HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-0302 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 numb r o iopJe who
wish to be heard and the length of the agenda
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 2, 1993
I. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 7 : 00 P.M. , Conference Room, to consider the
acquisition of real property pursuant to O.R. S. 192 . 660 (1) (e) .
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7: 30 P.M. , Civic Center Council Chambers
III. ROLL CALL
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
d
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of February 16, 1993 .
VI . CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees.
2 . Departmental Reports.
3 . Memo from Fire Chief on fire facilities study and approval of
study committee.
4 . Memo from Director of Finance regarding process for selection
of financial consultant for future bond issues.
5. Memo from Police Chief regarding motorcycle traffic
enforcement program.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Must conclude by 9: 30 P.M. )
1. P.A. 92-057 , request for street revisions and approval for
outline plan of five-lot subdivision on Granite St. near its
intersection with S. Pioneer St. Revision involves change in
street length of less than 500' for the new street from
Granite to the end of cul-de-sac. Testimony will be limited
to the issue of street length and how the criteria apply to
the change in street length. (Applicants: Gary & Diane Seitz)
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Set date for study session on capital improvement program for
Wednesday, March 10 or Thursday, March it at 7:30 P.M.
IX. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Memo from Planning Commission concerning proposal by Jackson
County CDSC for employment of ombudsperson for affordable
housing.
2 . City Administrator's Monthly Report - February 1993 .
3 . Request by Councilor Reid for Council discussion of specific
policy direction to Economic Development subcommittee for
distribution of grant monies.
X. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the
agenda. (Limited to 3 min. per speaker and 15 min. total)
XI . ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS:
1 Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance annexing a
contiguous area, withdrawing the area from Jackson County Fire
�E'�• o� a District No. 5 and zoning at C-1 Retail Commercial (Cahill
ZAnnexation) "
2a Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance amending the
Comprehensive Plan Map and amending the Zoning Map of the City
�e of Ashland for the area around Ashland Community Hospital.
Also included is an amendment to the Land Use Ordinance
adopting a new "HC" Health Care District. "
3 . Second reading by title only of "An ordinance amending Section
14 . 08.030 of the Ashland Municipal Code by revising
requirements for sewer connections inside the Urban Growth
P��• Boundary and adding a new Section 14 . 08. 031 providing for
4� sewer service connections outside the Urban Growth Boundary" .
Second reading by title only of "An ordinance completely
9oS revising the Local Improvement and Special Assessment Chapter
dand deleting the sidewalk assessment chapter of the Ashland
(," Municipal Code" .
, S. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance adopting the
Ashland Municipal Airport Master Plan Final Report as a
. 7d to supporting document of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan
-� (Planning Action 92-147) " .
6. Reading by title only of a "A Resolution calling a special
election on May 18 , 1993 for a three-year serial tax rate levy
g3- 7 to provide funds for operation and maintenance of a city
swimming pool program and recreation facilities" .
j 7. Reading by title only of "A Resolution of intention to provide
deAe) -Yg-e),? for sanitary sewer improvements for property located in the
area of North Mountain Avenue North of Bear Creek" .
XII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
XIII . ADJOURNMENT
(d:\cmnciNgwda)
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 16, 1993
CALL TO ORDER: Council Chair Acklin called the meeting to order and Led the Pledge of
Allegiance at 7:30 P.M. on the above date in the Council Chambers. Laws, Hauck, Winthrop,
and Arnold were present. Mayor Golden and Reid were absent.
Women's Sports Foundation Award. Acklin accepted an award on behalf of the City of
Ashland for "Outstanding Accomplishments in Women's Sports" from the Women's Sports
Foundation.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 2, 1993 were
accepted as present.
CONSENT AGENDA: Arnold pointed out that item 4b. should read: "Lowell Jones to the
Bicycle Commission, not George Hutchinson. Winthrop moved to accept the Consent
Agenda as follows: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions & Committees; 2. Departmental
Reports - January 1993; 3. Liquor license applications from the Playbill Club, 66 E.
Main St. and Theresa's Cantina, 76 N. Pioneer St.; 4. Appointments of David Mason to
the Street Tree Commission for term expiring April 30, 1995 and Lowell Jones to the
Bicycle Commission for term expiring April 30, 1993; and 5. Memo from Parks &
Recreation regarding update on Hamilton Creek and Superior property fire
management projects. Hauck seconded the motion which carried on voice vote.
PUBLIC HEARING: Cahill Annexation, 375 Tolman Creek Rd. Almquist reviewed the
history of the action, noting that the septic was failing and permission was given to Cahill to
connect to city sewer on the condition that the property be annexed. The public hearing was
opened, there was no comment from the audience and it was closed. The ordinance
appears later on the agenda.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Adopt Findings - Planning Action 92-048 (Health Care Zone).
Winthrop so moved, Arnold seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
Budget Committee Hearings Recommendations. Laws asked that Department Heads
bring their recommendations to Council in a timely fashion. No action needed. .
Local Improvement and Special Assessment Ord. Almquist read the sections as
amended by Council at the February 2nd Council meeting. Several citizens asked to review
the changes, and action was taken later in the meeting.
NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: Correction Easement - Lithia Park Village. City
Attorney Nolte said this will clear up the property title of a neighbor who purchased the
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - February 16, 1993 - 1
property from Mark Cooper several years ago. Lloyd Haines, representing property owner
Zan Nix, said the easement will be for sewer maintenance if the property is developed.
Arnold moved to authorize the Mayor and City Recorder.to sign the Correction Sewer and
Storm Drain easement, Hauck seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
Banner Fee Waiver Request - R.V. Women's History Project. Arnold moved to continue
to sponsor this project by waiving the banner fee, Hauck seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
Forest Lands Commission. P.W. Admin. Asst. Pam Barlow reviewed the memo included in
the agenda packet. A resolution creating the Forest Lands Commission was read by title
only and Laws moved adoption. Arnold seconded and the motion passed-unanimously on
roll call vote.
Snow Survey/Sluicing Report. P.W. Dir. Hall said the sluicing of Reeder Reservoir will
begin on February 22 and should take less than one week. He gave the background of the
sluicing project which involved many affected agencies, and said the results are of sufficient
benefit to warrant the possible damage to Ashland Creek. No action necessary.
Plaza Kiosk. Almquist reviewed his memo and said a requirement for using the kiosk will be
to distribute information about the city. Winthrop said this is a great location to sell tickets to
cultural events and plays other than Shakespeare. Laws expressed concern about the
possible clutter from newspaper displays. Arnold moved to approve the RFP, Hauck
seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
PUBLIC FORUM: Kenton Gould, 1565 Siskiyou Blvd., #32, asked about the cost of
alternatives to sluicing which would be less damaging to Ashland Creek. Acklin said all the
appropriate public agencies are satisfied with the sediment ponds which reduce the impacts
of the sluicing. Laws recommended that Gould refer to the background documents at City
Hall.
