas in between the units.
Fields wondered if the applicants could be given the option of eliminating all the trees and just replanting
trees and vegetation in appropriate places. McLaughlin said that was a possibility. Jansen said he
would be willing to replace the trees with substantial caliper trees, assuming they could get six inch
caliper trees in there. Fields thought it would be nice to have six $500 trees in the development.
Armitage added, at least six large caliper trees on the property. McLaughlin said in exchange for not
requiring retention of these natural features, a Condition can require it be part of the revised landscaping
plan. Part of the landscaping plan can incorporate these suggestions.
Fields wondered about the location of the electric and gas meters. Jansen said they are shown on the
plan but if they cannot go in the noted area (near the middle rear of the building) they will be put near
Walker.
Staff Response
Molnar said Staff would like the Walker entrance placed as far to the south as possible. With regard to
tree retention, without knowing exactly how much protection is needed around the trees, that information
could change their minds on tree removal and the alternatives mentioned are good.
Armitage believes it would be worthwhile for Staff to study and find out what is technically possible for
tree replacement and the costs involved.
Fields feels strongly about public outdoor space shortage. He would also like to see some space
dedicated in the residential area. Molnar suggested wording of a Condition: That the plan be revised to
include 1,090 square feet of usable public space associated with the commercial uses and an additional
usable residential outdoor space (distinguish between the two).
Rebuttal
Richardson does not see a problem with arranging outdoor space. Fields envisions a picnic table in the
outdoor space.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
V
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Hearn moved to approve PA98-091 with the attached Conditions and those Conditions expressed.
Those include a bus stop with at least a bench and awning, large caliper trees, public space revisions,
and treatment around the entrances. Gardiner seconded the motion.
Howe believes the Commission is asking for things that she would like to see again such as the
distinctive entrances, trees behind the sidewalk, public and residential space, transformer location, and
the bus stop.
Fields is still having trouble with no guardrails and access problems from the parking area to the
building.
Molnar said if the action is continued, Staff could come back with prepared findings which would then not
delay the applicant.
Hearn, Morris, Gardiner and Armitage did not wish to continue and Briggs, Howe, Chapman, and Fields
wished to continue.
The applicant agreed to a 30 day extension to the 120 rule.
Hearn withdrew his motion. The Commission agreed to a continuance. McLaughlin said the hearing will
be continued at 7:00 p.m. on October 13, 1998. No notice will be mailed out since this was announced
publicly.
OTHER
Briggs distributed an article from Preservation magazine discussing civic building standards.
McLaughlin said that could be discussed at the meeting.
McLaughlin said a study session is scheduled for September 29, 1998 with the City Council to review
and discuss portions of the Transportation System Plan. They will also talk about the retreat with the
Council to talk about civic projects.
Governor's Task Force on Growth - McLaughlin reported there will be a video conference public hearing
held including seven topics subject to testimony by people around the state. This is an opportunity for
testimony. If any Commissioner is interested in any of the topics, contact McLaughlin.
Ron Bass has submitted his resignation from the Planning Commission as he is taking a professional
leave from the community.
Briggs felt Philip Lang made a good point in his letter. If the property on Fourth & B would copy the
window boxes at Peerless, it would help considerably.
ADJOURNMENT-The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8, 1998
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 1:35 p.m. by Chairman Steve Armitage. Other Commissioners present
were Mike Morris and Chris Hearn. Staff present were Bill Molnar, Mark Knox and Susan Yates.
TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS
PLANNING ACTION 98-087
REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE A PARCEL INTO TWO LOTS AT 1338
SEENA LANE
APPLICANT: MELANIE MINDLIN
This action was approved.
PLANNING ACTION 98-091
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 8, 290 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL
OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED AT 559 SCENIC DRIVE.
APPLICANT: ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
There was a request filed for a public hearing but withdrawn. The neighbors had concerns about access.
The access will be just from Catalina.
PLANNING ACTION 98-066
REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAN APPROVAL UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR
A 49-UNIT MIXED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON
WILLIAMSON WAY AND HERSEY STREET.
APPLICANT: DOUG NEUMANIMIKE MAHAR
This action was approved.
TYPE 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS
PLANNING ACTION 98-033
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO INSTALL A DISC ANTENNA AT 1650 CLARKE AVENUE.
PROPOSED LOCATION FOR DISC (7'-6") HAS CHANGED FROM THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TO
THE PARKING LOT SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
APPLICANT: SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts -Site Visits were made by Morris and Armitage.
STAFF REPORT
This action was heard before the July 14, 1998 Hearings Board with most of the discussion centered
around the location of the disc antenna. The proposal being presented today just changes the side of the
gable where the disc is proposed to be located. Molnar showed a photo montage submitted by the
applicant and describing where the proposed disc antenna will be located.
Molnar said the main standard Staff has used to locate a disc is to choose the least visible location as
viewed by city streets and residential properties. The direction was given to the applicant at the last
meeting to work with neighbors and satellite dish experts to find a suitable location for the disc. Most of
the concerns at the last meeting were from residents on Garden Way. Staff feels the location presented
today is more visible from city streets and without any discussion with property owners along Harmony
Lane or Oakway Circle, more visible to some of those areas. It is a difficult site and the disc will lend itself
to only particular locations on the site.
Molnar said this is not the worst location but one other alternative might be the center gable as it would be
less visible from some of the surrounding streets. He was hoping there would have been a little more
analysis by someone in the industry explaining why at least other areas on the site were insufficient. It
seems some of the impacts may just shift to other neighbors.
PUBLIC HEARING
Bill Pugh, representing the Seventh Day Adventist Church,1650 Clarke Street explained they chose the
original location because it was the only location to receive the signal . The church is a random user.
Trying to keep it as hidden as possible they kept it on the gable. They met with all neighbors objecting to
the satellite and brought in an expert installer. The option was to move to other side of gable, still visible
from Heiner's yard but not the area he uses. Yes, it does make it more visible to Clarke Street and the
first house on Oakway Circle. It is in a lower location on the roofline and stays below the treeline. It is
below the skyline. In this location it disappears as best as possible. A two foot dish would not work
because it has a lower power signal.
Armitage wondered about putting it on the ground next to the church building. Pugh said locations were
considered on the ground next to the community service building but the signal could not be picked up on
the ground,just the roof.
i
Armitage asked Pugh if the proposal is the least visible overall. Pugh affirmed and said a tree is growing
that will eventually sit between the street and the disc.
HOWARD HEINER, 784 Garden Way, objected last month because of the location of the dish. He met
with church people and experts and they are amenable to the location chosen at this time. However, if
that location is refused or moved to the south side, he would have to object.
Hearn asked if the proposal is the least visible location as viewed from the neighboring properties. Heiner
said, no, but it is for him. It is obviously more visible to those on Clarke and maybe passersby.
j Staff Response - Molnar would agree with Pugh that the disc will be primarily viewed from Clarke and
Oakway Circle. Because of the elevation, he is concerned from a planning viewpoint. It is good they had
an expert going through the site. This is difficult because of the location is surrounded by three streets.
Pugh said he did not speak with either residence on Clarke. Molnar said notices went to residents on
Clarke and Oakway Circle.
Armitage thought it seemed the ground location on the side would be the least visible from Clarke and
Oakway. Molnar said setting the dish at the rear of the building would allow it to better blend and not be
as visible from the street.
Rebuttal - Pugh said if the dish is located on the ground, it might have to be elevated to clear the roofline.
It would have to go up about six feet.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Hearn moved to approve PA 98-033 with attached Conditions. Morris seconded the motion. The motion
was voted on unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 98-088
REQUEST FOR A REVISION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BUILDING ENVELOPE AND SOLAR
WAIVER AT 1607 PEACHEY ROAD.
APPLICANT: KIRT MEYER
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts-Site Visits were made by all.
STAFF REPORT
Knox explained this property has a great deal of history associated with it as outlined in the Staff Report.
The proposal is for a building envelope modification and solar waiver. The property was annexed in 1989
and partitioned in 1996 with a variance. The variance was for having one extra lot off a private road. The
applicants justified the variance application stating the envelopes would set the buildings back from the
creek and limit impacts on the creek and set back the building from the adjacent property owners. Staff
felt that was an acceptable proposal. In 1997, the applicants asked for a building envelope modification
and solar waiver.
Now new applicants are asking for a minor amount more. Staff has some concerns. The integrity of the
original comprehensive application has been somewhat degraded due to the number of changes. It would
have been unfair to the neighborhood to not have a public hearing. Lastly, the proposal that is before the
Hearings Board today is for an envelope modification (blue line on the site plan)which is currently an
adopted envelope. The yellow area on the site plan was allowed in the last application allowing an
outdoor patio area. The applicant is proposing to enclose the yellow area and add another 30 square feet
making it about 90 square feet. In looking at the original variance request, the reasons for justifying it
were because it did not close the conservation corridor. This application would close up that area.
The solar variance being requested creates an approximate 74 '% foot shadow. It is about 25 feet beyond
what the fence would shadow. The plans the applicant has submitted are purchased plans that are two-
dimensional and do not consider topography constraints, solar envelope, building envelope and therefore
the lot has to be fixed to fit the house. Usually building plans are received that have been drawn by a local
designer who would take into account natural features of the land. The house could be designed around
those constraints and still work.
Molnar has struggled with this application. He has viewed it more a modification of the 1996 approval. At
that time, the applicant offered points in that application which made it similar to a subdivision. Now there
have been a number of planning actions that have whittled away the original plan. The applicant inherited
the lot with a history with it. This is more than an incremental change.
Hearn recalled considerable discussion about the setback to the riparian area in the request in 1997. He
remembered talking about one to two feet making a difference in the riparian area. He also recalled when
the applicant came before them there were concerns about eroding of the original application.
PUBLIC HEARING
KIRT MEYER, 2909 Dead Indian Memorial Road and VADIM AGAKHANOV, 117 Garfield Street testified.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
I a
Agakhanov said he is the local designer who redesigned the plans. He took off a huge porch. They are
trying to meet the CC&R's. The neighbors do not object. The house will be fourteen feet from the creek
allowing space for trees to grow. The solar will not shadow the house because it is in the corner and no
one will develop that part of the property.
Meyer said because the elevation of the property being shadowed is elevated and if a six foot fence were
built it would create a 23 foot shadow. The foundation will be about a foot underneath with excavation
underneath.
RICHARD LUCAS, 1632 Ross Lane, represents himself and his wife and Kerry Lay. The application has
incrementally changed over time. If you take any variance, it seems minor, but over time it has become
more major. He feels the applicants are trying to be honest but there is still the issue of what is
necessary. The applicants inherited a piece of property that had the problems they were not informed
about. The solar shadow is a definite indicator of the size of the house. He agrees that fitting a pre-
existing design on the lot is a problem. There are only so many configurations of plans they could have. It
would be helpful to reduce the roof pitch. He is glad they are trying to keep the foundation a little lower.
He does not believe it would be that difficult to design a house that will meet the criteria. Now it seems to
be a problem to have the extra lot with a large house.
JOHN KLEIN, 1000 Walker, said he is not opposing development, but everything was fine until Starr
(previous applicant) sold 1010 Walker. At that time a proposal came asking for a variance for the drive to
access. Then he received another notice requesting another variance. He realizes the variances are not
self-imposed by the new owners but he sees it relating all the way to the original owners which have led to
i
everyone else from here forward requiring a variance.
Staff Response - Knox said changes in the roof pitch could shrink the volume of the building. He told
Agakhanov if he makes any changes, they need to be reflected on the plans the Planning Department
has.
Hearn wondered what part of the application pertains to the Minor Land Partition criteria. Molnar said
there is not clear criteria for adjusting a building envelope.
Hearn asked to what extent the green square on the site plan affects the visual corridor. He believes it will
affect it from a not yet built house. Molnar said it depends on what the impression is of the visual corridor.
Any increase in the envelope towards the riparian ,even though this is incremental, will diminish the visual
corridor.
Molnar said in addition to showing a habitable structure is not shaded (solar waiver) it also needs to be
shown there are unique or unusual circumstances about the site which justify a waiver. The applicants
have discussed topography and lot configuration.
Rebuttal -Agakhonov said after 5:00 or 6:00 p.m., there is no shadow at all. Concerning changing the
roofline, the bedrooms have to be fire accessible. By lowering the roof and windows they will lose the
classical American design.
Meyer said they put the garage on the north side to keep it as non-invasive as possible. The roof has to
be that high for the room above the garage.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8, 1998
Morris asked how tall the building will be. Agakhanov said it is roughly 27 feet and they are lowering it to
25 feet.
COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Hearn said when someone owns both tracts(solar), he leans toward not being too concerned about the
solar variance. Knowing the history of the property overall, he can understand both sides.
Armitage said with regard to the solar variance, there won't be a problem for future buildings and the
shadow does not reach Ross Lane. What are unique and unusual circumstances? Molnar said the high
point of the house scales off at 31 feet.
Armitage said this property has gone through many changes. There was a proposal for a structure that
did meet the criteria and with a waiver already granted. Armitage has a difficult time trying to find unique
and unusual circumstances with the applicants saying a house cannot be built. He does not consider the
building envelope to be unique or unusual. It cannot meet the criteria with the present design.
Morris said the addition of the new area seems minor as does the solar, however, he was not on the
Board during the other applications.
Morris moved to approve the application. There was no second and the motion failed.
Armitage said this could be called before the full commission.
Armitage moved to deny PA98-088. Hearn seconded the motion. The motion was approved with Morris
voting "no".
APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS
Morris moved to adopt Findings for PA09-033 (Seventh Day Adventist). Hearn seconded and the
Findings were adopted.
ADJOURNED -The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 8,1998
TRAFFIC
SAFETY
COMMISSION
.. ..rr�.......,�.....�... �x:....ro.... xA............. .....�.�,yti.....w�w.w�xx...Y.H...x.�x .Y W.�.....a ar.... ...................._...................._..
Minutes of Meeting
September 24, 1998
Members Present: Don Laws, Bob Goeckerman, J. David Fine, John Morrison,
William Snell
Staff Present: Jim Olson, Dawn Curtis, Brent Jensen
Members Absent: Michael Savko
I. Call to Order
Commissioner Fine called the meeting to order at 7:08 PM.
II Approval of Minutes
August minutes were approved.
III Items for Discussion:
A. PUBLIC FORUM ITEMS:
1) Parking Prohibition on Sherman Street
Olson reviewed the request from Mary Voris, 633 Iowa, to restrict
parking on Sherman St. at the intersection of Siskiyou Blvd.
Vehicles parking along the bottom of Sherman St. make visibility
and maneuverability extremely difficult. On occasions when there
are cars present on both sides of Sherman, the width of the street
becomes compromised leaving it difficult for a car turning off of
Sherman onto Siskiyou and a car turning from Siskiyou onto
Sherman to fit between the parked cars. During several instances,
vehicles turning onto Sherman will have to yield and wait for
vehicles to turn onto Siskiyou. This creates a safety issue. Staff
recommended to Commission that this request of a 50 foot parking
restriction on both sides of Sherman St. be approved.
Questions were raised concerning the amount of parking being
lost. Olson informed Commission that only two parking spaces on
each side would be lost. Jensen commented that parking is not
allowed within twenty feet of any intersection, so the loss is only
G:Daw \TreftSepwnbu 98.wpd
actually thirty feet on each side. Support from two other residents
was called into Olson after notices were sent to neighbors
regarding this proposal.
Motion to approve and seconded. Unanimously approved.
2) Cross-Walk Painting on N. Main St. in Briscoe School Area
Olson revisited this request made at the August TSC Meeting.
Streets to be painted would include:
A. NORTH MAIN STREET
@ Bush Street
@ Central Avenue
@ Skidmore Street
@ Van Ness Avenue
@ Hersey Street
@ Wimer Street
@ Laurel Street
B. Laurel Street
@ Central Street
Staff strongly recommends this action be implemented.
Geokerman felt that if a crosswalk was added to the intersection of
Wimer and N. Main it would create a pedestrian problem because
this is a blind corner for vehicles traveling onto Main St. tend to
stop just short of the intersection. This would put vehicles in the
crosswalk before they turn and infringe on the pedestrians. Olson
felt this was standard practice for most intersections.
Implementation of the crosswalks was supported by Morrison.
Motion to approve staff recommendation of the crosswalk painting
was approved unanimously.
3) Third Street Parking Request
Olson reviewed a request from Dr. Thomashefsky regarding the
parking situation on Third Street. Dr. Thomashefsky requested the
addition of four to six, one to two hour parking spaces be added to
Third St. Staff presented two alternatives to this request: 1) West
side of Third St. from Lithia Way to C Street be posted at two hour
parking; 2) Designate the first four hour parking spaced from Lithia
Way on east side of Third Street as two hour parking.
