HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-0604 Council Mtg PACKET Important: Any citizen attending Council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is
the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you wish to speak, please rise
and after you have been recognized by-the Chair, give your name and address. The
Chair will then allow you to speak and also 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
JUNE 4, 1991
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7: 30 P.M. , Civic Center Council Chambers
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of May 21, 1991.
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. Certificate of Appreciation - Linda Jackson, Hospital Board
V. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions & Committees.
2. Monthly Departmental Reports - May 1991
3. Memo from Dick Wandersheid regarding progress on affordable
housing.
4. Memo from Fire Chief concerning extension of burning season
due to weather conditions.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (to conclude by 9:30 P.M. )
J1. Continuation of public hearing for the improvement of Lori
Lane from Hersey Street northerly.
2. Remand of Planning Action No. 89-071, a Conditional Use
Permit for 90-unit housing complex on Hersey near
Williamson Way. Hearing is limited to items on remand from
LUBA, i.e. livability in Ashland Municipal Code Section
18. 104.040(B) ; and Comprehensive Plan Policy XII-I relating
to vacant lands (Applicant: Michael & Louis Mahar) .
3. Adoption of proposed methodology and fee schedule for
systems development charges pursuant to ORS 223 .297 -
223 . 314.
4. Adoption of 1991-92 Budget.
5-. Adoption of Supplemental Budget for 1990-91.
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Presentation by Ashland High School students regarding
availability of tobacco products by minors.
2. Confirmation of appointments of Hospital Board members.
3. Confirmation of appointments to Audit Committee.
VIII. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Letter from Jack Davis relative to project on "A" Street
and fuel contamination.
2. Memo from the City Administrator regarding the City
Attorney's position.
3 . Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Interim City
Attorney
IX. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the
agenda. (Limited to 15 minutes)
X. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS:
a&3 2, el. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance amending
--------T chapter 6.24 of the Ashland Municipal Code relative to
transient occupancy tax" .
�2. Second reading by title only of "An ordinance amending
a¢33 ordinance No. 2052, the Land Use Ordinance' of the City of
Ashland and Section 18. 12 .030 of the Ashland Municipal Code
to re-zone certain property from R-1-5 to E-1. (Peter
VanFleet)
� 3. Second reading by title only of "An ordinance amending
chapter 4.20 of the Ashland Municipal Code relative to
I_ systems development charges" .
,le a4 . First reading of an ordinance authorizing nd ordering the
improvement of Lori Lane between Hersey Street and
Glennvista Estates.
5. First reading of an ordinance levying taxes for fiscal year
1991-92 .
((
O. " 6. Resolution reorganizing the Audit Committee.
7. Resolution adopting the budget and making appropriations
for the 1991-92 fiscal year.
�y�ss 8. Resolution approving supplemental budget and making
appropriations for the 1990-91 fiscal year.
dog* 9. Resolution electing to receive state revenue sharing for
1991-92 .
(5 ip. Resolution certifying--the provision of certain municipal
services to qualify for state revenue sharing.
XI. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
MAY 21, 1991
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Catherine Golden called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of
Allegiance at 7:35 PM on the above date in the Council chambers. Laws, Williams, Acklin,
Winthrop and Arnold were present. Reid was absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The Minutes of the regular meeting of May 7, 1991 were approved
with one correction: page 3, 2nd paragraph, strike 8th sentence, "Acklin said the City already
gives...".
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS - Golden read a proclamation for "Crosswalk Awareness Week".
CONSENT AGENDA -Winthrop moved to remove Rem 6 for discussion and approve 1 through
5, Acklin seconded, all ayes on voice vote. Winthrop felt the Beck Report should not be
approved before the scheduled public hearings on June 4th and 18th. Hall said the public
hearings would cover a lot more and Council was merely accepting Phase II of the Beck Report
to use as guidelines for those hearings. Council felt the issues had already been discussed.
Arnold explained the term "guiding document'was misleading. Winthrop said.R would be useful
if some issues could be addressed in a study session and Golden also had some questions.
Hall said he would make himself available to them however they wished to discuss R. Acklin
moved to accept the document and Williams seconded. All ayes on voice vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Arnold moved to continue the public hearing on a Conditional Use Permit
for offices on Hospital grounds until June 18th and Winthrop seconded. All ayes on voice vote.
Almquist noted that an Rem had been inadvertently left off the agenda regarding the continuation
of the public hearing on Lori Lane until June 4th. Laws so moved and Arnold seconded. All
ayes on voice vote.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Report and proposed resolution regarding future electrical facilities. Golden had secretary
poll the EMF Committee members for their comments on the revised resolution (by City Attorney)
and was not able to reach all of them. Phil Clark was not happy with the removal of the
numbers. He referenced the Valdez Principles and said the environmental issues were not
being withheld by the City. He"felt the Committee worked hard and said R wasn't easy to come
to grips with all the criteria. The changes to the resolution by the City Attorney leaves the City
non-accountable for its actions. Quotes like "attempt to mitigate" are not enforceable. He
encouraged the Council to continue studying the criteria and not accept the Attorney's revision.
Winthrop asked Clark if he knew of any other city in the country that showed evidence of
adopting.2.0 or 2.5 mG standards? Clark said he had read some reports that say 2.0 mG is a
threshold and a health risk. Golden noted very few changes in the revision. Indications are
that we can meet those goals in Section 5 without harm to the City. Cate Hartzell gave some
results of other studies that indicate 2.5 mG is dangerous and substations should be located at
least 300-400 feet-away from residential areas -Eric Wallbank agreed'that the distance was a
concern and if is not realistic to bring other existing substations into conformance (some have
a reading of 12 mG). He felt the changes don't give the Electric Department anything to strive
for. Ron Thurner said the intent of the draft was to have "weight of law" but he was concerned
the revision made is not enforceable.
Minutes - Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - May 21, 1991 - P. 1
Robert Monroe lives across from the proposed site and was concerned with land values. He
said there would be a 20-50% reduction in property value if a substation were located across
from his home. This, he felt, was totally unfair, that it would hurt people and take away their land.
Nancy hasn't heard enough about the conservation issues and wants to be assured that enough
has been done about conservation before considering we absolutely need a new substation.
Golden said you can't impose a lifestyle on people but can only encourage them to conserve.
She said the City of Ashland is setting the pace in Oregon for Energy Conservation. In the last
10 years, the population has increased 6% but street use has increased 50%. Lifestyles are not
easily changed. Nancy said people are not being asked to change and they may be more willing
than the city thinks. Golden said in the middle of winter, it would be difficult to believe people
would do without heat in order to conserve. She asked the City Attorney to comment on his
revisions. Bashaw said he was at a disadvantage because he didn't have any opinions on EMF
numbers. If you make a law, you have to discuss the legal consequences. A resolution is
usually a political commitment. The City will always be responsible for its actions whether there
is an ordinance or not. Enforceability is an issue but he doesn't know what the answer is.
Williams felt the City should have a stated goal. Winthrop made the following suggestions:
Section 4A, should state that the City "attempts to minimize EMF.exposure". In 5A, remove
"should be established" and it should say the City "shall systematically seek to reduce public
exposure to EMF..." Section 56, A City goal "shall be to encourage..." Section 613 is redundant
and is stated in 4A and 5A. He said this issue has forced Council to pay close attention to EMFs
but he is not comfortable with setting a number as a standard. It could be detrimental to set s
rigorous standard and not be able to adhere to it. The City would then be in violation of its own
resolution. Winthrop moved to adopt the resolution with suggested changes and Williams
seconded. Laws suggested in Section 5 using 2.5 mG as a goal until more definitive numbers
available. Changes can be made on an on-going basis. Acklin noted that the committee did feel
comfortable with 2.5 mG as a goal but the level of concern rose dramatically when it was made
a strict standard. Bashaw noted Laws' suggestion posed no legal problem. Arnold said all the
data that was available did not reflect that we should choose a number. Laws' statement does
not satisfy anything except for people in the audience. Laws commented that the City cannot
make 100%choices in favor of health but shall always try to improve. The original motion carried
unanimously on roll call vote. (Reso. 91-15)
Confirmation of appointments to Audit Committee and Mayor's appointment of Janice
Reardon to Hospital Board, postponed for two weeks.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
Appeal from a determination by the Finance Director concerning Hotel/Motel taxes due.
Jill Turner, Finance Director, gave a brief history of her findings on the audit done on transient
room tax payers. She estimated a loss to the city of about$5,000 total,.the difference being the
tax paid on the net amount as opposed to the gross amount. SORC is an agency that buys
hotel rooms in bulk and then sells them as a package with other activities, i.e. theatre tickets,
dinners. Teri Koerner, SORC, has been in business for 10 years and represents 25 different
properties. They book rooms for groups as well as individuals. They ask their clients to list a
rack rate and to give it to them for at least 15%less. They then promote their clients in package
deals. Using Turner's formula, Koerner came up With less than $3,000. On the net rate for
rooms that they book, they have paid almost $17,000 into the hotel/motel tax and have been
trying to build 'a base for a stable economy in this town; she was disheartened to listen to the
negative as opposed to the positive SORC tries to do to build a new and broader.audience for
the City of Ashland. Arnold asked to see SORC's contract with Ashland Hills Inn. Lori
Hernando, Ashland Hills Inn Controller, said agreement with SORC is 15%of their published rack
rate at the time of purchase. John Cauvin, President and CEO of Ashland Hills Inn, said all this
Minutes - Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - May 21, 1991 - P. 2
nonsense for$1,052.84. He said he is for audits but thought this was harassment. He disagrees
with the City Finance Director's interpretation of the ordinance. He said she doesn't have hotel
experience and if the City insists they pay this, Ashland Hills Inn will go to court. Turner pointed
out that Section 4.24,040, second sentence, separates the amount of tax from the amount of rent
charged and that's what the ordinance requires. Laws felt everybody had done their jobs and
the Finance Director's job is to interpret the ordinance in the manner.that benefits the City to the
greatest degree. However, he was persuaded by the attorney's briefs and moved to grant the
appeal. Winthrop seconded. The appeal was upheld with Acklin and Arnold dissenting.
Memo from Planning Commission requesting scheduling of hearing before the Council
on Comprehensive Plan Elements. All agreed to schedule the following hearings:
Environmental Resources, June 18th; Open Spaces, July 2nd; Economic Element, July 16th.
Request to cut new pavement at 450 Willow Street. Williams moved to deny the request,
Winthrop seconded, the motion carried with Laws and Arnold dissenting.
Set date for public hearing on proposed methodology and fees for systems
development charges for June 4, 1991. Almquist said on that same day, we have the Lori
Lane public hearing and the Mahar project on Hersey. Acklin moved to approve the date and
Arnold seconded. All ayes on voice vote.
Set date for public hearing to review NW Water Moratorium for June 18, 1991. Almquist
said on that evening, we have the Environmental Resources Element of the Comp Plan and the
Hospital appeal. Acklin moved to approve the date and Arnold seconded, all ayes on voice vote.
Report from TCI Cablevision on channel realignments and program changes effective
June 3, 1991. For information only, no action necessary.
PUBLIC FORUM - Opened and closed without comment.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS:
Second reading by title only of ordinance vacating a portion of Spring Creek Drive.
Arnold moved adoption and Acklin seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote.
(Ord. 2626)
Second reading by title only of ordinance pertaining to vehicular access to Calle
Guanajuato. Arnold moved adoption and Winthrop seconded. The motion carried unanimously
on roll call vote. (Ord. 2627)
Second reading by title only of ordinance amending Chapter V, Population Projections
and Growth. Arnold moved adoption and Acklin seconded: The motion carried unanimously
on roll call vote.
(Ord. 2628)
Second reading by title only of ordinance amending Chapter XI, Energy. Arnold moved
adoption and Acklin seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote. (Ord 2629)
Second reading by title only of ordinance amending Affordable Housing Plan. Winthrop
moved adoption and Arnold seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote. (Ord.
2630)
Second reading by title only of ordinance relative to Business Licenses. Arnold moved
adoption and Laws seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote. (Ord 2631)
First reading by title only of ordinance relative to transient occupancy tax. Williams
questioned the exemptions in 4.24.030(D), "shall not exceed the greater of 10%or$10 per day."
Turner explained per transient meant per person, not per room. Williams moved to second
reading and Winthrop seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote.
First reading of ordinance amending Ordinance 2052. Almquist read the ordinance and
Laws moved to second reading, Arnold seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call
vote.
Minutes - Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - May 21, 1991 - P. 3
First reading by title only of ordinance relative to systems development charges.
Almquist reviewed the changes noting on page 2, under B. Development, the last sentence
should read, "need for additional or enlarged capital improvements." Re: page 6, Section
4.20.080A, Almquist noted that several developers came in the day after the ordinance was first
read and paid a substantial number of systems development charges with no evidence of valid
building permits. The attempt was to create a level playing field for everyone. Laws noted on
page 9, Section 3, "repealed as of June 30" would leave a whole day without an ordinance so
it should read July 1 st. Laws noted it would be fairer not to charge those who have already paid
SDCs as of April 16th regardless of when they build. Williams moved passage to second reading
with the above changes and Laws seconded. Steve Moriia, said the City made a deal and he
didn't feel it was fair to charge a developer twice. After much discussion, it was agreed that
Section 4.20.080A should read: "Any development for which water or sewer systems
development charges were paid prior to April 16, 1991, are exempt from all systems development
charges, if the development occurs within three (3) years of the effective date of this chapter.
If the development occurs after three (3) years from the effective date of this chapter, the
transportation, parks and storm drain portions of the systems development charges shall be
assessed, and a credit shall be given for the water and sewer system development charges paid
prior to April 16, 1991. For systems development charges paid between April 16, 1991 and the
effective date of this chapter, a credit shall be given for the amount paid and shall be applied to
the systems development charges owed hereunder." The first motion and second was
withdrawn and Williams moved passage to second reading with all changes and Laws seconded.
The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote.
Resolution transferring and increasing appropriations within 1990-91 Budget. Almquist
read the resolution. Acklin moved to approve and Winthrop seconded. The motion carried
unanimously on roll call vote: (Reso. 91-12)
Resolution setting cemetery.fees. Almquist read the resolution. Acklin moved to adopt
the resolution and Williams seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote. (Reso.
91-13)
Resolution reorganizing the Audit Committee. Postponed for 2 weeks.
Resolution adopting revised electric rate schedules. Laws moved to adopt and Winthrop
seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll call vote. (Reso. 91-14)
Lease with FAA for runway end Identification lights. Arnold moved to authorize Mayor
and Recorder to execute lease and Acklin seconded. The motion carried unanimously on roll
call vote.
OTHER BUSINESS
Almquist noted the meeting to review City Attorney selection was rescheduled to Tuesday
night. Golden felt there should be a selection committee outside of Council, but that Council
should sit in and comment. Acklin noted proposal was originally made that Council would
interview. Laws felt it was the Mayor's prerogative to decide on the process. Winthrop and
Williams felt other department heads should be included. Golden agreed to meet with Almquist
to discuss further.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adjourned at 10:55 PM.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Minutes —Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - May 21,. 1991 - P. 4
ASHLAND COMMUNITY • 'HOSPITAL
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
April 23, 1991
The regular monthly meeting of the Board of Directors of Ashland Community
Hospital was held on Tuesday, April 23, 1991, in the conference room.
PRESENT: Steve Lunt, B. Doyle Greene, Linda Jackson, Judy Uherbelau, Bruce
Johnson, M.D.; and.Angus Brownfield. Pat Acklin, City Council Representative and
Jerome Nitzberg, M.D, Medical Staff Representative.
Also present: Chuck Butler, Foundation President; James R. Watson,
Administrator; Polly Arnold, Director of Patient Services; Mike McGraw,
Controller; Peggy Cockrell, Director of Personnel; Pat Flannery, Director of
Development; Glenda Cole, Administrative Assistant; and Louise Watson, reporter
for The Daily Tidings.
Guests: Peg Crowley, Director, Community Health Center; Cora Horton, Eileen
Skoog, Barbara VanCurler, and David. Beaudoin, Excellence in Caring Award
Recipients.
Absent: Walt Hoffbuhr and Frank Billovits.
I. EXCELLENCE IN CARING AWARDS
Ms. Cockrell stated that we have four employees receiving awards
today. She introduced each employee and gave a brief background on each. Mr.
Lunt presented each employee with a pin and expressed the Board's appreciation
for their contributions to the Hospital. Recipients were: Cora Horton,
Environmental Services; Eileen Skoog, R.N., Nursing; Barbara VanCurler, Dietary;
and David Beaudoin, Physical Therapy. Following lunch and the presentations, the
employees were excused to have their pictures taken.
II. CALL TO ORDER
Mr.' Lunt called the meeting to order at 12:15 and introduced
everyone.
Ms. Crowley expressed appreciation for the Board's donation to the
Health Clinic. She stated that the donation will enable them to increase their
days of availability. This will benefit both the. clinic and the community. She
stated that 85% of their patients work at minimum wage and have no healthcare
coverage. Patients are charged on a sliding scale basis and may make monthly
payments. They see approximately 75% adults, 13% children, and 12% seniors. She
stated that they have 2 physicians that work with them part-time. Ms. Crowley
answered questions and invited everyone to come down to the clinic for a tour.
r'
Board of Directors
April 23, 1991
page 2
III. MINUTES
Mr. Lunt called for a review of the minutes of the Strategic Planning
Committee of January 4, 1991; the Ad Hoc Planning Committee of February 14, 1991;
the Executive Committee of March 20, 1991; and the Board of Directors of March
26, 1991. Ms. Uherbelau stated that she was present at the March Board of
Directors meeting. The minutes will be corrected. Mr. Brownfield corrected his
motion in the Strategic Planning minutes. The minutes will be corrected.
Following discussion, it was recommended and approved that all sub-
committee minutes will be mailed to all Board members at the time they are mailed
to the committee members. This will keep all Board members current on what is
happening in each sub-committee.
Ms. Uherbelau made the motion to approve the minutes as corrected.
Mr. Greene seconded the motion and the motion carried.
IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Mr. Lunt reported that B00R/A had made a presentation at the last Ad
Hoc Committee meeting and said pretty much what they did at the Board Retreat.
He stated that we should have the revised Master Site Plan in the next few weeks.
V. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
Mr. Watson stated that there was no correspondence to come before the
meeting this month.
Mr. Lunt stated that this is the last Board meeting for Linda Jackson
and presented her with a crystal vase in appreciation of her many years of
support and dedication to the Hospital. Ms. Cockrell then presented Ms. Jackson
a gift certificate and flowers from the management team.
VI. DECISION ITEMS
A. Staff Development Plan: Mr. Watson stated that Physician
Assistants.has been added to the plan and there are no other changes. Following
discussion, Dr. Johnson made the motion to approve the Staff Development Plan as
presented. Mr. Brownfield seconded the motion and the motion carried.
B. Community Health Group: Mr. Watson stated that the medical staff
has agreed to accept up to 3 patients a month for a trial of 4 months. We would
accept patients that are referred for services. Following discussion, .Mr.
Brownfield made the motion to approve the participation in the 4 month trial with
a report to the Board monthly to indicate the level of financial contribution.
Ms. Uherbelau asked to amend the motion to add that the termination be brought
to the Board. Mr. Brownfield agreed. Mr. Greene seconded the motion and the
motion carried. Mr. Watson stated that we will monitor our cost and keep
everyone informed. Ms. Acklin stated that the City Council should be made aware
of this project. Mr. Watson stated that Councilor Greg Williams and Jill Turner,
City Controller, are members of the Community Health Group.
Board of Directors
April 23, 1991
Page 3
C. Transfer of Funds: Mr. Watson requested approval of the transfer
of $300,000 to Materials and Supplies. Mr. Brownfield made the motion to approve
the transfer. Ms. Jackson seconded the motion and the motion carried.
D. Pharmacy Policy & Procedure Manual: Mr. Brownfield stated that
he has reviewed the manual, found it to be excellent, 'very detailed, and
recommended it's approval. Ms. Jackson seconded the motion and the motion
carried. Mr. Lunt reported that Mr. Brownfield and Ms. Cole have worked out a
system whereby the departmental manuals will be reviewed prior to coming to the
Board for approval. Mr. Brownfield encouraged all members to read the manuals
if possible because they are very informative.
E. Special Board Meeting Date: Following review, Thursday, May 2nd
at 0700 was chosen for the special meeting. The meeting will be to review the
options presented by BOOR/A for the location of physicians offices.
F. March Expenditures: Mr. Lunt reported that he had reviewed the
expenditures for the month of March, that everything is in order, and recommended
approval. Ms. Jackson made the motion to approve the expenditures. Dr. Johnson
seconded the motion and the motion carried.
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Infection Control Manual: Mr. Watson stated that the Infection
Control manual will come to the Board next month for approval.
B. Physician Offices - CUP Update: We are still on the City Council
agenda for May 21st.
C. Strategic Planning Update: Mr. Watson reported that our
physician recruiter is having a hard time finding and OB/GYN for us. Most
hospitals are offering benefit packages to entice physicians to their hospitals.
It has been recommended that we provide a "line of credit" that would be repaid
at a later time. We are not sure that we can do this. He stated that he has
talked to the OB Committee and Executive Committee about this and has asked them
to think about it.
The Swing Bed Program is up and running. Nothing new regarding it.
We have asked a consultant to give us a proposal for a diagnostic
cardiac cath lab. This report should be available in a few weeks. We will then
do a survey of physicians to see numbers of procedures sent to Medford.
D. Board Inservice Date: .Following discussion, it was decided that
we should have inservice every other month beginning in June. A date will be
determined later. The June meeting will be on Quality Assurance.
VI. MEDICAL STAFF REPORT
Dr. Nitzberg stated that he had no report this month.
Board of Directors
April 23, 1991
Page 4
VI. QUALITY ASSURANCE
Mr. Watson reported that the Quality Assurance Committee met on April
2, 1991, and that all issues are being handled appropriately.
VII. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. Nursing: Ms.Arnold stated that May 6th is Nurses Day. She
stated that there will be a special luncheon in Medford for nurses on that day
and that each hospital was asked to select a nurse that represented excellence
in caring. Kendra Anderson, LPN, was chosen.
B. Financial: Mr. McGraw reported that we have a new auditing firm
and they will begin their audit in May. Mr. McGraw reported that drug companies
are increasing the prices charged to hospitals in order to recoup revenue lost
as a .result of a new federal law (Pryor Bill) requiring them to offer their
lowest prices to state Medicaid programs.
C. Personnel: Ms. Cockrell reported that Dr. John Maurer will give
the second presentation on the Medical Form program on cable TV. The forums are
scheduled for the 4th Wednesday of the month. She stated that National Hospital
Week is May 13th - 17th and that we will be having a different activity each day.
We will also have an employee barbecue on May 15th and encouraged the Board to
attend. Ms. Cockrell stated that we will be participating in a county wide
disaster drill in late May.
D. Foundation: Mr. Butler stated that Mr. Brownfield has resigned
from the Foundation and Dr. Johnson will be assuming his position. He stated
that they now have 154 Patrons. He stated that 23 of the 27 Foundation members
are Patrons, 6 of 9 Board members are Patrons, and 1 of 7 City Council members
are Patrons. Patty Adams will attend next month's Board meeting to talk about
the Dinner/Dance scheduled for November.
E. Other Issues: Mr. Watson reminded everyone of the Auxiliary's
Chocolate Festival on May 18th. He asked the Board members to consider the
purchase of new tables and chairs for the conference room.
VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Ms. , ackson made the motion to move into Executive Session pursuant.
to ORS 192.660, Section 1, "e". Mr. Greene seconded the motion and the motion
carried.
Dr. Johnson made the motion to move out of Executive Session. Mr.
Greene seconded the motion and the motion carried.
VIII. ADJOURN
Ms. Jackson made the motion to adjourn. Mr. Hoffbuhr seconded the
motion and the motion carried.
Respectfully submitted:
APPROVED:
Stephen B. Lunt, Chairman .
MINUTES
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
Wednesday, May 1, 1991
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 12: 03p.m. on Wednesday,
May 1, 1991 at the Copper Skillet.
ATTENDANCE
In attendance were Commissioners Al Alsing, Merle Mills,
Bill Knowles, Ken Jones, Matthew Ben-Lesser, Linda Katzen,
Jerry Insley, Leo Zupan. Staff representative Pam Barlow
and Administrative Secretary Rhonda Moore attended. Allan
Sandler and Charles Shafer attended along with Jeremy Scott
and Cy Fink.
MINUTES
The minutes of the April meeting were approved unanimously
with the following corrections--Topic: U.S. Cellular
Antenna - . . . Dunn Butte is "right in your face" as you
come around to land at runway 12 . . Topic: Review of
the Expansion of the Administration Building - . . . Katzen
wanted to know where the pilots' phone would be. . .Topic:
FBO Report - Group 3-CAP is putting together a work
party.
NEW MEMBERS/ELECTION OF CHAIR, VICE CHAIR
Motion was made by Insley to nominate Al Alsing as Chairman;
Ben-Lesser seconded. Motion carried unanimously. . . .Motion
was made by Zupan to nominate Ken Jones as Vice Chairman;
Insley seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
. . .Reappointments were made to the Commission by Mayor Cathy
Golden for Jones and Knowles.
LAND USE: MIHALJEVICH
Barlow presented a request for approval of the construction
of a single family structure in an area where the surface of
the ground encroaches on the horizontal surface of the
airport made by Marvin Salles, Century 21, on behalf of Mark
and Karen Mihaljevich. After discussion regarding the
staff's recommended approval of the proposal contingent upon
the applicants signing a hold harmless agreement for airport
noise, it was suggested that the hold harmless agreement be
reviewed by the City Attorney to make certain that the
document will cover- future expansions of the airport. It was
moved by Knowles to recommend the hold harmless agreement
also include a height restriction dependent on approval of
the building plans as submitted to the Planning Department.
Insley seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Minutes - Airport Commission
Wednesday, May 1, 1991
page 2
WAITING LIST POLICY: DISCUSSION
Commissioners discussed the methods for offering hangars to
those on the waiting lists, whether two offers should be
made, when names would be dropped from the waiting list
position, whether to offer a 6 month option if a person was
unable to accept the hangar offer, etc. Knowles moved that
a hangar should be offered to the first on the list and if
that person was unable to accept the hangar, the hangar
would be offered to the second person on the waiting list.
The first person would remain first on the list until a
second hangar opened and that offer was declined by the
first person on the list.' After the second hangar offer was
declined, the first person would be dropped to the bottom of
the list. Jones seconded the motion. It was decided not to
amend the motion to allow the first person on the list to
exercise a 6 month option on the hangar. The motion passed 5
to 2 with Katzen and Insley opposing. . . . Mills moved to
offer the first person on the waiting list a 6 month lease
option on the hangar that would allow the second person to
use the hangar during that time. The first person would
have 6 months to take ownership of the hangar and if that
ownership was not exercised during the 6 months, the hangar
would be offered to the second person on the waiting list.
Insley seconded. Motion passed unanimously. . . .Discussion
was held regarding the hangar waiting lists. Requests were
made of staff to:
--Purge the waiting lists yearly.
--Post current waiting lists in the FBO office.
--Lists should be in chronological order using the date a
hangar was requested as the effective date for placement on
the waiting lists.
--Staff provide a dated receipt to individuals when they
request to be placed on the waiting list.
Staff agreed to accommodate these requests promptly.