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS: Special Assessment Ord. Jack
Blackburn, 805 Oak St., thanked Council for the changes but would like the notice to include
a statement regarding the 2/3 remonstrance. Arnold moved the ordinance to second
reading and Hauck seconded. Vicki Neuenschwander, 455 Tolman Creek Rd., expressed
concern about Sec. 13.20.020.C. Laws moved to amend the original motion by striking
Section 13.20.020.C. from the ordinance and Hauck seconded. That motion passed with
Acklin dissenting. The original motion as amended passed unanimously on roll call vote.
Sewer Connections. First reading by title only of an ordinance amending Chapter 14.08 of
the A.M.C. by revising requirements for sewer connections inside the Urban Growth
Boundary and providing for sewer connection outside the U.G.B. Arnold moved to second
reading, Laws seconded, all YES on roll call vote.
Health Care Zone. First reading of an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan Map
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - February 16, 1993 - 2
and amending the Zoning Map of the City for an area around Ashland Community Hospital.
Also included is an amendment to the Land Use Ord. adopting a new "HC" Health Care
District. Hauck moved to second reading, Winthrop seconded, all YES on roll call vote.
Cahill Annexation. First reading of an ordinance annexing a contiguous area, withdrawing
the area from Jackson County Fire Dist. No. 5, and zoning it C-1 Retail Commercial. Hauck
moved to second reading, Winthrop seconded, all YES on roll call vote.
TCI Franchise. Second reading by title only of an ordinance amending Ord. Nos. 2258 as
amended by Ord. Nos. 2415 and 2536, concerning the franchise with TCI Cablevision of
Oregon. Winthrop is concerned about waiving the right to review rate increases. Arnold,
too, feels the Council should exercise its rights under the Cable Television Consumer
Protection Act of 1992. On a question from Laws, Almquist said TCI is unwilling to collect the
PEG access fee without something in return. Acklin requested the City Attorney to research
options, and Winthrop moved to continue this item to the next meeting. Hauck seconded, all
AYES on voice vote.
Cable Access Commission Membership. Second reading by title only of an ordinance
with respect to membership on the Cable Access-Commission. Winthrop moved adoption,
Hauck seconded, all YES on roll call vote. (Ord. 2701)
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Executive Session. Winthrop moved to
place this issue on the agenda, Hauck seconded, all AYES on voice vote. Arnold moved to
direct the City Attorney to proceed with settlement of the issue discussed in Executive
Session, Laws seconded, all AYES on voice vote. T.I.D. Laws asked that residents who are
not using TID wait before signing those water rights back to TID, so they will be available for
City purchase. Airport Master Plan Public Hearing. Arnold noted receipt of a letter from
Michael Sanford, 127 Strawberry Ln., requesting that the hearing be held at a regular meeting
of the City Council. Arnold moved to place same on the agenda, Hauck seconded, and the
motion carried on voice vote. Laws moved to reject the request, Winthrop seconded, and
the motion carried on voice vote with Arnold and Hauck dissenting. Acklin asked that
Admin. Almquist's response to a letter in the LVWA Newsletter concerning the airport be sent
to all who receive that publication.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. to February 23, 1993 at 7:30 P.M.
Nan E. Franklin Catherine Golden
City Recorder Mayor
(dAmi.V-16-93)
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council 7 February 16, 1993 - 3
1
ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
January 26, 1993
The regular monthly meeting of the Board of Trustees of Ashland Community
Hospital was held at 12:15 on Tuesday, January 26, 1993, in the conference room.
PRESENT: Steve Lunt, Dick Nichols, Frank Billovits, Judy Uherbelau, Madeline
Hill, Bruce Johnson, M.D., Mary O'Kief, and Mary Ellen Fleeger, Trustees. Pat
Acklin, City Council Representative, and Clifford A. Hites, M. D., Medical Staff
Representative.
Also present: James R. Watson, Administrator; Polly Arnold, Director of Patient
Services; Mike McGraw, Controller; Peggy Cockrell, Director of Personnel; Pat
Flannery, Director of Development; and Glenda Cole, Administrative Assistant.
Guests: Jimmie Emmons, Auxiliary President; Peg Crowley, Sharon Laws, Todd
Ouellette, and Claire Fincher, Ashland Community Health Clinic.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Lunt called the meeting to order at 12:15 and welcomed everyone.
II. COMMUNITY HEALTH CLINIC PRESENTATION
Mr. Watson introduced Peg Crowley who introduced other Clinic
Representatives. Ms. Fincher gave the history of the Clinic, the changes that
have occurred during the last 20 years, and a summary of the patients they see
at the Clinic. Ms. Crowley reviewed their budget and estimated costs for the
coming year. She reviewed how patients are charged for services. Ms. Crowley
reviewed their present funding. She stated that they are seeking financial help
of approximately $50,000 and are asking all three local hospitals for help.
Following the presentation, there was a question and answer period. These guests
left the meeting at 12:50 PM.
III. MINUTES
Mr. Lunt called for a review of the minutes of the Marketing
Committee of September 10, 1992; the Strategic Planning Committee of November 6,
1992; the Executive Committee of December 15, 1992; and the Board of Trustees of
December 22, 1992. Following review, Mr. Billovits made the motion to approve
the minutes as circulated. Ms. O'Kief seconded the motion, and the motion
carried.
IV. COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Marketing Committee: Mr. Nichols stated that the Committee met
on January 11th . He stated that there was. discussion regarding formulating some
policy or recommendations on a public relations\community education campaign.
Discussion revealed that the members were unclear as to the directive from the
Board and would like to have more direction from the Board. It was noted that
a joint meeting of the Board, the Strategic Planning Committee and the Marketing
Committee was recommended and will be scheduled.
Board- of Trustees
January 26, 1993
Page 2
B. Strategic Planning Committee: Mr. Lunt stated that the Committee
met on January 14th. He stated that it was the recommendation to have the joint
committees meet and review the Strategic Plan.
C. Finance Committee: Ms. Uherbelau stated that the Finance
Committee met on January 22nd to review the proposed 1993-94 budget. She stated
that there was only one change and that was to increase the contingency fund to
$700,000. Also discussed was a proposed policy regarding non-budgeted items or
new service over $100,000 should be brought to the Board for approval.
V. DECISION ITEMS
A. Quarterly Auxiliary Report: Ms. Emmons gave a delightful summary
of the Auxiliary's activities over the last quarter. These included successful
Bake Sales (next one on 2-12-93), gift shop bargains, Christmas Luncheon,
Stockings for Christmas babies,and total hours donated to the hospital. She
stated that the second annual Auxiliary Tea is scheduled for tomorrow, Wednesday,
January 27th, and the Spring Fling is scheduled for April 3rd at the Methodist
Church. Following the report, . Ms. Uherbelau made the motion to approve Ms.
Emmons report as presented. Mr. Billovits seconded the motion and the motion
carried.
B. Health Future Participation: Mr. Watson reviewed again the
benefits of participating with the Health Future project. Following discussion,
Ms. Hill made the motion that we participate with Health Future if they have a
total of 10 hospitals participating and no further contributions to be made
without Board approval. Dr. Johnson seconded the motion and the motion carried.