Commissioner Fine, a business resident of Third Street voiced
concerns over this request. Fine inventoried 44 2-hour parking
spaces within a block and a half of this location. The area on Third
Street was designated as all day parking to accommodate patrons
G:Daw \TraPSeplemb"98.wpd
and employees of the downtown business area. Fine also
remarked that he has had few complaints about parking while he
his practice has resided in the area. Jim Norton, 74 Third Street
and neighbors asked that this request likewise be denied as the
residential impacts of the change would affect where they and
visitors to their homes ability to park for long term periods of time
near their houses. Morrison asked Thomashefsky if he would be
willing to compromise with two 2-hour parking spaces in front of his
business? Fine commented further that justification is still not there
to compromise downtown merchant parking. Law agreed with Fine
that this does not seem a serious problem, but would present a
problem with the downtown business to further remove parking.
Snell voiced concern over whether granting this request would
show preference to Dr. Thomashefsky. Thomashefsky was made
aware of parking situation before moving to the neighborhood.
Jensen remarked this is a tough situation because this area is a
buffer zone between the business of downtown and the residential
areas, it will be hard to make this distinction over who is more
influential. Fine asked if any other businesses had commented on
this request. Curtis remarked that the Vieze's had commented that
they did not like the idea. Laws indicated that this area was
dedicated as "for public use". Laws asked Thomashefsky if his
patients were informed on the off-street parking behind his building.
Thomashefsky sends a map to all patients before they come to
office. Morrison asked for Staffs opinion on this. Olson says it is
two-fold and he sees both perspectives. Staff would be
comfortable with either. Morrison felt we should stay with status
quo. Fine suggested we invite Dr. Thomashefsky back to revisit
this issue in a few months if there is still an issue.
Commission voted to deny this request unanimously.
4) Parking Restriction on Vista Street
Mike Frank, Secretary of the Ravenwood Condominiums
Homeowners Association, requested a no parking zone be
established on the north side of Vista Street from the Ravenwood
Place entrance 25 feet to provide vision clearance for vehicles
exiting. Staff showed various photographs which supported the
claim by Frank that the vision is often obscured (by the same
vehicle). Staff recommends that the equivalent of one parking
space be prohibited easterly of the Ravenwood Place on the north
side of Vista Street as there is ample parking elsewhere along the
street.
Madeline Blue, 357 Vista, called Staff regarding this request and
felt the addition of the no parking zone would encourage vehicles to
park where they would block sidewalks and mailboxes. Feels this
G:Daw \Trat\SgA mbe 98.wpd
members of the Commission. Olson will be attending.
-Geri Parker-Paley, Region Transportation Safety Coordinator, ODOT
Announcement on the Safety Belt Campaign - usage is up to 87%
average for the state. Oregon hopes to achieve 90% by the year 2000.
The present goal was to reach 85% by the year 2000 and we have
surpassed that already.
The new influence will be on reducing traffic injuries. Sandy DiPiro, 776-
7132 Ext. 30 will be heading this program. If Commission would like she
can speak to them regarding coordination of this program.
Fine asked Paley if it would be feasible to have more programs south of
Corvalis for educational purposes. The present programs are held up
north during the week, Fine would like to see more programs in this
region. Suggestions on video conferencing and weekend courses were
given to Paley to follow up on.
G. GOAL SETTING - None.
H. Other
1. Report on Central Ashland Bikeway
Leford is completing project. Vandalism is already a concern.
IV. Informational Items - No Discussion
A. "Do the Buckle" for inclusion in Utility Mailer
B. Traffic Safety Notes- Nomination for 1998 Transportation Safety Award
C. ACTS Oregon News
D. Oregon Highway Plan Update
E. Brochures, Posters & Stickers Available from ODOT
V. New Items -
Beach and 8'" Visibility Problem
Staff will pass on request to have vegetation trimmed.
VI. For Next Meeting - None
VI. Meeting was Adjourned at 8:45 PM
Respectfully submitted,
Dawn V. Curtis
Public Works Administrative Secretary
G:Daw \TraMeptember 98.wpd
restriction would limit their livability. Morrison asked if vehicle in the
picture was a frequent nuisance. Frank replied that the vehicle is
often parked there for days on end. Even when the vehicle moves
to avoid being towed, it will only move a few feet. Frank continued
that by making the vehicle stay back the twenty-five feet the
visibility problem is solved. Morrison asked if Staff had performed
an accident history. Olson had not. Morrison had visited this site
and remarked that when he pulled out of the entrance to
Ravenwood Place, he had to look behind the vehicle to see, but if
another vehicle had been parked behind the first vehicle, he would
not have been able to see. Geokerman viewed street as
congested with no sidewalks and visibility problems. Fine
commented that this is a repeating problem with private drives and
that the Planning Department should be made aware of these
issues for consideration while plans are still in process. Laws
commented that there weren't too many other cars present in the
photos. Frank said pictures represented the usually situation and
there is rarely competition for parking on the street. Jensen agreed
with Fine that intersection policies should be implemented on this
corner.
Snell motioned that reasonable length of no parking be applied
according to Staff recommendation. Olson agreed that 25 feet is
adequate. Commission voted unanimously to apply a 25 foot no
parking zone on the north side Vista Street east of Ravenwood
Place.
B. REVIEW OF TRAFFIC REQUESTS / PROJECTS PENDING
1.
C. FOLLOW-UP ON PREVIOUS TRAFFIC ACTIONS
Olson reviewed status of traffic actions:
-Garfield Street Parking Prohibition for Bus Turning - Thanks from Buzz
Heard of Ashland School District.
-Grandview, Sunnyview, & Skycrest Street intersection study has
commenced.
D. HANDICAP ISSUES - None
E. TRAFFIC SAFETY EDUCATION COMMITTEE
1. School Safety Program - No report
2. SOU Traffic Safety Committee - No report
3. Traffic Safety Notes - None
F. EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES -
-Transportation Safety Conference, October 28, 29, and 30 in Hood River
Staff awaiting registration packets and will forward them to the interested
G:Daw \TrnflSeptemba 98.wpd
i
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
° Noon, Wednesday, September 2, 1998
w�+
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Mace, Chairman, Lillian Insley Paul Rostykus, William Skillman, Don
Fitch, Ken Ehlers, Alan Hassell, Councilor Alan DeBoer; Staff present: Paula
Brown, Bob Skinner, FBO, and Dawn Curtis
MEMBERS ABSENT:
I. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting 12:00 Noon
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Wednesday, August 5, 1998
Minutes approved with change.
III. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Pending Projects:
1) T-Hangar Development
Curtis discussed the waiting list for potential hangar rentees. Interest has been raised because of the
new construction taking place. Oregon State Police would appreciate having a closed hangar for
security reasons. Mace pointed out the fact that there has not been any open hangar space and this
obviously shows the interest. Mace commented new hangars should be built by the City for profit.
DeBoer felt it was time to look into AIP funding for projects, i.e. taxiway expansion, fencing, etc.
Mace questioned our financial options at this time. Insley asked which construction costs could be
covered by ODOT. DeBoer remarked that ODOT funding is usually used up with the Port of Portland
activities. Mace commented that most of the money will go to rural areas. DeBoer suggested that we
apply every 2-3 years for the AIP funding. Staff will put together a new list of priority projects.
B. Maintenance Issues: Staff
1) Tree Trimming:
Staff was informed of the fledgling hawk nest by Mr. Dunn. The fledglings departed the nest but the
empty nest is still above the height of the tree cutting. Staff will inform Mr. Dunn to cut the tree above
the nest which is only a few feet above the suggested cutting line.
Hassell asked who had recommended that we trim the trees. Skinner remarked he had been told by the
State of Oregon. Discussion ensued regarding the area where the trees were to be cut. Skinner asked
if the approach could be shot again for grades and heights. Brown will bring surveyor maps to next
meeting for review. Mace remembered the tree trimming plan has been modified in the past. Skinner
interested in looking at the slide slope approach. An obstruction map was presented with the Airport
Master Plan.
IV. NEW BUSINESS:
A. John Day Proposal:
Staff received a Proposal by John Day for the addition of two 10 unit Nested T-Hangars to be located
in the "Future Hangar" area called out in the Airport Master Plan. Day presented maps and proposal
to Commission. Discussion ensued regarding the layout direction for the proposed hangars. The angle
presented differs from the placement anticipated in the Airport Master Plan. Construction would
necessitate further site work, addition of 1300' of taxiway at approximately $100/ft, and further
security fencing costing $20-30,000 along the back road. The lease would be identical to the 25 year
lease in currently used. Excavation amount to accomplish the grade on the taxiways would be
significant if the hangars were tiered. DeBoer recalled that a quote had been presented to the Airport
Commission by Burl Brimm for the excavation costs. Research could be done to find costs associated
with building the first nested T-hangars.
Brown felt some costs could be applied for through AIP funding. Mace suggested we approach the
City Administrators to review these alternatives and which other projects they fell should be a higher
priority. Brown asked Commissioners for their feelings, would this be financially acceptable to them.
Jacobsen vied that the addition of new hangars built by City would bring in immediate income and
would be under the influence of the City and the Commission instead of opening the airport up to
private enterprise. DeBoer feels the goal should be for the City to own all the small T-Hangars. Mace
commented that our intentions would be compromised by allowing commercial owners into the airport,
but we should develop a list of people willing to do the construction than let City decree what should be
allowed. Day interjected that the hangar cost alone for the City would be $15 1foot with Davis/Beacon,
he could achieve the same for much lower costs. There would less risk for the City if private owners
were involved. Insley interjected that the goal of the airport should be to become self sufficient.
DeBoer remarked that the airport is self sufficient. Mace reviewed that the policy on the T-hangars has
always been fairly consistent between private owners. DeBoer agreed that the Airport Commission has
developed private owner hangars for personal use. Skinner remarked that 25 pre-paid leases would
benefit airport income, but we will lose some revenue waiting for the City to arrange the building.
Mace agreed that Staff time will soak up remaining revenue, and private building might benefit the
airport more in the long run. DeBoer granted that the City has a list of people who are willing to build
privately, we need to look at this kind proposal for true benefit. Mace agreed that we look into benefits
and that we open the proposal process up to other private builders. Brown will contact Day with the
outcome of this meeting, following the meeting with Mace, Scoles, DeBoer and Brown.
B. SOREDI Grant Update:
Brown revisited the history of the $25,000 SOREDI Grant for the sanitary sewer line. The condition
the Commission faces now is that if we accept this grant we also have to accept the entire cost of the
sewer line, $212,000. Brown needs Commission to recommend this proposal be taken to the Council.
It is within the AIP and further costs can come from the SDC funds, maybe 75-80%, this will
reevaluate the SDC priority.
Commission recommended that SDC Project List prioritize sanitary sewer as a necessary improvement
and be brought to the Council on September 15'for consideration.
C. CPI Issue with Land Lease Hangar Rate
Staff has been contacted by lessees regarding the raise in rental rates. Staff has asked Finance to
review the computations and have found discrepancies. Staff will produce the new rates at the next
Commission Meeting. Staff will also be reviewing and amending leases to accommodate for
inconsistencies. Jill Turner will also be speaking at the next meeting in regards to Airport financial
status.
V. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION:
A. Status of Airport Financial Report. Review of Safety Reports:
Business is up. 40-50 hours of activity. Fire watch has been contracting from Ashland.
Ramp sealing has failed, could we have county look into this problem. DeBoer suggested we have an
Airport Association Clean-up Day to curb costs of manual labor. Brown will research weed control
material to be placed under the asphalt as a future fix.
B. Ashland Airport Association: Status Report
None.
C. Other:
1. Fuel Tank Status: Commission would like the Fuel Tank Status to be kept on the agenda.
Tank engineering is now taking place. Costs should be available soon. Skinner concerned
with the time schedule.
Skinner informed the Commission that he had been approached by a fuel distributor that would
be willing to offer the airport a$20,000 loan for the fuel tank changeover if they could have
exclusive privileges. Skinner looked to other dealers to see if they could offer a similar deal. If
Skinner had his choice he preferred going with Texaco since they have been the distributor for
the airport for the past six years. The $20,000 would be split evenly with Bob Skinner and the
City. Both would be liable for default. Commission will address this at a future meeting.
2. Craven Review of Building Site:
A survey was sent into the Engineering Department on a piece of land Northwest of the airport
just outside the approach zones. Brown informed the Commission that this is within the slope
elevation and should be looked at. DeBoer suggested that every piece of information be
brought before the Commission for consideration. Mace recommended that County look very
hard at this request. Brown will follow up letter to inform applicant that his proposal and
subsequent requests will go through the Commission.
VI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: None
VII. NEW: None
VII. ADJOURN:
Meeting was adjourned at 1:30 PM.
G:0a \AirpW1nLdm\August 98.wpd
CITY OF ASHLAND ``may oF'ASy2o
Office of the Mayor
1'
OREGON.°` '
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 14, 1998
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Mayor Catherine M. Shaw
RE: APPOINTMENT OF DALE SHOSTROM
TO BUILDING APPEALS BOARD
I would like to recommend and seek approval of the appointment of Dale Shostrom to
the Building Appeals Board for a term to expire December 31, 1998, to replace the late
Ken Hagen's position. Dale Shostrom is a current member of the Historic Commission.
• � I '�'�4 ..ed.ru
October 15. 1998 er Gc j 19008 I �
City Council
City Hall
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Re : RVTD Routes in Ashland
Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to RVTD suggesting
some changes in Ashland' s bus routes. I believe these
changes would save money and serve riders better. As
a regular rider myself I 'm in a good position to know
where the average rider is likely to need to go , and I
do not believe that the current routes reflect these
needs adequately.
Yours trully,
Anya Schwarz 7
157 Siskiyou Blvd . #193
Ashland, OR 97520
J
I
October 159 1998
Rogue Valley Transportation District
3200 Crater Lake Avenue
Medford, OR 97504-9075
Attn : General manager, Sherrin Coleman
As an advocate of alternative transportation, I would like
to make a few suggestions on how to make your service in
Ashland more utilitarian, not only for the riders but for
RVTD as well.
First, the route along East Main is a terrific idea, but
badly executed. Many of the apartments near East Main are
occupied by students, but route 6 doesn 't go anywhere near
SOU. Students on their way to class are not likely to take
kindly to detours downtown or to Tolman Creek Road in order
to change buses.
III A better solution would be to combine the 5 and 6 routes as
per the enclosed diagram. All the important stops are covered :
Rite-Aid/Albert son s/Bi-Mart, Ashland Shopping Center (approached
from Siskiyou) , and SOU.
I 've been on route 5 to be the only passenger for two or
three miles. As much as I like the idea of my own personal
limo , an empty bus every 15 minutes or so Is a luxury neither
Ashland nor RVTD can afford to offer. And a luxury that is
so impractical it is repeatedly taken away is no bargain to
the rider.
Dependability is absolutely necessary to establishing rider
loyalty. A route that effectively covers the city and does
so year after year is the only way to induce the public to
forsake automobiles. The proposed route would serve more
people instead of pampering ,just a few.
Secondly , In order for route 5/6 to work efficiently, route
10 should be reversed—quite easily done with a few extra
benefits besides. ( see diagram) By reversing 10 you not
only cover the same ground, but you eliminate two totally
unnecessary left turns at Tolman Creek Road. I should think
eliminating these turns would not only shave off a moment or
two , but would actually contribute to safety and cut down
on driver fatigue. Turning a vehicle that size cannot be
easy y. Again all your major players are covered : Rite-Aid ,
etc . , Ashland Center, The Plaza, SOU, and Ashland Hills Inn .
(If Ashland Hills Inr Is a contribut--r to the 6 bus, it could
easily be included on that route as well. )
2-Ashland Routes
These suggestions are the result of seven years of bus
riding in Ashland. I have tried to keep in mind who your
commercial financial contributors might be as well. I
hope these suggestions prove helpful. Bus service In a
city this size is a rarity , and I would like to see it
continue .
Yours truly,
Ada —fc/w7
Anya Schwarz
1257 Siskiyou Blvd. #193
Ashland, OR 97520
CC : City of Ashland
�PRo�os�D J
RSN �AN �
RO cn eS
to
`G
i g
tounFe�
� 0 T
r y /
3
z
� T
w y
n i �
2
a`
o� T
4\b ILAb
E �
�O
1�urE �o CREVe-�s���
�oOTE 1O
RevE2SE �1RTIoN �l 1 m ivATt 2 LEFT TuRNs
RT \}u3'� 6(o
To�mAN CR�6K RD .
s
� 3
o
a
y
v �
�P
Ro UtE 5�b
Cpm6kNE ROUTES 80 TNRT THE E. MEIN 6u5 PR�S�S
a� emu .