Minutes - Airport Commission ,
Wednesday, May 1, 1991
page 3
FREIGHT HANDLERS FEE: CHANGE TO FIXED RATE
Staff requested that the Airport Commission recommend to
City Council to amend Section 3 , Part C of Ordinance 2392,
making the freight handlers fee a fixed rather than a
variable fee to read as follows: "b) The fee shall be
($5.00/$10. 00) for all 135 flights landing at the Ashland
Airport" . The Commission declined to accept the change and
requested Scott to' collect the fee as required based on
Maximum Gross Takeoff Weight. Insley moved to leave
Ordinance 2392 as is. Knowles seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. . . .Knowles asked Scott for the current procedure
at the airport for collecting the fees. Scott indicated
pilots come to the office and fill out receipts that are
then forwarded to the freight companies. Alsing stated that
it is up to the City to enforce collections. Insley
remarked that liens against aircraft can be filed with the
FAA.
REVIEW OF SAFETY REPORTS - JERRY INSLEY
Insley reviewed the safety reports. The NAVY T-28 and the
Cessna 310 are not tied down and it may be necessary to
advise the owners to anchor these planes to avoid damage to
other planes during high winds. Insley will report further
to the Commission on this matter. Insley will confer with
the City Attorney to research the liability of the City when
craft do not use City-supplied tie downs at the airport.
US CELLULAR ANTENNAE
Barlow reported speaking with U.S. Cellular's Chicago
office, and found that the antennae location on Dunn Butte
was still tentative with property owners and U.S. Cellular.
Alsing requested that a letter be sent to Council opposing
the proposal.
STATUS OF REIL AND LORAN SYSTEMS
Barlow reported that Ashland is in the top 10 for. receiving
a LORAN system. The REIL should be installed sometime
during June or July, 1991. Insley suggested that, in lieu of
using the taxiway during construction, that the threshhold
on 30 be displaced 3001 .
Minutes - Airport Commission
Wednesday, May 1, 1991
page 4
FBO REPORT
Scott reported that a "Good Guy Award" should be given to
them for the clean up done. . . .The bathrooms ' septic system
backup problems have been resolved temporarily. The septic
system's deficiencies have not yet been resolved with the
County. . . .The City repaired the rotating beacon. . . .The CAP
has been on a Search & Find exercise. . . .CAP and Air Force
are accountable for the CAP hangar maintenance problems.
. . .The 310 was tied down and the T28 chalked. . . .There was
some theft from the canteen candy machines. Scott reported
that several young girls were involved and he was able to
catch one of them in the act and talk with them. Scott
thinks that will be the end of the problem. . . .Scott will be
unable to attend the Users' Group Meeting and requested that
a substitute be sent if necessary. . . .Scott stated that the
financial report for April will be available by May 20 and
that following months' reports will be available within the
same time frame.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Zupan moved that the tiedown fees be waived during the May
18 Aerofest being held at the Medford/Jackson County
Airport. Insley seconded. Motion passed unanimously.
. .Allen Sandler requested the Commission's opinion on
including home hangar plans in the Master Plan. . . .Sandler
also requested Commission's opinion on possibility of
allowing a residence or hotel on airport land. It was
suggested that Sandler check with FAA and Roy Bashaw.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Alsing adjourned the -meeting at 1:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted:
Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant
Airport Commission
PJB:rm\591.min
CITY OF ASHLAND
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEET=NG
M=NiJT IF-S
April 24, 1991 Chair Adams called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m. at 340 S. Pioneer Street.
ATTENDANCE:
Present: Thomas Pyle, Patricia Adams, Al Alsing, Lee .
Howard, Wes Reynolds, Ken Mickelsen, Greg
Williams
Absent: None
I. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE. AGENDA
An update on So. Pioneer Street and Systems Development charges was
placed under Old Business.
II. APPROVAL OF MINITTES
Commissioner Howard made a motion to approve the minutes of the
March 25, 1991 Regular Meeting as written. Commissioner Alsing
seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
III. BILLS AND FINANCES
A. Approval of previous month's disbursements
Commissioner Pyle made a motion to approve the previous month's
disbursements as indicated by Payables checks 414906 through 414987 in
the amount of $47,394.57 and Payroll checks 414374 through 414421 in the
amount of $23,602.59. Commissioner Howard seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
B. Approval of March 31, 1991_ Quarterly Financial Statement
Commissioner Pyle made a motion to approve the March 31, 1991 Quarterly
Financial Statement for the third quarter of fiscal year 1990-91.
Commissioner Howard seconded.
In discussion, Commissioner Reynolds inquired as to why some areas of
expenditures were not approximately three fourths expended at this time.
Director Mickelsen explained that recreation and pool oriented accounts are
typically not used heavily in the first three quarters but expended in the
fourth quarter.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 2
Regular Meeting - April 24, 1991
IV. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ON THE AGENDA None
V. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION NOT ON THE AGENDA None
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Bid letting - Stairway Work in Lithia Park
Director Mickelsen indicated that the department had received one bid
for the new stairway construction in Lithia Park. That bid was from
Ashland Construction, Inc. , the same firm which had constructed the first
stairway, in the amount of $7,000. He indicated that the department was
very satisfied with this firms construction of the first stairway and that
the bid price was under the budget estimate for the project and, therefore,
recommended that the Commission accept the bid.
Commissioner Howard made a motion to accept the bid proposal from
Ashland Construction, Inc. in the amount of $7,000 for construction of the
new stairway in Lithia Park. Commissioner Alsing seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
It was estimated that the project would be completed by mid-June.
B. Bid letting - Utility truck body
Director Mickelsen presented a bid tabulation form to the Commission
for a utility truck body. The bids were very competitive. Director
Mickelsen recommended that the Commission accept the lower bid from
Advanced Truck Body indicating that the department has worked with this
firm in the past and has been satisfied with its work.
Commissioner Alsing recommended that the Commission accept the bid from the
low bidder. Commissioner Pyle seconded.
The vote was: .5 yes - 0 no
C. Report of security for Lincoln Statue and Perozzi Fountain
Superintendent Gies made a report to the Commission for the various
options available for placing security video cameras at both the Perozzi
Fountain and the Lincoln Statue to hopefully deter vandalism.
MOTION After brief discussion of .the range of options, Commissioner Pyle made
a motion to purchase and install the least expensive video camera security
system which would include the number of cameras necessary to cover both .
the Perozzi Fountain and the Lincoln Statue. Commissioner Alsing seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
D. Letter from Planning Department on Open Space element of new
Comprehensive Plan
The Commission received a memorandum from the Planning Director dated
April 19, 1991 indicating that modification in wording for the Open Space
element of the new comprehensive plan was needed because there was not yet
a secure funding source for the program. Copies of both the current
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 3
Regular Meeting - April 24, 1991
OLD BUSINESS - con't.
Comprehensive plan wording - con't.
wording and new wording were presented to the Commission. Director
Mickelsen indicated that the Council needed to adopt the new plan by
July 1, 1991.
MOTION Commissioner Reynolds made a motion to accept the new wording with the
proviso that when the whole funding package for Open Space is in place that
the plan could be amended. Commissioner Alsing seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
E. 'Progress with proposed closure of So. Pioneer Street
Director Mickelsen indicated that he had not yet had an opportunity to
speak to City engineering about the possibility changing the parking
arrangement on So. Pioneer to possibly improve the turn around situation.
Commissioner Pyle expressed his concern that the tourist season was almost
upon the community and would like to try to find a solution so that the
road could be closed before the tourists really hit the town.
F. System Development Charges
Commissioner Reynolds spoke briefly about the Council meeting in which
the proposed Systems Development Charges were discussed. - He indicated that
the Commission was the only entity which spoke in favor of the charges at
the meeting. Councilor Williams indicated that general consensus among the
Council seemed to still be an adoption date by July 1, 1991. After some
brief discussion, the Commission by consensus indicated that it was still
in support of adoption by July 1, 1991 and that it still would recommend
that the parks segment of the plan be set at 100% since it was clear, ready
to go and had an immediate need for the funds since some critical open
space lands were on the market now.
VII. NEW BUSINESS None
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE, COMMUNICATIONS, DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Mickelsen indicated that the weather had not been cooperating
for purposes of grading the Lithia Mill site and that there was still a
couple of days left to complete the process. Fie also indicated that the
draining and painting of the pool was waiting for better weather also.
Director Mickelsen reported that there had been some discussion in city
budget meetings about the fiscal viability of the State Ballet of Oregon.
The budget committee had decided that City funds to support. the ballet
performances in the park would be allocated per performance and paid after
each performance. Fie recommended that the Commission adopt the same
policy. The Commission agreed by consensus to disburse the $1,000 which it
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 4
Regular Meeting - April 24, 1991
CORRESPONDENCE, DIRECTOR'S REPORT - con't.
had allocated to the ballet in fiscal year 1991-92 by performance in
proportion to the number of performances given. As yet the department has
not been contacted by the ballet on a performance schedule. '
The Commission had received a letter from Judie Bunch concerning
appropriate signing to let the public know that a portion of the
Marketplace would be on Water Street as well as on Calls Guanajuato and how
to find them. Commissioners Adams arld Howard indicated that they would be
willing to work with Ms. Bunch to create appropriate signing.
IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Reynolds indicated that to the best of his knowledge that
there was no immediate legislation being proposed at the state level which
would impact upon parks at the city level . He suggested that it might be
wise however to have someone like Len Hannon who in on the State Parks
Commission come to a meeting to discuss long range plans. He expressed
concern that the different levels don't talk to each other.
Commissioner Alsing indicated that the Commission had very generally
discussed extending the path in Lithia Park up to the reservoir area. He
indicated that he would like to see a plan of attack developed whereby some
progress could be made to discover the magnitude of such. a project. He
wondered if conceivably Tayler Funds could be expended for the project.
Director Mickelsen suggested that perhaps the Commission could approach the
City about doing a survey of the property. Commissioner Alsing suggested
something very rough such as locating monuments just to get started.
Commissioner Pyle inquired whether or not it would be appropriate to
request that the League of Oregon Cities assist in lobbying with the state
legislature concerning restoring the possibility of real estate transfer
tax and not putting a limitation on sales taxes . Councilor Williams
indicated that his impression was that the League was not a particularly
powerful lobbying entity and that the Commission would probably be more
affective just writing our local legislators. By consensus, the Commission
decided to write letters to appropriate legislators.
Commissioner Pyle indicated that prior to the end of Jean Crawford's
term on the Commission she. had indicated that she would like to see some
particular kinds of tables or benches located at Triangle Park. He
indicated that he would like to see that pursued.
Commissioner Adams reported that the citizens' committee working with
Western Advocates on the survey concerning open space funding was moving
forward and hoped to have the survey completed soon. She indicated that
approximately 400 citizens would be surveyed with 25 questions by trained
volunteers. It was suggested that perhaps a notice could be printed it the
City Newsletter which comes out in the utilities. bills as advance notice to
citizens that the survey would be taking place.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 5
Regular Meeting - April 24, 1991
X. NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA The next Regular Meeting was scheduled for
May 22, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. A "park walk" was
scheduled for 5:00 p.m. prior to the
meeting.
XI. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, Chair Adams
adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted, '
Ann Benedict
Management Assistant
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
May 8, 1991
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Jim Lewis at 7:35 p.m. Members present
were Jim Lewis, Terry Skibby, Thomas Hunt, Keith Chambers, Jean MacKenzie, Jane
Dancer, Lorraine Whitten and Deane Bradshaw. Also present were Senior Planner John
McLaughlin and Secretary Sonja Akerman. No members were absent.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBER
Lewis introduced Jane Dancer, new member who was appointed by the Mayor on May 7th.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Bradshaw moved and Whitten seconded to approve the Minutes of the April 3, 1991
meeting as mailed. Motion passed unanimously.
STAFF REPORTS
PA 91-049
Comprehensive Plan Map Change, Zone Change and Conditional Use Permit
80 and 130 Hargadine Street/96 West Fork Street
Phillip and Sharon Thormahlen
The Richard Stevens Company
McLaughlin explained the applicants would like to change the zoning on these sites from
R-2 to C-1-D in order to operate a motel. Under a Type III amendment, the Zoning Map
and the Comprehensive Plan Map would both have to be changed if this were approved.
Staff concurs with the agent there are impacts from traffic, parking and noise, but the
applicants and agent have failed to meet the burden of proof. Staff is recommending denial
of the zone change, so the Conditional Use Permit could not be approved. If this action
is appealed to the City Council and approved at that level, a motel would be an appropriate
use. When questioned about future ownership, McLaughlin answered future owners could
convert the motel use to a restaurant, shop, etc.
Bradshaw questioned the loss of affordable housing in the six rental units if the structures
are converted into motel units. McLaughlin stated the applicants had applied to convert
the four-pleic at 130 Hargadine Street into a three-unit traveller's accommodation in 1987.
This request; he explained, was-denied;-but-mainly because of manager issues. The new
traveller's accommodation ordinance has since clarified owner and business owner.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
May 81 1991
Mike LaNier, Planning Consultant, 2720 Stonebrook in Medford, stated be is representing
the applicants. He disagreed with the staff report and added there is a need to eliminate
a long standing disagreement with the Thormahlens and the Oregon Shakespearean Festival
Association. The Zone Change will accomplish this. The Thormahlens, he explained,want
to move and they have been unable to sell their property. They want to maintain the
integrity of the property, while continuing to operate the Stone House as a traveller's
accommodation. C-1 is the only zoning which will allow them to relocate and hire a
property manager. He went on to say the existing apartment units across the street sit
vacant all summer because they are usually rented to college students. He stressed the fact
that his clients do not want to change anything regarding the Stone House, they primarily
want to rent out the Windsor Arms as a motel in the summer. LaNier stated this is not a
standard residential neighborhood due to the proximity of Lithia Park, OSFA and the
parking lot across the street.
Bradshaw expressed her concerns with "spot" zoning and stated the ambience of the
neighborhoods could be drastically changed. LaNier countered and said spot zoning is
completely unrelated, as this would be integrated into existing zoning.
Whitten stated that for the record, the Stone House was built after Chataugua and sees no
reason for the owners to maximize their property. Chambers declared he was willing to
accept the intent of the application, but in a legal sense, it does not matter the
Thormahlens plan on keeping the use the same because it is not a binding commitment if
the property sells. It seems the owners are proposing the zone change because they cannot
do what they want. LaNier stated the Thormahlens want to do something legally acceptable
to the City and that the Conditional Use Permit runs with the land.
McLaughlin agreed, however, if someone buys the property and wants to switch to a
permitted use in a C-1-D zone, it may not even require a Site Review or Staff Permit.
Discussion ensued about the impact a zone change would have on the area.
JoAnn Patton, 115 Fork Street, took exception to LaNier's statement about the area not
being a "standard" neighborhood. Most people have lived in their homes longer than the
Thormahlens. She stated the neighborhood is unique because of OSFA and a zone change
would not be appropriate. She agreed the burden of proof had not been met by the
applicants. She added the neighbors purchased their property for residential use.
Chambers moved to recommend denial of this application to the Planning Commission.
Whitten seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed.
2
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
May 8, 1991
PA 91-046
Minor Land Partition
97 Pine Street
Mary Taylor
McLaughlin explained the applicant would like to divide her property into two parcels,
while saving two large trees, one near the side of the existing two story house and another
on the north east comer of the lot. All requirements are being met,however, the neighbors
are against this partition and question the appropriateness of developing that area. Staff
is recommending approval because the ordinances do not protect open space,but rather are
geared to allow for infill of lot areas. The flag design allows for higher densities and comes
closer to compliance with the Comp Plan. Since no Variance is required, Staff feels the
action should be approved.
When questioned by Bradshaw, McLaughlin said water and sewer are available and this has
been confirmed by Public Works.
McLaughlin,when asked about placement of a shop or new accessory dwelling,stated either
could be built on the property, but the new dwelling could be no more than one-half the
square footage of the existing house.
Mary Taylor stated she has lived in the existing house for over nine years. When she
bought the property, it was a very private area, but that has now changed. She no longer
wants to own such a large lot. When she first decided to sell, she contacted neighbors to
see if they wanted to buy it for open space, but received no response. The driveway would
be screened by bushes or a fence, so she feels she will be less impacted than her neighbors
on Scenic Drive. The neighbors on either side of her have not objected. Taylor added that
she and her neighbors tried to get a green belt a couple of years ago and met with Ken
Mickelsen, Parks Director, to find out what they could do. There was no funding available.
Jim Doerter, 80 Scenic Drive, stated that first of all, he has no bad feelings about Mary
Taylor. He then passed out copies of the November 2, 1988 Historic Commission meeting
and the November 9, 1988 Planning Commission meeting, then said a similar request for
a land partition on 109 Pine Street had been denied and Ms. Taylor had spoken against it.
He then showed slides of the area. He agreed the lot is sitting there and the setbacks are
okay, but that area between Pine Street and Scenic Drive would be about the only open
space left in the area, considering recent approvals for Houghton, Barton and Yondorf on
Scenic and Grandview Drives. He stressed the need for the Commission to consider
compatibility with this decision. Approval of this will create a neighborhood behind a
neighborhood. There is also the possibility additional land could be acquired to allow more
flag drives --
3
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
May 8, 1991
When questioned by Skibby about other flag lots on Pine Street,McLaughlin answered most
would need Variances. Chambers remarked he is sensitive to what should be approved in
the Historic District and that the Commission is charged with protecting and enhancing the
Historic District, making sure the District is not degraded. He agrees the quality of Pine
Street is unique and the application runs counter to what the Historic Commission is
charged with doing.
Whitten asked Taylor if she thought of building under the affordable housing ordinance
rather than dividing her property. Taylor answered it is something to consider, however,
a driveway would still be needed. She related there are 1,900 square feet in her house.
Cindy Ceteres, 68 Scenic Drive, stated she bought her home because of the feeling. She
was very struck by what she looks down upon - an incredible old orchard space. She
expressed a strong feeling that each property be considered individually, and that she does
not want to wound something in Ashland that we can never get back. She would like to
save this special area to preserve Ashland.
Taylor, after listening to concerns of the Commission, stated she gave this a great deal of
thought. Her decision to divide the property came after she received her taxes, which had
risen significantly over the past year. Her application does not involve a Variance -and she
would still fight partitions that involve Variances in the area.
Doerter added it would help to have the back property line and height of the new structure
restricted.
Historic Commission concerns include: 1) future development and future owners; 2)
impact on street; 3) character of neighborhood; 4) open space; 5) property owners being
forced to divide property because of taxes; and 6) the dramatic change of character a new
house would have on existing homes, especially if located behind them on a hill.
Whitten moved to delegate this decision to the Planning Commission with Historic
Commission concerns relating to this specific proposal and flag lot partitions in general to
be forwarded. Skibby seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed.
PA 91-058
Transfer of Ownership
333 North Main Street
Lester S. and Francoise A. Roddy
McLaughlin stated this application is for the transfer of ownership of the Wood's House
traveller's accommodation. All conditions will remain the same.
Chambers moved and Bradshaw seconded to recommend approval of this application.
Motion passed unanimously.
4
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
May 8, 1991
PA 91-064
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review
256 Sixth Street
Jim Haim/Liam Sherlock
This application is for the conversion of two structures - one into a one bedroom cottage
and the other into a workshed/sauna. There is T-1-11 siding on the main house and the
outbuildings. Battens will be added to the siding. McLaughlin stated there is a possibility
one of the structures cannot be saved, and if that is the case, the applicants would not need
the Conditional Use Permit since new construction needs to comply with the setbacks. The
applicants will need to sign in favor of paving the alley, but the paving will be deferred to
a later date. Some type of improvement will have to be made (not paving), perhaps packed
gravel.
Bradshaw moved to recommend approval of the concept of the project,but the Commission
will need more detailed plans (which can be reviewed at a Thursday Review Board
meeting) before the building plans can be approved. Whitten seconded the motion and it
was unanimously approved.
91-063
Minor Land Partition and Variance
Scenic Drive and Alta Avenue
Kim and Dale Rooklyn
McLaughlin explained Alta Avenue currently does not meet access requirements, as it is
very steep and narrow. The applicants bought the property with the intention of dividing
it so they could sell one lot and build on the upper one. In the meantime, the City Council
passed an ordinance which would not allow access off such steep streets. $the partition
is not allowed, the applicants will be forced to sell their property. Ordinance requires the
paving of the frontage of the property (on Alta Avenue) to Grandview Drive. Staff is
recommending the Variance not be granted, however, if the applicants and Planning
Commission are agreeable, the lot split would be approved with the condition if parcel 1
sells, the money will be put into a special account to be used for road improvements. City
services are available on both Alta and Scenic.
The Commission agreed not to vote on this matter, but also agreed the Staff
recommendations sound equitable.
5
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
May 8, 1991
PA 91-057
Conditional Use Permit
660 and 664 "A" Street
James and Cheryl Lewis
McLaughlin explained this application is for a two-unit motel. Since between the alley and
"A" Street is zoned E-1 and the alley is partly paved now, they will look at getting the rest
of the alley paved. Since this area is already zoned for this type of use, Staff is
recommending approval.
Lewis added he wanted to get approval for both houses, although he will probably continue
to live in 660 "A" Street.
With a motion by Skibby and second by Whitten, it was unanimously agreed to recommend
approval of this application. Lewis abstained.
PA 91-067
Zoning Map and Comprehensive Plan Map Change
250 North Pioneer Street
City of Ashland
Due to a mapping error ten years ago, the City is in the process of correcting the zoning
on this piece of property, McLaughlin explained.
Bradshaw moved and Whitten seconded to recommend approval of this action. Motion
passed unanimously.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
April follow:
Michael Sullivan 486 Siskiyou New Studio
Sam Egen 364 Vista Retaining Wall
BPOE 255 E. Main Interior Remodel
Phillip Lang/Ruth Miller 758 "B" St. Remodel
Pam Morey 307 Meade Remodel
Brett Dowell 183 Vista Deck
Bank of America 101 E. Main Sign
Heart & Hands 255 E. Main Sign
6
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
May 8, 1991
OLD BUSINESS
Review Board
Following is the schedule (until the next meeting)for the Review Board,which meets every
Thursday from 3:00 to 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
May 9 Hunt, Whitten and Dancer
May 16 Bradshaw, MacKenzie, Lewis, Hunt and Skibby
May 23 Hunt, Skibby, Lewis and Chambers
May 30 Hunt, Skibby and Chambers
National Historic Preservation Week
Judges will be George Kramer, Terry Grant and Tom Giordano. So far, 20 nominations
have been received. Skibby will conduct Downtown tours on May 12th and 18th beginning
at 2:00 p.m. at the Lincoln Statue.
Senate Bill 750
McLaughlin said he had talked with George Kramer regarding this bill. Right now, it is
dead in committee. If by some chance it gets out, it will most likely die on the floor.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
ADJOURNMENT
With a motion by Whitten and second by Bradshaw, it was the unanimous decision of the
Historic Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m.
7
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE
• MAY 2, 1991
Rose Otte called the meeting to order at 2 : 10 p.m. in the
jury room. Present were sub-committee members Don Laws, Anne
Meredith, and Sabra Hoffman. Also Present were Jill Turner,
Sandra James (Chamber Director) , Michael Jones (Shakespeare) ,
Barbara Allen (Chamber Business Facilitating Committee) , Michael
Gibbs (Chamber -Visitor and Convention Bureau) , Laura Vogel
(Chamber Staff) , Corky Leister (SOREDI) and Lois Wenker (Chamber
President and Budget Committee Chair) .
The purpose of the meeting was to explore better ways to
allocate the Economic Development Budget and to review the
committee's priority's. Rose distributed her letter of concerns.
Michael Gibbs stated that the money spent on Tourism
Promotion is well spent. It is like capital and the return is
shown in future revenues. He believes that the reason the
previous room tax increases failed was because there was little
return for the industry. Gibbs stated he would be willing to
work with the industry groups and explore the possibility of
increasing the tax. Discussion centered around the possibility
of an extra tax.
Other issues discussed was whether the Ordinance should
• guarantee that the first four percent be allocated to the City
and that the remaining balance dedicated to economic development.
Corky Leister said there is always a need for more economic
development funding whether it be for tourism or for general
economic development.
It was decided that Michael Gibbs and the Chamber would
explore funding ideas with other lodging representatives to
decide if they are receptive to any change in the tax.
The next meeting was set for May 23,rd at 2: 00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers.
Approved as amended at May 23 meeting.
•
.*'O* ASp�'°
4 ems. `(�o • � � ♦il V L � iL Li Li 41�
GREGO"
��. Honorable Mayor and City Council
Aram: Al Williams , Director of Electric Utilities
�uFjetL Electric Department Activities for MARCH 1991
THE FOLLOWING IS A CONDENSED REPORT OF THE ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITIES FOR MARCH 1991 .
WE INSTALLED 8 NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES AND 2 OVERHEAD SERVICES.
WE RECONDUCTORED 4 SECONDARY SERVICES DUE TO ELECTRICAL UPGRADES.
WE INSTALLED 1500 FEET OF CONDUIT AND INSTALLED 845 FEET OF
CONDUCTOR.
SEVEN TRANSFORMERS WERE INSTALLED FOR A- TOTAL OF 625 KVA AND FOUR
WERE REMOVED FOR A NET GAIN OF 317 KVA ON THE SYSTEM.
WE RESPONDED TO 50 REQUESTS FOR CABLE LOCATES.
WE HAD 288 CONNECT ORDERS AND 214 DISCONNECT ORDERS FOR A TOTAL OF
502 .
THERE WERE 315 DELINQUENT ACCOUNT NOTICES WORKED AND 87 DELINQUENT
ACCOUNTS WERE DISCONNECTED.
TWELVE 45 ' POLES, TWO 35 ' POLES AND TWO 30' POLES WERE SET IN
CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE TESTING AND TREATMENT PROGRAM.
EMPLOYEES ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
EL�'R=C DEPARZS�7'r
MONTHLY REPORT
MARCH 1991
PRIMARY CIRCUITS INSTALLED
NONE
UNDERGROUND SERVICES INSTALLED
1025 OAR KNOLL 30'-4/0 URD
400 SUNSHINE 40'-4/0 URD
657 N. MAIN 50 ' -350 MCM
659 N. MAIN 50 ' =350 MCM
157 BLUE HERRON 60'-4/0 URD
894 CYPRESS PT. LOOP 90 '-4/0 URD
875 ROCA 150'-4/0 URD
1042 OAK KNOLL
OVERHEAD SERVICES INSTALLED
561 C STREET 60'-#2 TPX
183 VISTA 60'-#2 TPX
ALTERED SERVICES
159 N 2ND ST 125'-#2 TPX
1660 SISKIYOU 30'-#2 TPX
775 FAITH 100,'-#2 TPX
1326 LEE ST
• ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE TWO
TEMPORARY SERVICES INSTALLED
1780 EAST MAIN
740 JEFFERSON
918 CYPRESS PT LOOP
1078 OAK KNOLL
1144 AUGUSTA CT
TEMPORARY SERVICES REMOVED
1042 OAK KNOLL
157 BLUE HERRON
400 SUNSHINE
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLED
1" PVC 90 '
2" PVC 530 '
3" PVC 880 '
TRANSFORMERS INSTALLED
CITY HALL VAULT 2-100 KVA OH'D
11 11 11 1-250 KVA OH'D
681 NORMAL 1-25 KVA OH'D
649 NORMAL 1-25 KVA OH'D
597 NORMAL 1-50 KVA OH'D
A ST ALLEY 1-75 KVA OH'D
TRANSFORMERS REMOVED
CITY HALL VAULT 2-50 KVA OH'D
it " " 1-167 KVA OH'D
A ST ALLEY 1-50 KVA OH'D
POWER POLES INSTALLED
325 TERRA ST POLE STUB
1665 PARKER ST 1-45' POLE
402 HARRISON 1-30 ' POLE
225 B ST 1-35 ' POLE
50 A ST 1-45 ' POLE
1211 PARK ST 1-45 ' POLE
291 HARRISON 1-45 ' POLE
1860 CREVISTON 1-45' POLE
360 GARFIELD 1-45 ' POLE
GLENDOWER ST 1-30 ' POLE
GLENDOWER ST 1-45 ' POLE
436 BEACH - - _- 1-45 ' POLE
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE THREE,
POLES CONT.