Mr. Watson stated that he will make at least quarterly reports to the Board.
C. Community Health Clinic Grant: Following discussion, Ms. Hill
made the motion to contribute $15,000 to the Clinic. Mr. Nichols seconded the
motion and the motion carried. It was recommended that the Clinic come to the
Board on an annual basis to request contributions.
D. 1993-94 Budget: Ms. Uherbelau stated that it was the Finance
Committee's recommendation that the Board approve the Budget. She made this
recommendation in the form of a motion. Mr. Billovits seconded the motion and
the motion carried. Mr. Nichols asked if it was,possible to format the budget
the same way as the monthly financials so that the monthly financials could be
compared to the budget. Mr. Nichols will meet with Mr. McGraw after the meeting
to discuss the feasibility of this issue.
E. Meeting Dates: Auxiliary Tea is scheduled for January 27th.
Board Retreat (combined meeting with Strategic Planning and Marketing Committees)
scheduled for Saturday, March 6th. Motion was made, seconded, and carried to
approve these meeting dates.
Board- of Trustees
January 26, 1993
Page 3
F. Home Health Policy & Procedure Manual: Mr. Watson stated that
the Joint Commission requires that the Board of Trustees approve all the policy
and procedure manuals. The first for this year is the Home Health Agency's
manual. He stated that he had reviewed and approved the manual. Ms. Arnold
stated that there were no significant changes since last year. Ms. Hill made the
motion to approve the manual. Ms. O'Kief .seconded the motion and the motion
carried.
G. Talent Office: Mr. Watson stated that the Foundation will not
be acquiring land in Talent for our use. Mr. Moser is continuing to pursue land
and cost for this project. Mr. Watson stated that the City Council did not
approve the resolution giving the Board the power to buy land. It was noted that
the City Council is in favor of our Talent Office project.
H. December Expenditures: Mr. Lunt reviewed the December
expenditures, stated that he felt everything is in order, and recommended
approval. Dr. Johnson made the motion to approve the expenditures. Mr.
Billovits seconded the motion and the motion carried.
VI. MEDICAL STAFF REPORT
Mr. Lunt welcomed Dr. Bites as the new representative from the
Medical Staff. He is the retiring Chief of Medical Staff. Dr. Hites stated that
he has no report this month.
VII. DISCUSSION .ITEMS
A. Ashland Health Coalition: Mr. Watson stated that this group is
continuing to meet. He stated that a Healthcare Forum will be on Cable Access
TV with a panel consisting of an insurance representative, a physician, someone
from the hospital, and the Community Health Clinic.
B. Strategic Planning Update: Mr. Watson stated that we have the
draft of the Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws for the Healthcare Enhancement
Corporation. These items have to be reviewed and approved by the physicians
prior to coming to the Board. Mr. Watson stated that we have architects drawing
plans for the Community meeting rooms.
VIII. QUALITY ASSURANCE
Mr. Watson stated that the Quality Assurance\Improvement Committee
met on January 5th and that all issues are being handled appropriately.
Board of Trustees
January 26, 1993
Page 4
IX. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. . Nursing: Ms. Arnold that in 1992 we experienced a 25% increase
in surgical procedures over 1991. We have had a 38% increase in the number of
orthopedic and eye cases. There was a 30% increase in the number of special
study procedures and an 8% increase in obstetrics. In Obstetrics, we had a 2%
drop in repeat c-section rate.
B. Financial: Mr. McGraw reviewed the financials for the" month
ending 12-31-92 in detail. He stated that we had net revenue over expenses of
approximately $41,000 with a year-to-date total of approximately $298,000. This
is an increase of $67,000 over this time last year. We have no debt.
C. Personnel: Ms. Cockrell stated that she is recruiting for
dietary and laboratory: She stated that she is working on our annual tabloid
insert in the Daily Tidings which will go out in February. Our next Medical
Forum will be with Dr. Epstein and Dr. Ewing on eyes. Mr. Watson stated that
we will begin our Open Forums with employees working on benefit package.
D. Foundation: Mr. Flannery stated that the President's Club was
started in 1992 and we have 14 members to date. He stated that there was an
increase in donations in 1992 over 1991 of 18.4%. Donations for Lights for Life
increased by 31.4%. The Foundation's Long Range Planning Committee is continuing
to work on the development of the 4 acres donated. Mr. Flannery stated that Ms.
Patty Adams is the new president of the Foundation.
X. ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:20
pm.
Respectfully submitted:
APPROVED: Richard A. Nichols,
Secretary
Stephen B. Lunt,
Chairman
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
Minutes
December 2 , 1992
CALLED TO ORDER/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Meeting was called to order at 12 : 01pm. Those Commissioners
present were Insley, Alsing, DeBoer, Katzen, Mills, Jones, and
Zupan. Staff representatives present were Steve Hall and Pam 1
Barlow. Minutes were approved. Alan DeBoer was introduced as
the new Commissioner replacing Matthew Ben-Lesser-:T--- Alan will
also be the new Safety Officer.
AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT
Reeser reported the fuel sales were slightly up; Budget Rent-A-
Car is operating; recommended a frequency change. Insley thanked
Reeser for maintaining the log of transient visitors' freight
log.
FBO RECOMMENDATION
Hall reported to Commission on Council meeting regarding the FBO
recommendation. Hall will be negotiating lease with Bob Skinner:
Hall hopes to have Skinner in place by February 1, 1993 .
DRAFT POLICY ON NON-COMMERCIAL HANGARS BECOMING CITY PROPERTY
Barlow reviewed proposed policy. . Discussion followed among
Commission and audience members. Commissioners are to forward
their comments to Barlow.
HANGAR SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT (LOTTERY/LEASE)
Jones deferred on hangars to the Users Group proposal.
CHANGE UNICOM FREQUENCY TO 123.0
Insley reported problems with cross traffic on radio frequency,
especially during summer season. Frequencies are available to all
users and can be changed at will. Staff will check with FCC
regarding these problems and report to Commission at January
meeting.
REVIEW OF SAFETY REPORTS
Insley reported that weeds in asphalt are a problem. Ripped wind
sock will be replaced by Texaco.
Hall reported that federal regulations are requiring fuel tank
valves be checked. .
A
1
Ashland Airport Commission Meeting
December 2 , 1993 Minutes
page 2
REPORT FROM THE AIRPORT USERS GROUP
DeBoer reported on the Users Group meeting. He presented their iI
hangar construction proposal. DeBoer moved to have City send
letter to current Hangar Construction list people that City will
be accepting $2 , 000 refundable deposit for entrance in a lottery }
for 6 positions with 4 alternates. that would build following the
hangar development policy standards. Motion was seconded and
passed unanimously.
Zupan moved that Charles Schafer will be flagged as one of the 6
lottery positions with the remaining 5 selected as mentioned in
the previous motion. The motion was seconded and passed with
Alsing opposing.