.fl y
� y
Ay ��
To: City Councilors
From: Rick Landt
Date: 20 Oct 98
Re: Street Design Standards
Although I have found many innovative, solid parts to the current draft of the Street Design
Standards, I have serious reservations about others aspects of the draft. I would like to mentioned
some of them below:
1) I am curious what was the basis for the tree-related perimeters. Was it scientifically based? Was it taken from
what other cities have done? If so, were environments (climate and soils) and goals the other cities similar? The
concerns that I raise below are based on my observations in Ashland over the past 16 years.
2) A six foot minimum for park rows is too narrow to grow and maintain large trees. Large trees are a great goal, that I
support,and to be successful, their roots need room to grow.I would refer readers to the railroad district,home a
many large street trees. Where they are growing best, with mimimal conflicts with sidewalks, roads, curbs, etc. is
where park rows are 10 to 12 feet wide. Where they are diminished in size to six feet, serious conflicts between the
trees and man-made structures are occurring. For example,note the beautiful honey locust tree on B Street,near the
intersection with 2nd Street. It is just the magnificent specimen I think we envision when we think of large street
trees, and it is now threatened,because it is upheaving sidewalk, curb and street,creating safety and maintenance
problems.
3) On page 17, first full paragraph, the draft state that "placement, types of trees, and planting methods are addressed
in The Street Tree Standards of the Site Design and Use Standards of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance." I would add
that no mention is made of the crucial issue of maintenance in this ordinance. Further the ordinance is inadequate in
its description for urban trees, that require special attention, due to the somewhat hostile environment. I understand
that a revision of this ordinance is forthcoming, I am bothered though, that the Street Design Standards might be
ratified before the referenced Street Tree Standards are in place.
4) I have reservations about the streetscape cross-sections shown on pages 26,28,29, and 30.
a) The plan shown on page 26 sets in stone a single approach to streetscapes that creates a number of problems. I
believe that we would be bettered served on quieter streets that have on-street parking if the sidewalk is
adjacent to the street. An excellent example of how this works well is on High Street. Because there is parking
along High Street, a buffer exists between pedestrians on the sidewalk and vehicular traffic. Additionally,
street tree roots are unimpeding by impervious surfaces on three sides,enhancing their ability to thrive and grow
into large trees. Where there is parking on only one side of the road, the sidewalk could be adjacent to the road
on the parking side with a wide park row on the opposite side. Furthermore, water is saved by not having
narrow, difficult to water, park rows that tend to waste water. Finally, it is safer, cleaner, and more comfortable
to step out onto sidewalk than onto landscape.
b) Perhaps I do not understand the commercial cross-sections,but what is shown are "planting strips." I assume this
means continuous.Blocking ingress/egress between businesses and parking with a"planting strip"would not be
good for business. Where there is diagonal parking, the planter should be a parallelogram directly in front of
the parking spot, with sidewalk all sides of it except the curb side. With parallel parking, the solution requires
a diagram,not words.
I have a number of other concerns that I have not had the time time list. I think there are many good
elements in this document, but I urge further work, especially as relates to trees and streetscapes
before the document is approved.
Council Communication
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
October 20, 1998
Submitted by: Maria Harris
Approved by: Paul Nolte L__i
Approved by: Mike Freeman/
Title:
Street Design Standards
Synopsis:
The purpose of the proposed street design standards is to regulate the development of new
streets, and reconstruction of existing streets or portions thereof. These standards will apply to
new streets associated with development approvals, as well as establishing standards for the
improvement of existing streets through the local improvement district (LID) process. The street
design standards have been developed to implement the goals and policies of the Transportation
Element of the Comprehensive Plan according to Chapter 18.108, Procedures, and to be in
accordance with the Transportation Planning Rule (Oregon Administrative Rule, Division 12,
Transportation Planning).
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Street Design Standards with several
changes to the City Council at the October 13, 1998. The attached document does not reflect the
recommendations of the Commission at this time. The suggested changes are as follows:
• pp. 19, 24 and 25 - For Neighborhood Collector, Residential increase the curb-to-
curb pavement width from 20' to 22'.
• , pp. 19, 31 and 32 - For Neighborhood Street, Residential eliminate the No Parking
option. .
• pp. 19,31 and 33 - For Neighborhood Street, Residential increase the curb-to-curb
pavement width from 21' to 22'.
• . p. 40 - For 3. .Handrails for Pedestrians and 4. Steps for Pedestrians define steep
with percentage slope.
• . p. 40 - Add a standard requiring sidewalks to be scored when the slope is steep (to be
defined.)
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Street Design Standards with the changes proposed by the
Planning Commission.
Background:
The street design standards have been developed to implement the goals and policies of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan according to Chapter 18.108, Procedures.
Specifically, 18.108.170 says:
"It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use
Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the
comprehensive plan..."
In December 1996, an updated Transportation Element was approved and adopted by the City
Council. Many of the goals and policies of the Transportation Element address street design
(Street System Policies 2,3,5,6 on page 33, Pedestrian and Bicycle Goal 1 and Policies
2,6,7,9,10,11,12,13 on page 50). The following policy from The Street System section is one
example.
"Design streets as critical public spaces where creating a comfortable and attractive
place that encourages people to walk, bicycle and socialize is balanced with building an
efficient corridor. Design streets with equal attention to all right-of-way users and to
promote livability of neighborhoods." Policy 3, page 33
The update of the Transportation Element, along with a package of comprehensive transportation
planning efforts, is required by a relatively new(1991) state Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR)
known as the "Transportation Planning Rule." This OAR outlines how Statewide Planning Goal
12: Transportation is to be implemented. Specifically, local jurisdictions are required to prepare
local street standards as described in the following excerpt.
�I
"Local governments shall establish standards for local streets and accessways that ,
minimize pavement width and total right-of-way consistent with the operational needs of
the facility. The intent of this requirement is that local governments consider and reduce
excessive standards for local streets and accessways in order to reduce the cost of
construction, provide for more efficient use of urban land, provide for emergency vehicle
access while discouraging inappropriate traffic volumes and speeds, and which
accommodate convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation." OAR 660-1-45 (7)
Council Communication/Street Design Standards
10.20.98
Page 2.
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
October 13, 1998
PLANNING ACTION: 98-109
APPLICANT: City of Ashland
LOCATION: citywide
ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.80 Subdivisions
18.88 Performance Standards
Options
REQUEST: A request for an amendment to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to establish a set
of layout and design standards for streets.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
The purpose of the proposed street standards is to implement the goals and
policies of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan according to
Chapter 18.108, Procedures. Specifically, 18.108.170 says:
"It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use
Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with
the comprehensive plan..."
In December 1996, an updated Transportation Element was approved and adopted
by the City Council. This update, along with a package of comprehensive
transportation planning efforts, is required by a relatively new(1991) state
Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) known as the "Transportation Planning
Rule." This OAR outlines how Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation) is to
be implemented.
In.addition to giving local jurisdictions guidance on implementing Statewide
Planning Goal 12, the Transportation Planning Rule sets requirements for
coordination among levels of government and the preparation of transportation
system plans. In general, the overall purpose is summarized as follows:
"Through measures designed to reduce reliance on the automobile, the
rule is also intended to assure.that the planned transportation system
supports a pattern of travel and land use in urban areas which will avoid
the air pollution, traffic and livability problems faced by other areas of the
country" (OAR 660-012-0000).
Many of the policies of the Transportation Element require the City to update the
street standards to facilitate all modes of travel, and to use traditional street design
for the planning and design of new and reconstructed streets (Street System
Policies 2,3,5,6 on page 33, Pedestrian and Bicycle Goal 1 and Policies
2,6,7,9,10,11,12,13 on page 50). Subsequently, Staff updated the street design
standards as part of the Transportation System Plan and Local Street Plan
projects.
A Planning Commission Study Session was held on August 25, 1998 to review
the draft street standards.
2) Description of Proposal:
Any change to the text of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is a legislative
amendment. As such, the Planning Commission is charged with reviewing the
draft street standards for conformance with the goals and policies of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, holding a public hearing and
recommending approval, disapproval, or modification of the proposed amendment
to the City Council.
The draft street standards have for the most part not changed in content since the
Planning Commission reviewed the document at the August 25, 1998 Study
Session. Language has been added in response to comments from the Study
Session and to address issues brought up by Public Works, Fire and Planning
Staf£,'Tholddditions that'fiaye been added sirice}the,'August"1998-Pldhning
Corimisston Study Session"are shaded:
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
Staff recommends forwarding the street standards to the City Council with a .
recommendation for approval.
PA98-109/Street Standards Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
City of.Ashland.
. . October 13, 1998 .
Page 2 .
ATTN: JODY - classified
PUBLISH IN LEGAL ADVERTISING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing on the following items with respect
to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance will be held before the Ashland City Council on
October 20, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. at Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street,
Ashland, Oregon. At such Public Hearing, any person is entitled to be heard, unless
the public hearing portion of the review has been closed during a previous meeting.
Request for adoption of the Transportation System Plan and Street Standards.
Applicant: City of Ashland
Copies of this ordinance have been furnished to members of the city council seven
days prior to the council meeting, and three copies are on file in the office of the city
recorder for public inspection during business hours.
Barbara Christensen
City Recorder
PUBLISH: Daily Tidings
10/10/98
Purchase order: 30223
Fig: ED
F
regon Transportation & Growth Management Program
� 1175 Court Street NE
Salem,OR 97310-0590
John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.,Governor (503)373-0066
FAX (503)378-2687
A Joint Program
of the
October 05, 1998 0 C T _ 8 Department of
1998 Transportation
and the
Mana Harris, Associate Planner
Department of
City of Ashland Planning Department Land Conservation
20 East Main Street and
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Development
Re: DLCD File #003-98, Local Street Standards.
Dear Ms. Harris:
Thank you for both the notice on your intent to amend you Land Use Ordinance to revise your
street design standards and the opportunity to review the City of Ashland's draft local street
standards. We are encouraged by the contents of the draft document. The draft clearly reflects
the City's diligent efforts to comply with the applicable street and right-of-way related
requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule.
The City of Ashland is making substantial progress toward the development of an efficient and
effective transportation system that provides for both the movement of automobile traffic and
alternative transportation modes. Your efforts to place transportation systems for public
transportation, pedestrian and bicycle travel at the same level of importance and development
priority with other forms of travel are laudable.
Thank you again for the opportunity to review your draft local street standards. Please accept our
congratulations on a job well done.
TRicams; AICP
Transportation and Land Use Planner
Form 739-2368(10-97) -
Street Design Standards ' '�` , ` ��'�
City of Ashland
kk
�e
(k N
F �
a
r
Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.
Section I: Basic Principles of Traditional Street Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Required Street Layout and Design Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Section II: Connectivity Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Street Connectivity Approval Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Section III: Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Elements of the Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Application of Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Table 1: City of Ashland Street Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Street Design Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Boulevard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 '
Avenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Neighborhood Collector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Neighborhood Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Alley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Multi-use Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Section IV: Street Corner Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Curb Return Radius Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . : . . . . 38
Section V: Hillside Streets . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Hillside Street Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Section VI: Driveway Apron and Curb Cut Spacing . . . . . . - 41
Driveway Apron and Curb Cut Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
INTRODUCTION
Ashland's streets are some of the most important public spaces in the community. This
handbook outlines the art and science of developing healthy, livable streets. It is intended to
illustrate current standards for planning and designing the streets of Ashland. The standards are
to be used in the development of new streets, and reconstruction of existing streets or portions
thereof(i.e. improving a paved local street by adding sidewalks).
The handbook contains standards for street connectivity and design as well as cross sections for a
series of street types. Each cross section provides a model for building streets the traditional
way. As the term handbook suggests, it is intended as a guide and resource for use by home
builders, developers and community members in the pursuit of quality development practices.
A series of street types is offered including the multi-use path, alley, neighborhood street,
commercial neighborhood street, neighborhood collector, commercial neighborhood collector,
avenue and boulevard. Variations can be made from these basic types to fit the particular site
and situation. However, the measurements of each street component must be used to create and
maintain the desired low-speed environment where people feel comfortable and the maximum
number of people walk, bicycle and use transit.
All streets in Ashland shall be designed using the following assumptions.
• All designs encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel.
• Neighborhood streets (Neighborhood Collectors and Neighborhood Streets) are
designed for 20 mile-per-hour (mph).
• All streets are paved.
• All streets have standard vertical, non-mountable curbs.
7 Gutter widths are included as part of the curb-to-curb street width.
• Most avenues and boulevards should have bicycle lanes.
• Parkrow and sidewalk widths do not include the curb.
• Sidewalks are shaded by trees for pedestrian comfort.
• All streets have parkrows and sidewalks on both sides. Exceptions may be allowed
when physical conditions-preclude the,iristaliatroil of a sidewalk S ch i onditiors
may include topography or the existence of natural resource areas such as wetlands,
ponds, streams, etc.
7 �� All parkrows and medians are landscaped. lvi�1
' Garages are set back from the sidewalk so vehicles are clear of sidewalks.
• Building set backs and heights create a sense of enclosure.
The street connectivity and design standards are part of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance and are
approval standards that will be used to guide land use decisions and street construction projects.
While much of this handbook is a "user-friendly" version of what is in the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance, the.entire document is a supporting document to the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 1
Section I outlines the basic traditional street design principles for planning and designing new
and reconstructed streets. Section II specifies the street connectivity standards which must be
used in laying out and locating new streets. Section III contains cross sections and describes the
design requirements for new and reconstructed streets. Section IV specifies curb return radius
standards. Section V outlines additional standards for hillside streets. Finally, Section VI
defines standards for driveway apron and curb cut standards.
BACKGROUND
In December 1996,the City of Ashland adopted an updated Transportation Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. Many of the policies of the Transportation Element require the City use
traditional street design for the planning and design of new and reconstructed streets (Street
System Policies 2,3,5,6 on page 33, Pedestrian and Bicycle Goal 1, Policies 2,6,7,9,10,11,12,13
on page 50). Subsequently, the City of Ashland updated the street design standards, as part of the
Transportation System Plan and Local Street Plan, to reflect traditional street design principles
and implement the goals and policies of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
SECTION I: BASIC PRINCIPLES OF TRADITIONAL STREET DESIGN
Tradittonal•nei6 orhood design is used'as the basis•foi`the City, ofAshland:street layout;design
andiiconnectivity standards Tlus planning and design concept is used because itcreates streets
that:provi& rhiiltiple transportation options, focuses on a safe environment-for all_users;:treats
streets as public spaces,and:enhances the livability of iheneighborhoods.
:Traditional or"neo-traditional" neighborhood design is a planning and design concept that
revisits many of the features of urban neighborhoods developed prior to World War 1I.
Neighborhoods were designed to be easily used by pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders.
Several areas including the Railroad District, the Downtown, the Briscoe School neighborhood
and the Gresham-Sherman Street neighborhood are examples of traditional neighborhood design.
The single most'distiinguishing feature'of traditional,neighborhood design is the,continuous fabric
of.intunately:blended;land<uses,sarxariged 'so that4travel between stltem-canibe,made;by..walkin .,
bicycling,transit in addition to the privately-operated auto. Streets are small, and connected into
grid networks which provide multiple available,routes for a given trip.
The following definition of a traditional neighborhood is based on the work of Elizabeth Plater-
Zyberk, Andres Duany and Randall Arendt. Although streets are just one element of
neighborhoods, the description of a traditional neighborhood is given for the purpose of placing .
traditional street design in the proper context.
• The traditional neighborhood has a center and an edge. Development is
compact in the center and density decreases as one moves towards the edge.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 2 Ashland Local Street Plan
• The center includes a public space, such as a square, a green, or an important
street intersection. The center is the focus of the neighborhood's public
buildings.
• It is compact, usually one-quarter of a mile from the center to the edge.
• It gives priority to public space. Streets are designed to be part of the public
realm. Civic buildings are located in prominent locations. Open space is
provided in the form of squares, parks and plazas.
• Neighborhood architecture is of human scale and proportions. Buildings are
close to the street.
• It includes a mix of activities such as residences, shops, schools, workplaces and
parks. Commercial activities meet everyday needs such as grocery, newsagent,
drugstore, hardware, etc.
• The area is walkable and pedestrian friendly, but also auto-accessible. Routine
activities such as schools, shops and playgrounds are within walking distance.
• Th a �iieety f housing types - single-family homes, town homes,
apartments, etc.
• It consists of interconnected network of small streets and blocks, generally laid
out in a grid or modified grid pattern. Block lengths are under 600 feet. Streets
have sidewalks and large parkrows with street trees.
• Streets are scaled for typical uses rather than being oversized to accommodate
worst-case scenarios.
• There are opportunities for casual socializing at gathering places such as cafes,
neighborhood parks, soda fountains and taverns. These gathering places provide
people locations.other.than one's home or workplace where informal public life.
may be experienced.
Narrower streets are one of the primary characteristics of traditional neighborhood design.