NORMAL ST 2-45 ' POLES
NORMAL ST 1-35 ' POLE
A ST 2-45' POLES
WIRE INSTALLED
#2 TPX 375 '
#4/0 URD 370 '
#350 MCM 100 '
STREET LIGHT MAINT.
GREEN MEADOW WAY 1-100 WATT BULB
8 TH ST 2-100 WATT BULBS
MOUNTAIN AVE 2-100 WATT BULBS
LOCATES
TOTAL 50
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
INSTALLED CONDUIT FOR CONDUCTORS WITHIN OAK CREEK SUBDIVISION;
REPLACED POWER POLES IN .CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE REPLACEMENT
PROGRAM; INSTALLED EIGHT NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES, TWO NEW OH'D
SERVICES AND FOUR ALTERED SERVICES; SISKIYOU AND HILLVIEW REPAIRED
OH'D PHASE WIRE THAT BURNED TO THE GROUND; REBUILT TX BANK AT CITY
HALL VAULT DUE TO BURNT CONDUCTORS AND OVERLOAD; TESTED RECLOSERS
AT THE ASHLAND SUBSTATION IN RELATION TO VOLTAGE PROBLEMS; FINISH
NORMAL ST REBUILD; REPAIRED BURNT DOWN PHASE ON THE N. MAIN FEEDER
BETWEEN NEVADA ST AND N MAIN; ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
ELECTRIC #8
CONNECTS: 288 DISCONNECTS: 214 TOTAL: 502
DOOR HANGERS:315 SHUTOFFS:87
ELECTRIC #5
WORKED WITH PHIL LIND TO INSTALL COMPUTER CABLE WITHIN WAREHOUSE
AREA; TESTED GEN. BATTERYS AT FILTER PLANT; WORKED WITH MECHANIC
ON GEN. FOR WATER DEPT. ; WORKED ON POWER AND GROUND PROBLEM FOR
POLICE DISPATCH; ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
METERMAN
TESTED 'lo AND 30 METERS; INVESTIGATED HIGH BILL COMPLAINTS; CABLE
LOCATE S; .ATTENDED-MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
,NEGO�
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
wr
ram: Al Williams , Director of Electric Utilities
Electric Department Activities for FEBRUARY 1991
THE FOLLOWING IS A CONDENSED REPORT OF THE ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITIES FOR FEBRUARY 1991 .
THE DEPARTMENT INSTALLED 1065 FEET OF PRIMARY UNDERGROUND
CONDUCTOR.
WE INSTALLED 7 NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES AND 0 OVERHEAD SERVICES.
WE RECONDUCTORED 6 SECONDARY SERVICES DUE TO ELECTRICAL UPGRADES.
WE INSTALLED 970 FEET OF CONDUIT AND INSTALLED 3680 FEET OF
CONDUCTOR.
FIVE TRANSFORMERS WERE INSTALLED FOR A TOTAL OF 417 KVA AND TWO
WERE REMOVED FOR A NET GAIN OF 367 KVA ON THE SYSTEM.
WE RESPONDED TO 68 REQUESTS FOR CABLE LOCATES.
WE HAD 227 CONNECT ORDERS AND 180 DISCONNECT ORDERS FOR A TOTAL OF
407 .
THERE WERE 301 DELINQUENT ACCOUNT NOTICES WORKED AND 89 DELINQUENT
ACCOUNTS WERE DISCONNECTED.
SIX . 45' POLES, TWO 35 ' POLES AND TWO 30' POLES WERE SET IN
CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE TESTING AND TREATMENT PROGRAM.
EMPLOYEES ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
J
MONTHLY REPORT
FEBRUARY 1991
PRIMARY CIRCUITS INSTALLED
ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE 915' - #2 AL CCN
PARR PLACE APTS. 150' - #2 AL CCN
NORMAL AVE. REBUILD 1350' - #556 AAC (30)
UNDERGROUND SERVICES INSTALLED
875 CYPRESS PT. LOOP 60' - #4/0 URD
721 MORTON 70' - #4/0 URD
695 OAR ST 220' - #4/0 URD
525 DOGWOOD 60' - #4/0 URD
1016 CANYON PARK 90' - #4/0 URD
1138 AGUSTA CT "90 ' - #4/0 URD
764 OAK KNOLL 100' .- #4/0 URD
OVERHEAD SERVICES INSTALLED
NONE
ALTERED SERVICES
52 EAST MAIN
561 C ST
70 BUSH ST
1535 WEBSTER
288 PATTERSON
310 OAK ST
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE TWO
TEMPORARY SERVICES INSTALLED
157 BLUE HERRON
2524 SISKIYOU BLVD
2990 NOVA
1138 AUGUSTA CT
182 NEVADA
TEMPORARY SERVICES REMOVED
695 OAK
525 DOGWOOD
1016 CANYON PARK
248 VAN NESS
328 WIMER
852 MORTON
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLED
300 ' - 2" PVC
670 ' - 3" PVC
TRANSFORMERS INSTALLED
538 ALTAMONT 1-50 KVA OH'D
ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE 1-167 KVA UG
1-100 KVA UG
NEVADA ST 1-50 KVA OH'D
.426 B ST 1-50 KVA OH'D
TRANSFORMERS REMOVED
538 ALTAMONT 1-25 KVA OH'D
NEVADA ST 1-25 KVA OH'D
POWER POLES INSTALLED
1058 PALM 1-35 ' POLE
1149 OAK ST 1-30 ' POLE
538 ALTAMONT 1-45 ' POLE
121 NOB HILL 1-45 ' POLE
SOSC PARKING LOT 1 730 ' POLE
5TH & A ST 1-45 ' POLE
269 GRESHAM 1-35 ' POLE
955 BELLVIEW 1-45' POLE
426 B ST 1-45 ' POLE
460 B ST 1-45 ' POLE
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT ,
PAGE THREE,
WIRE INSTALLED
150 ' #6 DPX
190 ' #1/0 TPX
235 ' #350 MCM
690 ' #4/0 URD
1065 ' #2 AL CCN
1350 ' #556 AAC (30)
STREET LIGHT MAINT. .
363 OXFORD 1-T&C FIX
1-PHOTO-CELL
1-100 WATT BULB
LAUREL ST 1-PHOTO-CELL
PARK & ASHLAND ST 1-150 WATT BULB
SISKIYOU BLVD 1-70 WATT BULB
1-PHOTO-CELL
LOCATES
TOTAL 68
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
RECONDUCTORED NORMAL AVE FROM #8 COPPER TO 30 #556 AAC AS PER
SYSTEM STUDY; CHANGED OUT RECLOSER ON THE BUSINESS CIRCUIT OF THE
NEVADA.SUBSTATTON; REPLACE POWER POLES IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE
TESTING AND TREATMENT PROGRAM; INSTALLED SEVEN NEW UNDERGROUND
SERVICES; INSTALLED CONDUCTOR AT ASHLAND MEADOW VILLAGE AND PROVIDE
A LOOP FEED CIRCUIT FOR THE PARK PLACE APTS. ; INSTALLED 970 FEET
OF UNDERGROUND CONDUIT AND 6380 FEET OF CONDUCTOR; ATTENDED MONTHLY
SAFETY MEETING.
ELECTRIC #8
CONNECTS: 227 DISCONNECTS:180 TOTAL: 407
DOOR HANGERS: 301 SHUTOFFS:89
ELECTRIC #5
GRID NUMBERED 467 POLES IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR DRID NUMBERING
PROGRAM; MAINT.- ON PMP. STATIONS; WIRE ALARM AT FILTER PLANT;,
PREPARE MATERIAL LISTS FOR NEW GENERATOR. AT PUMP STATION; MISC.
ELECTRIC WORK FOR CITY DEPTS. ; ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
METERMAN
TESTED 10 & 34 METERS AS PER TESTING PROGRAM; INVESTIGATE HIGH BILL
COMPLAINTS; PREFORMED7ELECTRIC-DEPT. LOCATES; SAFETY METING.
Y
Y o.rao..r.M1
oft AS
1y rma ran dum
�4EGGa
D, Honorable Mayor and City Council
wram: `^�
Al Williams , Director of Electric Utilities
,�$UQIQtt.- Electric Department _Activities for JANURARY 1991
THE FOLLOWING IS A CONDENSED REPORT OF THE ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITIES FOR JANURARY 1991 .
THE DEPARTMENT INSTALLED 1650 FEET OF PRIMARY UNDERGROUND
CONDUCTOR.
WE INSTALLED 6 NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES AND 0 OVERHEAD SERVICES.
WE RECONDUCTORED 5 SECONDARY SERVICES DUE TO ELECTRICAL UPGRADES.
WE INSTALLED 2930 FEET OF CONDUIT AND INSTALLED 2315 FEET OF
CONDUCTOR.
FIVE TRANSFORMERS WERE INSTALLED FOR A TOTAL OF 210 KVA AND TWO
WERE REMOVED FOR A NET GAIN OF 150 KVA ON THE SYSTEM.
WE RESPONDED TO 56 REQUESTS FOR CABLE LOCATES.
WE HAD 266 CONNECT ORDERS AND 226 DISCONNECT ORDERS FOR A TOTAL OF
492 .
THERE WERE 517 DELINQUENT ACCOUNT NOTICES WORKED AND 70 DELINQUENT
ACCOUNTS WERE DISCONNECTED.
ONE 55 ' POLE, THREE 45' POLES, AND ONE 30 ' POLE WERE SET IN
CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE TESTING AND TREATMENT PROGRAM.
EMPLOYEES ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
Fr-�"T�I C DEPAR'I1�7'r ,
MONTHLY REPORT
JANURARY 1991
PRIMARY CIRCUITS INSTALLED
555 THORNTON WAY 300'-#2 AL CCN
THOMAS SUBDIVISION 400' 42 AL CCN
CLAY ST. SYSTEM IMP. 950'-#4/0 JKT. PRIM.
UNDERGROUND SERVICES INSTALLED
607 LIBERTY 90'- ,#350 MCM
912 CYPRESS PT. LOOP 90' - #4/0 URD
301 GRANDVIEW 130'- #4/0 URD
1258 MUNSON 40'- #4/0 URD
876 CYPRESS PT LOOP 80'- #4/0 URD
540 PARRSIDE 35'- #4/0 URD
OVERHEAD SERVICES INSTALLED
NONE
ALTERED SERVICES
122 HEIMAN
134 HIGH STREET
105 HIGH STREET . 70'- #2 TPB
423 MORTON 60'- #2 TPX
645 GLENWOOD 70'- #4 TP%
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE TWO
TEMPORARY SERVICES INSTALLED
940 PINECREST
894 CYPRESS LOOP
1013 PINECREST.
1482 WOODLAND
TEMPORARY SERVICES REMOVED
290 WIGHTMAN ST
876 CYPRESS PT LOOP
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLED
400 ' - 1" PVC 550 ' - 3" PVC
840 ' - 2" PVC 1140 ' - 4" PVC
TRANSFORMERS INSTALLED
1482 WOODLAND 1-25 KVA UG
SHER14AN ST 1-75 KVA OH'D
THOMAS SUBDIVISION 2-50 KVA UG
280 ORANGE ST 1-50 KVA OH'D
707 HELMAN 1-10 KVA OH'D
TRANSFORMERS REMOVED
280 ORANGE ST 1-50 KVA OH'D
707 HELMAN 1-10 KVA OH'D
POWER POLES INSTALLED
IOWA ST 1-45' POLE
1287 IOWA ST 1-30 ' POLE
CLAY ST 6 EAST MAIN 1-55 ' POLE
800 PRACT ST 1-45 ' POLE
47 EMERICK 1-45 ' POLE
WIRE INSTALLED
#4 TPX 70 '
#2 TPX 130 '
#4/0 URD 375 '
#350 MCM 90 '
#2 AL CCN 700 '
#4/0 AL JKT (30) 950'
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE THREE,
STREET LIGHT MAINT.
TOMMYS REST. 1-100 WATT BULB
AIRPORT 2-10 WATT RUNWAY BULBS
BESWICK 1-150 WATT BULB .
165 ALMOND ST 1-100 WATT BULB
it 11 11 1-PHOTO-CELL
WILEY & PRIM ST 1-PHOTO-CELL
809 GLENDOWER 1-100 WATT BULB
" - 1-100 WATT FIX
HIGH & LAUREL 3-PHOTO-CELL
11 11 3-100 WATT BULBS
5TH, 6TH & 7TH C ST 3-100 WATT BULBS
667 INDIANA ST 1-100 WATT BULB
1-PHOTO-CELL
LOCATES
TOTAL 56
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
REPLACED POWER POLES IN CONJUNCTION WITH POLE TESTING AND TREATMENT
PROGRAM; INSTALLED SIX NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES; INSTALLED FOUR NEW
TEMP. SERVICES; DISCONNECTED TWO TEMP. SERVICES; INSTALLED 2930
FEET OF CONDUIT AND 2315 FEET OF CONDUCTOR; INSTALLED FIVE
DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS; VARIOUS STREET LT. MAINT; ATTENDED
MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
ELECTRIC #8
CONNECTS: 266 DISCONNECM 226 TOTAL: 492
DOOR HANGERS: 517 SHUTOFFS: 70
ELECTRIC #5
GRID NUMBERED POWER POLES AND UNDERGROUND DEVICES; REPAIRED
BARMANUTOR CONTROLS AT THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT; INSTALLED NEW
SERVICE AT THE NORTH MAIN PUMP STATION; WORKED ON THE POLICE GATE
CONTROLS; REPAIR HYDROLIC PUMPS AT THE FILTER PLANT; CHANGE OUT THE
BY-PASS SWITCH ON SISKIYOU BLVD. OVERHEAD LIGHTS; ATTENDED MONTHLY
SAFETY MEETING.
METERMAN
TEST AND REPAIRED 10 AND 3¢ METERS AS PER ELECTRIC DEPT. TESTING
PROGRAM; CHANGE CHART AT THE NEVADA SUBSTATION; WIRE CT' S AT
GARFIELD ST; CHANGE OUT RECLOSER AT THE NEVADA SUBSTATION; ATTENDED
MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING. _
. �°F�"�o. Pmurttxt � �tm
�4EGO •
�lllI. . Honorable Mayor and City Council
r` v)
Al�` Al Williams , Director of Electric Utilities
1YII�EtI. Electric Department Activities for DECEMBER 1990
.THE FOLLOWING IS A CONDENSED REPORT OF THE ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITIES FOR DECEMBER 1990 .
THE DEPARTMENT INSTALLED 515 FEET OF PRIMARY UNDERGROUND CONDUCTOR.
WE INSTALLED 7 NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES AND 2 OVERHEAD SERVICES.
WE RECONDUCTORED 3 SECONDARY SERVICES DUE TO ELECTRICAL UPGRADES.
WE INSTALLED 690 FEET OF CONDUIT AND INSTALLED 1635 FEET OF
CONDUCTOR.
SEVEN TRANSFORMERS WERE INSTALLED FOR A TOTAL OF 412 KVA AND EIGHT
WERE REMOVED FOR A NET GAIN OF 150 KVA ON THE SYSTEM.
WE RESPONDED TO 42 REQUESTS FOR CABLE LOCATES.
WE HAD 213 CONNECT ORDERS AND 184 DISCONNECT ORDERS FOR A TOTAL OF
397 .
THERE WERE 219 DELINQUENT ACCOUNT NOTICES WORKED AND 49 DELINQUENT
ACCOUNTS WERE DISCONNECTED.
ONE 50 ' POLE, TWO 45 ' POLES, AND ONE 30 ' POLE WERE SET IN
CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE TESTING AND TREATMENT PROGRAM.
EMPLOYEES ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
' EI��RIC DEPAR'I'�V'r
MONTHLY REPORT
DECEMBER 1990
PRIMARY CIRCUITS INSTALLED
401 TERRACE ST. 205' - #2 AL CCN
LITHIA PARR 310' - #1/0 CCN
UNDERGROUND SERVICES INSTALLED
2961 NOVA ST. 80' - 4/0 URD
196 PATTERSON 115' - 4/0 URD ,
248 VAN NESS 100' - 350 MCM
91 " 130' - 4/O URD
328 WIMER ST. 300' - 4/0 URD
719 PARK ST.
1259 MUNSON 40' - 4/0 URD
OVERHEAD SERVICES INSTALLED
1602 ASHLAND ST. 145' - #1/0 TPX.
ALTERED SERVICES
601 WALNUT 120' - #2 TPX.
COOLIDGE ST. 30' #1/0 TPX.
1210 ASHLAND MINE RD.
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE TWO
TEMPORARY SERVICES INSTALLED
NONE
TEMPORARY SERVICES REMOVED
NONE
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLED
690 ' — 2" PVC CONDUIT
TRANSFORMERS INSTALLED
521 N, MAIN 1-50 KVA OH'D
420 SHERIDAN 1-50 KVA OH'D
THORTON WAY 1-75 KVA OH'D
479 SCENIC 1-75 KVA OH'D
GARFIELD 1-75 KVA OH'D
1602 ASHLAND ST. 1-37 KVA OH'D
560 WALKER 1-50 KVA OH'D
TRANSFORMERS REMOVED
401 TERRACE 1-25 KVA OH'D
521 'N. MAIN 1-25 KVA OH'D
420 SHERIDAN 1-25 KVA OH'D
THORTON WAY 1-50 KVA OH'D
479 SCENIC 1-25 KVA OH'D
GARFIELD 1-50 KVA OH'D
1602 ASHLAND ST 1-25 KVA OH'D
560 WALKER 1-37 KVA OH'D
POWER POLES INSTALLED
HELMAN ST. 1-30 ' POLE
401 TERRACE 1-45' POLE
150 HERSEY 1-50 ' POLE
713 OAK 1-45' POLE
WIRE INSTALLED
205 ' #2 AL CCN
310 ' #110 CCN
725 ' #4/0 URD
100 ' #350 MCM
175' #1/0 TPX
120 ' #2 TPX
o
ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT
PAGE THREE,
STREET LIGHT MAINT.
AIRPORT 1- 10 WATT RUNWAY
1- 10 WATT DIRECTIONAL
1713 SISKIYOU 1- 150 WATT BULB
LINDA ST. 1- 100 WATT BULB
" 1- PHOTO CELL
145 E. MAIN 1- 200 WATT BULB
SISKIYOU BLVD 1- 70 WATT BULB
701 NORMAL 1- 100 WATT BULB
TERRACE ST. 1- 100 WATT BULB
HERSEY AND ORANGE 1- 100 WATT BULB
LOCATES
TOTAL 42
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
REPLACED EXISTING POWER POLES IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR POLE TESTING
AND TREATING PROGRAM; INSTALLED SEVEN NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES;
INSTALLED ONE NEW OVERHEAD SERVICE; INSTALLED 690 FEET OF
UNDERGROUND CONDUIT; INSTALLED 1635 FEET OF CONDUCTOR; INSTALLED
SEVEN . NEW . -DISTRIBUTION TRANSFORMERS; VARIOUS STREET LIGHT
MAINTENANCE; .AT.TENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING•.
ELECTRIC #8
CONNECTS: 213 DISCONNECTS: 184 TOTAL:397 .
DOOR HANGERS: 21'9 SHUTOFFS: 49
ELECTRIC #5 '
WORKED WITH SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT CRWES ON ANAROBIC DIGESTER; GRID
NUMBERED POWER POLES AND UNDERGROUND DEVICES; REPAIRED LIGHT.
FIXTURE AT THE SEWAGE. TREATMENT PLANT; WORKED ON THE AIREATOR
MOTORS AT SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT; CLEAN AND REPAIR ASHLAND PUMP
STATION CONTROLLS; FINISH WIRING SAFETY SWITCHES ON THE ROLL-UP
DOORS AT FIRE STATION #1; ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
METERMAN
TEST AND REPAIR 10 AND 3� METERS AS PER ELECTRIC DEPT. TESTING
PROGRAM; INVESTIGATE VOLTAGE COMPLAINTS AND INSTALL RECORDER IF
NECESSARY; ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING.
0
L Memorandum
percod May 28, 1991
Mayor and City Council
rQTtI: Dick Wanderschei
�1t�tjgt : Progress on Affordable Housing
Councilor Winthrop thought it would be worthwhile to update the
Mayor and City Council on progress that has been made to date with
respect to affordable housing. The following items have been
accomplished thus far.
1) PARK PLACE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
This four-unit project has been granted preliminary approval
from the Ashland Planning Commission. Final Plan review by
the Planning Staff is scheduled for June as a Type I hearing,
which would then be reviewed by the Ashland Planning
Commission at its July 9th regular meeting. After this it is
anticipated that construction would commence in mid to late
July.
2) SLEEPING SECOND INSTRUMENT
The sleeping second mortgage document has been developed
and reviewed by the City's legal counsel. It has also been
reviewed by Farmers Home and they agreed it was acceptable
for use in the Park Place project. It is now ready for use in any
affordable housing project where it will be needed.
3) AFFORDABILITY RESOLUTION
The City Council adopted Resolution 91-04 at its February 19,
1991 City Council meeting. This resolution sets income levels,
rent levels, and purchase price levels for affordable housing
projects in Ashland.
4) LAND USE AND ZONING
A number of changes to land use and zoning ordinances have
been approved. The City Council has approved a change
which allows accessory apartments in R-1 zones via a
conditional use permit. . Also approved was a requirement that
25 percent of all units proposed for condominium conversion
must meet affordability criteria. The rollback of density and a
new density bonus of up to 25 percent for each percentage of
new housing that meets affordability guidelines had second
reading on May 21st and will become effective on June 21st.
In addition, Planning Staff has drafted ordinance changes which
would require as a condition of approval the provision of
affordable housing for housing projects which are proposed on
C-1 or E-1 land, and thus require a conditional use permit.
Also, it is being proposed that land annexed for housing would
carry a requirement that affordable housing be provided in
conjunction with this annexation approval. These changes
have been presented to the Planning Commission but have not
yet received approval.
This summarizes the activities that have been accomplished
over the last ten months. Hopefully, when all these changes
are accomplished, we will be able to entice some developers to
start providing affordable housing in Ashland.
d J Cf �N�i'•
: � -._ a . � elitorttn �E �tm
May 30, 2992
�Rgoo ;
Brian Almquist, City Administrator
rum:
Steven Hall, 'Public Works Director-_J-U j�l 4,
� 3P Re:Lori Lane LID - Continued Hearing, Sidewalks
r ACTION REOIIESTED
Option 1. City Council review attached information,
complete public hearing and adopt attached original
proposed ordinance forming LID.
Option 2. City Council direct staff to narrow
street (minimum width of 20 feet) to allow
construction of a four foot sidewalk in front of Tax
Lot 301 .
BACKGROUND
At the scheduled hearing on May 7, 1991, City
Council directed staff to review the issue of
including sidewalks or pathways on the improvement
to the remainder of Lori Lane.
Council also directed staff to renotify participants
of the proposed changes and increase in cost.
I noted during the hearing that there were some
physical constraints, including some mature
landscaping, that sidewalk or pathway construction
would effect. The property affected is owned by
Allen Drescher. Attached are two letters from Mr.
Drescher expressing his concerns with the
landscaping. I suggest you ask Roy Bashaw what the
City's legal responsibilities are for landscaping
that is placed within the public right-of-way
Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer, and I reviewed
the project in the field and he has provided a
memorandum expressing constraints and cost for the
proposal. His philosophical discussion of the
process used. by the Engineering Division gives you a
"flavor" of the degree -that the Division attempts to
meet 'all needs within the constraints of given
projects and sites.
Brian Almquist
May 30, 1991
page 2
New sidewalks will be constructed as a condition of
the Glenvista P.U.D. , Phase 2 (Tax Lot 300, 39-1E-
5DA) , which would leave about 170 feet of sidewalk to be
constructed on Tax Lot 301 where the physical constraints exi
I 'concur with Jim Olson's recommendation that a sidewalk or
pathway not be constructed adjacent to Tax Lot 301. With the
volume of traffic and the 12 foot travel lanes, there shoul
adequate room for pedestrians to use the paved street safel
If the Council wishes to add the sidewalk or pathway in fron
Tax Lot 301, staff recommends another continuation of the pub
hearing and staff will renotify the participants of the propo
change in design for the June 4, 1991 Council meeting.
OPTIONS
+ City Council accept staff proposal and not construc
sidewalk adjacent to Tax Lot 301.
+ City Council approve 20 foot wide road section for
portion of improvement to allow 4 foot sidewalk to be
constructed in front of Tax Lot 301. Staff does not
recommend reducing road width to 20 feet.
SUMMARY
1. Council directed staff to review addition of
sidewalk/pathway for full length of LID.
2. Sidewalk is required on Tax Lot 300 with development.
3. Sidewalk/pathway along Tax Lot 301 has severe physical
constraints and would require the removal of some matu
landscaping or narrowing the street from 24 feet to 20 f
for at least a portion of the length.
4 . Staff recommends approval of original proposal without
sidewalk/pathway adjacent to Tax Lot 301.
SMH:rm\lori2lid.cc
Enclosures - Original Ordinance
Olson report
Original memo
Dresher letter, 5/22/91
Dresher letter, 5/20/91
cc: Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant
Allen Drescher, P.C.
DRESCHER & ARNOLD rjV Amp
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
E.MAIN P.O.BOX M A11
ASHL 8!
RNG,OREGON 520 £1 \
ALLEN G.DRESCHER,PC TELEPHONE
G.PHILIP ARNOLD Na 22 1991 'f t(�f/''���"'ft 1�j((}� (503)4824 s FAX
May / �j 1 ii {�D (509)214 G1
DATE MAY 2 4 101
Steven Hall, P.E.
Ashland City Hall
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re : 410 Lori Lane
Dear Steve:
This is simply to confirm my position set out in my
letter to Roy Bashaw, a copy of which is enclosed. . I
understand that the City takes a differing position.
Simply to avoid a controversy between myself and the
City of Ashland I am willing to compromise and settle
this matter on the following terms:
1 . A 24 foot wide street improvement will be
constructed. This could be either a 20 foot wide street
with a four foot sidewalk or a 24 foot wide street with
no sidewalk.
2 . The 24 foot wide improvement will commence
within two feet of the south-westerly edge of the right
of way to minimize the encroachment into my existing
concrete driveway, trees and shrubs on the northeasterly
side of the improvement.
3 . The City will remove the existing concrete
sloped driveway and recontour and replace it with a
concrete driveway to serve as access to the concrete
parking lot with the same width as the existing concrete
driveway using wire mesh and a concrete mix suitable to
withstand use by fully loaded garbage trucks on a steep
incline .
4 . The City will remove the two pine trees and
fotinia shrubs that lie within the area to be improved.
The smaller pine tree and the shrubs will be transplanted
by the City on my property along the border of the area
to be improved, and if any of the transplanted shrubs or
if the small pine dies, they will be replaced by the City
with a tree or shryb of--the same kind , quality and
matur'ity as the replaced tree or shrub.