REPORT ON OREGON AIR FAIR
Alsing reported on his attendance. He said it was a valuable
experience and encourages others to attend.
OTHER BUSINESS
DeBoer suggested the hangar lists be revamped with a $50
refundable deposit being required. Hall recommended a non-
refundable deposit. Insley asked that this be continued to the
January meeting.
Alsing questioned the Valley Oil surcharge on gas. Hall stated
it is under legal challenge now. Alsing recommended letters be
written to local representatives with copies to the legislators,
AOPA, OPA, and AR Aeronautics.
Meeting was adjourned at 1: 35PM
Submitted by,
Rhonda Moore
Administrative Secretary
Aitp\Minuet\D=Mtg.min
A A
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
Minutes
January 6, 1993
CALLED TO ORDER
Meeting was called to order at 12 : 02 pm by Chairperson Insley.
Minutes were accepted as submitted.
FBO LEASE PROGRESS/AIRPORT BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Barlow reported that the new FBO lease was accepted. Hall
reported that the Council had passed the budget changes Tuesday,
January 5, 1993 .
RE-DRAFT OF POLICY ON NON-COMMERCIAL HANGARS BECOMING CITY .
PROPERTY
Commission reviewed and revised draft. Commission requested the
policy be reviewed by City Administrator and City Attorney.
There is concern about the tax advantages for hangars becoming
city property with a 20-year lease.
MASTER PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS
Commission will be reviewing master plan adoption with City
Council on Tuesday, February 23 , at 7: 30pm at Council Chambers
(Note location change from Senior Center to Council Chambers--
Rhonde,1/19/93) -
HANGAR CONSTRUCTION REPORT:
--GROUND LEASE REVIEW/LOTTERY PROCEDURE REVIEW
Commission reviewed ground lease particulars and requested staff
bring fees recommended by Finance Department to next meeting.
Commission will then review several alternatives.
CAP LEASE FINALIZED
Staff to prepare letter of understanding on CAP's septic tank.
REVIEW OF SAFETY REPORTS
Skinner will review and submit the monthly safety report to the
Commission.
DeBoer presented his monthly safety report.
REPORT FROM THE AIRPORT USERS GROUP
Paul Mace reported that 56 pilots have paid out of 137 pilots.
Next meeting will be March 14. DeBoer moved to have the "coffee
can" funds be donated to the Users' Group. Motion was seconded
and passed unanimously.
PREPARE FOR GOAL SETTING AT THE FEBRUARY MEETING
Insley reviewed procedure and asked that the Commissioners bring
the last several years' goals to the meeting.
4 _ w
Ashland Airport Commission Meeting
Minutes - January 6, 1993
page 2
AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT
Skinner reported on the status of the FBO. The new phone number
is 482-7675. The windspeed and barometer have been fixed.
Valley Oil will serve "Jet All gas. , Skinner will be working
jointly with Valley Oil to promote airport activities and
materials will be sent to aviation publications. He also plans
to join the Chamber.
Submitted by,
Rhonda E. Moore, Administrative Secretary
Airp\MinuksUan93.mtn
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
February 3, 1993
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, Le Hook, Jean MacKenzie, Dana Johnson, Keith Chambers,
H.L. Wood, Jane Dancer and Steve Ennis. Also present were Assistant Planner Kristen
Cochran, Secretary Sonja Akerman, and Council Liaison Pat Acklin. No members were
absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ennis stated he would like Page 3 of the January 6, 1993 Minutes to read design rather than
drawings in the second paragraph under 93-002. Also, on Page 4, in the third paragraph
under 93-007, it should read "...required of Cooper/Silverman" rather than "by
Cooper/Silverman". Hook then moved and MacKenzie seconded to approve the January
6, 1993 Minutes as corrected. The motion was unanimously passed.
STAFF REPORTS
PA 93-002
Conditional Use Permit
726 Iowa Street
Kai Jacobson
Cochran explained this planning action was called up by the Hearings Board because the
exterior details were somewhat lacking.
Kai Jacobson said he understands why he was asked to provide more detail. He will be re-
roofing the existing house and using composition shingles on both. The siding will be
channel rustic cedar, which will also match the existing house. The windows will be double
hung vinyl. Split block will be used for the foundation. He also said he plans on using the
same color paint for both structures.
Skibby suggested a wider space between the two double hung windows.
Cochran reported the oak tree will be saved. Jacobson added the driveway will remain the
same and conveyed he will be planting English laurel on three sides, the existing trees will
remain, and he will be planting fruit trees between the buildings.
Lewis questioned the height and skylights of the new structure. Jacobson said it will be
slightly shorter than the existing house and that the upper story will have five foot walls.
1
2 -
Skylights will be located on the east and back sides. He also said he feels this project will
improve the neighborhood.
While he realizes Jacobson needs the space in the garage, Chambers remarked he still has
an issue with the bulk of the building, and feels it will dominate the property. The scale and
bulk, he said, are out of sync, and he was unsure of a solution.
Ennis added the drawings which were submitted are drawn with 6'8" walls, so the building
will be more like one and one-half stories. Chambers asserted that he feels the intention
of the ordinance was for living space, not necessarily for garage and storage space.
Hook moved to recommend approval of this application. Lewis maintained the Review
Board will have input on the plans. Ennis stated it is clear Jacobson is concerned with the
accessory structure. Wood seconded the motion, and it passed with all voting aye except
Chambers.
PA 93-007
Site Review
277 Fifth Street
Sherbourne/Jackson
Cochran explained this planning action was called up because of neighborhood concerns.
Also, the designer had revised the plans which were previously submitted.
Steven Sherbourne, designer for the project, submitted the new elevations and stated the
facade on "A" Street has been modified because it is so close to the sidewalk and it needs
to meet the needs of the owner as a professional. Since the building will accommodate a
dentist office, the windows were moved up for patient comfort. The owner has decided not
to use a metal roof -- it will either be composition shingles or tile base shingles. He also
said the owner had not decided on a color yet, but that he had suggested neutral tones.
The Commission, in discussing the revision, agreed the first design had more positive
features. Ennis suggested using double hung windows with a panel on the bottom. Skibby
said there seems to be a lack of continuity on the "A" Street side with the other three sides.
Ennis moved to recommend approval of the application with the following conditions: 1)
the roof material be either composition or tile base shingles, and 2) the applicant work with
the Historic Commission Review Board to make the design on "A" Street more compatible
with the other three sides. Hook seconded the motion, which passed with all voting aye
except Hook.
Ashland Historic Commission it
Minutes
February 3, 1993 Page 2
PA 93-024
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review
35 South Second Street
Michael Gibbs
Cochran explained this application was approved by the Historic Commission and Planning
Commission two years ago. The owners propose to build a two-story, two-guest unit cottage
next to the alley. 'Be design is compatible with the Winchester Inn. One more parking
space will be required off the alley.
Michael Gibbs stated the structure will look like it is one story from the Hargadine Street
side and will have a side entrance. The front entrance will be from the lawn area on the
bottom story.