Narrower streets have several benefits. Currently, it is not uncommon for 25 percent or more of
A.proposed development's land area to beset aside for required rights-of--way. Using narrower .
streets can reduce this:percentage and free up the land for open space,or more intense
development. Narrower streets reduce street development costs. Narrower,streets have been
found to slow down traffic and reduce accident potential. Narrower street also have a more
intimate feel, and contribute to neighborhood livability.
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 3'
Traditional neighborhood design streets and networks achieve a balance between the different
modes of transportation that is lacking in conventional suburban development. Furthermore, the
street is treated as a public space and is considered a key element of the neighborhood. The
following list of"pros" of traditional neighborhood design streets is based on the work of Walter
Kulash, P.E., a nationally recognized traffic engineer specializing in livable traffic design and
traffic calming.
• A network of small interconnected streets has more traffic capacity than the same
street area arranged in,al sparse hierarchy of large streets. According to Kulash,
this is because intersections control the capacity of any network, and there are
more intersections to disperse the turning movements.
• In the traditional neighborhood street network, the traveler can choose from many
routes available on the basis of what`they see out on the street. People can take
altemative routesin the full confidence thatth'emetwork is complete. The
multiplicity ofroutes avaflable alsolets ti e.wN "alker/cyclist match.the route to their
particular skrlls:°For example, expert cyclists cari choose.to take-therr place,in
traffic'as a fully-vested vehicle;while low-skill cyclists can travel on small;
possibly.more crrcurtousroutes
• The geometry,of a:dense n etwork of small streets provides-shorter travel-distance
between'any two;pomts Overall;`even though trio,lengths are shorter, travel time
is-comparable to'c`onvegtional suburban development. This is because travel
speeds;are loweHii traditional neighborhood's: Shorter trip lengths'encourage
walking,and bicycling 'jn' traditional-,neigh borhoods a dense network of.small
stfeets:is,combined with;a mix,ofland uses places a large number of_ orivins'an
destinations wtttiin walking or bicyclingcdistance:
• Motor vehicle travel speeds are lower on.traditional neighborhood streets which
directly affects overal :safety, the non-automotive traveling environment and the
livabilityof neighborhoods. movements ,,See Section Designing for 20 mph in
Section'IIL' Design Standards. I The conventional suburban development
automobile trip;made mainly on artenal,streets is typif ed bys a pattem of high
speeds for short segments;of road, inferspersed with long traffic signal delays. In
contrast;the traditional neighborhood automobile trip with its greater use of
collector and local streets,,is characterized by,..low maximum-speed, morefrequent
short delays at intersections and a greater number of turning
The overall trip quality for people using 91-of the:different modes of
transportation is superior_in a:traditional neighborhood street network. What we
have long felt intuitively, but are only starting to appreciate,is that our perception
of travel is not one-dimensional at all, but rather considers a host of factors along
with the"hard" measures of time.and speed. There is a degree of goodness or .
badness felt by the traveler, and though difficult to quantify, we know it directly
affects how people travel and human behavior while traveling.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 4 . Ashland Local Street Plan
• A series of small streets yields a better bicycle and pedestrian environment than a
hierarchy of a few larger streets. Specific problems with larger arterials are large-
radius corners; shallow-angle crossing as ramps and turn-lanes, monstrous
pavement expanses to be crossed, dual left turn-lanes, long traffic signals, short
walk signals and generally competitive and aggressive driving. Kulash describes
the general feeling walkers and bicyclists experience on high-speed, large arterials
as "being in an alien moonscape."
The,traditionaLneighborhood provides a depth;oftexture and richness of detail
along the streefthatis interesting to one traveling at the pedestrian speed.
It is important to note that traditional neighborhood design, as used in current times and in this
handbook, does not exclude or prohibit automobiles. Rather, it accommodates driving just as it
provides for other forms of transportation. The purpose of the street design standards in this
handbook is to create streets which afford people the equal opportunity to walk, bicycle, use the
bus or drive. Traditional neighborhood design is used because this approach creates streets
which are able to obtain the balance between providing transportation options and maintaining
livability in adjacent streets and neighborhoods.
Reauired Street Lavout
The following basic principles will be used by the
Street Required Layout Planning Commission for the planning and designing
' Design Principles of new streets.
1. Neighborhood Form and Character
Streets are important elements of the form and character of neighborhoods. Street
layout and design are an integral part of neighborhood design.
2. Neighborhood Identity
Neighborhood identity is largely influenced by the streets in the area.
3. Emergency Vehicles
Streets should be designed to efficiently and safely accommodate emergency fire
and medical services vehicles: The effects of decisions concerning turning'radii_
and paths must be made with a full understanding of the implications of such
decisions on the other users of the street.
4. Specificity
Each street should be designed individually and molded to the particular situation
at hand by a multi-disciplinary team. Planners, engineers, architects, emergency
responders, utility providers, landscape architects as well as the developer and
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 5'
neighborhood or homeowners association groups should be included in street
design teams.
The following conditions (existing and projected) must be considered in order to
design each street.
• the volume of pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle traffic each day and at peak
hours;
• the speeds of motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians along the street as
designed or redesigned;
• the mix of pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle traffic (including percentage of
large trucks);
• the zoning and surrounding future land uses (assess pedestrian, bicycle and
transit generators and Attractors such.as schools, shopping.areas,:community
buildings,parks;churches..and,gathering,places';
• the natural features of the area such as slope, mature trees, creeks, wetlands,
etc.;
• the adjacent building setbacks with respect to the street;
• whether adjacent properties will be serviced directly from the street, or from
alleys; and
• the function of the street and relation to the surrounding street network.
5. Shared Street Space
On neighborhood streets with relatively low average daily traffic (ADT), the curb
to curb area on neighborhood streets shall be used as a shared space by moving
automobiles, parked cars and bicycles.
Discussion: A principle central to the design and sizing of neighborhood level
streets in traditional street design is the use of shared street space where ADT is
relatively low. Rather than having separate lanes of traffic or parking, the curb-to-
curb area is narrow and drivers may be required to slow down or pull over to let an
oncoming vehicle pass before proceeding. On neighborhood streets serving 25
dwelling units or less, research has shown that the chances of meeting another car
where two cars are parked opposite each other will occur only about once a month
for an average driver.
6. Human Scale
Streets should be designed at the human scale. Human scale.is the relationship
between-the dimensions.of the human body and the proportion of the spaces which
people use: Those areas that provide visually interesting details,create
opportunities for interactions and,feel comfortable to pedestrians moving at slow
travel speed are designed at a•"human scale."
Discussion: The scale of a street design is of paramount importance. The design
scale of a traditional street is that of the pedestrian, sometimes referred to as
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 6 Ashland Local Street Plan
"human scale." Describing what is of a"human scale" is perhaps best described
by noting that which is not. A highway billboard beside a 55mph highway is a
good example of vehicular scale. In order to be noticed, the sign must be very
large with lettering large enough to be noticed and read by a motorist passing by at
81 feet per second (55mph). In contrast, a pedestrian typically walks at 3.5 to 4
feet per second. Moving at a much slower pace enables pedestrians to take in
much smaller signs and lettering.
8. Streetscape
Street design should consider the entire area from building face to building face, or
the "streetscape." The streetscape begins at the front of a vertical element, such as
a building or fence on one side of a street and runs to the front of a building on the
other side of the street. It is a three dimensional area running the length of the
street.
Discussion: The level of integration of land use and transportation is readily
apparent by viewing the streetscape. The designer must consider the scale of the
buildings, the form of development expected to occur and the expected level of
motor vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle volumes when designing or redesigning a
particular street. In addition, the function and ambience of the street must be
considered and the needs of vehicular and nonvehicular users addressed.
9. Connectivity
Streets should be interconnected. See Section IP Connectivity Standards.
Discussion: Traditional neighborhood streets are interconnected.
Cul-de-sacs and other dead-end streets are not typical of traditional neighborhood
design except in areas where topographic, wetland and other physical features
preclude connection. Where extreme conditions preclude a street connection, a
continuous nonautomotive connection in the form of a multi-use-path ortrail shall
be provided.
10. .Multiple Routes
Streets shall be laid out using a grid or modified grid network pattern to provide
multiple routes. See Section IL Connectivity Standards.
11. Pedestrians, Bicyclists and Public Transportation Users
Pedestrians, bicyclists.and bus riaer_s are considered primary users of all streets.
Streets should be designed to meet the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists,thus
encouraging walking, bicycling and riding the bus as transportation modes.
Pedestrian, bicycle and public transportation considerations should be integrated
from the beginning of the design process.
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 7
12. Driveway Aprons and Curb Cuts
The number of driveway aprons and curb cuts along streets should be minimized to
enhance the pedestrian environment and maintain vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle
capacity. See Section VI for Driveway Apron and Curb Cut Standards.
13. Access to Activity Centers
Neighborhood streets should provide convenient access to and from activity
centers such as schools, commercial areas, parks, employment centers, and other
major attractors.
14. Vista Terminations
Street design should always consider important sites at the end of streets and
should seek to learn what civic buildings, or public spaces may be needed for a
particular area. The focus of vista terminations can be'a,wide variety of things
such as:buildings,plazas;;parks„or a potable view: New subdivision design should
provide consideration for vista termination in street layout.
15. Pavement Area
The pavement area of neighborhood streets should be minimized, consistent with
efforts to reduce street construction and maintenance costs, storm water runoff, and
negative environmental impacts. Narrower streets also distinguish neighborhood
streets from boulevards and avenues, and enhance neighborhood character.
16. Peak Run-Off
Where appropriate, the local street system and its infrastructure should reduce peak
storm water run-off into the City's storm drain system and natural water systems
downstream, and provide biological and mechanical treatment of storm water
runoff whenever possible.
17. Preservation of Natural Features
Neighborhood street design should be responsive to physical features, and should
avoid or minimize impacts to natural features and water-related resources. Street
layout standards should allow street alignments,to follow natural contours and
preserve natural features. See Standard 5 in Section 11: Connectivity Standards.
18. Neighborhood Street Volumes
Neighborhood streets should be designed to carry traffic volumes at low speeds.
They,should function_safely while reducing the need for extensive traffic
regulations, control devices and.enforcement. . .
19. Cut-Through Traffic
The neighborhood street should be designed to reduce continuous cut-through,
non-local traffic on neighborhood streets.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook .
Page 8 . . Ashland Local Street Plan
20. Street Trees
Street trees should be planted on neighborhood streets to create attractive and
healthy neighborhood environments, and to enhance the image of a street as a place
with which residents can identify. Trees planted in the parkrow, along the
sidewalk, or anywhere in the public right-of-way must be from the City of Ashland
"Recommended Street Trees: A Guide to Selection, Planting and Maintenance."
Discussion: Trees and landscaping form an essential element of the traditional
neighborhood streets. The relationship of vertical height to horizontal width of the
street is an important part of creating an inviting public space or"outdoor room."
Large stature trees form an especially important part in creating the outdoor room
when buildings are setback from the street and are relatively low in height (i.e.
single-family residential neighborhoods). For further discussion, see Elements of
the Street in Section II/: Design Standards.
21. Street Lights and Furniture
Light poles should be pedestrian scale and styles of poles should match the
neighborhood. Spacing of light poles should be determined by the adjacent land
uses. Lighting should be placed at frequent intervals in busy retail and commercial
areas, but may be limited to intersections in residential areas. In some instances,
building or fence-mounted lighting may replace the need for additional street
lighting. Lighting elements should provide full-spectrum light so that colors at
night are realistic.
Street furniture includes pedestrian amenities such as benches, flower pots,
sculptures and other public art, low walls for sitting and drinking fountains.
Benches should be provided in retail and commercial areas, along frequently used
pedestrian corridors (routes over one-quarter of a mile to schools, parks, shopping,
etc.) and at all bus stops. Trash receptacles should be provided in all pedestrian
sitting areas.
22. . Curbs
Curbs should be a standard,vertical 6" high curb on all improved streets. Rolled
or mountable curbs should not be used because they do not create an effective
safety barrier, channel storm water, or prevent automobiles.from parking on the
parkrow and sidewalk. The horizontal curb surface is not included in the parkrow,
or sidewalk width.
2.3. Transit Routes and Stops
Streets identified.as future transit routes should be designed.to safety And.
efficiently accommodate transit vehicles, thus encouraging the use of public transit
as a transportation mode. Transit stops should include amenities, such as but not
limited.to a bench,shelter.from the elements, a posted schedule, bicycle parking,
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 9
and water fountains,that encourage combination trips such as walking or bicycling
to the bus stop and vice-versa at the destination.
I
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 10 Ashland Loca/.Street Plan
SECTION II: CONNECTIVITY STANDARDS
In traditional neighborhood areas, the street networks are laid out in a grid network. The grid or
modified grid network provides interconnected streets and multiple travel route options for
pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers. The grid network has several benefits. Grid-patterned streets
provide many connections and route options for short trips. Many connections and route options
disperses traffic and increases safety. The grid pattern uses land efficiently and allows a greater
number of lots on a site. Cul-de-sacs and other dead-end streets are not typical of traditional
neighborhood design except in areas where extreme topographic or wetland conditions preclude
connection.
New and reconstructed streets shall conform to the
Street Connectivity following connectivity standards, and the City of
Approval • ' • Ashland Street Dedication Map.
1. Interconnection
A. Streets shall be interconnected to reduce travel distance, promote the use of
alternative modes, provide for efficient provision of utilities and emergency
services and provide multiple travel routes.
2. Efficient Land Use
A. Street layout shall permit and encourage efficient lot layout and attainment of
planned densities.
3. Integration With Major Streets
A. Neighborhood circulation systems and land development patterns shall
effectively integrate with boulevards and avenues, which are designed to
accommodate heavier traffic volumes.
4. Alleys
A. The use of the alley is recommended, where possible. The alley can contribute
positively to the form of the street and has many advantages. First, it allows the
most positive streetscape because it eliminates the need for driveways and the
visual intrusion of garages. Secondly, the alley can create a positive
neighborhood space where the sidewalk feels more safe and inviting for
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 11
pedestrians, neighbors socializing and children playing. Third, when the garage
is located in rear yards off the alley, interesting opportunities arise for creating
inviting exterior rooms using the garage as a privacy wall and divider of space.
Finally, the alley enhances the grid street network and provides midblock
connections for nonmotorists.
5. Preserving Natural Features
A. Streets shall be located in a manner which preserves natural features to the
greatest extent feasible.
I. Whenever possible, street alignments shall follow natural contours and
features so that visual and physical access to the natural feature is possible.
2. Streets shall be situated between natural features, such as creeks, mature
trees, drainages, open spaces and individual parcels in order to
appropriately incorporate such significant neighborhood features.
6. Walkable Neighborhoods
A. Neighborhoods shall be sized in walkable increments, with block lengths as
defined in Standard 11. 9. Block Length and an approximate one-quarter mile
walking route from the neighborhood center.
7. Off-Street Connections
A. Off-street pathways shall be connected to the street network and used to provide
pedestrian and bicycle access in situations where a street is not feasible. In
cases where a street is feasible, off-street pathways shall not be permitted in lieu
of a traditional streets with sidewalks. However, off-street pathways are
permitted in addition to traditional streets with sidewalks in any situation.
8. Block Length
A. The layout of streets shall not create excessive,travel lengths. Block lengths
shall be a maximum of 300 to 400 feet and block perimeters shall be a
maximum of 1,200 to 1,600 feet.
Block length is defined as the distance along a street between the centerline of
two intersecting through streets. Block perimeter is defined as the sum of the
block lengths of all sides of a block.
B. An exception to the block length standard may be permitted when one or more
of the following conditions exist.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 12 Ashland Local Street Plan
I. Physical conditions that preclude development of a public street. Such
conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography or the existence
of natural resource areas such as wetlands, ponds, streams, channels,
rivers, lakes or upland wildlife habitat area, or a resource under protection
by State or Federal law.
2. Buildings or other existing development on adjacent lands, including
previously subdivided but vacant lots or parcels, which physically preclude
a connection now or in the future considering the potential for
redevelopment.
3. Where an existing public street or streets terminating at the boundary of
the development site have a block length exceeding 600 feet, or are
situated such that the extension of the street(s) into the development site
would create a block length exceeding 600 feet. In such cases, the block
length shall be as close to 600 feet as practical.
C. When block lengths exceed 400 feet, the following measures shall be used to
provide many connections and route options for short trips.
1. Where extreme conditions preclude street connections, continuous
nonautomotive connection shall be provided. In no cases shall off-street
pathways be used in lieu of a traditional street with sidewalks in cases
where extreme conditions do not exist.
2. Introduce a pocket park, or plaza area with the street diverted around it.
3. At the mid-block point, create a short median with trees or use other traffic
calming devices to slow traffic, break up street lengths and provide
pedestrian refuge.
SECTION _III: DESIGN STANDARDS
Safety
In any design situation, no topic is more important than human safety. Street design situations
require the consideration of many, sometimes competing elements to make the street safe for all
modes of travel. In street design, the standards that should be applied and questions that should
be asked include the following.