PAGE .2
Lori Ln.
5. I am resigned to the probability that the more
mature shore pine will be lost. The City will need to
replace it with a shore pine of a size and quality
comparable to the younger pine that we will try to save.
6. The foregoing items will be undertaken by the
City at no cost to me in consideration of my release of
my claim against the City to the ownership of the
property on which the concrete driveway and trees and
shrubs are located as set forth in my letter to Roy
Bashaw.
With a copy of this letter to Roy Bashaw, I am
confirming that at this time and until this matter is
resolved , or until I am convinced otherwise , ' I will
maintain the position set forth in my earlier letter to
him.
I _ want to thank you, Jim Olsen and Roy Bashaw for
your courtesy and thoughtfulness in attempting to resolve
this matter .
If this matter can be resolved in the manner set
forth above, I would suggest that the council approve an
agreement between myself and the City to this effect.
Thanks again.
Very truly yours,
All esch r
e , P.C.
AGD/amy
Roy Bashaw
Jim Olsen
DRESCHER & ARNOLD
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
=E.w • .a D ?W
ASPLw4 OPEOOP P!5]0
ADEN G."PESCPEP,PC - 03)W93
Y TELEPHONE
4..P 5
AP
PHILIP o Ma 20 1991 l03)AX
I5071 4ez4941
Roy Bashaw
Attorney at Law
292 Terrace Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Dear Roy:
I own real property at 410 Lori Lane.
When the property had apartments built on it in 1972
by a prior owner, a concrete driveway leading from the
parking lot to the street was constructed, presumably
with a building permit (and perhaps as a requirement by
the city for a paved driveway) . Since its construction,
the driveway has been used and maintained by the prior
owners .and myself, and trees and shrubs have been planted
and maintained along either side of the concrete
driveway .
When I purchased the property in 1981 it was my
belief that the property extended to the end of the
concrete driveway, where the used portion of Lori Lane
begins.
I have just learned that the city maintains that the
concrete driveway, constructed with a city permit 19
years ago and maintained as a paved, private driveway
lined with trees and shrubs, encroaches on Lori Lane.
When the city engineer informed• me that only a °small
corner" of the driveway would be cut off and none of the
shrubs would be lost, I . agreed that this would be fine
with me. I am now advised that the plan is to invade
five or six feet of the driveway at a point of steep
incline so that the entire driveway and a portion of the
concrete parking lot will have to be torn up, excavated,
re-contoured and re-cast in concrete at a cost of many
thousands of dollars. Several mature shrubs would also
be destroyed and have to be replaced.
tI .had an inkling thaw something might be amiss, so I
looked up Section 62.18 of the bar book on real property,
a copy of which is enclosed. . I have indicated the two
cases that most closely approximate my situation. The
law on the subject, in summary, seems to be that where
you have a permanent improvement like a concrete driveway
PAGE 2
Lori Ln.
constructed with the permission of the city so that it
extends into an .unused portion of a street and the
property owner is led to believe by the conduct of the
city that the street stops where the permanent
improvement is constructed, and the property owner would
sustain substantial damage if the improvement were
removed, then the city is estopped from denying that the
street has been abandoned where the improvement has been
constructed.
After you have had a chance to look at this, please
give me a call. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
CU&
Allen G. Drescher , P.C.
AGD/amy
encl.
U7 � O ' Qmaran in
May 13, 1991
II: Steve Hall
r
rO2n: James H. Olson
Subject Sidewalks on Lori Lane
The Engineering Staff has always prepared our street
improvement plans with the following points as major
considerations:
1. Public Utilization and Driving Safety.
Improvements are designed in accordance
with current safety standards regarding sight
distance, curve construction, intersection
design, alignment, grades, vertical curves,
etc.
2. Support Strength
All public ways are designed for a minimum
20-year life span, supporting 4 percent truck
traffic loading. . The design takes into
consideration such aspects as the bearing value
of the sub-base, traffic composition, the
thickness and type of base material, and the
thickness and type of pavement material. Each
project is -considered and analyzed individually
and is designed based upon its own set of
circumstances. This is an area which offers
little area for compromise.
3. Construction Costs
Most projects are constructed as local
improvement districts with the adjacent
property owners generally paying 100% of the
costs. The City currently offers no
participation in these projects except under
very rare circumstances.
The Engineering Staff has a very real
obligation to the citizens of Ashland who
comprise any assessment district to maintain
these costs as low as possible. In most
instances, a preliminary construction cost
estimate is published and made available to all
property owners.
Even though this is a preliminary estimate and is done
prior to any survey work and before actual design is
commenced, it is required that the actual bid for
construction be within 10% of the preliminary estimate. It
is imperative that nothing be overlooked in the preliminary
estimate and that problems be anticipated and taken into
consideration.
It is not difficult to design a project where
adequate funding is available. However, when working within
the confines of a limited budget, every additional cost must
be scrutinized. Each cost increase must be computed as to
the impact it will have on each owner's assessment.
4. Design Within Existing Improvements
This aspect of the street improvement process offers the
Engineering Staff its greatest challenge. It is also
something about which we excell. By far, the most difficult
portion of street design is to widen a street to a width
which will support traffic and parking and yet match each
and every driveway, to save owners' prized trees or shrubs,
and to leave landscaping as unaffected as possible. We are
constantly working with the adjacent owners to protect their
improvements, even though they might be located on public
right-of-way and would legally be removed without recourse.
We feel that we are very sensitive to the citizens of
Ashland and are always willing to listen to any reasonable
request.
Every street improvement project is a compromise. It is
a blend of all the previously listed design considerations.
Each additional aspect of construction is a balance between
the significance of the impact on existing improvements and
the cost to complete the work.
Lori Lane is a very good example of such a compromise. We were
approached very early on by Mr. Alan Drescher who expressed.a
desire to save as much of his hedge as possible. It is possible
to save most of the hedge only if the sidewalk were not included
in this area.
To construct the walk would add significantly to the cost of the
project in the following manner:
a. Additional clearing and stripping
lump sum $500. 00
b. Additional excavation
10 c.y. @ $20. 00/c.y. _ $200.00
c. Additional fill material
10 c.y. L37 $15. 0-0 _ $150.00
d. -Remove and replace additional concrete
driveway
360 s. f. @ $5.50 = $1,980.00
e. Construct concrete sidewalk
675 s. f. @ $3.00 = $2 , 025.00
Total $4, 855. 00
The additional sidewalk would add. $4,855.00 to the project cost
which would increase the total construction cost by over 20
percent. This is an extremely costly addition for the benefit to
be derived. If the cost were to be divided equally throughout
the entire district, the cost per foot would raise by $7.38 to
$42. 25 per foot. To assess only the Drescher property would
increase that amount to $69.15 per front foot; which is more than
any previous improvement assessment.
Conclusion
Our original decision to delete the sidewalk from this section of
the improvements was based upon the following:
1. The existing hedge and plantings provide a natural and
attractive buffer between the street and the apartments.
With the installation of sidewalks, this would be entirely
removed along with seven trees.
2. The connection to the existing driveway on Lori Lane
would be extremely difficult with the inclusion of a
sidewalk. Our current design (without sidewalk) requires a
driveway grade of 20% to meet the proposed curb elevation.
The sidewalk would force the match point 5 feet farther out
increasing the grade to over 23%. With the abrupt grade
breaks involved, this connection would not be possible
without further removal and reconstruction of a portion of
the concrete parking area, thereby increasing the cost
substantially.
3. Because of the removal of trees and shrubs, the extra
fill required and additional driveway reconstruction, the
walk would be abnormally expensive, adding $4,855.00, or 20
percent to the project cost.
There is sure to be a reluctance on the part of the
assessment district as a whole to assume this extra ($7.38
per foot) cost when the benefit is so local. Mr. Drescher
would probably be even more opposed to assuming full cost
since it would double his assessment as well as eliminate
his existing sight and sound barrier.
As mentioned before, we have a strong commitment to maintain a
good relationship with those whom we are essentially working for.
Because of the impact, both physical and economical, that the
addition of a sidewalk would have on the .project, we have not
included that in our preliminary cost estimate, our preliminary
design, nor in our discussions with the property owners.
Lori Lane is not a busy street and has little value as a main
pedestrian connection. The street has no capacity for on-street
parking;. however, it is -sufficiently wide (241 ) for two twelve-
foot lanes of travel. Our most recent traffic counts show only
45 vehicles per day using the street.
JHO:rm\lorilnsidwks
GLENNVISTA ESTATES
1257 Siskiyou Boulevard, Suite 232 r
Ashland, OR 97520
efif?19g �J
( 503) 482-9300 orn
March 8, 1991
Div.
ti
Jim Olson
City Engineer
' City Hall
Ashland OR 97520
Dear Jim: '
Enclosed please find signed Petitions for Streement improvements
regarding the porposed Lori Lane paving and LID. The signatures
on these Petitions represent 100% of the abutting property owners.
I would apreciate knowing what your schedule is for completing the
improvements and if there is anything further that I can do to help
so that this project can move forward speedily, please let me know.
I remain,
Very ly you ,
L d Hai e
LMH:mb
PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT
LOCATION Lori Lane - from Hersey Street to Glenn Street
Received by City Engineer Date
NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Pers s signing this petition must be legal owners of
record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real
property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of
property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners
should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership.
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND: '.
We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland,
Jaclkson County, Oregon, hereby petition that:
Lori.-Lane- be improved with- curb, gutter and asphalt pavement .
in accordance with plans and
- specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost
of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited
thereby, and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefitting)
an said street.
NAME c ADDRESS TAY LOT
3&13 L AAAW -$f sv p
PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT
MAR 1991
N RECEIVE
LOG4TION Lori Lane — from Hersey Street to Glenn Street
i En Ineering Div
Received by City Engineer Date sc� ZL1
5Zb2E.
NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of
record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real
property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of
property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners
should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership.
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CM-!MON CODNC3L OF THE CITY OF AS11L41M: '
We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland,
.72c1'=en County, Oregon, hereby petition that:
.Lori -Lane. be improved with cLrb,- gutter and asphalt pavement
in accordance with plans and
specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost
of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited .
thereby, and that we are the owuers .of the real property f routing. (or benefitting)
on said street.
NAME C ADDRESS TAX LOT
Zqo � r eZ
L ItK -
M.
4 --/7 qD D
7 � S�'
PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT 9j� 213
IQ
cry ppAR 1991
LOCATION Lori Lane — from Hersey Street to Glenn Street M
� Eng,nesing.Div.
Received by City Engineer Date
NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Per ons signing this petition must be legal owners !z
record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real
proQerty, abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of
property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners
should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership.
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CO&%!MON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND: `. .
We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland,
Jackson, County, Oregon, hereby petition that:
Lori Lane. be improved Ait cirb, gutter and asphalt pavement
in accordance with plans and
. . specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost
. of such paving and improvemencs.be assessed upon the real property benefited.
thereby, and that we are the owners of the real property frontiag. (or beneFitting)
on said street.
NAME c ADDRESS TAX LOT
2ao � �dZ
sv o �
4LANP Q
ON e-fOG vv Nwe l -�y-7I/Alo a; _!TU rL g7o
'J- or-- d '
c7vt (j In ej
G� �OOrJ' CI000 I
fo��M1 Jji
• PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT �
to n CD
LOCATION Lori Lane — from Hersey Street to Glenn Street' N EaB�geemg��v.
Received by City Engineer Date
NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Per Fns signing this petition must be legal owners of
record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale
contract of real
property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of
property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners
should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership.
TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR JUM C0.`=N COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHL4ND: `. .
We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland,
Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that:
Lori be improved •sith curb, gutter and asphalt pavement. '
in accordance with plans and
specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost
. of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited. .
thereby, and that we are the owners of the real properry fronting (or benefitting)
on said street.
NA`LF ADDRESS TA% LOT
36-� l 4e : S2 - o 1
AlliLArvp
. 4,40E ASil, 0 .
- ' -- � Emorttnr��xm
April 12, 1991
OREGON
Brian Almquist, City Administrator
r- Steven Hall, Public Works Director
rum:
p�1tIIjP Lori Lane Proposed LID
ACTION REQUESTED
+ City Council conduct remonstrance/public hearing.
+ City Council adopt attached ordinance forming the Lori
Lane local improvement district.
BACRGROIIND
City Council adopted Resolution 91-09 on April 2, 1991 setting a
public hearing to hear comments and remonstrances for the
proposed local improvement district (LID) on Lori Lane.
Notice was delivered and published as required by City Charter
and the Oregon Revised Statutes.
1008 of the abutting and affected property owners have signed
Petitions requesting the improvement.
The project will complete the improvements for the full length of
Lori Lane as the first phase was completed as a requirement of
the condominium development on Glenn Street.
The attached memorandum from Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
will provide the detailed information of the proposed LID.
cc: Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant
encl: Ordinance
Olson Memorandum w/attach.
Resolution 91-09
Notice of Hearing — --
SCALE; 1°=100'
3 l E 5DAA _ ,�s� ° . j sot.
-(D 39
39 IE 5DA
r V
,r r-
1 100` 34CO a
c £
� GLENNV�STh
Re o. !Q0 I P. U.D. r
too, tow
' �P335.m 3!00 op• � `.
K
! oo 29� _ 3�
m c -
Ln
c 3 30p (T
-
Proposed Street
SOO Q 12
_Impirovements
LIMIT OF PROPOSED
°Za r 5 aaaac m 30j
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
•
So Ilzbo
w
N MERSEY ST. Sol .S°2
�{ Z400
a
M ; 400
rft
ITI
PROPOSED LORI LANE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
of&;, CITY OF ASHLAND
ENGINEERING DIVISION
°aeco�'
DATA SHEET FOR
PROPOSED
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
STREET Lori Lane DATE 3-12=91
LIMIT OF PROJECT Hersey Street to end 'of pavement
LENGTH OF 385 feet PAVEMENT 4-inch A.C.
PROJECT DESIGN
RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH 46 ft. PAVEMENT WIDTH 24' to 28 '
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS CHECKLIST
Yes No
Concrete curb and gutter x
Concrete curb type C or C-1 x
Curb and/or curb and gutter both sides x
Curb and/or curb and gutter on one side only x
Typical section - center crown
Typical section - offset crown
Typical section - no crown x
Typical section - inverted crown
PETITION RESULTS
DATE PETITION WAS PREPARED 7-10-89
DATE PETITION WAS RECEIVED 3-11-91
TOTAL ASSESSABLE FRONTAGE 789.74 ft.
FRONT FOOTAGE REPRESENTED BY AGREEMENT --
FRONT FOOTAGE SIGNED ON PETITION 789 . 74 ft.
TOTAL FRONT FOOTAGE. REPRESENTED 789 . 74 ft.
PERCENTAGE OF FRONTAGE REPRESENTED 100%
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT $27 , 640
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED COST PEA FRONT FOOT $35 . 00
PAGE I o£.
CITY OF ASHLAND
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING DIVISION
ESTIMATE FOR
Street: Lori Lane Estimate By: J.H. Olson
Limits : Hersey St. to end of pavement Date: 3-12-91
GENERAL INFORMATION
Length of Project 385 ft.
Width of Street 24 ft.
Pavement Design 4"
A. ES.TIKkTED CONSTRUCTION 'COSTS
: Total Estimate $ 22 , 950. 00
B. OTHER (list)
C. TOTAL $ 22,950 .00
D. ENGINEERING @20% 4 ,590.00
E. PROJECT TOTAL ' 27, 540 .00
F. TOTAL. ASSESSABLE FRONT FOOTAGE OR UNIT OF ASSESSMENT
789 :74
G. ASSESSABLE COST PER FRONT FOOT OR PER UNIT OF
ASSESSMENT $ 34. 87
Use' $ 35. 00
Street Iproverent Project
Location Lori Lane
Page 2 of 2
ZTLi I I UNIT
NO. ITEM PRICE I AXOIINT
1 Site Work Lump Sum 1 $: 3 , 000. 0011$3 , 000. 00
2 Excavation-Subgrade Prep 100 C.Y. 1 20. 001 2 , 000. 00
3. Watering 5 Unitsl 50. 00 250. 00
4 Concrete Curb & Gutter 775 L.F. 6. 001 4 , 650. 00
5 A.C. Paving 225 Tons 11 40. 0011 9,000. 00
6 Curb Inlets 2 Each 600. 0011 1,200 . 00
7 Reconstruct Catch Basin . 1 Each 11 500. 00 500.00
8 12". Storm Drain 30 L.F. 15.. 00 450. 00
9 Shale fill 80 C.Y. 1 15.00 1,200.0'0 .
10 3/4"-0" Crushed Rock 25 C.Y-. 12. 00 300. 00
11 Adjust Manhole 1 Eachl) 250.0011 250. 00
12 Adjust Valve 2 Each 75. 001 150 . 00
11 1
. 1
- 1
TOTAL
22, 950. 00
u '
Memorandum
May 30, 1991
'•.OREGO" ,•0•'
Brian Almquist, City Administrator.
r
7e ram: Steven Hall, Public Works Director
Systems Development Charges - Methodology and
77 Rates
ACTION REOIIESTED
City Council conduct a public hearing on the Systems
Development Charges Methodology and Systems
Development Charges.
City Council adopt amended resolutions as attached
establishing Systems Development Charges Methodology
and Systems Development Charges.
BACKGROUND
State Law (ORS 223 .297 to 223.314) requires each
municipal corporation to adopt new systems
development charges (SDC's) . The new SDC's must be
in place prior to July 1, 1991. Any SDC's which do
not comply with State Law will automatically
"sunset" at the end of the day, June 30, 1991.
The City retained the firm of Moore, Breithaupt and
Associates, Inc. of Salem, Oregon to propose
legislation for the implementation of the new State
Law, a methodology for computing SDC's, and examples
of SDC's based on the .proposed methodology.
City Council held the initial public hearing on
April 2, 1991 and continued the hearing. The City
Council conducted two work sessions followed by the
continued hearing on April 16, 1991.
At the Council meeting of May 21, 1991, the Council
had the first reading of the ordinance amending the
Municipal Code for SDC's and setting a hearing for
the SDC methodology and rates for June 4, 1991.
Brian Almquist
May 30, 1991
page 2
on Wednesday, May 28, 1991 I met with Darrell Boldt, Larry
Medinger, Don Greene and Dale Shostrom to discuss the SDC fees.
They expressed a concern to me as to the percentage split on
projects listed in the water projects listed in Schedule 1. 1 of
the Report.
They suggested several issues that they felt should be resolved
and I agree with several of them. The key issues are:
+ The situation of an old line that may be beyond its useful
life and may need to be replaced. That cost should not be
attributed to growth, but existing population.
+ They also felt that the total project percentage should
not exceed the 22% growth projected in Ashland over the next
planning period.
In each case, I partially agree with them and have made some
adjustments in three major projects on Schedule 1.1. Those
projects are adjusted as follows:
Project Original Revised
--------------------------------------
91-A-1 85% $765,850 35% $315, 350
91-A-3 90% $648,900 50% $360,500
91-A-7 85% $866, 150 15% $152,850
For your information, this reduced the water SDC for a residence
approximately $400.
I agreed to review all projects in the list in the next year and
evaluate the split on two factors:
• The age of the pipe.
• The current capacity of the pipe used (by electronic
model) .
+ The vacant lands served in the case of a totally new line
being installed, rather than replacing or updating an
existing line.
Each of these factors will then be used to allocate the
percentage split of the remaining projects.
Brian Almquist
May 30, 1991
page 3
The actual figure will be above that growth percentage. The
issue of a maximum of 22% split to growth is one that I cannot
support. That assumes that all of the water system is operating
at capacity, which is not true. Using the three steps listed
above will give us a better indication of the split between
existing demands and growth demands on the water system.
We also discussed formulae for allocation of costs to residential
units including fixture units, floor area and number of
bathrooms. On this issue, we agreed to disagree! I still
recommend (#1) use a flat rate as proposed in the report or (#2)
use fixture units as proposed in the resolution and discussed
below.
OPTIONS DISCUSSION .
WATER/SEWER RESIDENTIAL SDC'S
At the last work session of the City Council, concern was
expressed as to the equity of charging a "flat rate" for water
and sewer SDC's for residential units because of the disparity in
home size, family size and number of bathrooms.
It needs to be realized that a "totally equitable" answer cannot
be made for every individual residential unit. It is impossible
to account for the actual number of occupants as that changes
with new babies, loss of grown children or change in ownership
and family size.
Similarly, it is difficult to determine how much water each
individual occupant uses. There are averages established in the
methodology based on average consumption in the City of Ashland.
Also, how one irrigates their landscaping is extremely difficult, ,
if not impossible, to measure. Some residents use unmetered City
TID water and others use finished potable water. Some conserve
water and others waste water on their landscaping. Some have all
grass, others barkdust, rocks and shrubbery. Agaim, an average
points to the most equitable solution.
Brian Almquist
May 30, 1991
page 4
Several suggestions were made by City Council and staff
including:
• Base the SDC on floor area of residential units
• Base the SDC on actual fixture units in residential units
• Base the SDC on number of bedrooms in residential units
The SDC as proposed for water and sewer is based on an average
residence occupancy of 2.3 persons. In addition, the methodology
describes the average residence as 16 fixture units.
If the Council wishes to not use an average home, I recommend
that the computation of water and sewer SDC's be based on fixture
units within the given unit. The fixture units give a national
average (Uniform Plumbing Code) of actual potential demand on
City water and sanitary sewer facilities. We design our
faclities for that demand and it is a good measuring tool for
"share of capacity" on a given water or sanitary sewer
facilities.
I do not recommend the use of floor area, lot area or number of
bedrooms.
EXPANSION OF RESIDENCES-ADDITIONAL SDC88
Other discussion revolved around additions to single family
units. That issue was resolved with the ordinance which has
completed the first reading. Section 4.20.010.B of the proposed
ordinance defines an SDC as applying when a development
"increases the usage of any capital. improvements or which will
contribute to the need for additional or enlarged capital
improvements." SDC's will be charged for an addition to a
residence if:
+ Additional plumbing fixtures are added (water and sewer
SDC)
+ Additional roof, patio or other hard surface area is added
(storm sewer SDC)
TRANSPORTATION FEE SDCVS
The City Council expressed concerns about. the high cost for a
commercial development.
Brian Almquist
May 30, 1991
page 5 '
The methodology includes a reduction from the "Trip Generation"
table.
The City Council also discussed the "Trip Length" included in the
table as possibly being too long. John Fregonese indicated that
the trip lengths proposed were one-third of national figures. He
concluded that the trip length was correct for Ashland.
.As a sidelight, my trip length from home to City Hall is 2. 2
miles and I consider my trip from Walker Avenue to City Hall
representative of an "Ashland Average".
Staff recommends adopting the proposed trip lengths.
The transportation SDC was developed in "generic" terms of needs
for future lane miles of street for future development. At this
point in time, the City does not have a capital improvement
program to site specific projects.
SUMMARY
1. Staff recommends adoption of attached resolution which
establishes the methodology proposed by the consultant with two
modifications. The modifications would change the method of
computing SDC's for water and sanitary sewers from "per unit" to
"per fixture unit". The "per unit" calculations were based on a
national average of 16 fixture units per single family residence.
2 . Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution
establishing Systems Development Charges in accordance with the
methodology and an expanded list of categories for the
Transportation SDC. The expanded list is included with the
proposed resolution.
SMH:rm\sdcres.cc
cc: John Fregonese, Planning Director
Roy Bashaw, City Attorney
Ken Mickelsen, Parks Director
Enc: Methodology Resolution (Exhibit will be available Monday)
SDC Rate Resolution with Exhibit
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A METHODOLOGY USED TO CALCULATE SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 4.20.050 OF THE ASHLAND
MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. . Chapter 4, "Methodology" , of the "Report On Systems
Development Charges For the City of Ashland, Oregon" authored by
Moore Breithaupt & Associates of Salem, Oregon, attached to this
Resolution as Exhibit "A" is adopted as the methodology for
calculating Systems Development Charges with the following
amendments:
1. Section A. All Systems Development Charges will be
computed on the actual number of fixture units within the
structure. Any alterations to a structure which adds new
fixture units will require an additional. Systems Development
Charge to be made. Fixture Units shall be calculated from
the Uniform Plumbing Code, latest edition, as adopted by the
City of Ashland.
2. Section B. All improvement charge Systems Development
Charges will be computed as in Section A.
SECTION 2. Three (3) copies of this Resolution and Exhibit "A"
shall be maintained in the office of the City Recorder and shall
be available for public inspection during regular business hours.
SECTION 3. The Methodology described in Exhibit "A" shall be in
effect when Chapter 4.20.050 is amended on or after July 1, 1991
in accordance with Oregon Law.
The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the .4th Day
of June, 1991.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of June, 1991.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
- encl: Exhibit "A"
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES PURSUANT TO
CHAPTER 4.20.040. OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE.
THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The "Systems Development Charges Schedule" marked
Exhibit "A" and attached to this Resolution is adopted as the
systems development charges.
SECTION 2. Three (3) copies of this Resolution and Exhibit "A"
shall be maintained in the office of the City Recorder and shall
be available for public inspection during regular business hours.
SECTION 3. The Systems Development Charges described in Exhibit
"A" shall be in "effect when Chapter 4.20.050 is amended on or
after July 1, 1991.