Skibby stated he was concerned about design replication. Gibbs said James Hamrick, from
SHPO, had told him there was too much replication. When Gibbs let him know the cottage
will be on a separate tax lot, Hamrick said SHPO did not have jurisdiction over it in that
case. The main differences between the two buildings will be the use of masonite siding,
thermal square windows with a decorative wooden arch, a modern design door, and French
doors in the new building. They will keep the same roof pitch and the same color schemes.
The new building will work as a whole unit with the Winchester Inn and the gazebo.
Chambers said he feels the new building is very compatible. Skibby agreed, stating it will
have a positive impact. Chambers questioned if the existing trees would remain. Gibbs said
he will make every effort to save every tree. One dogwood will be moved, but the cherry
tree is questionable. If it can't be saved, another will be planted.
Skibby moved and Dancer seconded to recommend approval of this application. It was
unanimously passed.
PA 93-026
Conditional Use Permit
376 "B" Street
Sue DeMarinis
Cochran stated the applicant currently has her office at 386 "B" Street. She wants to scale
down the operation of her clinic and move into the new house. Three parking spaces would
be required; two will be off the alley. Cochran went on to say the Commission needed to
weigh the impacts of the two uses -- number of trips generated for single family residence
as opposed to clinic and apartment. The clinic will only be open three 1/2 days and two
3/4 days. She also explained a Conditional Use Permit goes with the property. If new
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
February 3, 1993 Page 3
owners can meet the conditions, they automatically have approval. If the CUP lapses for
six months, however, the owners will have to apply again.
Skibby stated even though a residence will remain, there will be a gain in commercial use.
When questioned about pavers, Sue DeMarinis answered she would rather put in brick strips
similar to the ones across the street. When questioned about alley paving, Cochran stated
DeMarinis will have to sign in favor.
Chambers stated he has concerns about the balance of businesses and residenses in the area.
This is also being talked about at other levels. There is a net loss of one single family _.
residence to a one bedroom apartment, and a net gain of two businesses.
Hook moved to recommend approval of this application with the condition the alley not be
paved at this time. Johnson seconded the motion and it passed, with all voting aye except
Chambers, who abstained.
PA 93-025
Conditional Use Permit
486 Siskiyou Boulevard
Shirley Grega
Cochran explained the application is for a four-unit B & B with a request to allow two of
the units to have kitchens in order to rent as apartment dwellings during the off-season.
Three units will be in the main house and one in the guest house. Six parking spaces are
required, two of these are existing. The maple tree will remain and the parking will
surround it. The owners will have stacked parking. A fence or hedge will be required on
the parking area side. The owner is also proposing to tear down the single story portion in
the rear and replace it with a new addition in the same footprint.
Skibby stated the rear portion was added at a later time. Shirley Grega agreed and said the
walls are only three inches thick, which is not enough room to rewire, insulate, etc.
Ennis suggested sloping the parking area in order to have less impact on the adjacent
property owner. Grega said that was her intention, and that she would be using pavers; she
also said she will be replacing the wooden shingles with composition shingles on the house.
Skibby stated it is clear the property will be upgraded, and the Commission concurred the
addition will be compatible to the house.
Therefore, Skibby moved and Johnson seconded to recommend approval of this application.
The motion passed unanimously.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
February 3, 1993 Page 4
PA 93-022
Minor Land Partition
North Side of "A" Street between First and Second Streets
John Fields
Cochran stated this application is a Minor Land Partition to divide the property into three
lots. Parcel 1 will be used by Oak Street Tank & Steel.
Lewis said his only comment was that area used to be a wrecking yard, and there have been
oil problems. He wondered if the area had to be DEQ approved, as in the remainder of
the SP subdivision. Cochran related the City is concerned, but DEQ enforces details such
as this.
Chambers moved to recommend approval of this application with the proviso DEQ
investigate the site. Hook seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
January follow:
128 Manzanita Street Casey/Kathleen Mitchell Interior Remodel
155 Hillcrest Street Bill/Lisa Molnar Remodel/Addition
673 Siskiyou Boulevard Freeman/Golden Remodel
247 Third Street Jacquelyn Peake Barn Repair
234 Vista Street Sid DeBoer/Karen Adderson Addition/Remodel
142 Church Street Sheafe Ewing Remodel
49 North Main Street Daniel Greenblatt Structural Floor Repair
REVIEW BOARD
Following is the schedule (until the next meeting) for the Review Board, which meets every
Thursday at least from 3:00 to 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
February 4 Lewis, Johnson and Skibby
February 11 MacKenzie, Wood, Skibby and Lewis
February 18 Hook, MacKenzie, Wood, Dancer, Ennis and Skibby
February 25 Hook, MacKenzie, Wood, Dancer, Skibby and Chambers
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
February 3, 1993 Page 5
r
OLD BUSINESS
Joint Study Session
Ennis reported he and Chambers had met with Susan Powell and Mike Bingham of the
Planning Commission, and City Council members Pat Acklin and Rob Winthrop on January
27th. In the end, Winthrop suggested turning the Conditional Use Permit process upside
down -- if it meets the criteria, its O.K. They will be working on changing the Conditional
Use Permit wording in order to meet more specific criteria in the Historic District. Sub-
zones will have to be created. Chambers said the net effect will be limiting the use of single
family residences in certain sub-zones. They are hoping to get a consensus with the Historic
Commission, Planning Commission and City Council. He added they will be looking at a
special area plan for the Railroad District. The next subcommittee meeting will be
February 17th, and the Planning Commission joint study session will be February 23rd.
Cemetery Nominations to National Register
Hook summarized the City Council unanimously agreed to appropriate half the funds from
the cemetery levy. This money will be available July 1st. The City will request the
remaining funds from SOHS.
Applegate Trail Plaque
Skibby reported Southern Oregon Historical Society had made numerous comments on the
proposed wording of the plaque. Dick Ackerman, from Oregon California Trails
Association, is waiting for the change in wording to submit for finalization. Skibby will draft
a letter from the Commission to Dick Ackerman.
Heritage Landmarks List
Cochran related the hearings before the Historic Commission will be held April 7 and 8 in
the Council Chambers.
Granite Street Fountain
Hook will get together with Mike Morrison in the near future.
Alley Committee
Chambers reported the committee is moving quickly. Several members met with John
McLaughlin to explain the status of the committee. They will be meeting next week with
Pam Barlow and Steve Hall (Public Works), and McLaughlin, then will present the updated
draft letter to the Planning Commission at the joint study session on February 23rd. He
stressed it is important to understand the Alley Committee is not a subcommittee of the
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
February 3, 1993 Page 6
Historic Commission. The final draft will be presented to the Commission before it is sent
to the City Council.
Statue at Library
MacKenzie said a new floodlight has been ordered, as have the four brass plaques. These
have not arrived yet. Benches will be placed by the statue and new plantings are still to
come.
NEW BUSINESS
Concerns/Comments
Hook expressed his frustration about the amount of time spent on certaih planning actions.