• What actions may reasonably be expected of motorists and nonmotorists along the
street?
• Given a foreseeable but infrequent problem, what are the ramifications on other users of .
the street if the problem is specially addressed in the design?
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8; 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 13
• When balancing conflicting matters, the frequency of conflict between the two or more
competing elements and the resulting frequency of difficulties that will be experienced
should be documented.
• What are the physical consequences of a particular design element or decision?
• If in doubt, favor the nonmotorist and accommodate the motorist.
Designing for 2Omph
High-speed roads have a place between cities, but not through the heart of the community.
Relatively low actual travel speeds, a maximum of 20 mph, for motor vehicles is a critical
concept in traditional street design. Low motor vehicle travel speeds are important because they
affect safety, the non-automotive travel,environment and the livability of neighborhood.
As motor vehicle speed increases, the perception and
comfort of pedestrians and bicyclists is negatively impacted
f {y}� OYt144 mph and the number of motor vehicle/pedestrian accidents
lOL[FananJ��mrog tft]I717tl17AA increases. In general, streets with motor vehicles traveling
at high speeds are unwelcoming to pedestrians and
dAAAAAAA 30 bicyclists because the impact of motor vehicles kinetic
�xdaJs A AA p energy and loud sound.
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZA 4p Neighborhood streets (neighborhood streets, neighborhood
collectors and some avenues) should be designed for motor
vehicle travel speeds of 20 mph or less. When a question
exists concerning a particular design detail, the conflict
Chances of a Pedestrian should be resolved in favor of the nonvehicular users,
5urviving a Traffic Accident unless the public safety will truly be jeopardized by the
decision. Favoring the nonmotorist will usually result in
the correct decision because motorists have the benefit of traveling in a device designed to
enclose, protect and support the human(s) inside. An inconvenienced motor vehicle will seldom
result in a modal shift, but an inconvenienced nonmotorist will often become a motorist resulting
in a modal shift.
A survey by the Federal Highway Administration found that by"a wide.margin, residents find ,
traffic moving at 20 mph through their neighborhoods acceptable; by an equally side margin they
find traffic at 30 mph unacceptable. At 20 mph; drivers can anticipate conflicts and have time to
stop_for"pedestrian at crosswalks. Pedestrian-vehicle accidents are less frequent and, when they
occur, much-less severe.
Tradiitonal neighborhood streets are designed to;c date an environment where drivers will realize
that driving fast and aggressively is inappropriate. In other words,neighborhood streets are
designed so the speed limits are self-enforcing.-Narrow streets with parkrows and street trees and
on-street parking calm traffic. "In some cases, further traffic calming treatments such as curb
extensions at sidewalks,textured, raised crosswalks, medians, and"a host of other tools, are .
needed.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page-14 Ashland Local Street Plan
Research has shown operating speeds decline somewhat as individual lanes and street sections
are narrowed. Conversely, studies by the Institute of Transportation Engineers has shown posted
speed limits are regularly exceeded if streets have "gun barrel" designs, or even gentle curves
with wide cross-sections. Speed zones; "go slow" signs and lane restriping cannot compensate
for the effect on drivers of the physical environment of streets designed to make driving
comfortable at travel speeds above 20 mph.
Elements of the Street
Street design involves the creation of some of the most important and frequently used public
spaces. In addition to the very important function of providing a travel corridor, streets provide
critical public spaces which shape the character of Ashland's neighborhoods. Because streets
serve a variety of users, street design must address the divergent needs of pedestrians, bicyclists,
transit, motor vehicles, adjacent land uses and neighborhood character.
There are, generally speaking, a dozen or so elements that make up a street. However, the design
and assembly of those elements and the determination of the sizes and locations are individual to
each street and of lasting importance.
Street, public right-of-way and street right-of-way are used interchangeably throughout this
document. The term street refers to more than the paved, curb-to-curb roadway surface. It
includes the sidewalk, parkrow, street trees, lighting and street furniture, bike lanes, on-street
parking lanes and motor vehicle travel lanes. Right-of-way measurements include the area
needed to locate all of the street ingredients. A description of the elements that comprise a street
follows.
Motor Vehicle Travel Lanes
The width of a particular street seems to be a simple topic, but this is actually a complicated
subject that requires considerable thought and attention. Auto-oriented development focuses on
motor vehicles traveling safely and efficiently. This translates into designing streets so that
motor vehicles are interrupted as little as possible so that continuous speeds can be maintained.
To design for the continuous opportunities for free-flowing vehicles creates situations where
passenger cars, the predominant vehicle most of the time, will travel at speeds greater than are
desirable for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Streets in Ashland must be designed to a different end so that the overall function, comfort,
safety and aesthetics of a street are designed for all users and are more important than vehicular
efficiency.
Travel,lanes of 8 to 10 feet in width are.adequate for all types of vehicles that enter a
neighborhood. An average car ranges from 5.5 to 6.5"feet in width. Fire trucks, large buses,
RV's and semi-trucks measure 9.feet from mirror to mirror.
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 15
Curbs
Typically, standard vertical curbs are used on all traditional neighborhood streets. The standard
vertical curb serves a number of purposes. Curbs:
• act as a safety barrier for pedestrians;
• channel storm water into the storm drainage system;
• prevent automobiles from parking in parkrows or on sidewalks;
• keep the edges of the pavement from breaking down; and
• facilitate street sweeping.
Bicycles
A separate, striped bicycle lane is required on boulevards and avenues because travel speeds and
volumes are high. Typically, the travel speeds and motor vehicle traffic volumes associated with
neighborhood streets do not necessitate a separate, striped bicycle lane. The Oregon Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan recommends bike lanes when projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) exceeds
3,000 trips per day, and/or actual travel speeds exceed 25mph.
Parking
Most neighborhood level streets allow on-street parking. Parallel parking is the recommended
method for on-street parking, but other on-street parking methods, including diagonal and head-
in, maybe appropriate under certain circumstances. Diagonal and head-in parking must be
carefully evaluated before implementing because it requires and additional 11 feet of street
width.
Parkrow a_nd Street Trees _ v
Parkrows,,with'streettrees area basic destgh feature,bf traditional rieighborhoodg. Street trees are
tl*ltreesyplanted m the;pkrow, or= nywheie else in thepu lic ng4t,qf way ,Thparkrow rs the
aa baz
plantinge etweeq the curb
and sidewalk.`
Nothing humanizes.a street more.,than-a,row of trees shading the'sidewalk.. Street trees.provide a
buffer to.pedestrians and adjacent'land,uses from:the,yehicles on the,street :Street trees.help
calm motor vehicle traffic speeds: Street trees can enhance street,image and are amimportant
pazt.of ribighborhood 'character.;Large trees provide+Ieafyacanopies and welcome shade;buffer
. .__.
pedestrians, screen parked c'a'rs and'traffic,.break visual continutty;'soften the chazacter of ttie
street and enhance property values:. Economic benefits are reflected in the increased values of
properties on streets,with well-established trees
Trees are perhaps one of the very few elements of a street, along with well-designed buildings,
that can be large and yet still effectively be of human scale. In addition to their.naturalization-f
the street, trees can serve to create a.frame around a street and are recognized as being very
conducive to enhancing the nonmotorist environment. Inmost situations, street trees should line
the street and be located in the parkrow.
Large-scale; high canopy trees are preferred over smaller-scale trees for street tree use, whenever
they can be used. Among the reasons for this are:
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 16. Ashland Local Street Plan
• Use of larger trees with high canopies allows fewer trees to be used to achieve a
reasonable amount of shading.
• Large trees provide a canopy over the paved are of the street reducing the air
temperature near the ground. Depending on the species of tree planted, research has
shown that the temperature difference can range�between 5 to 8 degrees Fahrenheit.
• Large-scale trees are more effective in removing,pollutants form the air because they
provide more leaf surface.per tree thansmall trees. A single, large, free-standing tree
with a height of 75feet and a crown width.of 45feet will absorb the carbon dioxide
output of 800 homes in.a year's time.
• When large trees with high canopies are plantedalong streets serving.commercial
uses, conflicts with store signs are minimized because he tree canopy is above the
sign.
Large-scale,trees require an adequate planting area For this4eason,parkrows must be at least 6
feet,wrde., Smaller park'rows maybe penmtted to respondrito�the cha acfenstics of individual
developments`.or street reconstriiction projects suchas irisaffictent public nght of`way, steep
slopes or„othei.physical conditions However,the street trees must be planted properly and
- -�w w
carefully chosen to ensure'healthy.'growthand root controls uThe plaeenient,types of trees and
plftant ng methods are'addressed mithexStreet Tree Standardsf the Site:Des:gn and Use Po
Standards.of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance;
Trees.require maintenance and funding to support watenngprurung, disease,pest control and
other items of standard tree care They can cause varying amounts of leaf litter , The
marritenaztce rand care of•the parkow and street+treesais;the responsibility ofthepropertyo�wrier
abuttingtithe;parkrow�(AshldndMunrcip,"al Code 9 085130) the placement, types;oftrees arid
planting methods are addressed in the Street Tre_e_S_ tandardsof the Site Design and Use
Standards
,of,the Ashland Land.Use Ordinance:
Sidewalks and Crosswalks
An,mterlinked:network of sidewalks is a_basic design feaitt�e of traditionalkneighborhoods.,
Side' alks;must be continuous. The walkit g experience mtisYbe pleasurabldif-people are to
choose walking as a mode of transportation. Continuity, texture and richness of detail is
essential,to absorbing the pedestrians attention for large amounts of time at a slow speed.,
Interesting'-pavement architectural details,iplacement of stet re tiees;ahe width,,of theipar, ow;
the treatment of building facades, and other visual details enhance the walking experience. In
contrast;'this continuity can be destroyed by treeless expanses of sidewalks, open edged-parking
lots and blank walls.
In addition to sidewalks, pedestrian networks,can be formed with walkway connections to
existing development and across wetlands and.slopes that may not be crossed by streets without
. difficulty. In the center of neighborhoods, pedestrian networks may also be formed by additional
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998 .
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 17
Effect of Corner Turning Radii on Curb Extensions Reduce Crossing Distance
Fecicotriarl Crossing Piotaricco
Sidewalk with nature strip
Centerline of crosswalk
5 ft w1&3ih.nk
XV1,i A"ER
26 ft w,&
g Percent
Radius IncFea—s-ed— Fe
Distance Crossing Increase
FIV�71 C1�111111i-
25 ......
+3V 150%
walks between buildings, but not at the expense of maintaining the continuity of the pedestrian
network adjacent to the streets.
The treatment of intersections is especially important in determining if street crossings are
convenient for pedestrians. The continuity of the sidewalks should continue across the street and
be defined by a change of texture in the street. A pavement change indicates tat at this point
drivers must yield the road to pedestrians. Handicap access ramps should be located behind the
comer and at the narrowest part of the street.
Pedestridris must-be-pr6vide&with the shortest bossible roir[6 across 'street intersections 'This is
accomplished by,using,small curb radii and curb extensions. AS corner radius increases,the
ped'e"S-t*'n*'an*'crossing-,di§taiiee;,i'n'cr'edses.'-Sight triangles should-,bc*ee-of sireef,trees so)that
pedestiiails. rs','can`see each 6then]',
1—1—— and 1. drive.
Application of Standards
On streets classified as boulevards and avenues, which have high volumes, higher travel speeds
and a larger percentage of large vehicles, the street function and average daily traffic (ADT) will
necessitate adherence to the street standards outlined below. At the neighborhood collector and
neighborhood street level, design must follow the standards, but be.flexible enough to
accommodate varying situations.
One of the basic aspects of traditional street design is that the design must be very specific for the
particular street at hand. When determining how to classify a new street for the purpose of
design, careful attention should be given iven I to considering the street as a whole in the context of the
neighborhood, of the underlying zoning,and land uses, and the future amount of traffic, rather
than strict adherence to using projected average daily traffic (ADT.) figures alone... Care must be
taken not to focus on effr6ency and worst case scenarios. The end goal should be to balance
creating a notable, livable, functional street for the neighborhood, and providing a variety of
transportation options for residents.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 18 Ashland Local Street Plan
(
° 03 .\ ) \ ) \ ) °
) § ; « , T !
& § � ! ; ` § § \ \ \ ', , I
k \ B # ! 2
-
/ ( § k ( |
� $ ) § fi ) � '
/ ( \
■ , ) I a
!
° \ § | Im
2 {
! a ( ) ® ! ) ■ ¥ , � - B5 - ° .
! $ § �
§ § _ z z . .
| ■
j \ E $ § : .
5 ! -
; f {
Z5
/ . / / / \ |
§ \ | ) ) / ! \ kk ) ) z
aa z
Draft Street Standards Handbook . . . October s,s.
alandlocal Street Plan Pagw, �
Street Design Standards
A description of street design standards for each street classification follows. For an abbreviated
presentation of the street right-of-way standards, see Table 1. All elements listed are required
unless specifically noted:
Approval Standards: New and reconstructed streets shall conform to the following design
standards.
Boulevard
Boulevards are major thoroughfares filled with both human and vehicular activity. Design
should provide an environment where walking, bicycling, using transit and driving are equally
convenient and should facilitate the boulevard's use as a public space. Design should start with
the assumption that the busy nature of a boulevard is a positive factor and incorporate it to
enhance the street scape and setting. A 2-lane, 3-lane, or 5-lane configuration can be used
depending on the number of trips generated by surrounding existing and future land uses.
Street Function: Provide access to major urban activity centers and provide
connections to regional traffic ways such as Interstate 5. Traffic
without a destination in Ashland should be encouraged to use
regional traffic ways and discouraged from using boulevards.
Connectivity: Connects neighborhoods to urban activity centers and to regional traffic
ways such as Interstate 5.
Average Daily
Traffic: 8,000 - 30,000 motor vehicle trips per day
Managed Speed: 25 mph - 35 mph
Right-of-Way
Width: • 59' - 71' for 2-Lane
• 71' - 83' for'3-Lane
• 93' - 105' for 5-Lane
Curb-to-Curb
Width: • 34' for 2-Lane
• 46' for 3-Lane .
• 68' for 5-Lane.
Motor Vehicle
Travel Lanes: Two 11' travel lanes for 2-Lane
• Two 11'travel lanes, one 12' median/center turn lane for 3-Lane
• Four 11' travel lanes, one 12' median/center turn lane for 5-Lane
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 20 Ashland Local Street Plan
Bike Lanes: Two 6' bike lanes, one on each side of the street moving in the
same direction as motor vehicle traffic
Parking: In 8' - 9' bays
Curb and Gutter: Yes 6" vertical/barrier curb
Parkrow: 6' - 8' on both sides, hard scape parkrow may be used in
commercial areas for locating street trees in wells, street lights and
furniture and bicycle parking
Sidewalks: 6' on both sides in residential areas, 8' - 10' on both sides in
commercial areas
Boulevard
3-Lane
r
71 CIA��a nit o
ova
12'
Bike Travel Median Travel Bike
Lane Lane and/or Lane Lane
Planting Canter Planriting
g Turn Stp
P Lane
Sidewalk - Sidewalk
Pavement
71'to 83'
Right-of-Way
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Mhland.Local Street Plan a Page 21
Avenue
Avenues provide concentrated pedestrian, bicycle, transit and motor vehicle access from
neighborhoods to neighborhood activity centers and boulevards. Avenues are similar to
boulevards, but are designed on a smaller scale. Design should provide an environment where
walking, bicycling, using transit and driving are equally convenient and should facilitate the
avenue's use as a public space. A 2-lane, or 3-lane configuration can be used depending on the
number of trips generated by surrounding existing and future land uses.
Street Function: Provide access from neighborhoods to neighborhood activity
centers and boulevards.
Connectivity: Connects neighborhoods to neighborhood activity centers and
boulevards.
Average Daily
Traffic: 3,000 - 10,000 motor vehicle trips per day
Managed Speed: 20 mph - 25 mph
Right-of-Way
Width: • 57' - 70' for 2-Lane
• 68.5' - 81.5' for 3-Lane
Curb-to-Curb
Width: • 32' - 33' for 2-Lane
• 43.5' - 44.5' for 3-Lane
Motor Vehicle
Travel Lanes: • Two 10' - 10.5' travel lanes for 2-Lane
• Two 10' - 10.5' travel lanes, one 11.5' median/center tum lane
for 3-Lane
Bike Lanes: Two 6' bike lanes, one on each side of the street moving in the
same direction as motor vehicle traffic
Parking: In 8' - 9' bays
Curb and Gutter: 'Yes, 6" vertical/barrier curb
Parkrows 6' - 8' on both sides, hard scape parkrow may be used in
commercial areas for locating street trees in wells, streetlights and
furniture and bicycle parking '
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 22 Ashland Local Street Plan
Sidewalks: 6' on both sides in residential areas, 8' - 10' on both sides in
commercial areas
Avenue
3-Lane
11 A
1 11.5' '-1
Bike Travel Median Travel Bike
Lane Lane and/or Lane Lane
Center Plantln
Planting Turn Strip
g
Strip Lane p
51dewalk Sidewalk
41.5'-44.5'
Pavement
68.5 t 81.5'
Right-nf-Way
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 23
Neighborhood Collector
Neighborhood Collectors provide access to neighborhood cores and gather traffic from various
parts of the neighborhood and distribute it to the major street system. Different configurations
with several on-street parking options are provided for residential and commercial areas.