The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the 4th Day
of June, 1991.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of June, 1991.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
encl: Exhibit "A"
TY OF ASHLN4` "EXHIBIT u`
'STEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE SCHEDULE
1ST REVISIO`i; .50191
+TER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
--------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- --------------------------------------------------------
Tntal Percent Allocated Total Celt Capita Summer Cost/ Fixture Cost/ First Seconc
1,P CIP PIP Capita . _ Per F1 - Daelline Unitsl Fixture 12
Cost 41location Cost Cao/EDU Unit Adiust't Unit Unit Unit Months Months
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:ngle Family Unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supply SDC $0,145,000 54.86 $4,468,347 11727 $391.03 2.3 1.00 $876.37 16 $54.77 $16.26 536.5:
Distribution-Residential SOP $471,676 100.00 €471,876 3161 $149.28 2.3 1.00 $343.35 16 $21.46 $7.15 $14.3:
Distribution-Shared SDC $3,691,556 54.86 $2,028,479 3161 $641.72 2.3 1.00 $1,475.96 16 $92.25 $30.75 $61.51
Treatment HE $5,400,000 54.66 $2,962,440 11727 $252.62 2.3 1.00 $581.02 16 $36.31 1112.10 $24.2'
Total 1.00 $3,276.69 $204.79 $68.26 $1.36.5:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:iti-Family Unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------c-----------------------------------
Supply SDC $8,145,000 54.66 $4,468,347 11727 $3-1.03 1.9 0.11 $528.11 16 $33.01 $11.00 $22.01
Distribution Residential SDC $4,'1,876 0.00 $0 3161 $0.00 1.8 0.11 $0.00 16 $0.00 $0.00 $0.()(
Distribution-Shared SDC $3,697,516 54.86 $2,028,479 3161 $641.72 119 0.77 $889.42 16 $55.59 $18.53 $37.0%
Treatment SDC $5,400,000 54.86 $2,962,440 11727 $252.62 1.8 0.11 $350.13 16 $21.86 $7.29 . $14.51,
Total €1,767.66 $110.48 $36.65 $73.6`.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
)urist Accomodation Room
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supply SDC $2,145,000 54.86 $4,468,347 11727 4361.03 1.36 1.00 $518.20 16 $32.39 $10.80 $21.5`
Distribution-Residential SDC $471,876 0.00 f0 3161 $0.00 1.36 1100 $0.00 1.6 $0.00 $0.00 $0.0(
Distribution-Shared SDC $3,697,556 54.66 $2,028,479 3161 $641.72 1.36 1.00 $872.14 16 $54.55 $10.16 $36.36
Treatment SDC $5,400,000 54.86 $2,962,440 11727 $252.62 1.36 1.00 $343.56 16 $21.47 $7.16 $14.31
Total $1,734.50 $108.41 $36.14 $72.27
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2mmercial/Retail Building
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supply SDC $8,145,000 54.86 €4,468,347 11721 $3B1.03 2.3 0.77 $674.81 16 $42.18 $14.06 $28.12
Distribution-Residential SDC $471,616 0.00 $0 3161 $0.00 2.3 0.71 $0.00 16 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Distribution Shared SDC $3,697,556 54.86 $2,026,479. 3161 $641.72 2.3 0.17 $1,136.49 16 $71.03 $23.66 $47.3:
Treatment HE $5,400,000 54.6642,962,440 11121, $252.62 2.3 0.77 $447.38 16 $27.96 $9.32 $18,64
Total $2,258.68 $141.17 $47.06 €94.11
;IV OF ASKANT _-YHHHT A"
I'STEM DEVELOPMENT CHARSE
�5- REVISION; -17,'
ANITARY SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES-11PRin"EMCNiT CHARSE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total el I Ent t Cr- Cppi,2 Summer Post/ Fixture Cost/ First Se-L-nd
I Alloia�pd Total _7
71P lip C1-1 lapit= Pe- rpr F, Dwe'!i qu flni ts 1 FJ xhire 12
Cost Allocation Cost Cap1EDU Unit AdJust"I Unit Unit Unit Months Months
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i n g 1 E Family U n i I .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collection SDC $817,000 54 $441,160 6000 $73.53 2.30 1.00 $169.12 16 $10.57 $3.52 t7.0t
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ilti-Family Unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collection SDC $817,000 54 $441,190 6000 $73.53 1.80 1.00 $132.35 16 $B.27 $2.76 15.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:urist Accomodatiori Room
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collection SDC $817,000 54 $441,180 6000 $73.53 1.36 1.00 $100.00 16 $6.25 $2.08 $4.17
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3mmerEia'/Retail Building, I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------L------------------------------------------------------
Distribution/Collection SK $817,000 54 $441,180 6000 173.531 2.30 1.00 $169.12 16 $10.57 $3.52 $7.0'
)NITARY SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES-REIMBURSEMENT CHARSE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Treatment Cost/ /Cap. Capita Daily Cost Fixture Cost/ First Second
CIP Plant 1,000 Sewage per Useage per Units/ Fixture 12 No's 12 No's
Cost Capacity GPD 5PDPC Unit EPD Unit Unit Unit . @ 1/3 @ 213
------------------------------------------------------------7-------------------------------------------------------------------------
7ngle Family Unit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment SDC $7,277,000 3.1 $1,057.10 105 2.300 241.5 $255.29
16 $15.96 $5.32 $10.64
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ilti-Family Unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------
Treatment SDC $7,277,000 3.1 $1,057.10 IOU 1.80 199.0 $199.79 16 $12.49 $4.16 $8.32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
iurist Accomodation Room
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment SDC $3;277,000 3.1 $1,057.10 105 1.36 149.8 $150.95 16 $9,43 $3.14 $6.29
---------------------------------I----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
)mmercial/Reta'l Buildi ..g
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Treatment SIC , $3,277,000 3.1 $1,057.10 105 2.36 241.5 $240.29 16 $15.96 $5.32 $10.64
---------------------
--------------------- ------
:T''i OF ASHLAND E':HiBIT A°
STEM DE4'E1 OPMENT CHARGE SCHEpIr_=
?sI REVISION: 5!30191
?ANSPDCJATTON SYSTEMS GE'=.'=LGPFEIT CHARGES
g= +
IT. LAND USE GESCRIPTIO`r A`tERA6E UNIT ADJUSTED X ADJUST NEW CON1. FIRST SECOND
]6E DAILY MEASUREMENT TRIP OF NEW TRIP LANE COST 12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS
TRIPS 'LEN 6TH. TRIPS RATE MILES PER UN TI @ 1/3 @ 2/3
#
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=--------------------------------
110 6eneral Light Industrial 6.967 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 6.967 0.00120 €132.37 €44.12 €88.25
120 6eneral Heavy Industrial 1.496 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 1.496 0.00026 €28.42 €9.47 €18.95
i40 Manufacturing 3.846 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 3.846 0.00066 €73.07. €24.36 €48.72
150 Warehousing 4.862 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 4.862 0.00084 (92.76 €30.92 €61.84
151 Mini-Warehouse 2.606 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 2.606 0.00045 €49.51 €16.50 €33.0;
':10 Utilities- 0.792 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 0.792 0.00014 $15,05 €5.02 €10.03
210 Single Family Cetachen Res. 10,062 per unit 2.2 100 10,062 0.00204 €224.72 €74.91 €149.81
'.20 Apartment/Attached Residence 6.103 per unit 2.2 100 6.103 0.00124 €136.30 €45.43 $90.87
230 Residential Condominium 5.587 per unit 2,2 100 5.587 0.60113 €124.78 €41.59 €83.18
140 Mobile Home Park 4.814 per unit 2.2 100 4.014 0.00098 €107.51 €35.84 $71.68
'-50 Retirement Cummunity 3.300 per unit 1.9 100 3.300 0.00057 €62.70 €20.90 $41.80
252 Congregate Care Facility 2.145 per unit 1.9 100 2.145 0.00037 $40.76 $13.59 $27.17
110 Hotel 8.704 per unit 1.9 75 6.528 0.00113 $124.03 $41.34 $82.69
,20 Motel 10.189 per unit 1.9 75 7.642 0.00132 $145.19 $48.40 $96.60
?30 Golf Course 8.325 per acre 1.9 100 8.325 0.00144 $158.18 $52.73 €105.45
143 Theater 1.762 per seat 1.9 100 1.762 0.00030 $33.48 $11.16 $22.32
;91 Tennis Club 32.933 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 32.933.0.00569 $625.73 5200.58 $417.15
193 Racquet Club 15.939 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 15.939 0.00275 $302.84 $100.95 $201.89
i50 University/College 2.410 per student 1.9 100 2.410 0.00042 $45.79 $15.26 $30.53
160 Church/Synagogue 7.669 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 7.669 0.00132 $145.71 $40.57 $97.14
i65 Day Care Center 67.000 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 33.500 0.00579 €636.50 $212.17 $424.33
320 Nursing Home 2.597 per bed 1.9 100 2.597 0.00045 $49.34 $16.45 $32.90
330 Clinic 23.789 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 100 23.789 0.00411 4451.99 5150.66 $301.33
110 6eneral Office Building
Less than 50,000 sf gfa 24.390 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 25 6.098 0.00105 $115.85 $38.62 $77.24
50,000 to 99,999 sf gfa 16.310 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 25 4.078 0.00070 $11.47 $25.82 $51.65.
100,000 to 149,999 sf gfa 13.720 1,000 sf gfa 1.9. 25 3.430 0.00059 $65.17 $21.72 $43.45
over 150,000 sf gfa 12.400 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 25 3.100 0.00054 $58.90 $19.63 $39:27
120 Medical Office Building 34.170 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 25 8.543 0.00148 $162.31 $54.10 €108.21
^2 U.S. Post Office 86.760 1,600 sf gfa 1.9 100 86.780 0.01499 €1,648.82 $549.61 $1,099.21
112 Building Materials and Lnbr 30.557 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 15.279 0.00264 $290.29 $96.76 $193.53
114 Specialty Retail 40.675 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 20.338 0.00351 $386.41 $128.80 €257.61
115 Discount Store 71.160 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 35.580 0.00615 $676.02 $225.34 $450.6B
116 Hardware/Paint Store 51.289 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 25.645 0.00443 $487,25 $162.42 $324.83
?17 Nursery or 6arden Center 36.165 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 1B.OB3 0.00312 . $343.57 €114.52 $229.05
_7 U ASH:A-Ur PIT A"
'STEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE SCHEDULE
;ST REVIS)GN: 5.30/91
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
?AKPORTATIDN I DEVELOPMFNT CHARGES
LAND USE DESCRIPTION AVERAGE HLI T T
AOIUST NEW FIRST ILI, I-
h:D
ICE DAILY MEASUREMENT TRIP
w OF NEW TRIP LANE COST 12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS
TRIPS LENGTH TRIPS RATE MILES PER UNIT @ 1/3
Ut $lit iMt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
120 Shopping Center
less than 10,000 sf gfa 166.350 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 83,175 0,01437 $1,580.33 $526,79 $1,053.55
10,000 to 47,999 sf gfa 94.710 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 47.355 0.00019 $899.74 $297.91 $599.83
50,000 to 99,999 sf gfa 74.310 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 -17.155 0.00642 $705.95 $235.32 4470.63
100,000 to 199,797 sf gfa 58.970 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 29.465 0.00509 $559.24 $186.61 $373.22
over 20•,0001 -f gfa 48.310 1,001? sf gfa 1.9 56 24.155 0.00417 $458.95 $152.98 $33051.96
51 Low Turnover Restaurant 95,620 1,000 In sf gfa L9 50 47.210 (1,00826 $908.319 $302.80 $605.57
52 High Turnover Restaurant 200.895 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 100.44B 0.01735 $1,908.50 $636.17 $1,272.34
-141 Car Sales 47.523 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 23.761 0.00410 $451.47 $150.49 $300.98
:44 Service Station 133.000 Pumps 1.9 50 66.500 0.01149 $1,263,50 $421.17 $641.33
146 Car Wash 108,000 Wash Stalls 1.9 JO 54.000 0.00933 $1,026.00 $342.00 $684.00
)50 Supermarket 125.500 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 62.750 0,01084 $1,192.25 $397.42 $79433
160 Wholesale Market 6.728 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 3.364 0.00050 $63.92 $21.31 $42.61
;90 Furniture Store 4.345 1,000 sf gfa 1.0 50 1.173 0.00038 $41.20 $13.76 $27.51
Ill Walk-In Bank.,R&L,Credit Un. 189.951 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 94.976 0.01640 $1,804.53 $601.51 $1,203.02
112 Drive-In Bank,S&L,Credit Un, 291.108 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 145.554 0.02514 $2,765.53 $921.84 $1,843.68
130 Insurance Building 11.448 1,000 sf gfa 1.9 50 5.124 0.00099 $108.76 $36.25 $72.50
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gfa = square foot gross floor area
Institute of Transportation Engineers,.Trip Generation, 4" Edition
Trip Lengths are derived from national averages and then reduced by two-thirds to account for compact geography of Ashland.
Trip Rates are adjusted by multiplying unadjusted national average Trip RdtE5 time Percentage New Trips.
31 [Adjusted Trip Rate x Trip Length]/[2 1 5,500 vehicles per lane mile per day)
i1tt New Lane Miles x $110,000 per lane mile
` .
i7Y0FASH A'N, TA,"
�ST[M D EV-1L0 NT G F SCH I [ ^
)CT 8EVlS[D& 5/m/Y\
TUKK SEWER SYST[N DEVELOPMENT CHARS[
----'--------------------------'---------------------'---'---`---
Total Percmt Allocatpdlnperv -1 D, F:rs,
UP [lP [[P Area/ Pe/ 12 ft's i2Mo'=
Cost Allocation Cost 1/000lmpprv@113 @2�3
sq.ft. sq.{t^
___-_______-`-__-_-___'----_---_--___------____-_-_-_'_____----_
DC for All Ues $14,700,113 15 $2`205`oJ256U $0.086 SO,019 $0^057
ARK AND RECREATION SDC
_--_~--____.___--_-_'__-_--_-----__--'_--___--__-------___-------_-_-_-__-----___~
Total Capita Cost Adjust Adjust Capita Cost FIRST SECOND
C[P Attributed per Factor Cost/ per per 12 MONTHS 11, MONTHS
Cost Tn6rowth Capita % Capita Room Unit @ \/J @2/3
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
mgle Family Residential
--^'-----------------------------------------`---------'-----------'---------------------`----'-----
Large Active Parks $203,850 3000 $67.95 87 $5Y.12 2^34 S135,97 $45,32 $90.65
Small Active Parks $122,400 3000 $40.80 i00 $44.80 2.50 V3.84 $31.28 $62.56
Passive Parks v609,000 3000 $203^00 87 $i76,61 2.30 $406.20 $135.40 $270,80
�63� 0� �2\2 �0 $�2�
Total ' ` ' .01
_-----_--------____'-_--_--_-------_--------_'------_------_-------___------------_-_--------__---
dti-Family Residmotia}
--------------------*_--_-------___----_---_-__-_------___--__-------_---_--_--_-_-----------__---
'Large Active Parks $203,8J0 3000 $67.95 87 $59.11 1,80 $106^41 $35.47 $70.94
Small Active Parks $122.400 3400 $40.80 \00 $40,80 1,80 $73.44 $24.48 $48.96
Passive Parks $609,000 3000 $203.00 O7 $176,61 1.80 $317,90 $105.97 $211.93
�49775 N�� Y2 �33| 83
Total . , .
'-------------------------------------'--------------------------------------------------------
ooist &ccomodat'ooRoom
---'`----`------`----------^-----------'----------'------------------------'----------------
Large Active Parks 003/850 3000 $67^95 87 $59.11 2.70 N59.61 $53.20 $06.41
N22 �00 30�V �4� B� 0 �� 00 27� $� �0 �V �� $�
SmaDd
Active Parks ` ` . � , . ,00
Passive Parks $609,000 3000 $20-1`00 87m76.6\ 2.70 $476,85 $158.95 $117`70
Total
$636.46 $212.15 $424,31
- -_ ='-
^ '
'
'
'
ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO Mayor & City Council
FRON Keith E. Woodley, Fire Chief
SUBJECT Burning Regulations
The Ashland Municipal Code regulates outdoor burning within the
City of Ashland. AMC Section 10 . 30.020 establishes the period of,
April , May and September 15 to October 15 as appropriate
"windows" for open burning. Ordinarily, these dates would be
adequate to take care of the 'needs of the community for the
disposal of waste vegetation by burning. However, given the
priority placed on the importance of cleaning up the interface
area by removing waste vegetation, it may be necessary to support
this process by extending the periods under which open burning
may be conducted. Recent rain fall has been encouraging and
would provide the reduction of risk required for this activity.
The City should reserve the right to modify its burning
regulations as local conditions warrant and the public need
presents itself.
Recommendation: Extend the 1991 Spring burning period through
June 30th within the City of Ashland.
Public Peace, Morals and Safety 10. 28. 010--10.30. 030
or hallucination shall, if such condition was caused by the
inhaling of substances such as above=described, be presumed to have
inhaled the same within the city, but such presumption may be
rebutted by competent evidence and the ultimate burden of proof of
venue shall be upon the city. The deliberate inhaling of such a
substance as described in subsection A. , if it produces a visible
manifestation of a •condition of the nature therein described, shall
be prima facie evidence that the that the person so inhaling did so
with the intent of producing such a state or condition. The act of
inhaling may be proved by indirect or inferential evidence
satisfying the .standards of proof and sufficiency otherwise
required in the courts of the state..
C.. This section shall not apply to the use of inhalants, or
the condition produced thereby, where such use is made, or
condition induced, by or under the express direction or written
prescription' of a licensed physician for medical purposes. (Ord.
1579 S1, 1968; Ord. 1558 S39, 1968)
Chanter 10.30
CONTROLS ON OPEN BURNING
Sections:
10.30.010 Outdoor Burning Restricted.
10.30. 020 Period When Outdoor Burning is Not Allowed.
10.30.030 Ventilation Index.
10.30.040 Exempted Fires.
10.30.050 Special Exemptions--Disease Control.
10.30. 060 Special Exemptions--Religious Fires.
10.30.070 Permits Required.
10.30;080 Enforcement and Penalties.
10.30.010- Outdoor Burning Restricted. No person shall start or
maintain any outdoor fire (except for outdoor cooking) for the
purpose of burning any combustible material, except as allowed
under this ordinance. Nor shall any person in control of any
premises cause or knowingly. allow any such fire to be started or
maintained on any part of such premises. No barrel burning or
burning of garbage, plastic, styrofoam, ,or other noxious materials
shall be allowed at any time during the year, including burning
such materials in woodstoves or fireplaces.
10.30.02 Period When Outdoor Burning is Not Allowed. This ban on
outdoor burning shall be in effect for the entire year -except for
the y 1
.
10•.30.030 Ventilation Index. No outdoor burning shall be allowed
on any day when the ventilation index is less than 400. However,
158 Revised Jan. 1990
DlSou[hem Oregon
1 Regional Economic Development, Inc.
Main Office:
132 W.Main,Ste. 101
Medford,OR 97501-2746
(503)773-8946
Branch Office:
Grants Pass
(503)479-2502
Fax:776-6027 -
April 29 , 1991
Mayor Cathy Golden
City of Ashland
City Hall
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE : SO-REDI Board of Directors
Dear Mayor Golden :
Recent action by a budget sub-committee to allocate all economic
development grant funds to the Ashland Chamber of Commerce, who
will in turn fund economic development programs such as SO-REDI ,
could disqualify the City of Ashland from holding their current
"charter" Board seat . SO-REDI By-Laws, Article IV (Board of
Directors) , Section 3 . Number of Directors and Terms - stipulates
"If otherwise qualified as a member, seven charter seats will be
held by the public agency representatives of namely Medford, Grants
Pass , Central Point , Ashland, Jackson County, Josephine County and
Rogue Valley Council of Governments . "
Ashland, by virtue of its "charter seat' has automatically been a
member of the SO-REDI Board of Directors . This privileged position
ensures that Ashland, along with the other major public agencies,
will always hold a Board seat , while the other 15 Board seats are
contested every year (directors serve revolving three year terms,
with no more than 1/3 of the Directors terms expiring in each
year) .
In order to qualify and continue as a member, annual membership
dues are assessed and paid. If Ashland no longer pays their dues,
the City would be dropped from membership and their Board seat
would be lost . Ashland can continue with membership and have a
representative on the Board of Directors if they designate funds
(make the. check payable to the Chamber of Commerce and SO-REDI ) and
appoint a member of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce to represent
the City_. Obviously, a simpler method of retaining your membership
A @ B Properties City of central Point Hofibnhr @ Associate m.a Assoc,Ix tr Oregon
Bator Construed..Ox City of Grant.Pass Jackson County MCCoonsulting Enpoeas S�Padfc Stere
Borth!Real Fatale Co. City of Medford Grego Sete College
Eugene P.BmrBl lurmbv Co. Cutler @ he Job,Count Medford Mail ltibune
TCI Fist,Ivc
CP National C cia]Co Inc IO6 Kimball. County Palm fNaa er Light Co. U.S Bank
Delta Fmeuste Bank of Swim Kim6atk Diann,Donnelly&,@ Co.,CPA CPA. Puna @ Lower Rol Ewte Company U.S d Tt Commmdaeona
City of Ashland Rea Inst.Nte Back of KusmatkM Doane By @ .,CPA. Rogue 9alky Manor
Fwnomie Deelopmevt Cou.dl Oreg.v,N.A. nWia's Milford Auto Delvdtip. S @Blame Construction Co. United Telephone Company
and your "charter" Board seat is to continue to make out a check
directly to SO-REDI , without going through the Chamber of Commerce .
The method of paying assessed dues can be handled administratively,
however, the City Council should retain the ability to influence
regional economic development issues by having a City Council
member or the City Manager sit on the SO-REDI Board of Directors .
Medford and Grants Pass both have City Councilors on the Board,
while Central Point has its City Manager, and the two counties each
have Commissioners as Board members .
SO-REDI has worked effectively with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce
( they are also a SO-REDI member ) and will continue to do so . The
main issue is , will the City of Ashland remain a regional player
in economic development or rely on the Ashland Chamber of Commerce
to act on their behalf? The current Chamber leadership is very
pro-active and supportive of SO-REDI , and I am sure they can and
will represent the City on the SO-REDI Board if asked to do so.
The SO-REDI Board, Staff and myself have been extremely pleased to
have had Mary Lee Christensen as your representative. She has
actively participated in several programs and always contributes
during the monthly Board meetings . I would be honored to have her
continue as your representative .
I hope this letter clears up some of the confusion caused by a
proposed change on how to fund economic development by the City of
Ashland.
Please give me a call if you have further questions .
Sincerely,
Corky Leis r
Executiv Director
c : Mary Lee Christensen
Ashland Chamber of Commerce .
Jill Turner, Finance Director City of Ashland
Mayor Catherine Golden
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE: Budget
Dear Cathy,
Just a few points to be considered if the City Council votes to include
the ( SO-REDI ) Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, Inc. membership
funds with the Chamber of Commerce allocation from the budget.
It is my personal understanding that if the monies are not directly received
from the City, Ashland would lose the City Charter seat on the SO-REDI Board of
Directors. If the Chamber elected to send a check on behalf of the City, they ( the
Chamber ) would not be eligible for the charter seat on the Board.
. Any SO-REDI individual member at the $200+ monetary level, or corporate member
at the $500+ monetary level is eligible to run for a Board position. This would
be the procedure for the Chamber to become a Board member. A word of caution,
there are many business members who are active on committees now, who would probably
be nominated to the Board before a member who has not participated .and is just
newly eligible.
It would appear to be an unwise move for the City to knowingly lose a Charter
seat on the Board of such a viable organization as SO-REDI.
I would recommend that the City consider allocating an increase over the
$2500.00 given in the past. Perhaps even consider naming as the representative
or as alternate a member of the City Council. The Board meets every 4th.- Tuesday
of each month, alternating between Jackson and Josephine counties.
Sincerely,
Mary lee Christensen
City of Ashland Board Representative
COMMIT
TO QUIT
May 28, 1991
TO: Brian Almquist and Members of the Ashland City Council
.FROM: Rose Otte, COMMIT To Quit Community Involvement Coordinator
RE: June 4, 1991, City Council Agenda
On June 4, 1991, at the Ashland City Council Meeting, three students
from the Ashland High School Students Against Drunk Driving (SADD) would like
to present the findings of their recent attempt to purchase cigarettes and
other tobacco products from local stores and gas stations. The students will 1
at that time request that a city ordinance be introduced to restrict youth
access to vending machines as one attempt to curtail young people smoking.
t
Thank you for your time and interest in this issue. {
RO
sps,
1617, Barnett Road
Medford, Oregon
97504
(503) 779-8265
Fax (503) 779-9009
A Project of Inc NcLOnai Ca�cC la;elute
CITY OF ASHLAND .( CITY HALL
ASHLAND,OREGON 97520
telephone(code 503)482-3211
May 31, 1991
Jack Davis, Attorney at Law
Ainsworth, Davis, Gilstrap,
Harris, Balocca & Fitch, P.C.
515 E. Main St.
Ashland, OR 97520
Re: Your File No. 86-190
Dear Jack:
Thank you for your letter of May 15, 1991 concerning the property
which your client purchased from the City in 1986 and have occupied
since that year.
You have informed us that there is now an accumulation of hazardous
substances on the property which may violate state or federal
standards. If this is the. case, the City will readily agree, and in
fact urge, that the condition be corrected and the property brought
into compliance with law as required by the terms of your trust deed.
This is not just because the City's security interest in the property
may be impaired, but more important, because any such conditions must
be corrected and brought into compliance with environmental laws.
Your reports suggest that the substances may be associated with the
underground storage tanks which the City decommissioned in 1986.
However, I have ordered a closer examination of the entire matter as
it existed in 1986, as well as present conditions, and will take the
matter up with the City Council at the appropriate time.
Our evaluation may indicate that some cost-sharing is appropriate, but
in the meanwhile I would be willing to discuss with the Council the
matter of extending the payment period of your client's trust deed
obligation.
Again, we appreciate your promptness in bringing .the matter to the
City's attention.
Sincerely,
—Z`__ �Brian L. Alm. st
cc: Mayor & Council City Admini rator
i
1
LAW OFFICES
AINSWORTH, DAMS, GILSTRAP, HARRIS, BALOCCA &FITCH, P.C.
SIDNEY E.AINSWORTH SIS EAST MAIN STREET SAM E.DAVIS-Retired
JACK DAVIS ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 DONALD M.PINNOCK Retired
DAVID V.GILSTRAP -
DANIEL L.HARRIS (503)482-3111 FAX(503)488.4455 -
MICHAEL G.SALOCCA
KENNETH C.FITCH
May 15, 1991
BRIAN ALMQUIST
ASHLAND CITY HALL
ASHLAND OR 97520
Re: File No. 86-190
Dear Brian:
As you recall, I represent John Fields, Paul Comstock, and John
Everitt who purchased the A Street property from the City in
1986. The trust deed executed by them in favor of the City has
a due date of May 1, 1991. To procure financing for the
payoff, it was necessary that they perform a study of the soil
Around the gas tank for contamination. The results of -that
test are enclosed. You will see that there is substantial
contamination from gas and diesel. As you know, the tank was
filled with sand at the close of escrow so any petroleum
products in the soil must have been brought to the property by
the City. At this point, we are not certain as to the cost of
correction of the problem but that cost will have to be borne
by the City. Unfortunately, my clients will be unable to
consummate their refinance until either the problem is
corrected by the City or the City Council makes a commitment
to pay the cost when the. work is done. Please have the City
Council declare itself as to the course it prefers and we will
proceed ahead accordingly.
Yours truly,
AINSWORTH, AVIS, GILSTRAP,
HARRIS, BA CCA & FITCH, P.C.
JA DA
lh
ncl
cc:, J hn Fields
aul Comstock
John Everitt
e;+GP ASry�`°oo
memorandum
May 31, 1991
GREGO
Q. Honorable Mayor and City Council
r -
ram: Brian L. Almquist, City Administr t
City Attorney Recruitment
As you know, we recently conducted interviews of
potential City Attorney candidates. Only 14
proposals were received based on the Request for
Proposals format recommended by the committee that
met earlier this year to review the City's legal
needs.
The committee, in preparing its recommendations, had
hoped that the RFP would attract individuals
statewide who had experience in municipal law and
who wished to relocate to Ashland for a half time
position. In addition, it was hoped that contract
services could be secured for $50-60,000. The
majority of the proposals were substantially higher.
The interview panel met with three of the candidates
on May 28 and recommended a candidate who is
currently working in another Oregon city as
Assistant City Attorney. We were unable to come to
terms in a part-time position offer, and thus, it is
my recommendation that we re-advertise for a full-
time position.
The following is the recommended budget for the
position:
-Salary & Benefits (9 mos. ) $ 62,573
City Attorney
1/2 Time Secretary
Dues & Subscriptions 3,500
Insurance Services Fee 10, 000
Maint. Office Equipment 100
Miscellaneous 3,500
Professional Services 17,734
Office Supplies 3,500
Travel & _Training — 3,000
Telephone 1, 000
Capital Outlay 1, 500
TOTAL $ 106,407
May 31, 1991
Page 2
The 1991-92 Central Services budget contains an
appropriation of $96, 093 for the City Attorney's
office, and the Municipal Court budget appropriates
$11,000 for prosecuting services. Therefore, it
will be necessary to transfer $10,314 from the
Central Services operating contingency to cover the
net difference. I do not believe this will create a
problem for us during the year. Conversely, we will
be saving $8,100 (9 mos. ) in the General Fund due to
the absorption of prosecuting services by the City
Attorney in October.