He said he felt too much time was spent debating design and details. Cochran said because
a lot of time is spent on detail, Staff encourages people to come into the Review Board in
order to work out particulars before the Historic Commission meeting. Not all people,
however, take advantage of the Review Board.
Lewis commented he is pleased so many Commission goals are actually coming into being.
ADJOURNMENT
With a motion by Hook and second by Dancer, it was the unanimous decision of the
Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
February 3, 1993 Page 7
CITY OF ASHLAND
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
IIJEXSUILA MEET I NG
M I MUTES
January 26, 1993 Chair Adams called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m. at 340 S. Pioneer Street.
ATTENDANCE:
Present: Patricia Adams, Al Alsing, Tom Pyle, Teri
Coppedge, Wes Reynolds, Ken Mickelsen
Absent: None
I. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA
The election of 1993 Commission officers was placed on the agenda under
New Business. Also a discussion of an upcoming Wetlands meeting was placed
under Items from Commissioners .
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Regular Meeting - December 16 1992
Commissioner Alsing indicated that on page three, Glen Bessonette should
read Lynn Bessonette. Commissioner Reynolds that on page two Bea Gillian
should be corrected to read Bea Gilliam.. Several other typographical errors
were corrected. Commissioner Coppedge made a motion to approve the minutes
of the December 16, 1992 Regular Meeting as corrected. Commissioner Reynolds
seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
III. BILLS AND FINANCES
A. Approval of previous months disbursements
Commissioner Pyle made a motion to approve the previous month's
disbursements as indicated by Payroll checks #5938 through #5984 in the
amount of $31,422.05 and Payables checks #7262 through #7362 in the amount of
$55,623.24: Commissioner Alsing seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes _ 0 no
IV. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ON THE AGENDA
A. Julie Weber - Headwaters
Julie Weber representing Headwaters presented the Commission with
information regarding the upcoming Ancient Forest Activists Conference which
was coming up February 4 - 7 inviting them to attend. The Commissioner
thanked Ms. Weber for the information.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 2
Regular Meeting - January 26, 1993
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ON THE AGENDA - continued
B. Neighbor's concern for placement of sub-station near park
Linda Redding and Ariel Kradel were present in the audience to hear the
Commission's discussion concerning locating an electric sub-station near
Garfield Park. Commissioner Reynolds said that having reviewed the Council's
Resolution #91-15 adopted in May of 1991 that the it appeared to be quite
comprehensive in addressing the issue of locating sub-stations. He indicated .
that he did believe that Bonneville could be more specific in its plans for
site design and screening.
MOTION Commission Reynolds made a motion stating that
the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission recommend to the BPA that it
follow Resolution #91-15 adopted by the Ashland City Council and that the BPA
decision document describe and show the measures such as fencing and
landscape which will be used to mitigate the potential sub-station design.
Commissioner Pyle seconded.
In discussion of the motion all Commissioners indicated that they felt that
the Commission should be actively involved in site review especially
concerning landscaping and screening when in proximity to a park site.
Commissioner Adams indicated that she would like for the Commission to take
a stronger stand concerning the proximity of a sub-station to any park,
particularly when it comes to running lines adjacent to or under park
property. Commissioner Coppedge indicated that she felt that the Council 's
resolution essentially covered those issues particularly Section 4.
Commissioner Reynolds indicated that he would have no objection to amending
his motion to include special emphasis of Section 4. Commissioner Alsi.ng
indicated that as a citizen he believed that a new sub-station was needed. As
a Parks and Recreation Commissioner, he felt that if a location was sited
near a park that the Parks Commission should become involved as to its
relationship to Parks while leaving the question of EMPs to the Council. .
Commissioner Pyle concurred with Commissioner Alsing indicating that by
recommending that BPA rely on the Council 's already adopted resolution,
particularly Section 4A, that concerns about minimizing EMP has been
addressed. Commissioner Adams inquired as to whether or not the Commission
would like to include a statement indicating that the same criteria be used
for each site being considered and, therefore, that the best site according
to the criteria be chosen.
MOTION After some further discussion, Commissioner
Reynolds with concurrence of Commissioner Pvle withdrew his motion and
restated the following motion: that the Ashland Parks and Recreation
Commission would recommend to BPA in reference to site selection that it
follow Resolution #91-15 of the Ashland City Council, that its decision
document describe and show the measures such as fencing and landscaping that
will be taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts on parks and recreation
activities near whatever site may
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 3
Regular Meeting - January 26, 1993
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ON THE AGENDA - continued
Placement of sub=station near park - continued
be selected, that the APRC would like to be involved in the site planning of
any sub-station near an existing or proposed park, and that the APRC urges
the BPA to apply its criteria equally to all sites under consideration.
Commissioner Pyle seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
V. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION NOT ON THE AGENDA None
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Calle Guanaivato
Prior to discussion policies for either marketplace usage of restaurant
usage, the Commission reviewed the usable space map for Calle. Commissioner
Adams questioned the areas indicated on the map as "Usable Non-permit Space".
Stella Gardiner, Project Coordinator, indicated that she had indicated those
spaces on the map because of Commissioner Reynolds request to show spaces
which could possibly be used by the general public or special events but were
not specifically allocated for marketplace or restaurant purposes. After
some discussion, the Commission chose to delete these spaces from the map.
As to the deck, access to the deck would remain open for general public at
all time but the deck might be used during marketplace hours or by special
events for such activities as entertainment which did not exclude the public
from the tables and benches available for use.
1. Policies for restaurant usage - Commissioners reviewed the draft of a
policy regarding the use of Calle Guanajuato by restaurants. Staff indicated
that the draft included the recommendations made previously by the Commission
and addressed the two alcoves on Calle identified as "A" and "B" on the map
which would be rented to restaurants.
In addressing the fee to be charged for renting alcove space along Calle
Guanajuato, the Commission discussed its previously proposed concept of
asking $20.00 per chair for the first year with a $1 increase per chair in
years two and three. Indicating that in previous years the Commission had
charged $13.50 per chair, Commissioner Pyle said that he believed that a 1/3
increase was too much. Commissioners Alsing and Adams disagreed
MOTION indicating that they believed that $20 was a fair price. Commissioner Alsing
made a motion to adopted the following fee structure for the upcoming three
year Site Permit Agreement for restaurant space on Calle Guanajuato: $20 for
1993, $21 for 1994, $22 for 1995. Commissioner Coppedge seconded.
The vote was: 4 yes - 1 no (Pyle)
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission page 4
Regular Meeting - January 26, 1993
OLD BUSINESS - Calle Guanajuato - continued
Policies for restaurant usage - continued
MOTION The Commission reviewed the draft copy of Restaurant Policies for Calle
Guanajuato. Alex Reid, present in the audience and owner of Alex's
Restaurant, addressed the Commission's criteria for selection of restaurants
for use of space on the basis of "seniority." Essentially, he indicated that
he had "probably been snoozing" in previous years when space was made
available to restaurants but that since that was the case, that if the
Commission adopted this criteria then his restaurant would not be selected
for use of a space.