Residential Neighborhood Collector
Street Function: Provide access in and out of the neighborhood.
Connectivity: Collects traffic from within residential areas and connects these
areas with the major street network.
Average Daily
Traffic: 1,500 to 5,000 motor vehicle trips per day
Managed Speed: 15 mph - 20 mph
Right-of-Way
Width: • 47' - 49' for No On-Street Parking
• 48' - 56' for Parking One Side
• 55' - 63' for Parking Both Sides
Curb-to-Curb
Width: • 20' for No On-Street Parking
• 25' - 27' for Parking One Side
• 32' - 34' for Parking Both Sides
Motor Vehicle
Travel Lanes: • Two 10' travel lanes for No On-Street Parking
• Two 9' - 10' travel lanes' for Parking One Side and Parking Both
Sides
Bike Lanes: Generally nofneeded on low volume/low travel speed streets. If
motor vehicle trips per day exceed 3,000, and/or actual motor
vehicle travel speeds exceed 25 mph, a bike lane shall be required.
Parking: • . .One 7'.lane for Parking One Side
• Two 7' lanes for Parking Both Sides
Parking may be provided in 7' bays rather than a continuous on-
street parking lane.
Curb and Gutter: Yes, 6" vertical/barrier curb
Parkrow: 8' parkrow on both sides for No On-Street Parking
•
6 - 8' parkrows on both sides for Parking One and Both Sides
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 24 Ashland Local Street Plan
Sidewalks: 5' - 6' on both sides, use 6' in high pedestrian volume areas with
frequent 2-way foot traffic
Residential Neighborhood Collector
No Parking
io w
s. rrewi i.e.. ttemi i.e�e a'
n.euly
n..
awe suy sup awe
Slde+..h 51dw'/Ik
�2(Y�
�4T w 997 997
ebF.-or-wey
Draft Street.Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local sheet Plan Page 25 "
Residential Neighborhood Collector
Parallel Parking One Side
A Ic
T v-w' q-w If
6'W B' Parklry T�evel Line T�evel l�nc 6'iq B'
nt n
5'w6 PISMp� Scnpa 5'u6
Sld[wale 9Ww�lk
25'-2T
Pivemeni
e6-56
Ryhx-of-Wry
rh oci Collector
R Sidential Nei hbo 0
e
9
Parallel Parking Both 5ideo
® A 0
T 9'-10' 9'-10' T
6, 5. Parking Travel Lane Travel Lane Parking 6•
_
L Planting P5td
5ldewalk 5tdp _ _ P 5idewalk
32 34
Pavement
55' 0 63'
Right-af way
October 9, 1998 - Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 26 Ashland Local Street Plan
Commercial Neighborhood Collector
Street Function: Provide access in and out of neighborhoods and to neighborhood
core with shopping and services.
Connectivity: Collects traffic from within residential areas. Provides
neighborhood shopping opportunities and connects these areas
with the major street network.
Average Daily
Traffic: 1,500 to 5,000 motor vehicle trips per day
Managed Speed: 15 mph - 20 mph
Right-of-Way
Width: • 41' - 65' for Parallel Parking One Side
• 61' - 73' for Parallel Parking Both Sides
• 62' - 74' for Diagonal Parking One Side
• 79' - 91' for Diagonal Parking Both Sides
Curb-to-Curb
Width: • 28' for Parallel Parking One Side
• 36' for Parallel Parking Both Sides
• 37' for Diagonal Parking One Side
• 54' for Diagonal Parking Both Sides
Motor Vehicle
Travel Lanes: Two 10' travel lanes
Bike Lanes: Generally not needed on low volume/low travel speed streets. If
motor vehicle trips per day exceed 3,000, and/or actual motor
vehicle travel speeds exceed 25 mph, a bike lane may be needed.
Parking: • One 8' lane for Parallel Parking One Side
• Two 8' lanes for Parallel Parking Both Sides
• One'17' lanes for Diagonal Parking One.Side
Two 17' lanes for Diagonal Parking Both Sides
Parking may be provided in T bays rather than a"continuous on-.
street parking lane.
Curb and Gutter: Yes, 6" verticallbarrier curb
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local.Street Plan Page 27
Parkrow: 6' - 8' on both sides, hard scape parkrow may be used in
commercial areas for locating street trees in wells, street lights and
furniture and bicycle parking
Sidewalks: 6' - 10' on both sides
Commercial Neighborhood Collector
Parallel Parking One Side
8' 101 . 10' .
. 6.to g. Parking Travel Lane- Travel Lane .
6'to 10'Planting Planting 6'to 10'
Strip Strip -
Sidewalk Sidewalk
Pavement'
41'-65'
. - Right-of-Way
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 28' Ashland Local Street Plan
Commercial Neighborhood Collector
Parallel Parking Both 50co
H 1a 10' e
UG , 6' Par king Travel Lane Travel Lane lanting Planting 6'to 10'
5ldewalk
Strip 5trip 5l4ewalk
36'
Pavement
61'to 73'
Right-of-Way
Commercial Neighborhood Collector
Angled Parking One Side
n
a w
'17' i 10• 10• -
6'to H' Parking Travel Lane Travel Lane 6'to H'
6' a 10'Planting Planting 6• o 10'
5idewalk Strip Strip Sidewalk
3T
Pavement
62'to 74'
.. - Right-of-Way. .. .
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 29
Commercial Neighborhood Collector
Angled harking both 5ideo
no
un
n ,a is iv
6'to B' p.rkly invel l.K lr.vel l+ne p.king 6'[o H'
6"u Ranury Yl.ntiry 6'b10'
su:p s�
54'
Pavement
79'to 91'
Right-of-Way
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 30 Ashland Local Street Plan
Neighborhood Street
Neighborhood Streets provide access to individual residential units and neighborhood
commercial areas. Different configurations with several on-street parking options are provided
for residential and commercial areas.
Neighborhood Street: For use in the following single-family residential zones - WR
(Woodland Residential), RR- 1 and RR- .5 (Low Density
Residential, and R-1-3.5, R-1-5, R-1-7.5 and R-1-10 (Single-
Family Residential) unless specifically noted.
Street Function: Provide access to individual residential units and commercial
areas.
Connectivity: Connects to higher order streets.
Average Daily
Traffic: 1,500 or less motor vehicle trips per day
Managed Speed: 10 mph - 20 mph
Right-of-Way
Width: • 45' - 49' for No On-Street Parking
• 44' - 50' for Parking One Side
• 48' - 57' for Parking Both Sides
Curb-to-Curb
Width: • 18' - 20' for No On-Street Parking
• 21' for Parking One Side
• 25' - 28' for Parking Both Sides
Motor Vehicle
Travel Lanes: • Two.9'.- 10' for No On=Street Parking
• One 14' queuing lane for Parking One Side
• One I F queuing lane for Parking Both Sides in the R-1 zone,
One 14' queuing lane for Parking Both Sides in higher density
residential areas (i.e. R-1-3.5, R-2 and R-3)
On local residential streets with adequate off-street parking, a
single 14' wide traffic lane may be.permitted for both directions of,
vehicle traffic. The single traffic lane is intended to create a
"queuing street" such that when opposing vehicles meet, one of the
vehicles must yield by pulling into a vacant portion of the adjacent
i
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 31
parking lane. This queuing effect has been found to be an effective
and save method to reduce speeds and non-local traffic.
Bike Lanes: Generally not needed on low volume/low travel speed streets.
Parking: • One 7' lane for Parking One Side
• Two 7' lanes for Parking Both Sides
Parking may be provided in 7' bays rather than a continuous on-
street parking lane.
Curb and Gutter: Yes, 6" vertical/barrier curb
Parkrow: • 8' parkrow on both sides for No On-Street Parking
• 6' - 8' parkrows on both sides for Parking One and Both Sides
Sidewalks: 5' - 6' on both sides, use 6' in high pedestrian volume areas with
frequent 2-way foot traffic
Reoidential Neighborhood Street
No Farkinq
L _ 1
Q
9'
TI—I Lane Travel Lane g.
Planting Plantiing
5'sa6 5trip 5t.p 5'to6
5idmalk 5ldmalk
18 20' . _
. Pavement
. . . : I 45..49' ... - .I .-.
Right-of-Way
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 32 Ashland Local Street Plan '
Residential Neighborhood Street
Parallel Parking One S'de
R
A e. P.nmq 1F.rd Lme 6.�5.
Plantlny (�ueuing) Pl;n
5'm 6' Scdp Scdp 5'm e
Sidewalk 51dev�lk
r
P�remmt
49'to 50'
RIgM1t-of-Way
Residential Neighborhood Street
Parallel Parking Both Sides
w o 0
T
W-14' T
5.�5. Parking Travel Lane Parking 6.�5.
Planting (Queuing) Planting
' S'te 6' Strip Strip 5'to 6'
50.1k - 514.1k
25 25
' Pavement
45 57
Rlghs-af-Way
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 33
Alley
The alley is a semi-public neighborhood space that provides access via the rear of the property.
The use of alleys eliminates the need for front yard driveways and provides the opportunity for a
more positive front yard street scape, allows the street located adjacent to the front of properties
to be designed using a narrow width with limited on-street parking, and creates the opportunity
for the use of narrower lots to increase residential densities. Alleys are appropriate in all
residential areas and in some commercial areas for business frontage and for access and delivery
depending on eh circulation pattern of the area.
Street Function: Provide rear yard access to individual residential and commercial
properties and alternative utility placement area.
Connectivity:
Average Daily
Traffic: Not applicable
Managed Speed: Not applicable, motor vehicle travel speeds should be below 10
mph
Right-of-Way
Width: 16'
Pavement
Width: 12' with 2' graveled or planted strips on side
Motor Vehicle
Travel Lanes: Not applicable
Bike Lanes: Not applicable, bicyclists can easily negotiate these low use areas
Parking: No parking withing the right-of-way
Curb and Gutter: No curb
Parkrow: Not applicable
Sidewalks: Not applicable, pedestrians can easily negotiate these low use areas
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 34 Ashland Local Street Plan
Alley
12'
UnpaveA 5tnpa
Right-d-Way
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan q Page 35
Multi-use Path
Multi-use paths are off-street facilities used primarily for walking and bicycling. These paths can
be relatively short connections between neighborhoods (neighborhood connections), or longer
paths adjacent to rivers, creeks, railroad tracks and open space.
Function: For pedestrians and bicyclists, provide short connections between
destinations and longer paths in situations where a similar route is
not provided on the street network.
Connectivity: Should enhance route options and shorten distances traveled for
pedestrians and bicyclists.
Right-of-Way
Width: 12' - 18'
Pavement
Width: 6' - 10' with 2' 4' graveled or planted strips on side
Curb and Gutter: No curb
Multi-U5e Path
® 00
6'to 10'
Varies
2'to 4' .
" Unpaved 5tripe
10'to 18'
Right-of-Way .
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 36 Ashland Local Street Plan
SECTION IV: CROSSWALKS AND STREET CORNER RADIUS
Pedestrians must be provided with the shortest possible route across street intersections. This is
accomplished by using small curb radii and curb extensions. At the street comer, where one
curbed street meets another is known as the curb return. The measure of the sharpness of the
comer, or curb return is known as the curb return radius (Crr).
Effect of Corner Turning Radii on
Pedestrian Crossing Distances
Sidewalk with nature strip
Centerline of crosswalk 5e�
"�R°8Yk
WNW!
7roSSI.-"-
� o
S ft wide sidewalk
26 ft wide
stmt
Radius g ncrease ercent
Distance Crossing Increase
----'With a larger Crr, turning movements of right-turning vehicles are easier and possible at faster
speeds, but the length of the crosswalk needed to cross the street for pedestrians at that point is
also increased. As the Crr increases, the distance the pedestrian must cross increases, and the
time it takes for the pedestrian to cross the intersection increases. Higher turning vehicular
speeds are encouraged and dangerous "rolling stops" become more frequent. Table 2 exemplifies
the affect on intersection crossings as Crr increases from 15 feet to 35 feet.
Draft-Street-Standards Handbook October 8-1998
Ashland Local"Street Plan Page 37' . .
Table 2: Affect on Pedestrian Crossing of Curb Return Radius
SIDEWALK WIDTH 6' 6' 6' 8' 8' 8' 10' 10' 10' 10'
PARKROW WIDTH
CURB RETURN
RADIUS 15' 25' 30' E5' 25' 30' 15' 25' 30' 35'
CROSSING
DISTANCE ADDED 2.5' 11.6' 17.2' 10.0' 15.3' 1.1' 8.6' 13.6' 19.0'
TO STREET WIDTH
CROSSING TIME
ADDED WITH 0.7 3.3 4.9 0.5 2.9 4.4 0.3 2.5 3.9 5.4
ADDITIONAL
STREET WIDTH
(SECONDS)
from Traditional Neighborhood Development Street Design Guidelines, Institute of Transportation
Engineers
Crosswalk and Curb Return Radius Standards
Approval Standards: New and reconstructed crosswalks and comers shall conform to the
following curb return radius standards.
1. Crr Selection
A. Crr shall be selected based on reasonable anticipated vehicular and pedestrian
traffic volumes, traffic types and intersection control devices.
2. Recommended Range for Neighborhoods
A. The Crr shall be between 10 to 15 feet in neighborhoods, excluding intersections
involving boulevards.
3. Design for Large Vehicles
A. When designing Crr, allow for large vehicles to swing across the centerline of
the street as per AASHTO standards.
4. On-Street Parking..
A. On-street parking shall not be permitted within 30.feet of an intersection
. involving_boulevards and avenues to provide drivers clear vision of.pedestrians,
bicyclists and other vehicles. This setback will also assist larger vehicles to
turn.
October 9,:1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook,
Page 38 - Ashland Local Street Plan
5. Large Crr Mitigation
A. At intersections with Crr 15 feet or larger with high pedestrian traffic volumes,
paver bulb outs, textured crossings and other appropriate traffic calming
treatments shall be used to facilitate pedestrian travel.
6. Historic District
A. The Crr for newly constructed or reconstructed street corners in the Historic
District shall match and in not exceed what historically has been used in the
remainder of the Historic District.
7. Vision Clearance Area
No obstructions greater,than 2 Sfeet high;nor any landscaping which will grow
greater than2Sfeet high, with the exception of trees whose canopy heights aze`at all
{2,5 +�'
trmegreater,than' 8feet �sbe placed in a vision clearance s_'o that pedestriansarid
dnvers cansee,each otfiec See 8 72.120of the.Ashiand Land Use Or"dmancefor4the
....
vision clearance"standards;
SECTION V: HILLSIDE STREETS AND�NATuRAL AREAS
Occasionally, streets aze constr ietedm locations with signifteant natural features whichar quire
special accommodations such as ip lolly azeas, neaz creeks, rock outcruo!_ppings, drainages, or
^( rtn W.
wetlands 2,In thesetcases p cific,.considerahons should be mated}toY mmrze negative impacts'
For-example, widestrees<alongjsteep s lopes>require!much lazger hillside cuts tfian narrow
streets. Streets`o staruct min hillside areas'or natural ;esotirce_ areas'sliould-mini'irinegaive
mpacts and use minimal cut azid fillrslopes
Generally;the range of local'street types make rt possible to.'construct or improve€local streets`in
accordance with the.design standards In certain situations; however, exceptions,should be made.
Exceptions could result in construction dif", eanderi,ng sidewal V s-.sidew_alks;on o`r lyaone�[de of
the street, or curbside sidewalk,segments instead of setback walks
Hillside Lands and Natural Area Street Standards
Approval Standards: Hillside Lands is defined in Chapter 18.62, Physical and
Environmental Constraints, of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
Development of streets in Hillside Lands must be done in accordance
with the standards in Chapter 18.62. Streets in Hillside Lands may .
require.the following sPecial accommodations.
Draft Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 39
1. Clear Travel Lane
A. New streets shall provide a 20feet clear travel lane area in areas designated
Hillside Lands.
2. On-Street Parking At Foot Steep Hills
A. Ensure ample on-street or bay parking is available at the foot of steep hills,
especially those prone to snow and/or ice build up.
3. Handrails for Pedestrians
A. Handrails shall be installed along steep sidewalks.
4. Steps for Pedestrians
A. Flights of several steps shall be located intermittently along steep sidewalks.
5. Pedestrian Paths
A. A pedestrian path may be substituted for a sidewalk on one side of the street to
accommodate topography.