However, for 1992-93 the total budget will increase
by approximately $19, 000 to a total of approximately
$125,000 to reflect a full-year and projected salary
increases.
The final issue is office space for two people, and
the lack of space at City Hall. I am investigating
two options: (1) the possibility of using the old
Rehab. office in the Community Center on Winburn
Way, and (2) moving an employee from City Hall to
the Civic Center. While neither option is ideal, it
would be workable until additional offices are
constructed on the Civic Center site.
I request City Council permission to re-advertise
the City Attorney's position at a salary range of
$4,251 - $4,782 which is the same salary range as
other department heads effective July 1, 1991. At
the suggestion of Greg Williams, I will also include
the option of a three-quarter time position in the
event that some individuals might wish to entertain
the concept of a reduced work week.
PrrcorttnAUM
May 31, 1991
�REGO,
City Council
Catherine M. Golden
rum: .
�lI1PC#. Appointment of Interim City Attorney
Roy Bashaw has given notice that he will not be
available after June, 15. As you know, he is on
PERS retirement, -and has reached his annual maximum
as far as compensation is concerned and it is not
economic for him to continue beyond this date. I
think we will all agree that he has done a fabulous
job since stepping into this role last February, and
I am sorry we cannot keep him just a little longer.
I will have a new interim City Attorney nomination
for you on Tuesday night, but as of today, we have
not been able' to confirm his availability (Brian has
made each of you aware of who this individual is) .
If I am unable to confirm this by Tuesday night, we
made need to meet briefly on another night fora
special meeting since it is important that we have
legal counsel for our June 18 meeting.
Catherine M. den
Mayor
CMG:BLA:rm\ctyatty
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENT OF LORI LANE
BETWEEN HERSEY STREET AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AT GLENNVISTA
ESTATES BY CONSTRUCTING CURBS, GUTTERS, ASPHALT PAVING AND 'STORM
DRAINS AND AUTHORIZING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE COST OF THE
IMPROVEMENTS AGAINST PROPERTY TO BE BENEFITED AND PROVIDING THAT
WARRANTS ISSUED FOR . THE COST OF THE IMPROVEMENT BE GENERAL
OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND.
WHEREAS, The Council has declared by Resolution its intention to
construct the improvements described in substantial accordance with
the plans and specifications and to assess upon each lot or part
of lot adjacent to and benefited by the improvement its proportinal
share of the cost of the improvement as provided by the Charter of
the City of Ashland; and
WHEREAS, notice of such intention has been duly given and published
as provided by the Charter and a public hearing was held and it
appears to the Council that such improvements are of material
benefit to the City and all property to be assessed will be
benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective
assessments to be levied for the costs;
THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS..
Section 1. It is ordered that LORI LANE BETWEEN HERSEY STREET AND
EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AT GLENNVISTA ESTATES be improved by the
construction of curbs, gutters, asphalt paving and storm drains in
substantial conformance with the plans and specifications adopted
and on file in the office of the Director of Public Works and that
the cost be assessed upon each lot or portion of lot adjacent to
or benefited by such improvement as provided by the Charter of the
City of Ashland.
Section 2. Warrants for the construction of the improvement shall
bear interest at the prevailing rates and shall constitute general
obligations of the City of Ashland and the warrants shall be issued
pursuant to and on the terms and conditions in ORS 287. 502 to
287. 510 inclusive.
The foregoing ordinance was FIRST READ on the day of
1991 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this
day of , 1991.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1991.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE LEVYING TAXES FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 1991, TO AND INCLUDING JUNE
30, 1992, SUCH TAXES IN THE SUM OF $2,071,770 UPON ALL THE REAL AND PERSONAL
PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ASSESSMENT AND LEVY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE
CITY OF ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
THE PEOPLE OF ASHLAND, OREGON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Ashland hereby levies the taxes provided for in the
adopted budget in the aggregate amount of$2,071,770 and that these taxes are hereby levied upon the
assessed value for the fiscal year starting June 1, 1991, on all taxable property within the City.
Section 2: That the City Council hereby declares that the taxes so levied are applicable to the following
funds:
General Fund $ `855,863
Cemetery Fund 96,167
Band Fund 33.250
Parks and Recreation Fund 1,052,200
Recreation Serial Levy Fund 34.290
$2,071,770
The foregoing Ordinance was first read on the 4th day of June 1991, and duly PASSED
and ADOPTED this 18th day of June, 1991.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of June, 1991.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT, OBJECTIVES, AND
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MUNICIPAL AUDIT COMMITTEE.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of
Ashland, as follows:
SECTION 1. Municipal Audit Committee -- Established. There is
hereby established a Municipal Audit Committee which shall
consist of six (6) voting members. The Committee may request the
presence of any appointive City official(s) at its meetings.
SECTION 2. Term -- Vacancies. The voting members. shall be
appointed annually by the Mayor with confirmation by the City
Council. The voting members shall include one member of the City
Council, one member of the Parks & Recreation Commission, one
member of the Hospital Board, two lay members of the Citizens
Budget Committee, and one citizen at large position.
SECTION 3 . Ouorum -- Rules and Regulations. Four (4) voting
members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum. At its first
meeting each calendar year, the Committee shall elect- a chair, a
vice chair, and a secretary, who shall hold office at the
pleasure of the Committee. The Committee shall establish rules
for its meetings, and shall meet once during the planning stages
of the audit, and at such other times as the Committee deems
necessary.
SECTION 4. Mission. The mission of the Municipal Audit
Committee is to advise and assist the Council in meeting its
responsibilities for the accountability and stewardship of public
assets. The Committee should also advise and assist the Council
in audit management processes, in ensuring that audit processes
are independent in fact as well as in appearance, and in
facilitating communications on financial matters between the
Council, the external auditor, and the staff whose operations are
being audited.
SECTION 5. Responsibilities -- Generally. The responsibilities
of the Committee are to establish and maintain continuing
communications with the independent auditors, Finance Department
and elected officials, with respect to:
1. Annual financial reports prepared by management.
2. Scope and results of the annual audit and related fees.
3 . _ The City's accounting and financial reporting policies
and practices.
4. ' Adequacy and effectiveness of the system of internal
accounting controls—
5. - Scope of other services performed by the independent
auditors.
6. Evaluating the services provided by the independent
auditors and recommending their retention, or when
necessary, their termination and replacement.
7. Approval of the request for proposals (RFP) for audit
services, and assistance in soliciting participation by
potential proposers.
8. Evaluating the technical qualifications of proposing
audit firms and making recommendations on auditor
selection to the City Council.
9. Any other matters relative to the audit or the
government's accounts and its financial affairs that
the Committee, at its own discretion, deems necessary.
SECTION 6. Significant Accountings Policies -- Notification.
City management shall notify the Audit Committee of any of the
following:
1. The initial adoption of an accounting principle.
2. Changes in accounting principles or their application.
3. Accounting for unusual transactions.
4. Accounting policies in matters where there is a lack of
consensus on the appropriate accounting treatment.
SECTION 7. Reports. The Committee shall submit copies of its
minutes to the City Council. Reports or recommendations of the
Committee shall be considered advisory in .nature and. shall not be
binding on the Mayor or City Council.
SECTION 8. Compensation. The voting members of the Committee
shall receive no compensation for services rendered.
SECTION 9. Resolution No. 84-14 is hereby repealed.
The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the
day of , 1991.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,
1991.
Catherine M. Golden
__ Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS
BE IT RESOLVED that the Ashland City Council hereby adopts the 1991-92 Fiscal Year Budget, now on
file in the office of the City Recorder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the amounts for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1991, and for the
purposes shown below are hereby appropriated as follows:
GENERAL FUND
Human Resources $ 68,640
Economic Development 223,730
Debt Service 120,000
Transfers Out 58,500
Contingency 203,120
Police Department 2,022,430
Municipal Court 138,090
Fire Department 1,436,820
Senior Program 120,290
Community Development 542.600
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 4,934,220
POLICE SERIAL LEVY FUND
Transfers 24.000
CEMETERY FUND
Personnel Services 96,500
Materials and Services 105,420
Capital Outlay 15,000
Debt Services 1,500
Transfers 500
Contingencies 20.080
TOTAL CEMETERY FUND 239,000
BAND FUND
Personnel Services 4,000
Materials 33,280
Contingency 1.720 .
TOTAL BAND FUND 39,000
EMERGENCY 9-1-1 FUND
Personnel Services 36,600
Materials and Services 25,620
Capital Outlay 7,000
Contingency 4.280
TOTAL EMERGENCY 9.1-1 FUND $ 73,500
1
STREET FUND
Personnel Services $ 536,300
Materials and Services 931,520
Capital Outlay 120,000
Debt Service 7,600
Transfers 20.000
Contingencies 87,740
TOTAL STREET FUND 1,703,160
WATER QUALITY FUND
Personnel Services 814,110
Materials and Services 742,930
Capital Outlay 186,300
Debt Services 18,200
Transfers 240,000
Contingencies 170,000
TOTAL WATER QUALITY FUND 2,171,540
SEWER FUND
Personnel Services 422,510
Materials and Services 627,200
Capital Outlay 27,560
Debt Service 6,600
Transfers 53,E
Contingencies 123,130
TOTAL SEWER FUND 1,260,000
AIRPORT FUND
Materials and Services 23,500
Capital Outlay 5,900
Transfers 20,000
TOTAL AIRPORT FUND 49,400
ELECTRIC UTILITY FUND
Community Development Department 490,000
Electric Department 7,350,120
Debt Service 10,800 .
Transfers Out t30,000
Contingency 250.000
TOTAL ELECTRIC UTILITY FUND ' 8,230,920
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND
Personnel Services 1,0
Materials and Services 17,560
Capital Outlay 3,775,760
Transfers 48,0Q0
TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS $ 3,842,320
2
ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT FUND
Materials and Services $ '1,750
Capital Outlay 582,000
TOTAL ASSESSMENT CONSTRUCTION FUND 583,750
HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUND
Capital Outlay 260,000
Contingency 200.000
460,000
BANCROFT BOND FUND
Debt Service 465,000
Transfers 5.000
TOTAL BANCROFT BOND REDEMPTION 470,000
GENERAL BOND FUND
Debt Service 308,000
DEBT SERVICE FUND
Debt Service 63,000
ADVANCE REFUNDING BOND FUND
Debt Service 208,000
HOSPITAL BOND FUND
Debt Service 24,600
CENTRAL SERVICES FUND
Administrative Department 405,250
Finance Department 849,750
Transfer Out 25,000
Contingency 88,000
Public Works Department 441,200
Community Development 202.800
TOTAL CENTRAL SERVICES FUND 2,012,000
INSURANCE SERVICES FUND
Personnel Services 13,000
Materials and Services 480,000
Contingency 490.000
TOTAL INSURANCE SERVICES FUND 983,000
EQUIPMENT FUND
Personnel Services 99,210
Materials and Services 370,000
Capital Outlay 260,500
Contingency _ 100,000
,TOTAL EQUIPMENT FUND -- $ 829,710
3
CEMETERY TRUST FUND
Transfers $ 55,000
HOSPITAL FUND
Personnel Services 5,346,150
Materials and Services 3,573,290
Capital Outlay 1,363,000
Transfers 286,600
Contingencies 500.000
TOTAL HOSPITAL FUND 11,069,040
PARKS AND RECREATION FUND
Parks Division 1,231,260
Debt Service 4,500
Transfers 61,480
Contingency 15,000
Recreation Division 107,880
TOTAL PARKS AND RECREATION FUND 1,420,120
RECREATION SERIAL LEVY FUND
Personnel Services 43,125
Materials and Services 31.775
TOTAL RECREATION LEVY FUND 74,900
PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND
Capital Outlay 131.150
PARKS AND RECREATION TRUST FUND
Materials and Services 750
Total Appropriations $ 41,259,980
This Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Ashland on the 4th day of June; 1991.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED AND APPROVED this_day of June, 1991.
Catherine'M GoIden, Mayor
4
RESOLUTION NO. 91--
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1990-91
WHEREAS, Oregon Budget' Law, under ORS 294 .480 provides for a
supplemental budget process.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the amounts for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 1990, are increased by the amounts shown below:
FIRE EMT SERIAL LEVY FUND
Resources
Carryover $1,700
Expenditures
Transfer to General Fund $1,700
To authorize the transfer of the Fire EMT Serial Levy Fund
balance to the General Fund and to close out the Fire EMT Serial
Levy Fund.
WATER FUND
Resources
Carryover $ 88,000
Expenditures
Capital Outlay
Land 40,000
Ashland Bear Creek Pond 28, 000
Ashland Creek Diversion 20,000
Total $ 88,000
To authorize the expenditures for the above projects, which
were planned in the previous year, but were carried over to the
present year.
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of that the
above supplemental budget is hereby approved.
The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY APPROVED at a 'regular ;
meeting of the city council of the City of Ashland on the 4th
Day of June, 1991.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED AND APPROVED this day of May, 1991.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
of ASAF, � P 11T II x � •
�In um
May 29, 1991
GRFG'.
Z Q: Mayor and City Council
W Jill Turner, Director of Finance
rem:
p�ll�jPLi. State Subventions
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends passage of the attached
Resolution certifying municipal services for State shared
revenues.
DISCUSSION: This resolution certifies that the City of Ashland .
is eligible for State subventions. The State program requires
that cities located within a county having more than 100,000
inhabitants must provide four or more municipal services to be
eligible to receive state revenues.
ALTERNATIVES: None suggested
FISCAL IMPACT: The City should receive the following revenues
in 1991-92 :
Cigarette $ 53, 000
Liquor 98,000
Highway 726,000
RESOLUTION 91- _
WHEREAS, ORS 221.760 provides as follows:
Section 1: The officer responsible for disbursing funds to
cities under ORS 323 .455, 366.820 and 741.805 shall, in the
case of a city located within a county having more than 100,000
inhabitants according to the most recent federal decennial
census, disburse such funds only if the City provides four or
more of the following services:
1. Police Protection
2. Fire Protection
3. Street construction, maintenance, lighting
4. Sanitary Sewer
5. Storm Sewer
6. Planning, zoning and subdivision control
7. One or more utility services
and
WHEREAS, city officials recognize the desirability of
assisting the state officer responsible for determining the
eligibility of cities to receive such funds in accordance with
221.760, now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Ashland hereby certifies
that it provides the following municipal services enumerated in
Section 1. ORS 221.760:
1. Police Protection
2. Fire Protection
3. Street construction, maintenance, lighting
4. Sanitary Sewer
5. Storm Sewer
6. _ Planning
7. Electric Distribution
8. water
This Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the 4th day
of June 1991.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED AND APPROVED this day of , 1991.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
o'y CF ,
Aemo ran dixm
A.
'•,� EGO May 29, 1991
4 � �
Q' Mayor and City Council
7n
ram Jill Turner, Director of Finance
*Ihjert State Revenue Sharing
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends passage of the
attached resolution, approving participation in the
State Revenue Sharing Program.
DISCUSSION: State Revenue Sharing law, ORS 221.770,
requires cities to pass a resolution each year
stating that they want to receive revenue sharing
money. The law also requires that two public
hearing are held on the use of these funds. The
budget committee hearing was held on April 18, 1991
and the City Council hearing on June 4, 1991.
ALTERNATIVES: None suggested
FISCAL IMPACT: The City should receive $62,000 in
State Revenue Sharing monies next year.
RESOLUTION 91-
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION
TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUES
BE IT RESOLVED that the. City of Ashland hereby elects to receive
state revenues for fiscal year 1991-92. Pursuant to ORS 221.770.
This Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Ashland on the 4th day of June
1991.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED AND APPROVED this day of , 1991.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
Ito F-)Y-" Wo i r -
CITY OF ASHLAND "EXn18iT A"
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARSE SCHEDULE
LAS-1 REV151U"i: 6i$l91 L:HAN6PG TiT,AL CIF COST, WATER DISTR'1nUTIGH FROM �),hY1,556 TD ),225,r.Btil
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS FOR ,DC'S Based on Single Family Unit = 16 Fixture Units
Development Type Water Sewer Storm Street Parks Total
First 12 Months Drain
Single Family Unit 116 Ho €1,029 €141 $76 $75 €212 €1,534
Multi-Family Unit 116 Fu £55i £111 $30 $45 £166 €903
Tourist Accomodation Room €541 $84 €15 $48 €212 £901
Office.Building-10,000 sf gfa €1,409 €283. €343 $386 $0 €2,422
Development Type Water Sewer Storm Street Parks Total
Second 12 Month- Drain
Single Family Unit $2 059 €283 €152 €150 €424 €3,067
Multi-Family Unit $1,!03 €221 $60 $91 .€332 €1,807
Tourist Accomodation Room €1,00 £167 $31 $97 €424 £1,801
Office Building-10,000 sf gfa €2,818 $5 €681 €712 $0 €4,843
Development Type Water Sewer Storm Street Parks Total Original
Full Amount after 24 Months Drain Proposal
Single Family Unit $3,088 €424 €228 €225 €636 $4,601 €5,162
Multi-Family Unit $I,04 $332 $90 $136 $498 $2,710 $3,065
Tourist Accomodation Room €1,623 $251 $46 $145 $636 $2,702 $3,042
Office Building-10,000 sf gfa $4,227 $849 $1,030 €1,159 $0 $7,265 €15,984
NOTES:
1. Single Family Unit of 1,504 square feet with garage, driveway & walk bringing
total impervious area to 2,650 square feet.
2. Multi-Family Unit is part of a 10-unit two story apartment building and parking
lot, walks, etc. cover 70% of it 15,000 square foot lot.
3. Tourist Accommodation Room is pert of a 30-unit complex which, with its parking
lot and other paved areas, covers BOX of its 20,000 square foot lot.
4. This 10,000 square foot two story shipping center and its accompanying paved
areas covers 802 of its 15,000 square foot lot. it contains 32 °fixture units, as
defined by the Uniform Plumbing Code, twice that of an equivalent Single Family Unit.
1JAJI IT
CITY OF ASHLAND "EIHISIi A"
SYSTEM CE9ELOFMENi CHARBE SCHEDUL
1 AS7 5='a:SICtL _%4191 'C:HAtiSED i_iA! G1F' COST, ' ATE; DISTRIBUTION FROM 53,07,556 TO x3.225.6801
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS FOR SDC'S Based an Single Family Unit = 32 Fixture Units
------------------------------------------------------------------ - ---
Development Type Water Sewer Storm Street Parks Total
First 12 Months Ph ain
--------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Single 'Family Unit (32 FED $1,029 $141 $76 $75 $212 $1,534
Multi-Family Unit (K FU'I $551 $111 330 $45 $166 5903
Tourist Accomodation Room $541 $84 $15 $48 $212 $901
Office Building-10,000 sf gfa $705 $141 $343• 37186 $0 $1,576
Development Type Mater Sewer Storm Street Parks Total
Second 12 Months Drain
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single Family Unit (32 FU) $2,059 $283 $152 $150 $424 $3,067
Multi-Family Unit (32 FU) $1,103 $221 $60 $91 $332 $1,807
Tourist Accomodation Room $1,082 $167 $31 $97 $424 $1,801
Office Building-10,000 sf gfa $1,409 $283 $687 $772 $0 47%1151
----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- ---- --- - - -- -- -- - - - - - - - - ------------ --
Development Type Water Sewer Storm Street Parks Total Original
Full Amount after 24 Months Drain Proposal
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single Family Unit (32 FU) $3,088 $424 $228 $225 $636 $4,601 $5,162
Multi-Family Unit (32 FU) $1,654 $332 $90 $136 $498 $2,710 $3,065
Tourist Accomodation Room $1,623 $251 $46 $145 $636 $2,702 $3,042
Office Building-10,000 5f gfa $2,114 $424 $1,030 $1,159 $0 $4,727 $15,984
NOTES:
1. Single Family Unit of 1,500 square feet with garage, driveway $ walk bringing
total impervious area to 2,650 square feet.
Multi-Family Unit is part of a 10-unit two story apartment building and parking
lot, walks, etc. cover 701 of it 15,000 square foot lot.
3. Tourist Accommodation Room is part of a 30-unit complex which, with its parking
lot and other paved areas, covers 801 of its 20,000 square foot lot.
4. This 10,000 square foot two story shopping center and its accompanying paved
areas covers 801 of its 15,000 square foot lot. It contains 32 "fixture units` as
defined by the Unifo,-m Plumbing Code, twice that of ar, equivalent Single Family Unit.
A. WATER SYSTEM SDC METHODOLOGY
Introduction and General Information
Following is the methodology used to calculate the Water System Development Charges
required to cover the full costs of water facilities to serve new residential, c6mmercial, and
other water users in Ashland. There are three Components covered: Water Supply, Water
Distribution, and Water Treatment. The methodology for each component varies. In the
case of Supply, the reimbursement fee is based on the proportionate share of the City's
investment in its water supply dam, reservoir, and related facilities. For Water Distribution,
the improvement charge is the proportionate share of a list of water distribution projects
designed to meet future growth in the City. For Water Treatment there is a reimbursement
fee since there is considerable unused capacity which has already been built at the City's
Water Treatment Plant.
The methodology for each component uses several factors in common. These include the
percentage of consumption by each customer sector.
Water consumption for four sectors of customers has been compiled for the 1980-1988
period. The four customer sectors are Residential, Commercial, Governmental, and
Irrigation. Residential consumption includes only single family water accounts, because
multi-family accounts were recorded as Commercial. The last year for Irrigation water sales
was 1986.
The consumption by Residential, Commercial, and Governmental sectors was examined in
three different views. First we examined the Annual Average of Water Sales. This view is
useful for determining the total demand on the system placed by the various sectors. The
second view is the peak usage analysis for the months of June, July and August - months
chosen because they represent the highest demand on the water system. The third view is
the non-peak usage analysis - all months except June, July and August. This view is most
useful for determining average per capita use excluding the effects of irrigation.
Average water sales -
1980 through 1989
Residential (Single Family) 54.86%
Daily per capita SF resid. 16.1 Cu. Ft.
Commercial 37.36%
Governmental 7.78%
A - 1
Average water sales -
June, July, August 1980 through 1988
Residential (Single Family) 61.02%
Daily Per capita SF Resid. 28.0 Cu. Ft.
Commercial 32.93%
Governmental 6.05%
Average water sales -
Sept. through May 1980 through 1988
Residential (Single Family) 50.99%
Daily Per capita SF Resid. 12.4 Cu. Ft.
Commercial 40.14%
Governmental 8.87%
These per capita and percentage of consumption figures are used in the methodology when
determining the.proper allocation of costs and benefits for water supply, treatment, and
distribution. The City has been refining its computerized record system over the past year,
and will be able to accurately determine any shifts in the percentage of water consumption
by the various sectors. This capability should be used annually to insure that any significant
changes in the allocation of consumption are reflected in the resulting SDC's.
For purposes of this analysis an adjustment to the City's consumption record reports was
made to account for the water use of Tourist Accommodation Rooms. Five percent (5%)
of total water consumption was subtracted from the Commercial use percentage to obtain
this amount. Tourist Accommodation Rooms account for 5% of total water sales as
reported in the 1989 R.W. Beck and Associates Report on Water Supply.
These distributions of consumption are used to determine and represent the relative burden
on existing and proposed water facilities throughout the methodology.
Uniform Plumbing Code Fixture Units
The Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) contains a standardization for various types of
plumbing fixtures to account for their load on the drain system in a building. There are
somewhat different standards used for commercial development and for one and two family
homes (COBA). Both however, use a unit of measurement called a "Fixture Unit". For
example, under the Uniform Plumbing Code, a drinking fountain equals 1 fixture unit, a
public water closet equals 6 units, and a single stall shower equals 2 fixture units.
Based upon interviews with the United Sewerage Agency in Washington County, Oregon,
and the Lane Council of Governments, both of whom have examined the issue, a standard
of sixteen (16) UPC fixture units is substantially equal to one single-family dwelling unit. -
A - 2
i
This considers the fact that there will be a mix of older and newer homes in the
community. Washington County's United Sewerage Agency uses the standard to determine
the monthly sanitary sewer bill for commercial accounts. Lane Council of Governments has
recommended it to both Springfield and Eugene as an equivalent for sanitary sewer as well.
Given the close relationship between the flow of water into a home or commercial
enterprise and the outflow into the sanitary sewer, we will employ the 16 fixture unit
standard in calculating parts of the Water and Wastewater SDC's for Commercial uses.
Service Standard
For the Water Supply and Treatment Plant components of the water systems development
charge, the currently existing service standard has been assumed. For the Distribution
system there is some improvement in service level included in the projects identified as
required to serve future growth. However, this is the same improvement in service level that
comes from the completion of the non-growth related portion of the projects identified.
Thus new growth is not being asked to make up any deficiency in the current service level.
Other revenues will be used to complete that portion of the projects which raises the
standard of service in the City.
Methodology
Facility Type - Water
Facility Component - Supply
The current water supply for the City of Ashland has little unused water supply capacity.
The current sources of supply are Reeder.Reservoir, direct intake from Ashland Creek and
contracts for water from the Talent Irrigation District (TID). Of greatest concern to the
City is the fact that contracts for TID deliveries of up to 795 acre feet per year are
expected to terminate by 1997. While new growth and development is currently being
served, the prospects for the future are poor without a new source or sources of supply
being made available. The situation is made all the more critical by the drought conditions
prevailing in the past few years.
Due to this situation, the City has begun examination of various water supply alternatives.
(See for example: City of Ashland Water Supply Report, R.W. Beck and Associates, May
1989.) There are a number of possible supply and demand reduction alternatives presented
in the Beck Report, and the City has identified some additional prospects for increasing
future supply. However, no one water supply scheme has yet emerged as the approach the
City will follow.
A - 3
Because the City is temporarily serving, however tenuously, new growth and development
from existing water sources, the City should be charging a reimbursement fee for this
component of its Water System SDC. In other words, the current supply is virtually at
capacity and new growth is able to be accomodated only by virtue of the uncertain TID
contracts. As soon as a plan for a permanent solution to the water supply expansion is
adopted, this component should be recomputed as an improvement fee based upon the
costs of the adopted approach.
In order to establish a reasonable value for the existing water supply capacity which is being
made available to new users the full replacement value of the City's water supply system
should be calculated. The major components of that system include: Hosler Dam (1928 &
1948), the Ashland Creek water rights owned by the City, the value of TID contracts (1924,
1926 & 1935) which provide up to 769 acre feet per year in perpetuity to the City and
various intake, transmission, and storage facilities. This value would be discounted-by a
"percentage of use" amount to acknowledge the value of the stored water to the City's
electrical utility.
Unfortunately, there is a lack of adequate records fully documenting historical City costs
in developing these water sources. This lack of fully reliable historical data coupled with
the improbability of ever being able to duplicate the supply sources precludes developing
a complete replacement value for what can only be described as an irreplaceable asset.
However, the 1985 R.W. Beck report does include a proposal and cost estimate for a new
water supply dam and reservoir at the Winburn site upstream from Reeder Reservoir. This
information can be used to develop a reasonable estimate of the replacement value of the
existing dam and reservoir.
The potential dam and reservoir referred to in the report is estimated to be able to store
some 630 acre feet of water. This compares to the 840 acre feet which Reeder Reservoir
is capable of storing. (See: R.W. Beck report). Such a reservoir,when combined with other
existing sources, is projected to be able to meet the water needs associated with a
population growth to 23,600 as well as the commercial and industrial development
associated with such growth in population. The projected total cost is $10,000,000. With a
storage capacity of 630 acre feet per year, the capital cost per acre foot of water stored is
$15,873 ($10,000,000 divided by 630 acre feet).