Following some brief discussion and small modifications to wording which
would include setting a time frame which would indicate from "approximately
Memorial Weekend through Labor Day Weekend", Commissioner Pyle made a motion
to approve the Restaurant Policy with the stipulated changes. Commissioner
Alsing seconded.
The vote was: 4 yes - 1 no (Reynolds)
2. Policies for marketplace usage
Commissioners reviewed a draft of a philosophy statement, a time frame for
the marketplace, and an .outline of the criteria which would be required for
individuals who wished to submit a marketplace proposal to the Commission
along those guidelines. The Commissioners also reviewed a memorandum
summarizing information concerning marketplace operations in other cities.
MOTION After brief discussion, Commissioner Reynolds
made a motion to require that any valid Marketplace Promoter Proposal include
an offer of a minimum of two (2) percent of gross vendor receipts be made to
the Commission for use of the area for marketplace purposes. Commissioner
Pyle seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
MOTION Commissioner Pyle made a motion to adopt
the Commission's philosophy concerning marketplace operations on Calle
Guanajuato. Commissioner Reynolds seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Authorization to advertise for bids
MOTION Director Mickelsen requested that the
Commission authorize advertising for bids for playground equipment if
necessary when renovating the Hunter Park playground. Commissioner Reynolds
so moved. Commissioner Pyle seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 5
Regular Meeting - January 26, 1993
NEW BUSINESS - continued
B. Approval of 1993-94 budget
Prior to reviewing the budget documents for the upcoming fiscal year,
Director Mickelsen advised the Commission that it needed to consider the kind
of ballot measure it would recommend to the City Council for the Recreational
Serial Levy. Because the levy expires this year, a ballot measure needs to
be placed on the May 18th ballot.
MOTION Director Mickelsen presented the Commission
with budget worksheets developed from previous Budget Study Sessions. After
brief discussion, Commissioner Pyle made a motion to approve the budget as
presented and to recommend it to the City Budget Committee.
Commissioner Coppedge seconded the motion.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
MOTION Referring to the Budget Study Session in
which the Commission reviewed fees for park reservations, he asked whether or
not the Commission chose to increase the bandshell rental fee to $50.00.
Commissioner Pyle so moved. Commissioner Reynolds seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
MOTION Commissioner Pyle made a motion to use the tax
rate "not to exceed .10 cents" for the upcoming three-year serial levy on May
18th. Commissioner Coppedge seconded.
The vote was: 3- yes - 2 no (Pyle & Reynolds)
MOTION Commissioner Coppedge made a motion on
the Election of Officer for 1993 - 1994 to keep the same slate of officers
from the 1992 - 1993 year. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Pyle.
The vote was: 4 yes - 1 no (Adams)
III. CORRESPONDENCE, COMMUNICATIONS, DIRECTORS REPORT
IV. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
A. Prepared Food and Beverage Tax
Chair Adams gave a brief overview of the Prepared Food & Beverage 1% Tax
measure - Measure 15-1. All five (5) Commissioners were referred to as being
official contact- persons for information on the measure.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Page 6
Regular Meeting - January 26, 1993
B. Wetlands
Commissioner Reynolds presented a short synopsis on wetlands and informed
the Commission as to the date of the next Wetlands meeting - January 28, 1993,
7:00 p.m. in the city's council chambers. He said the topic to be discussed would
be raising the community's awareness about the issue.
X. NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA The next Regular Meeting was scheduled for Wednesday,
February 24, 1993. Agenda Item: Review of Calle
Guanajuato Marketplace Proposals.
XI. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, Chair Adams adjourned the
meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Ann Benedict, Management Assistant
Ashland Parks and Recreation Department
ASHLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Monthly Activities for January,1993
INVESTIGATIONS
During the month of January the Detective Division was called upon to assist with the investigation
of an Officer involved shooting which occurred at a local food store. Subsequent investigation
resulted in the arrest of two subjects and clearance of two Armed Robberies and one Attempted
Robbery. Information gathered during these investigations was provided to Portland Police and one
subject is currently under investigation by that department for 8 crimes in their jurisdiction.
The Division is also actively investigating a Homicide of a 44 year old local resident discovered
during the investigation of a suspicious fire at 168 Meade St.
A female in her early twenties reported having been raped at gun point on the College Campus.
This case has been fumed over to the Detectives.
PATROL
The National Guard presented a demonstration on the use and capabilities of the light armored
vehicle. The vehicle has been made available to the Department for use in major incidents.
Graveyard shift has focused on the neighborhood party activity. , These Friday and Saturday night
parties have been produced 17 citations issued for "Minor In Possession"and 3 people were cited
for "Furnishing Alcohol To Minors".
A lot of security work was done by the Graveyard team and each Officer has been assigned a
specific area . This system has been working out very well.
Jim Aldemtan developed an informant who provided information on a cocaine case resulting in an
arrest and recovery of 2 ounces of cocaine.
A residential burglary in progress was thwarted on Taylor St resulting in an "ON VIEW "arrest of a
local subject.
CRIME PREVENTION
The DARE pilot program is underway. We are focusing on four fifth grade classes ( 2 at Walker
and 2 at Helman ). The children have taken to Officer Bailey. Donations are being made by
several services to offset the cost of the program.
POLICE RESERVE
Training- 199 hours
Patrol - 153 hours
Meeting - 28.5 hours
Special Assignment - 118 hours
Total - 498.5 hours
Reserves worked 42.5 hours doing perimeter security for the fire scene at 168 Meade St
and 28.5 hours guarding the prisoner after the shooting at Sentry Market.
Reserve Shumway has attained Level Three in his training and is now cleared to do solo Patrol.
COMMUNITY SERVICE VOLUNTEERS
Number of Volunteers Reporting 56
Number of Days Worked 386
Number of Hours Worked 1294
PARKING
Parking citations issued - 423
Total parking citations issued - 519
Property Handled - 104
COMMUNICATIONS/RECORDS
The Communications division received 3,606 phone calls, 490 were 911 calls.
Police Cases 602
Medical Runs 46
Fire Runs 19
Ashland Life Support Runs 66
The Ashland Police Department received a total of 6,606 calls for the month of December.
2
CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER
Unsightly Premise Complaints - 5
Sign Complaints - 6
The Code Enforcement/Property Officer spent several hours at 168 Meade St after the fire
and at 1644 Ashland St ( Sentry Market robbery) collecting and tagging evidence for Patrol.