6. Pcdtervmg'=Natur61'Fddttieds
A_. Streets,shall be located in aMinanner,wh_1ch preserves natural.feature_s;to`;the
greatest'extent feasible.,
1:. Whenever possible, stceet•alignments shall follow natural contours
and features so that visual arid,physical access to the natural feature
is_posstlile:
2 Streets shall be sttuafed betweizr naturaf,features, suck as creeks;
mature trees;drainages, open spaces and individual parcels in order
to appropriately incorporate such significant neighborhood
features!
7. Exceptions to Street Design Standards
A. Generally,the range of local street types.make it possible to construct or improve
local streets m accordance with the street design standards. In certain situations
where the physical features of the land create insurmountable constraints, or .
natural features.should be preserved, exceptions may be made. Exceptions could
result in construction of meandering sidewalks,sidewalks on only one side of the
street, or curbside sidewalk segments instead of setback walks. Exceptions shall
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 40 Ashland Local Street Plan
be allowed when physical conditions that preclude development of a public street,
or components of the street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to,
topography, wetlands, mature trees, creeks ,drainages; and rock outcroppings.
8. Dead End Streets
A. Generally, the range of local street types make it possible to construct or improve
local streets in accordance with the street design standards. In certain situations
where the physical features of the land create insurmountable constraints or
natural features:should be-preserve d, exceptions may be made. Dead-end streets
may be permitted,in areas where•topographic,�wetland, creeks or other physical
features of the land preclude street connections: Only neighborhood streets may
be dead,end roads. .No deadtend street st_iall.exceed-500-feet in length, not
including the,turnaround:
SECTION VI: DRIVEWAY APRON AND CURB CUT SPACING
Driveway aprons, often referred to as private accesses, affect the safety, capacity and character of
a street. Motorists turning into and out of private driveways or parking lots can be the source of
potential conflicts with pedestrians, bicyclists and motor vehicles. In addition, motorists entering
and existing the street system slow down traffic and thereby reduce the traffic flow and street
capacity.
In Ashland, the Railroad District is well used by pedestrians. There are many factors which
affect the large amount of foot traffic such as interesting architecture, relatively flat terrain, large
parkrows with many trees, and the close proximity to the downtown. However, one of the street
design elements which makes the pedestrian environment convenient, safe and inviting is the
minimal amount of automobile traffic pulling in and backing out of driveways which cross the
sidewalk.
Every driveway apron is a challenge for pedestrians. As the number of private accesses
increases, the sidewalk loses continuity as the surface dips up and down with the driveway curb '
cuts. Even able-bodied pedestrians can have trouble negotiating excessive dips and cross-slopes.
The combination of an uneven surface and the continuous potential threat of a motor vehicle
impeding on the sidewalk negatively affects the.pedestrian environment and the character of the
street.
Public accesses, meaning public streets, can.have the same affect on safety and capacity of the,
street system. However, as.long as streets.are spaced at reasonable distances, the potential
impact is not as great as having numerous driveway curb cuts within one block length.
Draft.Street Standards Handbook October 8, 1998
Ashland Local Street Plan Page 41
The Driveivay Apron and Curb Cut Standards apply to private accesses on neighborhood
collector and neighborhood streets. Chapter 8, Access Management, of the Transportation
System Plan is the ruling document concerning the spacing of private and public accesses on
boulevards and avenues.
Driveway Apron and Curb Cut Standards
Approval Standards: New, reconstructed streets, curb cuts and driveway aprons shall
conform to the following driveway apron and curb cut standards.
1. Spacing
A. Driveway curb cuts shall be spaced at least 24 feet apart as measured between the
bottoms of the existing or proposed apron wings of the driveway approaches.
2. Width
A. The width of driveway curb cuts and aprons shall be minimized in the parkrow
and sidewalk area. The driveway width may be increased in the private yard area.
3. Shared Driveways
A. The number of driveway intersections with streets shall be minimized by the use
of shared driveways with adjoining lots where feasible.
4. Number of Driveway Curb Cuts Per Lot
A. For single-family and multi-family developments, one driveway curb cut is
permitted per lot. Larger multi-family developments may require more than one
driveway curb cut. For commercial and industrial developments, driveway curb
cuts shall be minimized where feasible.
5. Alley Access
A- If a property has alley access, a curb cut for a driveway apron is not permitted.
October 9, 1998 Draft Street Standards Handbook
Page 42 Ashland Local Street Plan
ASHLAND WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
ALTERNATIVES
CONNECT TO BEAR CREEK VALLEY SANITARY AUTHORITY(BCVSA)
• This would dispose of effluent and sludge.
• Is less expensive than the current plan.
• • Would eliminate the need for Ashland to Improve and operate their own
wastewater treatment plant.
• Would allow Ashland to sell or develop the land now being used by the treatment
plant.
• Would allow Ashland to sell the 840 acres, or convert it into a City Park for
equestrian, hiking, picnicking, and other uses.
• Ashland would still have revenue from operation of the sewer lines and pumping
station to collect raw sewage.
• System Development Cost is about 7.07 million, and to build the pipeline 7 miles
to Phoenix is about 4.6 million for a total of 11.7 million.
• The per household monthly cost for utilizing the Regional system would be $4.20
per household.
OR DON'T CONNECT TO BCVSA, BUT FIND OTHER WAYS TO DISPOSE OF THE
SLUDGE AND EFFLUENT
ALTERNATIVE FOR SEWER SLUDGE:
• Continue to apply to farmlands as is now being done.
• In the future this material can be improved and may have commercial value for
the city.
ALTERNATIVE FOR EFFLUENT SPRAYING:
• Dilute the effluent with clean water at the outlet of the treatment plant and
place it in Bear Creek thereby reducing the phosphorus level and increasing
the stream flow.
• Sources for the additional water:
• Irrigation water from the city owned land.
• Ashland joining Intertie for domestic water supply, and utilizing
Ashland Creek flow for diluting effluent.
• Piping Ashland TID canal.
Any one of these three sources of water will provide at least a 50/50 dilution.
The City's plan to spray effluent will deplete water flow in Bear Creek 6
months of the year. Affixing clean water with the effluent will reduce the
phosphorous level and not only maintain but increase water flow in Bear
Creek.
t
Council Communication
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
n / October 20, 1998
Submitted by: Maria Harris
Approved by: Paul Nolte r
Approved by: Mike Freeman
Title:
An Ordinance Replacing Chapter 2.22 of the Ashland Municipal Code to Change the name of the
Bicycle Commission to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission and to Amend Its Powers and
Duties
Synopsis:
The attached ordinance expands the Bicycle Commission to the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Commission. The primary changes in the ordinance are increasing the number of voting
members from seven to nine, having an elected chair and broadening the primary duties to
include pedestrian issues. Based on comments from the Council review in April 1998, the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission responsibilities include promoting bicycle safety programs.
The Traffic Safety Commission retains the responsibilities associated with transportation safety
education and pedestrian safety laws.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the ordinance and forward to second reading.
Background:
The purpose of the ordinance amendment is to expand the role of the Commission from strictly
addressing bicycle-related issues to advisement on all non-automotive methods of transportation,
with an emphasis on bicycle and pedestrian issues, The ordinance amendments are based on
comments from the Bicycle Commission, a review of the goals and policies of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, and.a review of ordinances for other
existing City commissions including Tree, Traffic Safety, Conservation, Historic and Planning
Commission.
In April, 1998, the Council reviewed an ordinance expanding the existing Bicycle Commission to
the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission. Concerns were raised about duplicating duties
between this commission and the Traffc Safety Commission, and it was determined that it would
be most appropriate for the Traffic Safety Commission to retain the responsibilities associated
with transportation safety education and pedestrian safety laws. The attached draft ordinance
reflects this by limiting the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission responsibility to bicycle safety
programs.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE REPLACING CHAPTER 2.22 OF THE
ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE NAME OF
THE BICYCLE COMMISSION TO THE BICYCLE AND
PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION AND TO AMEND ITS POWERS
AND DUTIES
Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified.
Deletions are fined-thran and additions are shaded.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 2.22 of the Ashland Municipal Code is replaced in its entirety to
read:
Chapter 2.22
BICYCLE AND=PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
Sections:
2.22.010 Established — Membership
2.22.020 Term —Vacancies
2.22.030 Quorum — Rules and Regulations
2.22.040 Powers and Duties — Generally
2.22.050 Reports
2.22.060 Compensation
2 22 010 Established — Membership. There is established _ Bicycle and;.Pedestrian
Commission which is established and shall consist of seven (7)nine voting members,
one of which shall be a city councilor, and four; 'ne'tjd*ng one member from th
non-voting members including a
representative from Rogue Valley Transportation District, the Director of Community
Development, the Director of Public Works and the Police she Chief of Police.
2.22.020 Term —Vacancies. The term of the voting'
members shall be appointed-for three{ years, expiring on April 30 of each year. Any
vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the mayor, with confirmation,by the city
"a ly, two (2) nnembers shall be
council, for the unexpired portion of the term."
erm —terms.
appointed to ternis expiring April 30, 1990, two (2) members to terms expiring-Apfif-30-,
i
, ' . The seven commission
members currently serving as of the date of this 1998 amendment shall serve:their
remaining terms. For.the two members to be appointed to the commission as a.result
of this 1998 amendment, one shall be appointed to a term expiring April 30, 2000, and
one member to a term expiring April 30, 2001. The successors shall be appointed to
three (-3) year terms. Any member who is absent for four ("r more meetings in a one-
year period shall be considered no longer active and the position vacant, and a new
Page 1 —ANNOTATED ORDINANCE
4
f member shall be appointed to fill the vacancy.
2 22.030 Quorum - Rules and Regulations. Four(4)-voting members of the
commission shall constitute a quorum. At its first meeting of the year, the commission
shall elect a chair, vice-chair and a secretary, who shall hold office at the pleasure of
the commission. The commission may make rules and regulations for its meetings,
consistent with the laws of the state and city charter and ordinances, and shall meet at
least once every month.
2.22.040 Powers and Duties - Generally. The primary purpose pow
responsibilities of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission shall be to advocate the
equal opportunity to use non-automotive forms of travel and to ensure the development
of bicycle and pedestrian facilities into a well-designed, integrated transportation
network for all Ashland citizens. In doing so, the powers,-duties and responsibilities of
the commission shall be'as follows:
A. To deve'pp,�tno,_recernrnend.pe.pre�pated . To.
promote bicycling.and walking_in Ashland:
B. . To review and
make recommendations on the long-range transportation plans--as relate_ d,
to bicycle and pedestrian issues of the city'..,
C. . To promote
bicycle safety_programs.
D. To serve in a liaison capacity between the city and Oregon Bicycle and
Pedestrian Advisory Committee in developing the statewide bicycle arid
pedestrian`program,,and in meeting the goals of the State of Oregon
Pf}aster
Bicycle 'and Pedestrian Plan.
E. To serve in a liaison capacity between the city and the Jackson County
Bicycle Committee in developing overall coordinated plans for bikepaths
bicycle facilities and bicycle safety programs.
F. To set an an advisery eapacity to the Ashland 6ity Council and the 6fty
Administrator
On a
- - __ .
yearly basis, to review and make recommendations on transportation
projects as related to bicycle and pedestrian issues in the city.- _ . to
review and recommend transportation project prioriti.zation_and.funding as
related to bicycle and pedestrian issues in the city:
H. _ . To advise
the planning commission in the administration of the site review process
with respect to bicycle and pedestrian facilities and parking.
I. To fester public knowledge and support of bmeyeling laws, emforeemen
needs.and traffic engineering problems amd . To assist in the
implementation of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive
Plan.
J. To coopefate with the public and private sehool systerris in promoting
To.develop and recommend to the city
council and planning commission adoption of ordinances and policies for_
Page 2 -ANNOTATED ORDINANCE
the planning and maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian facilities
throughout the city.
K. To advise the city administrator and city departments regarding bicycle
and pedestrian issues in the city.
2.22.050 Reports. The commission shall submit copies of its minutes to the city council
and shall prepare and submit such reports as from time to time may be requested of
them by the city council or planning commission.
2.22.060 Compensation.
the Gity Voting members of the commission shall receive no compensation
for services rendered.
The foregoing ordinance was first READ on the day of , 1998,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1998.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 19986
Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
Page 3 =ANNOTATED ORDINANCE .
Council Communication
Public Works Department
I'� October 20, 1998
Submitted by: Paula Brown �l� ,
Reviewed by: Paul Nolte 1
Approved by: Mike Freeman'A
Title:
Second Reading of an Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Clover Lane on Property Owned by
Vernon Ludwig Near Interstate 5 and Highway 66
Synopsis:
The proposed modifications to development plans in the Clover Lane area require a partial
vacation and realignment of Clover Lane. Council held a public hearing and first reading of the
ordinance on October 6, 1998.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Council endorse the second reading by title only to adopt the attached
ordinance to vacate a portion of Clover Lane on property owned by Vernon Ludwig near
Interstate 5 and Highway 66.
Background Information: (from the last meeting)
Mr. Bob Robertson of Pacific Western LLC has assumed the Vern Ludwig development plans for
the Clover Lane area. The plans call for the relocation of Clover Lane further to the east. A land
partition plat has been prepared which will create a new 53 foot wide right of way and cul-de-sac
which will provide access to five new lots.
A vacation of the former Clover Lane right of way is required as a part of the development plan.
Petitions requesting the vacation have been received and verified. As required by ORS Section
271.110, all of the abutting owners and 2/3 of the owners of the surrounding area have signed the
petition. The $500 filing fee was waived with the original 1994 application:
The final approval of this vacation must be contingent upon the approval of the land partition which
will create the new right of way. The land partition; in turn is contingent upon the relocation (or
bonding for)all existing utilities.
In addition to the street vacation, Mr. Robertson has prepared a bargain and sale deed which will
transfer title to the vacated Clover Lane, following the vacation, to Vernon G. and Ofelia Ludwig. It
is recommended that Council approve the partial vacation and authorize the signing of the deed
however, recording of the document shall be contingent upon approval of the land partition.
G:\PAULA\Clover Lane ORD-2 Council Communication.wpd
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF CLOVER
LANE ON PROPERTY OWNED BY VERNON LUDWIG
NEAR INTERSTATE 5 AND HIGHWAY 66
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. On the date specified in section two of this ordinance, the public right of
way described on the attached Exhibit A is vacated.
SECTION 2. The attached described right of way shall be deemed vacated upon the
date a partition map is recorded dedicating a new right of way for Clover Lane on
property where the vacated Clover Lane is located.
The foregoing ordinance was first READ on the day of , 1998,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 11998.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 1998•
Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney .
PAGE 1 - ORDINANCE.cA W1NDOws\TEMP Waaa4onordinancedoverlane.wcd
'J EXHIBIT A
EAGLE-EYE SURVEYING CORPORATION
( formerly Edwards Surveying & Land Planning Inc. )
23 North Ivy Street , Medford
P.O. Box 4397 , Medford, Oregon 97501-0170
Tel . (541 ) 776-2313 Fax . ( 541 ) 776-9978
DESCRIPTION FOR: Pacific Western LLC August 11 , 1998
VACATED PORTION OF CLOVER LANE' The Southerly portion of that
street known as Clover Lane fcranted to the City of Ashland.
Jackson County, Oregon in Volume 271 Page 548 Deed Records
said County and State and in Volume 582 , Page 417 said Deed
Records and in Document Number 88-28029 Official Records
said County and State beink more particularly described as
follows '
Commencing at a point on the East line of Government Lot
1 , in Section 14 , Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the
Willamette Meridian , Jackson County, Oregon, which is South
0 '00 ' 02" West a distance of 413 .43 feet from the Northeast
corner of said Lot 1 ; thence West a distance of 486 . 87 feet
to a point on the Westerly Right of Way line of Clover Lane
as described in Volume 271 , Page 548 , Deed Records , said
County and State, said point also being the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; thence South 00' 02 ' 16 West , a distance of 346 . 73
feet to the Easterly Right of Line of Interstate Highway'
Number 5, as described in Volume 509 , Page 241 , said Deed
Records ; thence South 23°46 ' 18" East , along said Easterly
Right of Way line, a distance of 127 . 15 feet ; thence
continuing along last said Right of Way line South 18' 06 ' 12"
East a distance of 7 .73 feet, to a point on the South line
of that tract described in Volume 272 , Page 618 , said Deed
Records ; thence East , along last said South line , a distance
of 49 . 21 feet ; thence North 18 '06 ' 12" West a distance of
27 . 67 feet ; thence North 23'46 ' 18" West a distance of 161 . 83
feet'; thence North 00'02' 16" East A distance of 296 .05 feet ;
thence West a distance of 25. 00 feet to the point of
beginning .