Were this computed cost of $15,873 per acre foot applied to Hosler Dam and Reeder
Reservoir the value would be $13,333 million (840 acre feet X$15,873). However, included
in the cost per acre foot of the proposed new dam are certain fixed costs which would need
to be incurred no matter what capacity of storage was contemplated. To be conservative,
we have assumed a fixed cost component in the Winburn Dam of 75% or $7,500,000. The
remaining $2,500,000 of variable costs when divided by the projected capacity of 630 acre
feet produces a variable acre foot cost of approximately $4,000. Extending this cost to 840
acre feet, the value is about $3-,360,000-.-T-bus, when the fixed costs are added to the
variable cost, the conservatively estimated replacement value of Hosler Dam and Reeder
A - 4
Reservoir is $10,860,000 ($3,360,000 plus $7,500,000). Again, to insure a conservative
calculation, no added replacement value is placed on water rights or other facilities
associated with supply other than the transmission capability assumed for the Winburn dam
project. To the extent water is available and not required for the Water Utility from Reeder
Reservoir, it is used to produce electricity for the City's Electrical Utility. For purposes of
this analysis, the City's Department of Public Works has suggested that as much as 25%
of the value of the dam and reservoir might be attributed to the Electrical Utility.
Based upon the foregoing conditions, the following represents the general Methodology
used to calculate the unit costs of providing the supply of water required to meet the
demands of growth for the following types of development: Residential Single-family unit,
Residential Multi-family unit (including mobile home dwelling unit), Tourist
Accommodation Room, and Commercial development. Government uses should be
classified according to their equivalent private sector use.
STEPS IN CALCULATING
1. Determine the value to the Water Utility of the existing water supply system based upon a $10,860,000
replacement value for Hasler Dam and Reeder Reservoir.
TOTAL VALUE OF EXISTING WATER SUPPLY X PERCENTAGE BENEFIT TO WATER
UTILITY = VALUE OF WATER SUPPLY COMPONENT TO WATER UTILITY.
$10,860,000 X 75% = $8,145,000
2.Allocate share of value to single family residential sector, develop a per capita value and calculate a Single
Family Residence SDC amount and a Multi-family Residence SDC amount:
(a) PERCENTAGE OF WATER CONSUMPTION ESTIMATED TO COME FROM SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL SECTOR X VALUE OF WATER SUPPLY COMPONENT = VALUE TO SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SECTOR OF PROJECT.
54.86%X$8,145,000 = $4,468,350
(b) VALUE TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SECTOR / ESTIMATED S.F. POPULATION
SERVED =PER CAPITA VALUE OF WATER SUPPLY TO S.F.RESIDENTIAL WATER USERS.
Population and Residency Assumptions
The U.S. Census estimates residential development Based on the foregoing assumptions, the population
consists of 70% single family residences and 30% served by the City's water supply consists of-
multi-family or mobile home residences.The City 5,100 S.F.units = 11,727 persons
also estimates 23 persons per single family 2,785 M.F. units = 55.013 persons
residence and 1.8 persons per multi-family(or 16,740 persons
mobile home park unit) residence.
PER CAPITA S.F. RESIDENTIAL VALUE _ $4,468,350/11,727 persons = $381
A - 5
(c) SINGLE-FAMILY PER CAPITA VALUE X AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLD SIZE _
COST TO PROVIDE WATER SUPPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
COST PFR S F'RESID 1JNIT $3S1 X 23 persotts/houseltold = $876
(d) DETERMINE COST TO PROVIDE WATER SUPPLY TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS
Multi-family residential units typically do not show the same level of increased summer month water usage
as is do Single-family Residential Units.Therefore, the Sept. through May per capita consumption of
Single-family units better represents per capita consumption of Multi-family Units than the annual average.
The ratio of Single-family per capita non-summer to annual consumption = 12.4/16.1 or.77
Apply the ratio to Single-family per capita to derive Multi-family per capita values.
Per capita value (Single-family) X ratio = Multi- $381 X .77 = $293
family per capita value.
PER CAPITA MULTI-FAMILY VALUE X AVERAGE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSEHOLD SIZE _
COST TO PROVIDE WATER SUPPLY TO MULTI FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
COS.T PER M F RFSID UNIT $293 X 1.8 persons/housefiold z $327
3.Calculate water use relationship between Single Family per capita and Tourist Accommodation Rooms;allocate
cost to Tourist Accommodation Room as a per capita equivalent:
(a) DETERMINE VALUE TO TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM OF WATER SUPPLY
Tourist Accommodation Rooms typically show a seasonal variation in consumption as do Single-family
Units.While the reasons for increased seasonal consumption are different,the net result is the same.
Therefore, the calculated Single-family per capita calculations are used when developing the value to
Tourist Accommodation Rooms.
TOTAL TOURIST ACCOMMODATION CONSUMPTION/NUMBER OF ROOMS = PER ROOM
AVERAGE WATER CONSUMPTION BY TOURIST ACCOMMODATIONS
5%of total city water use (R.W. Beck Study, 1989,pg.I1-3) X total water consumption in 1989/number
of rooms.
7,074,122 cubic ft4916 rooms = 7,668 cubic ft./room
(b) AVERAGE TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM CONSUMPTION / PER CAPITA SINGLE-
FAMILY CONSUMPTION = PER CAPITA EQUIVALENT CONSUMPTION
A - 6
Single Family Residential Consumption in 1989 = 65,950,000 cu. ft.
=
Single Family Residence Population in 1989 = 11,727 5.614 cubic ft.
Per Capita Equiv. Consumption = 7,668 Cu. Ft4,624 CuXt. = 136
(c) SINGLE-FAMILY PER CAPITA VALUE(STEP 2b)X AVERAGE TOURIST ACCOMMODATION
ROOM PER CAPITA EQUIVALENT (STEP 3b) = COST TO PROVIDE NEW SUPPLY TO
TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM.
COST P2rIt .... SST ACGOM,ROObf 5381 tX 231 . 5528
4.Determine an equivalent dwelling unit cost for all other commercial uses.
Sixteen(16)Facture Units as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code for commercial development is the
estimated equivalent of one Single-family Dwelling Uait.The Commercial sector does not generally show
the same pattern of peak summer use as the Single-family sector.Therefor to equate a Commercial use
with Single-family use,the adjustment factor calculated in Step 3a above needs to be applied.The SDC
component for Commercial developments other than Tourist Accommodation Rooms is calculated as:
NUMBER OF FDCTURE UNITS ACCORDING TO THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE
AS MOST RECENTLY ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF OREGON DIVIDED BY 16 TIMES
THE CHARGE FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT TIMES THE ADJUSTMENT
FACTOR (77%) TO DISCOUNT FOR PEAK SUMMER USE IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY
SECTOR.
5rsteen Fhcture'.1lntta $46X 77 S67S
A - 7
l
Methodology
Facility Type - Water
Facility Component - Distribution
The City of Ashland water distribution system consists of large diameter transmission lines
that connect to the water supply reservoir, the treatment plant and other parts of the City
and the major lines that distribute the water to the customers. Under the City's land use
regulations, developers and customers are responsible for the cost of installing most of the
smaller diameter lines (6" and less) in the system. Therefor, the Distribution Component
of the Water System Development Charge is for those lines and appurtenances which are
not the direct financial responsibility of the developer or customer.
A Comprehensive Water Plan for the City of Ashland was completed by the firm of R.W.
Beck and Associates in 1980. The study identified the major projects to be undertaken in
a phased plan of improvements and expansion of the Distribution System. The projects
were designed to serve a future population of 21,130 (growth of 4,390 persons) plus
attendant commercial, industrial and other growth.
Many elements of the water distribution plan have been completed. The remaining
elements are itemized in Schedule 1.1.2. The remaining elements consist of projects which
will serve both the existing customers and will provide for the expansion of the distribution
system capacity required to serve the demands of new growth and development. The City's
Public Works Department has categorized the extent to which each project is required to
serve the existing customers of the system or new development. In addition to this
distinction, projects designed to serve new growth were further categorized as serving only
Residential or Commercial growth or both general sectors. No projects were identified as
solely serving Commercial growth.
Of the $7,970,200 total project costs, $4,272,644 are allocated to improving the level of
service in the existing distribution system and $3,697,556 to serve growth. Of the amount
to serve growth, $471,876 is solely for Single-Family Residential Sector benefit and the
remaining $3,225,680 is of general benefit and serves all types of future growth. (See
Schedule 1.1 following this subsection).
Based upon the foregoing conditions, the following represents the general Methodology
used to calculate the unit costs of providing the increased capacity in the distribution
system required to meet the demands of growth for the following types of development:
Residential Single-family unit, Residential Multi-family unit, Tourist Accommodation
Room, and Commercial use. Government uses should be classified according to their
equivalent private sector use.
A - 8
1. Determine cost to serve residential growth -
(a) PROJECT COSTS TO SERVE PROJECTED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL GROWTH /
PLANNED GROWTH IN SINGLE-FAMILY POPULATION TO BE SERVED = PER CAPITA
COST OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PROJECTS.
Population and Residency Assumptions
The City of Ashland estimates residential Based on the foregoing assumptions,the population
development in the future will consist of two single projected to be served by the City's water
family residences for each multi-family or mobile distribution projects consists of:
home residence.The City also estimates 23 persons 1,374 S.F.units = 3,161 persons
per single family residence and 1.8 persons per 683 M.F.units = 1.229 persons
multi-family(or mobile home park unit) residence. 4,390 persons
Of all new residential population growth, it is estimated that 72%will reside in Single-Family Units. (See
discussion above.Supply Methodology Step 3a).
1471,876/3,161 (4,390 z.72) persons = $149 per capita
(b) PERCENTAGE OF WATER CONSUMPTION PROJECTED TO COME FROM SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL SECTOR X VALUE OF WATER DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT SERVING ALL
GROWTH/PROJECTED GROWTH IN POPULATION = SINGLE-FAMILY PER CAPITA COST
OF SHARED DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT COSTS
54.86%X$3,225,680/3,161 persons = $560 per capita
(c) PER CAPITA COSTS OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECI3 + PER CAPITA COSTS
OF SHARED DISTRIBUTION COSTS = SINGLE-FAMILY PER CAPITA VALUE OF
DISTRIBUTION PROJECTS TO RESIDENTIAL WATER USERS.
$149 + $560 = $709
2.Calculate SDC amounts for Single-family and Multi-family units based on per capita value:
(a) AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLD SIZE X PER CAPITA VALUE = COST TO
PROVIDE EXPANDED CAPACITY OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO SINGLE FAMILY
HOUSING UNIT.
COST:PFII SR TtESIT) UT+IIT $WX 23 personx/hot7sebold $11:31
(b) AVERAGE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSEHOLD SIZE X ADJUSTED PER CAPITA VALUE = COST
TO PROVIDE EXPANDED CAPACITY OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO MULTI FAMILY
HOUSING UNIT.
A - 9
CQS7'PER ri1.N`.RES1U. C1N1T = 1,g persons/houseLnld 7C S431($564X 77'} $T7G
• 77�adjnstment based on lowerper�capna use($ee discussion m Water SupPty McWntlology •
Step 3c)
3.Determine cost to serve tourist accommodation room based on a per capital equivalent value:
(a) AVERAGE TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM PER CAPITA EQUIVALENT X SINGLE-
FAMILY PER CAPITA VALUE = COST TO PROVIDE EXPANDED CAPACITY OF
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM. (See discussion in Water
Supply Methodology Step 4 for assumptions).
CQS1'PER'1'QURtST pCCOM.ROAM UNT1".= $S60?X 1,36 $76.2
4.Determine cost to serve commercial uses:
Sixteen(16)Fixture Units as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code for commercial development is the
estimated equivalent of one Single-family Dwelling Unit.The Commercial sector does not generally show
the same pattern of peak summer use as the Single-family sector.Therefor to equate a Commercial use
with Single-family use, the adjustment factor calculated in the methodology for Water Supply,Step 2d
needs to be applied.The SDC for Commercial developments other than Tourist Accommodation Rooms
is calculated as:
NUMBER OF FIXTURE UNITS ACCORDING TO THE UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE AS MOST RECENTLY ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF OREGON
DIVIDED BY 16 TIMES THE CHARGE FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING
UNIT FOR THE FACILITIES IDENTIFIED AS SHARED BETWEEN
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL. TIMES THE ADJUSTMENT FACTOR
(77%) TO DISCOUNT FOR PEAK SUMMER USE IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY
SECTOR.
36 Flstura Units :.. $392 ($StO X 77)%23 $992'
A 10
V000 0.0 000y�00 000 0000 0m0 0p0p0 0 Oo 0 0 0' o•p.po
O OP OOf`vw QmN NNNN .12 NI�� M mA C O O NL'I w
mm Nm OOf` •O mMM In w•O
d .00 NP .t .f O00 EON �O•p 'A q �pN N M
Nom} nv:!PO,ST• m!� W
U w N q N N N q NNN N N�.-
.. Gy q NNM NN NqN NN
M vM
Q N N
X X X X X X XXX X X X X X X X X X X
« O O O 99 99999 O O O 99 O O 99 999 O 99 O O O O
dd« OMO OM ONNOO 000 VAN OO MN OVp 1f1 N Y1N O O V\ O
d p 3 wM�t �nM ONN•pN A•ON NN MM �pww w �w in .1 w
2 L O
a L
C 6 0
0
u
�« L �O}.A'•N NM NO.Ntt MVN �N.00t0 NNOO dA� .GhpM� d •�OM O V A N.Op� «
U Q W M N N W M N N M N M N N N N M N N N N N p M N .
q At v lit!d N N} YC
0 O
« � o O b O b 0 0 0 0 o b O b b 0 Xo o O O o O o 0 0 o O O p
OOppO OO .y..�yOOO OO pOp yOy��y�O0�OO OpOwp OOO O OO O O O O � w
U.«w N•Ap.p Nd Of�Ab Ow M.Ot tO f�1�00 d.0 NLA LA U; EEO..- 8 •Op � O Kw
w X w w
LL W w«
d O
« O O
O C O O O
^ m 0 O N O
E O
P U•�V N� w
W N N N N P r
N O
H
m °o(°oy°oo°p,OO °o°o°o °oo o
r� E w ANN ^P Y1J VM! 00� Q;;—��NN OM '.�t•p ENpN P �W N A P OPp
.0 M U N N N p N N N N g N a NM w N' N NNN N q O W N N N N
LL w tlWl
W w �
O���}}•O O O O O O O O O O O yOy�p O O O O O O • • O O O .O�}}O O O V O O
Cd 'IO Yp 'OA^.00 Nb'N,a �1MV AMVN ^N N MYN1 � •pM A P�N N
a L L 2
y qEC « O L 6 O >M> O C
4j x « d U N w
O L w L w w 00 w S O d
SE«w1� L > 0 6'M d ti Y TS i Z «w u d
O p
L C p O L U O V W W C t
NW > To00 030 C d s v . 00 rc0 � a `w" c�
0 0 0
«w N«C « «M L V O T Y2«• � T L• Y m O
O
r« . w CC E Ew C y«
O
d J « w w f� w S e CO 2 qE L
•�C
O 72a 9 w w w E Y O ..-0 9•-K « 00 N owT u.Zow L W O yO w
2 Lq L« d « L 2 pp•. pp��� Y « w X L
mw M
•a f C - • Ep m �6x-�
C�w « C v p LC L « PjC
Lr w
OU• 0 Qww M ww w5
6 qQwL e V N W O�
q•0p,
O d �.pp m w O V
O C 3 w
• T • « • w L i >xl pp. w w O•F C w
L L «LE S w • w m w «m • W w > Q D P O« d • w w >
CO O Np 3 .U Y d w NC O. w d > O
w « ra CO wLww� jp.<� w '.NT w LTp w� OS•�2w cc C-� EL L2
O D. « L -• L YOd'0 Yww 2wrw ECww � C p1 yL 6« T« U «
L 41 w X L r L M« w w.� L Y O J 79 w C C J O« O E O w w w w w w M g U « w 0 w w O L w > w d C w w U L w L
w w3N QEr; LL•.- OZ d _NLL 0 w w d w •�. 00 L O w•� O«Z; L X00
L•«SWG�J =Z JNGww OF• U
O • SJ 0-7 L
« ww .. .. .. .. w .. L ww... w .. .. w .. w .. ..7 ..] .. a..Y-
dww dC0« wd ww w•- d w0: w1• w w0
« d CC CC C wwCw CCC wwww CdCL•.- >wCC C C > C CLL CO. Cw C
U L y J c < < c _ ''pp
• . . L L_ w pE rLrLrX J�
a O rrrr _ «_ Wow « «
L 6 r m m r m N N M N m•O.O N w M S^2 6^^N r N m^ ^ X M M O�M v
� T NN My 'MM N
^ 77
O N w O
7 NN N
J O > M J M >> >> j D
wQj U72 62 �6 6d Ma. 6 p LL
,JOOL •i! tO A� .-N •-NNAP �NM M�f vp•O NM vNd A w N M .1
0�w ziC map CO QQ EOm mapm 6Q4 mm G6 EG ¢ G< QQ6 Q Q m m m
0 z M LL p O.--r N N Lk Lk LA Lk (1 pp pJ m m m pp
w w w MW w w w w w w w w w w w P P P 0,0`0, P P P P P
Methodology
Facility Type - Water
Facility Component - Water Treatment Plant
From City records and a recent study of the City's water supply, it was determined that the
water treatment facility has considerable unused capacity(Water Supply Report, R.W. Beck
and Associates, May 1989.) Thus, new development should pay a reimbursement fee which
reflects the demand being placed upon this unused, capacity.
Size of Unused Capacity. Design capacity of the current water treatment plant is 12.5
million gallons of water per day (MGD). Current use, based upon average daily water
processed in the peak month, is calculated at 7.5 MGD. This indicates the plant is being
used a 60% of capacity, with 40% unused capacity.
Value of Unused Canacity Using comparative cost information derived from interviews with
City Department of Public Works staff, Eugene Water and Electric Board staff, and staff
from R.W. Beck and Associates, a conservative replacement value for the Ashland plant
is established at $9,000,000. This value should be reviewed periodically and increased as
needed.
Based upon the foregoing findings and conditions, the following represents the general
Methodology used to calculate the unit costs of providing the unused capacity in the Water
Treatment Plant available to meet the demands of growth for the following types of
development: Residential Single-family unit, Residential Multi-family unit, Tourist
Accommodation Room, and Commercial USE. Government uses should be classified
according to their equivalent private sector use.
STEPS IN CALCULATION
1.ASSIGNMENT OF VALUE TO TYPE OF USER:
Value of 60%
Customer Class % of Current Use of Capacity Used
Residential 54.86% $2,962,440
Commercial 3236% $1,747,440
Tourist Accom. 5.00% $,270,000
Governmental 7.78% 420,120
$5,400,000
A - 12
2. Calculate per capita Single-family residential value and apply to Single-family and Multi-family residential
units to calculate SDCs:
(a) COST OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY USED/CURRENT SINGLE FAMILY
POPULATION = PER CAPITA SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COST.
$2,962,440/11,727 persons = $253 per capita
(b) AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLD SIZE X PER CAPITA VALUE=REIMBURSEMENT
FEE TO PROVIDE UNUSED CAPACITY OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO SINGLE
FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
COST PER S FUHIT $253 X 23 petsons/household = SS$Z
(c) AVERAGE MULTI-FAMILY HOUSEHOLD SIZE X ADJUSTED PER CAPITA VALUE'
REIMBURSEMENT FEE TO PROVIDE UNUSED CAPACITY OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT
TO MULTI FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
_gang Mdsylojhgy aomuosuehnot ltd o 7at c 5co19u5 n t 0 fo25i•3 n oX n p77ea•)k;use 5 3d5i1 ff
erence (See
Step 3c
3.Apply Single-family per capita equivalent factor to Tourist Accommodation Rooms to calculate SDC:
(a) AVERAGE TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM PER CAPITA EQUIVALENT X SINGLE-
FAMILY PER CAPITA VALUE = COST TO PROVIDE UNUSED CAPACITY OF WATER
TREATMENT PLANT TO TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM.(See discussion in Water Supply
Methodology Step 3 for assumptions).
cost PFIt ToIlR1ST ACCOM.RQU1N 136 7c 5253 s344
4. Calculate Commercial Use SDC equivalent.
Sb teen(16)Fbaure Units as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code for commercial development is the
estimated equivalent of one Single-family Dwelling Unit.The Commercial sector does not generally show
the same pattern of peak summer use as the Single-family sector.Therefor to equate a Commercial use
with Single-family use, the adjustment factor calculated in the methodology for Water Supply, Step 2d
needs to be applied.The SDC for Commercial developments other than Tourist Accommodation Rooms
is calculated as:
NUMBER OF FIXTURE UNITS ACCORDING TO THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE
AS MOST RECENTLY ADOPTED BY THE STATE OF OREGON DIVIDED BY 16 TIMES
THE CHARGE FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT TIMES THE ADJUSTMENT
FACTOR (77%) TO DISCOUNT FOR PEAK SUMMER USE IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY
SECTOR.
16'Fixttue Uprts $582 X 77 $448
A - 13
B. SANITARY SEWER SDC METHODOLOGY
In developing the methodology by which the City's sewer SDC is calculated, the sewer
system is viewed as having two separate components - the sewerage treatment plant and
the collection system. A separate methodology for each of these SDC components is thus
recommended and described.
Sewerage Treatment Plant Component. The City's treatment plant has undergone a
number of improvements over the past 40 years to accommodate the increasing demands
placed upon it by a growing city and to comply with higher standards for treated flows
discharged from the plant as imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. The current plant's designed capacity was
brought to this higher level of treatment and geared to process the considerable effluent
burden from a food processing plant which is no longer operating. The result is that the
treatment plan has unused capacity that can handle a significant amount of effluent
generated over the next 10 to 20 years by new development. The methodology for
determining the reimbursement fee which assigns new development its equitable and
proportionate share of the value of this excess capacity consists of the following steps.
1. Determine amount of unused treatment plant capacity.
Based upon City information on dry weather water consumption (hence dry weather
discharge to the sewerage treatment plant), the current demand upon the plant was
determined as follows:
Plant Use (MGD) (in millions
User category Measurement of alg lons per dav)
Residential (4,370 accts x 105 x 2.4) 1.101
Commercial (@ 48% of Residential) .528
Governmental (@ 10% of Residential) .110
SOSC (@ 65 gpcd x 4,400 stu) 286
TOTAL AMOUNT PROCESSED 2.025 MGD
(say 2.0 MGD)
Data from Sewerage Study pg. 8 by CRS Shrine of September 1986, updated to 1990
population.
B - 1
The ratio of use to design capacity is'2.0 MGD/3.1 MGD = 65% used. Thus the
plant shows an unused capacity of approximately 1.1 MGD.
2. Determine present value of plant and the unit value of the unused capacity.
The historic cost of the current plant was determined through a review of Public
Works records which were used as follows:
Sewage Treatment Plant Value
Plant Construction Year Local Cost' 1991 Value
Initial construction 1936 $ 55,780 $1,100,000
Addition/upgrade 1960 280,000 1,622,000
Addition/upgrade 1978 299,326 505.000
Current value $3,227,000
' The local cost figures total construction costs less federal and state grants; thus local
cost is just that plant value paid for by Ashland's sewer utility users.
"The 1991 value was determined by applying the percentage increase in the ENR
Construction Index from the year of construction to the last week of February 1991.
The unit value (the unit being 1,000 gallons of sewage per day) of the unused plant
capacity is calculated by dividing the present value by its present design capacity.
$3,227,000 divided by 3.1 MGD divided by 1,000 = $1,041/1,000 GPD
3: Determine the reimbursement fee for "buying in" to the plant capacity
With the unit value of each 1,000 gallons of daily processing capacity determined,
the reimbursement fee for different categories of development can be calculated
when the average daily demand for each such category of development is known.
The formulas and calculation for the various categories of development follow.
B - 2
(a) Residential Uses.- ReimbursemenC Fee
Daily Daily Plant Reimbursement
Development Volume Capacity Vsed Due for Urit
Single family 105 gpd;x 2 3 241.5 pd
g $251
Multi-family 105 gpd x 18 189. 0 $197
Tourist room 105 gpd x 136 142 8 $149
Note Davy volume; based upon average dry weather flow of 105 gallons per capita
per day {gpcd� andpopuIahon factors of 2,3 per single:family biome, 18 per multi
family unit<and 136 per tourist room! See Water SDCMethodology in;this chapter
fox discussion sf Tourist Aceommodation Roam equivalent caleulatisn.
{b) Commercial Development Reimbursement fee
TheUnifonn Plumbing Code, as adopted by the State o£Oregon contains.
data:for various plumbing fixtuYes for commercial uses and the °fixture unit"
amount for each. Atypical single family home grill have;the equivalent of;16 '
fixture iimts `(See: Water System SDC:Methodology for fuller discussion) :For
every 16 UPC Fixture!:Units, reach commercial use, other.:than Tourist ,
Accommodation Rosins, will pay.the eguivalentof one (1) Single:-family
Residential SDC or fraction.tleresf, for the Wastewater:Treatment Plant
charge
(c); Governmental and Institutional Development
Government and Tnstituhonal uses are classified;and calculated accordin g tq
their equivalent private sec#or use, e g Residential Single family, lvlulUfamily,
Tou nst Accommodation Room; or Commercial
4. Credits Granted
If property tax-supported bonds had been used to help pay for the local share of
plant construction, the present value of that stream of payments from a development
property could equitably be credited against the STP reimbursement fee. If
outstanding debt was still requiring debt service payments through property taxes or
a portion of the sewer service rates, the present value of that stream of future
payments by a particular development could also be equitably credited. Since neither
of these situation exists in Ashland, the methodology includes no such credit
provision. _
B - 3
Sewer Collection System Component.
The portion of the sewer collection system which is considered for SDC support consists
of the major parts not assessed through local improvement districts nor installed directly
as a condition of land use development. These include the trunk sewers, interceptors and
any related lift stations. The 1986 Sewer Study by CRS Shrine indicated that there was
essentially no excess capacity which existed in the collection system and that capital projects
were needed to correct existing deficiencies and to meet the future demands of expected
new development.
The City's Public Works Department has identified the projects yet to be built to
accomplish the planned system expansion and has indicated that all of these future projects
are 100% related to serving new development. The methodology for determining the
appropriate public improvement charge for the collection system part of the Sewer SDC
consists of the following steps.
1. Determine present value for projects needed to serve expected new development.
The Schedule on the following page calculates the total current value of needed
sewer collection system projects at $817,000.
B - 4
ate® ! ! ! 999
!
, a .
J$!) # # # K # ■ # .
! _
§
/ ! u
\l / m /
r
f � 2f 27 • � & § ;
/ f / .
2. Allocate costs among categories of development.
Using data on effluent contributions from each type of development as shown in
Step 1 of Wastewater Treatment Plant methodology, the proportioning of use is as
follows:
Residential 54.0%
Commercial 26.0%
Governmental 5.4%
SOSC 14.6%
3. Determine per capita residential cost of new projects.
The 1986 Sewer Study indicates its recommended improvements to the collection
system are geared to serve a population of 22,700 - approximately 6,000 more
population than the 1990 figure. Thus total project costs of $817,000 are 54%
residential or $441,200. Divided among 6,000 new residents equals $74 per capita.
4. Determine Single-family and Multi-family improvement charge.
Single famrIy $74 tunes 2 3 person/househbid = $170 Up
Mulhfamrly ii $74 Mmes 18 personsThusehold::_ $133
5. Determine improvement charge cost for Tourist Accommodation development.
Tourist accommodation development is to be charged an improvement charge on
a per tourist accommodation room basis equal to 1.36 times the per capita cost of
$74.
Torrnst roam equtval— :factor of:136 ttnies $74 $101
6. Determine improvement charge cost for Commercial_Development.
The Uniform Plumbing Code, as adopted by the State of Oregon, contains data for
various plumbing fixtures for commercial uses and the "fixture unit" amount for
each. A typical single family home will have the equivalent of 16 fixture units. (See:
Water System SDC Methodology for fuller discussion).
For every ib UPC Fixtatta re Unrts, each commercial nse, other than Toarrst
Accommolatrari Booms, will pay the equivalent of one f i) Single-famr7q Residential
SDC ar fraction thereof; far eo.Sewer Collectton System charge
B - 6
C. STORM DRAINAGE SDC METHODOLOGY
Introduction and General Information
The City's stone drainage system was the subject of a thorough master facilities plan study
by KCM Engineering in 1985`. The study mapped and.described both the existing stone
drain facilities and made recommendations for improving and expanding the system to meet
demands of full build-out within each of the 15 drainage basins within the Ashland Urban
Growth Boundary. It stated that (with the exception of six major drainage channels -
Ashland, Clayton, Hamilton, Tolman, Wrights and Bear Creeks) all stone runoff is planned
and designed to be handled by conduit. A minimum size of 10-inch diameter concrete pipe
was used for future pipe installations in order to facilitate maintenance.
METHODOLOGY - Steps followed in calculating a Storm Drainage SDC are:
1. Determine the square footage of Impervious area that will result from full development
within the Ashland storm drainageturban growth area.
The Master Plan indicates that the existing system is essentially at or beyond capacity and
that construction projects to install conduit, eliminate bottlenecks and improve some open
drainage channels are necessary-to handle the increase in storm water runoff and to
accommodate existing and future runoff. The method used to develop the design and
location of these capital improvement projects used a computer to model both.existing and
increased flows from full development of currently undeveloped land within each of the
drainage basins. Four categories of land were used based upon the City's Comprehensive
Plan: single family, multi-family, commercial/industrial and parks and open space. Certain
ratios of impervious area to total land area were used to develop total impervious area to
be added in each basin and, using Ashland rainfall data, translating the increased runoff
from development into the appropriately designed storm drain system necessary to handle
that increased storm water flow.
The table following shows the results of this process in terms of the amount of projected
impervious area by each type of land use zone. The summary data shows the following
amount of new impervious area by major type of use:
Single-Family 378.7 acres
Multi-Family 35.7 acres
Comm'I/Industrial 175.2 acres
TOTAL 589.6 acres
Converting impervious acres from new development to square footage (589.6 X 43,560)
equals 25,683,000 square feet.
' City of Ashland Drainage Master Plan, KCM Engineering, Tigard Oregon, November, 1985
C-1
2. Calculate project costs and allocate to new growth.
ASHLAND STORM DRAIN PROJECT NEEDS -
Data from KCM Drainage Master Plan,July, 1985
Summary of Capital Costs - (1985 Dollars based on ENR Index of 4600 Seattle
WA.)
r
Projects
Done Since Current Value
Capital 1985$ of Remaining
Basin Cost Amount Dale Projects
Wrights Creek $ 16,200 $ 16,808
Hospital 904,500 938,448
Cambridge St. 230,400 239,048
Laurel St. 798,750 828,729
Ashland Creek 952,2(10 987,939
Railroad Yard 495,900 25,000 1991 434,512
55,000 bid
1991/92
Mountain Ave. 1,058550 110981280
Beach St. ' 1,687,900 89,000 1990 1,662,251
Fordyce St. none
Walker Ave. 41,000 42,539
Fast Main St. 2,628,950 2,727,621
Park St. 252,000 261,458
Clay Creek 922,950 957,591
Hamilton Creek 24,450 25,368
Interstate 5 basins 1.070.100 1.110.264
$11,083,850 $11,330,856
Plus Engineering, Overhead, Contingencies @ 30% 3399.257
Total Cost
$14,700,113
Notes:
1. Capital Cost is KCM estimate in 1985 dollars; does NOT include engineering&
design,contingencies or overhead.
2.Current value of projects remaining translated to current dollars based on ENR
of 4772.65 (2/25/91)
U ' Ditching cost is included in Beach St.estimate.
C-2
The City of Ashland Public Works Department has estimated the allocation of costs related
to correction of existing system deficiencies versus costs attributable to new development
to be 85% correction to 15% new development. Thus costs to be allocated to new growth
are $2,205,000 (15% of 14,700,000).
G3
imp-area.wkl
G4
3. Calculate the cost per impervious square foot of new development.
Total project costs to serve new development are divided by the square footage of
impervious area of future full development within the Ashland urban area.
COST PER SQUARE FOOT =
Project Costs/ Impervious Area in Sq. Ft.
$2,205,000/25,683,000 sq. ft. _ $0.085
4. Calculate the SDC amount.
From the building and site plans submitted with each development application, the square
footage of impervious area will be determined. The COST PER SQUARE FOOT will then
be applied to that calculated square footage to determine the amount of the Stone
Drainage SDC for that specific development. For example, a single family homesite with
a 1,500 sq. Ft. house, a two-car garage of 450 sq. Ft and walks and driveways covering 700
sq. ft. would cover a total of 2,650 sq. ft. The Storm Drain SDC would thus be 2,650 X
$0.085 = $225.25.
C-5
D. TRANSPORTATION SDC METHODOLOGY
Introduction and General Information
The City of Ashland has a system of streets and roadways which at various points have
become saturated especially during periods of peak use. The City has determined that
automobile use has grown more rapidly than population growth. While the City seeks to
promote alternatives to single-driver automobile use, continued growth and development
will require additional capacity to the City's collector and arterial street system. While
developers are required to provide residential streets within subdivisions, the added load
on the non-local portion of the system caused by both residential new subdivisions and in-
filling will need to be met. Furthermore, as new commercial development occurs it creates
additional trips which translate directly to the need for increased street capacity.
Under the Oregon statute, the transportation SDC is a broad category that can include
expenditures for a variety of projects that increase the capacity of the City's transportation
system. Consequently, when the cost of providing increased capacity is calculated, the City
includes such diverse elements as such expenditures as new street construction itself plus
required signalization, signing, curbing, sidewalks,widening, channelization and right of way
acquisition. Similarly, expenditures to increase capacity even on existing arterials and
collectors can appropriately be made as long as the SDC funding portion of the project is
increasing the capacity of the system.
Standard of Use
The standard of use proposed is the existing standard provided to the current residents of
the City. Were the standard of service increased, the change would result in the need to
recompute the cost per unit of growth (New Lane Miles Required). The level of service
relates directly to the capacity of the street system, i.e., the greater the number of vehicles
(lane capacity) the lower the standard and hence the lower the cost of an SDC.
The Transportation System Development Charge is an improvement fee because there is
no unused capacity for which the City seeks reimbursement. Thus the charges will be used
for expansions in the capacity of the City's arterials and collectors.
D-1
' I
I
STEPS IN CALCULATION
The Transportation SDC formula is:
ATTRIBUTABLE NEW TRAVEL IN VEHICULAR MILES PER DAY =
[(No.Trips/day by land use type z Trip Length)12 • % New Trips]
NEW LANE MILES REQUIRED =
Attributable New Travel/Capacity per Lane Mile in Vehicles per day
CONSTRUCTION COST* _
New Lane Miles Required X Construction Cost per Lane Mile
CREDITS =
Present Value of required or allowed developer contribution
TRANSPORTATION SDC =
Construction Cost-Credits
ASSUMPTIONS AND SOURCES:
The individual factors in the calculation formula are derived from:
1. Trips/day or Trip Rate is average number of trip ends per weekday from Trip Generation:An Informadon
Report(4th ed.),1987,published by Institute of Transportation Engineers, and Average Trip Lengths is
from 'Trip Lengths, Survey Data Tabulations, conducted by National Personal Transportation Study"
1983-84.
2. Percentage of New Trips is judgement based on surveys reported in "Factoring Passer-By Trips Into
Traffic Impact Analyses p.82, Public Worb, May 1984; ITE's Trip Generation and discussion of
methodology with City of Medford and Jackson County Public Works Department staff.
3. New Lane Miles Required is calculated by dividing the attributable new miles of daily travel by the
capacity of a lane of roadway at the City's standard,of service at 5,5W vehicles per day at average
weekday volumes.
4. Costs of Construction from City of Ashland Public Works Dept.stall.
5. Credits may include Real Market Value(as last determined by the County Assessor)of land for Collector
or Arterial streets or rights of way, or additional Collector or Arterial street capacity provided by the
developer and not required by the development itself. Developer provided lane miles that quilify for
credit will be based on the then existing City value for calculating the SDC.
D-2
DAILY TRIP ENDS AND TRIP LENGTH PER UNIT BY LAND USE.TYPE
Land-Use Type (Unit) Trip Rate Adjusted* Percentage Adjusted*
Trip New Trips * Trip
Length Rate
Residential Use
Detached Single Family Unit 10.1 2.2 100% 10.10
Multi-family Unit - each unit 6.6 2.2 100 6.60
Mobile Home in Park, - unit 4.8 2.2 100 4.80
Hotel/Motel/B&B, per room 10.2 1.9 75
7.65
Other Residential, each unit 10.1 2.2 100 10.10
Industrial & Warehouse, per
1,000 sq. ft. gross bldg. area
Industrial, light 7.0 1.9 100 7.00
Warehouse/Wholesale 4.9 1.9 100 4.90
Storage 2.6 1.9 100 2.60
General Office, per 1,000 sq.
ft. gross bldg. area 16.3 1 1.9 25 4.08
Retail/Commercial per 1,000
sq. ft. gross bldg. area 94.7 1.9 50 47.35
*Trip lengths are derived from national averages and then reduced by.666 to account tar compact geography of the City.
**Trip Rata arc adjusted by muhilfing an4uste i national avenge Trip Rates times Perventage New Trips. .
Notes to: Daily Trip Ends and Trip Length per Unit by Land Use Type
1. These formulas and calculations are based upon averages and typical conditions. As
such, the impact of individual new developments could be overestimated. Thus provision
is provided under the City's SDC Ordinance to permit the developer to submit on a case
by case basis a professionally prepared site and development specific analysis for review
by the City to determine if an adjustment is warranted. Similarly, the SDC Ordinance
permits the City to initiate a site and development specific analysis to determine if an
adjustment is appropriate.
D-3
2. The Land Use Types are categories derived from Trip Generation, 4th ed., 1987
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (TTE). The City will develop a
table of building permit types that correspond to the above Land Use Types and
descriptions and use the table as a guide in assigning proposed developments to the
proper category.
3. There will not be a Transportation SDC charged for construction requiring building
permits for miscellaneous structures that do not increase the level of demand on the
transportation system, e.g. carport, sheds, garages, etc.
4. Trip Rates are from ITE's Trip Generation calculations for Average Weekday Trip
Ends.
Cost per lane mile -
The City of Ashland, Department of Public Works, has estimated the cost of constructing
a new lane mile of Arterial or Collector roadway in the City. The estimated cost is $110,000
per lane mile.
The City may revise the cost estimate from time to time in accordance with the provisions
of the City's SDC Ordianance as new information is developed or as costs change.
SAMPLE CALCULATION:
Single Family House -
ATTRIBUTABLE NEW TRAVEL IN VEHICULAR MILES PER DAY =
[(10.1 daily trip ends x 2.2 mile Trip Length)/2 * 100% new trips]
= 11.11 vehicular miles
NEW LANE MILES REQUIRED =
11.11 / 5,500 vehicles per lane mile daily
= 0.00202 new lane miles
CONSTRUCTION COST* _
0.00202 lane miles X $110,000 Cost per Lane Mile
_ $222.20
CREDITS =
Present Value of required or allowed developer contribution
TRANSPORTATION SDC
Construction Cost Credits
1$222 20;per single family house
D-4
E. PARK AND RECREATION SDC METHODOLOGY
Introduction and General Information
Following is the methodology used to calculate the Park and .Recreation Systems
Development Charges required to cover the full costs of park and recreation facilities to
serve new residential growth to the year 2005 in Ashland. There are three Components
covered:Large Active Parks, Small Active Parks and Large Passive Parks. The methodology
for each component is basically the same.
For Park and Recreation Improvement fees the methodology looks only to the Residential
Sector. While it is true that employees of Commercial and Industrial establishments use the
City's parks and recreation facilities, however most demand placed on the facilities by
Ashland's employees is on an individual basis and therefor attributable to their role as a
resident of the City.In cases where use of the.facilities is on a employee-group basis, it will
most often be for fee-chargeable activities such as league softball or reserved area picnics.
Park user fees established by the Parks and Recreation Commission should be set at a level
sufficient to recover a proportionate share of fixed asset replacement costs from such users.
The tourism industry places added demand on the City's park and recreation facilities.
This is especially the case in regard to Lithia Park, the tennis facilities and the Municipal
Golf Course. The Municipal Golf Course should have fees set at a level to keep the course
self-supporting while setting aside adequate replacement reserves. if expansion is required,
the financing should be based upon revenues generated by user fees as well.
Lithia Park and the tennis facilities on the other hand, are used quite heavily by visitors to
the City but do not generate income. A study is currently being conducted by Rebecca L.
Reid of the Southern Oregon Regional Services Institute (SORSI) for the Southwestern
Oregon Visitors Association (SOVA) and funded by the Oregon Department of Economic
Development through the Regional Strategies program. As part of this study interviews
were conducted in Lithia Park between June and September of 1990.
Of some 683 contacts, only 28%were local persons (lived within 50 miles of Ashland). The
rest were visitors from at least 50 miles away. Of these 434 visitoM 241 or 55.5% had spent
the night in Ashland. And of those having spent the night in Ashland, 68% had stayed in
a Hotel/Motel or Bed & Breakfast accommodation. About 16% reported staying with
friends or relatives and the remainder had other accommodations including camping.
When the 434 visitors were asked the size of their party the responses ranged from 1 to
200. However,when the responses that-range from 1 to 6 are examined, approximately 95%
of the responses are accounted for. This reveals an average party size of 2.7 persons. This
is in the same order of magnitude as the-2.8-person average non-tour party size reported
by the Shakespearean Festival.
E -1
As these early results show, the tourist industry does place a heavy demand on Lithia Park.
While no study has been conducted to determine the use of other City of Ashland Park and
Recreation Facilities, the Parks Director reports that his observation over the years is that
there is strong tourist use of other facilities such as tennis courts. Based on these survey
data and the professional observations of City staff, there is ample evidence to conclude
that the addition of Tourist Accommodations in the City will add to the demand for Park
and Recreation capacity.
Based upon the professional observations of City Parks staff, there is little, if any, impact
on the small parks within the City, as these tend to serve the neighborhoods in which they
are located. Therefore, the SDC Methodology attributes a share of the cost to expand the
City's Large Active and Large Passive parks, but not the neighborhood oriented facilities
to Tourist Accommodation Rooms expansion.
Standard of Service
The City of Ashland comprehensive plan identifies a standard of 2.5 acres of active large
parks per 1,000 persons, 1.75 acres/1,000 for small active parks and 10 acres/1,000 for large
passive parks. However, the City falls short of these service standards for each park
category. Some of the City's park and recreation facility needs are being met through
cooperative agreements with the School District and with Southern Oregon State College -
both of which have made land available for park and recreation facilities.
Land made available by Southern Oregon State College may be required at a future date
for college purposes, thereby diminishing the supply of available park land. Thus as the City
looks to increase its inventory of developed parks with the goal of meeting the adopted
standards, the target may move if some land now in park use becomes unavailable.
System Development Charge calculations foi Parks and Recreation Facilities are based on
the cost of developed parks required to serve new development up to the standard currently
provided to the existing population - not up to the Comprehensive Plan Standards or to the
standard which includes the land currently provided by the School District and Southern
Oregon State College. The lowest standard (the current service level) is used because using
a higher standard would result in new development paying twice - once in the form of a
Systems Development Charge and then again in property taxes levied to increase the supply
of park facilities required to serve the existing population. By limiting the Systems
Development Charge to the existing standard, new development will share in the cost of
improving to the adopted standard through taxes over time as expansion of the Park and
Recreation System occurs.
Methodology
E -2
Park and Recreation Component
The general methodology for calculating appropriate levels of Park and Recreation Facility
SDC is as follows:
1. IDENTIFY AMOUNT OF PARK ACREAGE (BY TYPE OF PARK)
CURRENTLY IN USE AND OWNED BY THE CITY; DIVIDE BY CURRENT
POPULATION SERVED TO DERIVE CURRENT STANDARD OF USE.
2. CALCULATE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE
EQUIVALENT ACRES OF DEVELOPED PARKS TO PROJECTED
POPULATION.
3. QUANTIFY THE AMOUNT OF PARK DEVELOPMENT REQUIRED TO
SERVE THE PROJECTED POPULATION AT THE CURRENT STANDARD
OF USE.
5. APPLY CURRENT AVERAGE PER ACRE ACQUISITION AND
DEVELOPMENT COSTS TO AMOUNT OF ACRES REQUIRED TO MEET
NEEDS FOR PROJECTED ADDITIONAL POPULATION TO DERIVE TOTAL
COST OF ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT.
6. DIVIDE TOTAL COST BY PROJECTED ADDITIONAL POPULATION TO
OBTAIN PER CAPITA COST. REDUCE PER CAPITA COST BY "TOURIST
ACCOMMODATION ROOM FACTOR"
7. MULTIPLY ADJUSTED PER CAPITA COST TIMES AVERAGE NUMBER OF
PERSONS PER SINGLE-FAMILY UNIT, MULTI-FAMILY UNIT, AND
TOURIST ACCOMMODATION ROOM TO OBTAIN EACH SDC.
8. RECALCULATE NEW SDC AMOUNTS AS IN STEPS 1-6 AS PARK
ACREAGE IS ADDED TO THE SYSTEM.
• "Tourist Room Accommodation Room Factor" = Number of Persons in all Tourist
Accommodation Rooms / (Total Resident Population + Number of Persons in all Tourist
Accommodation Rooms)
On the following pages the Methodology is applied to the City of Ashland.
E -3
ASHLAND PARK NEEDS PROJEMONS .
To Accommodate Population Projected for year 2005
ACTIVE PARKS
LARGE
Currently Operate: 1730 tams(Gty Owned) .
15.20 macs(City Use-SOSC Fields) .
6.50 acres(City Use-walker School)
39.20 saes,in use
RatimlStandards 16,740 population
2.34 acrea/1,0110 in use
1.15 arrW1.000 correct City Owned Standard '
230 nae"000-Comp.Plan Goal
. ... Projected Pop.Growth 3,000 by year 2010
Acres for growth pop. 3.14 at Cusrent Standard of 1.05 atrestA.000
Acres for existing pop. 2435 at Comp.Phu Standard of 23 acresM000
Cost To Meet Growth Requirement
Acquisition Coat 78.100 @$25,000/ecre
,Development Coat 7W.150 @$40.000/aae,
5203.850
Current Cost To Improve to Comp Plan Standard
Acquisition Cast 608.750 @ 525,0001acrc
Development Cost 97000 @ 540,000/acre
$1.582.750
SMALL
Currently Operate: 830 acres;(City Owned)
18_15 acres((Sty Use-School Dist.)
26.65 acres in use
16.740 population
139 acres/I.000 in use
031 atres/1,000 current City Owned Standard
1.75 arres/1,000-Comp. Plan Goal
Projected Pop.Growth 3,0110 by year 2010
Acres for growth pop. 133 at Correct Standard of 031 aeres/1,000
Acres for existing pop. 768 at Comp Plan Standard of 1.75 acrv%A.000'
E -4
Cost To Meet Growth Requirement
Acquisition Cost 91,800 $60,000/acre
Development Cost 30,600 0$20,000h
$122,400
Coat To Improve to Standard
Acquisition Cost 160,800 @ 560.0001sese
Development Cost 53,600 @ 520,000/acre
$214,100
Passive:
Uthia and Bear Creek Parks 136,05 seros(city O-codj
16,740 population
. &13 aerp/l.000 jR use .
.. &13 aercs/1.000 current City Owned Surmised
10.00 acra/1.000 is Comp.Plan Goal
Projected Pop.Growth 3,000 by year 2010
Acres for growth pop. 2438 at Current Standard of&13 acrca/1,000
Acres for existing pop, 3130 at Comp.Plan Standard of N acrm/1.000
Cost To Most Growth Requirement
Acquisition Cost 487,634 @$20.000/a
Development Cost 121,909 0&5,000/acre
$609.543 .
Cost To Improve to Standard -
Acquisition Cost 626000 @$20,0001se e
Development Cost 156.500 0 SS WQtwm
$782.500
E —5
PROJECTED POPULATION
GROWTH TO 2010 3,000
PERSONS PER UNIT:
SINGLE-FAMILY 23
MULTI-FAMILY 1.8
TOURIST ACCOMMODATION
ROOM 2.7
TOURIST ACCOMMODATION
FACTOR 13%
FULL COST PER UNIT TO MEET EXISTING USE STANDARD
ACTIVE PARKS:
LARGE- TOTAL COST $203,850.00
ADJ.PER CAPITA $59.12
COST: '
SINGLE-FAMILY $135.98
MULTI-FAMILY $106.42
TOURIST ACC. ROOM $159.62
SMALL- TOTAL COST $122,400.00
PER CAPITA $40.80
COST:
SINGLE-FAMILY $93.84
MULTI-FAMILY $73.44
PASSIVE- TOTAL COST $609,000.00
ADJ.PER CAPITA $176.61
COST:
SINGLE-FAMILY $406.20
MULTI-FAMILY $317.90
TOURIST ACC. ROOM $476:85
TOTAL, SINGLE-FAMILY $636.02
MULTI-FAMILY $497.76
TOURIST ACC. ROOM $636.47
E -6
1991 ASHLAND SURVEY
METHODOLOGY
I . We started with a random selection of 375 registered
Ashland voters. We phoned as many of them as we could get phone
numbers for . We phoned each several times if necessary. We ended
up interviewing 224 persons.
2. The margin of error for our study is seven percentgage
points one way or the other with a. confidence level of 95%. This
means our sample should accurately represent all Ashland registered
voters within seven percentage points 95 times out of 100 .
3. It is important to remember that our sample is represents
only people over IS years of age who are registered to vote . They
are not necessarily representative of a.11 Ashland resident=_ .
J .
ASHLAND SURVEY 1?91
QUESTIONNAIRE
PS 415
Hello. Is. this (Name) ? ( IF NOT, ASK FOR THAT PERSON)
I 'm Your Name , a student at Southern Oregon State College . I 'm
working on a. class project for my Public Opinion Class. We're doing a.
poll of people in the city of Ashland. I 'd like to ask you a. few
questions. (DO NOT PAUSE) .
1 . First of all , how long have you lived in 1.
Ashland?
( 1 ) Under 1 yr ._7��°
(2) 1-5 yrs.l-'4162
(4) Over 10 yrs. 47. 1u/.
2. Did- you live in another state before coming 2.
to Oregon? ( IF YES) , which one did you
live in immediately before coming here?
22,7`2 34-K k,ZI 32.3,
( 1 ) (2) (3) (4) (°)
Native Calif . Wash . Other N.A .
3 . On a scale of 1 -10 , with I being lowest and 3.
10 the highest , hew would you rate Ashland
as a. place to live'
( 1 ) Low 1 -3_Jd 81q.E
(2) Medium 4-?1 ?`_7
(S) High 8-10'2.10
(9) N.A------
4. I would like to a.sk, you about some issues 4.
facing the city of Ashland. Do you think
Ashland should encourage or discourage
businesses or activities that will attract
more tourist=_.?
( 1 ) (2) (3) cy
Encourage Discourage Other N .A .
Do , ou think: the City should purchase the 5 .
Mt . Ashland Ski Resort?
LoNy. 62.72 3,42. 13.3;
Yes No Other N .A .
5.
along the sire= of' _iskivoi_ qi
narrowing the grass_. strip ire the middle%
Ye_ 'No rather. N .A .
7. Do you. believe Southern Oregon State 7.
College�jjhas a positive or negative impact
on Ashlnd?
G/ 5;02 61920
C1 > (2) (.0) (9)
Positive Negative Other N.A.
c. Do you think Ashland has enough park land? 8.
iol.3� 341% 4,4°7 3,1%
(2) (3) (9•)
Yes No Other N.A.
9 . Do you think Ashland is growing too fast , 9.
Just right , or too slowly? —�-
36,4`70 5�1y1I Z1, 9�P' 6,92 j,3�
{ i ) (2) (-) (4) ( 9)
Too fast Just right Too slow .Other N.A.
10 . Do , ou think the City's proposed new 10.
electric substation will threaten the
health of people living nearby?
a2 E,o� W,,79, f,4� ,2o-,
(2) (3) (9)
Yes No Other N .A .
11 . Turning to statewide and regional issues, 11.
would you favor a sales tax if all
revenues went to support school =_.?
A.6Z i.sYr, As?
. . ) (2)
YeE No Other f•i.A.
12 . 1n order' to pre sc rve x..11 spec i e S of 12.
Northwest Sal Mon , would you be willirig
to Pay substantially increased electric
rates.?
373`/
50,22 b Yl
Yes No Other N .A .
12. What is Your occupation? 13.
r1?cF95S- /3t 027. 6 ��
( IF RETIRED) , what i,,:as /o 6�+vgtzf/VCin K2 /$. 6 `7
Ur` ocru�,:tion et /2
t i Rfe :'.•i�U r�` rt.i=1�. - _. _. 5ICSOL'Nl, I.l ZL76
Arliarl= cattRr2 16-ql?
(3Lu r ca tt.R2 12. c aJ
1100-sa_ tViFif .S, &7'
N. y. 3 94
14 . Do you have any children, attending public 14.
=.ch
35,17
15. Do you consider yourself a Democrat , .15.
Republican , Independent , or other?
Z/�J b 4,72 ,2711 3,l% 2,z%
( 1 ) (2) (37 (4) (9)
D I R Other N .A.
16. We don' t need to know your exact age , 16.
but would you be willing to tell me which
of the following a.ge groups you tall Into:
( 1 ) Linder 27 LL,/
(2) 27-44-.-LZA
(3) 45-64 l Sl%
(4) 65 or o verb;0
9) N.A.S2�` "�
17 . Again , we don' t need exact Information , 17.
but what income group does your family
income fall into:
( 1 ) Under $10 ,000_L6,Z`�o
(2) $10 ,000—$20 ,00011
(3) $20 ,000—$40 ,000���6 �z
(4) $40 ,000—$60 , 000_1i,_E4
C5) 0 v e r $60 ,000_
(9) N.A. 5-,3?
18. What is the highest grade in school you 18.
have completed?
y,0% i9,2`ta 3-1,/ a? A,"L1 23 69 •.
( 1 ) ; 2; ( 3) (4) ( 5)
Less than HE;/ Some Bac Gradetm
HS GED Col i ago JCf/o&L
( 9)
N.(-I .
19. Do you own or rent your home or apartment? 19.
( If live viith parent) , does your parent
own or re t
( 1 ) (2) (9)
01.:1n Rent N .A .
20 . ( INTERVIEWER: FILL IN THIS QUESTION AFTER 20.
T.NTER:VIEIA'j Rp,nrnd t g s.er, :
Female M,aie