REGISTERED J X PRC!FE.SStONAI'
LAND SURVEYOR
OREGON
RSkL. D 6RAUGHTON
2657
Expires. 12/31/99
EXH 151 T MAAF
EXHIBIT "B"
I
(� CLOVER LANE \ `Y
\F
I .
✓Y
REGISTERED.
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURV YOR
SGALE p , 100 OREGON
µr".va
o 400 2.00 W=26�IIG 04
Council Communication
Legal Department
October 20, 1998
Submitted by: Paul Nolte/
Approved by: Mike Freeman �" `
Title:
An Ordinance Amending the Ashland City Band Chapter of the Ashland Municipal Code to
Redefine the Band Board and Its Duties Including Duties of the Band Director.
Synopsis:
The proposed changes in this ordinance were initiated at the request of the city band and more
accurately reflect how the band now operates. This ordinance received approval at its first
reading at the October 6, 1998, council meeting.
Recommendation:
Approval of this ordinance at council's October 20, 1998, meeting.
Background Information:
For years the city band has been operating under a system which does not conform to the city
ordinances. The system works so well, however,that when Raoul Maddox resigned as band
ch4ir,.he suggested the ordinance be changed to reflect the actual operation of the band. Raoul's
suggestions also created an opportunity to change the code provisions to make them more
uniform with other commissions and committees. These changes resulted in the mayor making
the appointments to the band board, which is recognized in the ordinance.as being the official
body overseeing the band. Additionally, the terms and expiration dates have been brought into
conformity with other commissions. Also,the appointment of the band director has been
streamlined and the process made more uniform with other mayoral appointments. And the band
committee, consisting of three council members,,has been eliminated since this aspect of the
existing ordinance has not been followed for several years:
G:\sharlmc\COUNCIL\Communications\nry band ord2.098.wpd
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND CITY BAND
CHAPTER OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO
REDEFINE THE BAND BOARD AND ITS DUTIES INCLUDING
DUTIES OF THE BAND DIRECTOR
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 2.56 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read:
I.
Chapter 2.56
i
CITY BAND'
Sections:
2.56.010 Band Board Established—Membership.
2.56.015 Band Board Terms--Vacancies.
2.56.020 Quorum--Rules and Meetings.
2.56.025 Powers and Duties--Generally.
2.56.030 Director--Appointment--Duties--Compensation.
2.56.040 Budget.
2.56.060 Performances.
2 56 010 Band Board Established—Membership. The Ashland Band Board is
established and shall consist of six voting members appointed by the mayor with
confirmation by the council. The board shall also consist of one non-voting ex officio
member, who shall be the director of the band.
2.56.015 Band Board Terms--Vacancies. The term of voting members shall be for
three years, expiring on April 30 of each year. The members serving on the band
board as of September 1998 shall serve until April 30, 1999. Any vacancy shall be
filled by appointment by the mayor with confirmation by the city council for the
unexpired portion of the term. The terms of the six members appointed to succeed
those members whose terms expire in April 1999 shall be staggered in the following
manner: Two members shall be appointed for one year, two members for two
years, and two members for three years. The length of the initial terms for these six
members shall be determined by the mayor at the time of appointment. Their
successors shall be appointed for three-year terms. Any board member who is
absent from four or more meetings in 'a one-year period shall be considered no
' For provisions regarding the city band, see City Charter, Art. XXI. .
Page 1 -ORDINANCE GAPAWORMband ord.wpd
longer active and the position vacant, and a new person shall be appointed to fill the
vacancy.
2 56 020 Quorum--Rules and Meetings. Four voting members of the board shall
constitute a quorum. If a quorum is present, the affirmative vote of a majority of
members present at the meeting and entitled to vote shall be sufficient to conduct
business. The board may make rules and regulations for its meetings and
procedures consistent with city ordinances, and shall meet as necessary but not less
than once per year. At its first meeting, the board shall elect a chair, who shall
preside over all meetings and perform such other duties as may be necessary for
the administration of the band, band board and this chapter. A vice-chair shall also
be elected who shall serve in the absence of the chair.
2 56 025 Powers and Duties--Generally. The powers, duties and responsibilities of the
Ashland Band Board shall be as follows:
A. General supervision and control over the Ashland City Band.
B. Report at least annually to the mayor and city council of the activities of the
band.
C. On or prior to December 15 of each year, report to the mayor as to the
activities and welfare of the band.
D. Determine compensation for the band director and members in accordance
with the band's approved budget.
2 56 030 Director--Appointment--Duties--Compensation.
A. Prior to January of each year, after receiving the report of the band board
under section 2.56.025, the mayor, with confirmation by the council, shall appoint a
band director who shall serve at the pleasure of the mayor.
B. The director shall:
1. Promote, organize and direct the Ashland City Band,
2. Select the musicians for the band,
3. Appoint a band secretary who shall keep minutes of all band board.
meetings, records of the organization and shall .particularly keep a.careful .
and accurate record of attendance by all members. The secretary shall
serve at the pleasure of the director and perform such other duties as may
be assigned by the director.
Page 2 -ORDINANCE c:wnuuoaoband ord.wpd.
4. Appoint a band librarian, who shall have charge of and shall carefully
keep all the sheet music now owned or hereafter acquired by band. The
librarian shall keep proper and complete records of all property placed in
the librarian's custody and shall make a proper inventory and accounting
thereof at the end of the year. The librarian shall serve at the pleasure of
the director and perform such other duties as may be assigned by the
director.
5. Appoint a quartermaster who shall have charge of and shall carefully
keep all band uniforms and other property which is now owned or may
hereafter be acquired by the band. The quartermaster shall serve at the
pleasure of the director and perform such other duties as may be
assigned by the director.
6. Perform such other services as may be reasonably requested by the
band board.
2.56.040 Budget. Prior to the preparation of the City budget each year, the band board
shall cause a careful estimate to be made of the band's needs for the ensuing year in
view of the funds to be available and shall submit same to the director of finance for
consideration with the other budgetary matters. Through the city's budget process, the
City Council shall fix and determine the Band's budget for the ensuing year.
2.56.060 Performances. The City Band shall present not less than ten concerts,
including the Fourth of July parade, during each summer season.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 11998,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 1998.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 11998.
Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor
Re i wed as to fo
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
Page 3 -ORDINANCE G:wnuuoRDmaod om.wpd
3
U
U
�o
a
N
h
UO
� v
C
N
p w w
Q U` w a H
O
N y U
W
_ O
aN N H
{GCy K Of_ ,V K a T w w w K w x
O O O O w Q
a L o
N
�I• N
N
w v
tl O
O O O O 0 O
co *M o
O N m
m c
r O'
N; u
NF
N � m
L
h c
v
O �... Er d
r a
O C
M oi v E m a0m i 'o• °o - c c -
V o C
•- E c o- H ° ° O -
o. a d £ u D a ° m otim m cn .IL 0 dl
CD E ° w � O E c>
U) W O w
O w £ � £7 2
o c o O ca c O O -O a_ a OO y u
�
T
O N w ' K
_c O v m
- �.m.E 0 c L . N . c Y y
O ` N O 00 'O C
y
t� j( � -
C — O L O p w
M L N m
yYJ O H a7 �
W o 5Hmm c vH d m d m O vU t E aa m d>
Q
c x M 2 Z: w ° c c o a E o ° ' E > o cO E 'E c o
U) N v ' _ = m Q K O u> c .0 O� g E o E L) 11
' n 2ir ` ulw w D a a r wa ¢ 0W 0: w a a CWfU
.
' U2
o N M V. t0 a2 cp U a
ea
W
t
Q
Y
O
O
J
C
QC� U
N
� C
O s
V U
m
00 W
O
i U
r ) ^ a1 D
N � O
N d v c d
L O T
0 N N ca
W D) c L .. cp um)
O Y O a) f0 C n v .
C
V N N � �'O cc W a7 w
0 c LL 3 °
m g m 0 fa y a) °
'D d c O y Z. Z _ '>
a3i � " c Y m ° � � mQ ° Ea
a)
_ N Q
c
o .� o. o ( m o o E o ._ y 'cu L) y m c D a)
. N N C N N � >. O r a) .. C N � �. uODi C C CL d :L)
v EU x xaaNi a�i � m ) E � L) y o ELL m ° w? c
D O }T, W W D) O. m •- o W N E a) > N =p
c m U V v D m Q o LL' A ti c L °v c O aci Ca
w ° OO � > mmLacnNN a@ Ncmo E � 0D
U — y c dUin � ° me O
a7 N a7 L L a7 c0 O Cpo >N LL fa a) C a) U
a+ .. 'O Q Q — � N d U � � Z N 7 cr 7 M C
� 'E � oM. .°— ww � �. a>i 0 C/) LL 0) Eoonrn.
F 'E � mC7 � � Fx � � � ,U LL F< ¢ � E � x � U)
C o
LL a ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ LL ♦ ♦ ♦ l ♦ ♦ U
a
C
O
N
U
_N
d -o
Q •U
C
7
Y U
J o
E
� N
a
f0
E
CL
V O
m j
N
N
O , O
V o
Z 0
N
O Y
CD N o
07 n U
T" o
0
CV �a a Y
d N
f0
l0 ~ N d Cc
N. N O .cc
CL nQ W l0 @ `
f0 3 m O O d M Y W.
� aap � aya "� cm ,
E `) za w. c�i " ma E p �
O N U Tv.� N N a N C Lu
(a M 22 cc
cl > (L) (L 0 o)a a 0
Em 0 Y Qc4) CL o
m d 0 H o m 7 @ >, U)
cu z
O N CD
O.w N CO 2 r N E N N O_Q
fJ1 m O E L ` a a) Y 4 d.0` J
c o N °? N U o o d (p a y
Y T N Q N C
p y y m 3 0 o U c m
u = A (DoaU) o yam
sclo �= Uc0P <u- CL
o . . . . . . . . . • . . . .
Council Communication
Legal Department
October 20, 1998
Submitted by: Paul Nolte
Approved by: Mike Freeman
Title:
An Ordinance Amending the Telecommunications Title 16 of the Ashland Municipal Code to
Add Provisions Regulating Cable Service and to Simplify and Clarify Requirements for Grantees
Synopsis:
This ordinance contains numerous amendments to the telecommunications ordinance adopted by
the council in March 1998. Major changes include adding a provision imposing the construction
and renewal requirements on cable TV utilities and deleting the requirement for a license rather
than a franchise for those telecommunication providers using only a small portion of the city's
right of ways. The distinction between a license and franchise was not clear and under the
proposed amendments only franchises will be issued.
The changes also include: 1) a requirement that a telecommunications provider pay a pavement
degradation fee when construction within a right of way includes cutting the pavement.
Pavement cuts shorten pavement life and this fee is designed to recoup the city's investment in
quality paving; 2) a requirement that providers cooperate with other utilities during construction,
within the right of way so that multiple cutting of the pavement is avoided; 3) a requirement that
a provider constructing within the right of way also install conduit and ducts for the city if
requested and paid for by the city; 4)a clarification that a provider who is permitted by the city
to install facilities above ground may do so with consent of the city or the joint pole owner(US
West); and 5) a fee.for resellers who have no facilities within the right of way but lease lines
from a franchisee. Resellers use leased lines to sell telecommunication services to others.
Recommendation:
Even though this ordinance was published in the Daily Tidings on Monday, October 12, 1998, in
order.to be read by title only at the council,Is October 20, 1998, meeting, I have since learned that
the League of Oregon Cities is going to unveil its extensively revised model ordinance at the
Annual meeting in November. I believe we should take a look at the League's revisions before I
submit proposed amendments to our ordinance. Delaying our amendments will not delay
Ashland Fiber Network nor will it leave us unprotected in the area of other telecommunication
providers. I have requested that this item be pulled from the October 20" council agenda.
Background Information:
Several months after the adoption of the telecommunications ordinance, representatives of US
West met with staff to voice their concerns over some ordinance provisions. US West felt that
the city had exceeded its authority in the implied manner the city would charge US West over
and above statutory limits. For incumbent local exchange carriers (i.e. US West), cities are
limited to charging 7% of a narrowly defined revenue base (about one-third of US West's total
revenue). In addition, US West felt that the unreimbursed co-location requirements imposed by
the ordinance amounted to a constitutional taking. US West also noted that the ordinance placed
in doubt the contractual provisions the city has with it over joint pole ownership. Under a
contract dating back to the 1920's practically every pole erected in the city is jointly purchased,
installed and owned by US West and the city. US West also pointed out several construction
requirements in the ordinance that were impractical, inefficient or uneconomical. Many of the
amendments are proposed to alleviate the concerns of US West and clarify some ambiguities
leading to those concerns. Some amendments also result from experience in other cities who are
attempting to implement their own telecommunication ordinances.
G:\sharlmc\COUNCI L\Commmimtions\telmommmimlions.ord2.098.wpd
OF
CITY OF ASHLAND
' nSy
�y �gtis
Public Works - Administration o
REGO� .'
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 15, 1998
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Paula Brown, Director of Public Works/City Engineer��
RE: UPDATE ON THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (STIP)
RECOMMENDATIONS BY RVACT
This is just a quick update on the progress made at the October 13, 1998, Rogue Valley Area
Commission on Transportation(RVACT):
The Commission endorsed the recommendations made by the Jackson Josephine Transportation
Commission with a few minor changes and caveats. ODOT expects to receive$19,000,000 for the
year 2000-2003 STIP. The RVACT recommendation going forward to the Oregon Transportation
Commission is as follows:
RVACT recom
Siskiyou Blvd(4th Street to Walker; Addition of Bike Lanes) $ 1,500,000
South Medford Interchange (Ramp Improvements ONLY) 700,000
Highway 238 -Jackson Street, Unit 1 11,000,000
Highway 62 Corridor Solutions . 2,900,000
Fern Valley Road Interchange Improvements 2,000,000 **
Grants Pass US 199 Redwood Ave-Ringuette Street 325,000
Grants Pass Spalding Avenue (Beacon - E Street) 453,000
Jackson County - Hamrick Road (Biddle - Vilas Road) 96,000
TOTAL $18,974,000
* STP funds from MPO to fund the other $2M local match
** Any project that comes in under budget, the under spent funds would go to fund
additional improvements at Fern Valley Road
Staff also entered into positive initial discussions regarding jurisdictional exchange of ODOT
jurisdiction facilities within the City and will bring back to Council at a future meeting.
G:\PAULA\memo-STIP Update Ocotber 15, 1998.wpd
` CITY OF ASHLAND CITY HALL
ASHLAND,OREGON 97520
October 12, 1998
Jon Mainard, Co-Chair
Mike Montero, Co-Chair
Rogue Valley Area Commission on Transportation
C/O RVCOG
PO Box 3275
Central Point OR 97502
RE: 2000-2003 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM(STIP)
The Ashland City Council reviewed and accepted the Jackson-Josephine Transportation
Commission(JJTC) STEP recommendations as follows:.
Highway 238 Unit 1 $11,500,000
Highway 62 Corridor 2,400,000
S. Medford Interchange 700,000
Hamrick Road 100,000
Fern Valley Road 1,500,000
Grants Pass 800,000
Siskiyou Blvd; 4'to Walker 1.500.000
$18,500,000
We throughly understand the emphasis on regional priorities and appreciate the inclusion of
Siskiyou Boulevard in the STEP recommendations. Having our Siskiyou Boulevard Bike Lanes
score highest in the original ranking criteria emphasizes Ashland's focus on meeting Oregon's
Transportation Planning Rule and the Oregon Transportation Plan. This accentuates Ashland's
strong commitment to multi-modal transportation options and to maintaining a compact and
sustainable community form. Although Ashland can merely provide vision and leadership in this
area, we are pleased that both the Highway 238 , Unit 1 and the Highway 62 corridor
improvements include notable options for multi-modal transportation alternatives and can
therefore support the JJTC package of projects.
The City of Ashland encourages RVACT's support in promoting a transportation program with a
strong multi-modal component. Transit, and other options that de-emphasize single occupant
vehicle travel, must play a significant role in all future transportation projects as we move into
the twenty-first century.
G:Daw TaulaULVACT State Transportation Impmw ent Program Ur.wpd
As both the Highway 238 and Highway 62 corridor improvement projects are fully funded for
the 2000-2003 STEP period, it is recommended that any additional ODOT funds received in this
biennium be split equally between Ashland, Grants Pass, and Phoenix projects as they prepare
for construction. All three cities rely on this funding to complete these important regional
projects. Even an additional $100,000 can achieve a significant difference in making these
projects a reality.
We urge the RVACT support the JJTC recommendations as delineated above, for the 2000-2003
State Transportation Improvement Plan.
Sincerely,
Carolle Wheeldon
Council President
CC: irrc
"TO
I
G:Daw Taula\RVACr State Transportation Improvement Program Ltr.wpd