3
a0
Hl FELICE DFPARJK<;T
LRC!,,T'[V: 7,121SOLHATE." INrIDEV REFOR7
REPGRTED OFFENSES CGES CL&IFFI) CLEREVE RMES NO. OF ARREST CHARGES
OF (IFFS14-iE3 4CH.W. ACTIAL. ACTUAL A CHANGE
THIS THIS LAST YEAR TO THIS THIS LAST THIS THIS LAST THIS MONTH YEAR TO DATE
NUIT4
YTO YTD D A T'.- HONMH YTP. YTD MOTH YTD YTD JUV VOLT TOTAL JUV ADULT
RAPE I ICO.0 14 1 100,Or",
ROPER% 3 1 f 2i-J4.4 'h' 3 3 WON 100,01, S 6
FSLT
610 1 1 1 12.5" 051 26,Q%
!ux 17,7% 15.7:4
3 11 14
SHOF,1F T i NO, T 12 58.3 1 5 1 10 Him HUI! 313%
NHC'T C-,Cl ""' - 7 1. 5.G :1
my RUT -ACCESS 7 7 5 49.0 T! 2 F 23.5" 20.6;
WKLE !HEFT S 5 0 ?7.91
;HEFT FFT FIG 7 7 1 -
33.2%
611JEF ?'LEFT. 17 17 eo in v i 1 1 5.9% 5,7x 5.1%
MIER VEN THEFT 5 5 6 i 7 6 1
WWI i
73
7 1 �!0 T,;%- 7-j 75 P.7 14 14 1p 17.0 17.20 E4.0% 7 21 20 3 El
TPRT ;i
3INFLE AS 9 5 7 Iii! 71 4, 4 511 'MOT, 77.C, 1 4 5 1
r F*
ult-K C0VfiTFVEiT 59.41
WpAUn 3
L, 1 2 5
Egos 5 5 3 66.7 N 2 2 4{..... 4!".m%
CUDIT CUBS 2 2 4 50A z 2 2 4 IN,% 109. " HO.0".
WE WE 6 1 3 116A
ENHUTANT
ETRE4 PSWiRTY 5
,4411,L1 T!1 ?4 34 60 WE x 4 4 2 U.3% 11.3% 3.31 5 E 7 5 2
WW-NS OF7E!JzK-,' 3 2 `,.0,0%
F ICE T if U,T 101 ii
ED CR TEI 2 2 2 + 50A 'L F 2 66.7% W%
5 A r 251 X 4 v WX 80:0% H0.M 6 6
FORME
OFF A= ST, FALL i I - I Or.li il 109,011, 1 1
is 55.6. % IT 3 19
IiGUIP. LA1.1's F 2 14 - 42,9 7,1 7 7 JE 87.5% 91.57 05.7% 4 13 22 L 19
!2 12 10 + 20A 3 2 1 255% it Al 10.0N 1 6 7 6
E
i p I.-SP_-n 3 .3 12 26 - 51A 4. 1 57.77, 4 1 5 4 1
ESCAU:
RL OTHER 41 41 46 - 10,9 % 7 7 13 17AI 17.1% 28.20 1 3 4 1 3
THREPTS 2 100.0 %
fuuTHROHERMS 1 1 5 Rvo % 1 1 5 1003% ?00.01 100,0% 3 2 ?
FUN. VAY 31.1117 I-. I- 4 �0 v.Q, X 2 2 2
PAST 11 T91,1. !61 111 215 211 ; 41 45 64 22.11 39.9% 39.1% E3 68 It E3 68
'AFT I t PHI 11 234 234 296 Its N 15 53 102 250 1•0 55.21 33 67 121 32 87
m «e 's«, cvm
CUM: c m:w, «:c R e
m93 ROW JANUARY !m
amewm REPORTED Ur . . CASES c ED CLEARENCE _„ ! « _ _= c m w
awws A'TUAL <r ACTUAL ; EHANEE
MIT »; Lm YEAR TO THIS THIS m! THIS THIS wr m; mm TO DATE
em NO g LATE m, m Y70 MOM o m m a! TOTAL m om,
TORT
r »e
<p e ! ! a - s, i ! , ! mn mt 43 ! ! ,
Emm er , - me : , »a
FLUDIMS
D ME 50P ! , , : E zca m» wx ! , ,
ems e m .
sw w x,» .
—. came ; , , - » ;
em »«! w , 9 s . «r =
MCI
»« sane ,
WEAL ca .
, m : 4 , . »: ; c • , w« »a we , . ,
v » «« I
FHP F mom ,
mme = t 1 . ac ; : > : »a m« wa 1 e it ! e
«ev PEF31INS : !
TN DE11TH-11CIF , ! . l , mz ! : as
9MER Jcm
+r e : m a , laa , : c,
rm y< n a e , 6i
ARMADAMO g e a . mii
MATE m. mill. .
: rA 75X
ASSIST. REITEREP z e e - g ; ! c»
DONTSTI! FROPLEIS s , l , Woo ,
UNKfILIFE rmic . , , - «5 !
UP me e z a > : 35 ; .
em +m j : : = s, .
w._«ax = s a . Us .
gem, G m e , . mgr
y« moon
WFUNROADS z z w - »» .
m± mm I ! 4
m mom=
r e e
WITED
MSE z z e - 4.9 .
m,ew
FAULT'; :
,m•
e '
»memos
:. M= n : ,
PART mr E « m y ! a ; E R » c: c, «m u s e ! a
0sm m w 563 - 61 ; 71 75 117 »s »R r.6% 33 109 142 33 m
ASHLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT ^
COMMUNITY SERVICE VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
FOR STAFF USE ONLY �
________________________________________________________________
TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR MONTH OF JAN 1993
NUMBER OF VOLUNTEERS REPORTING
HUMBER OF DAYS WORKED
NUMBER OF HOURS WORKED
WJUHN D' ENTREMONT
IRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES
" ��
PAGE NO. 1 � .~
02/18/1993 COMMUNITY SERVICE VOLUNTEERS
SUMMARY MONTHLY REPORT
FOR JANUARY , 1993
VOLUNT�ER ACTIVITY SS NUMBER DAY3 HOURS
WORKED WORKED
** AARP RETIRED EXECUTIVE
�* Subtotal **
2 8
** ADULT LEARNING CENTER
** Subtotal **
9 16
** BLIND READING
** Subtotal *�
3 10
** BLOOD PRESSURE CLINIC
** Subtotal **
2 7
** CAR WASH
** Subtotal **
^ 3 7
** CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
** Subtotal �$
4 16
**
COMPUTER ENTRY
** Subtotal **
22 125
**
COURT OFFICE
** Subtotal **
2O 130
$* CVS OFFICE
**
Subtotal **
23 94
** DA COURIER
**
Subtotal **
9 18
** EXERCISE COORDINATOR
** Subtotal **
3 9
*�
FORENSIC LAB
** Subtotal **
2 11
'
PA'GE NO� 2
02/13/1793 COMMUNITY SERVICE VOLUNTEERS
SUMMARY MONTHLY REPORT
FOR JANUARY , l993
VOLUNTEER ACTIVITY SS NUMBER DAYS HOURS
WORKED WORKED
*$ FRIENDLY VISITOR
**
Subtotal **
2 4
*� HISTORIAN
** Subtotal **
16 82
** LIBRARY, PUBLIC
** Subtotal **
22 66
** LOAVES AND FISHES
** Subtotal **
76 241
** MAIL COURIER
** Subtotal **
48 95
** MEALS ON WHEELS
** Subtotal **
8 8
** OMBUDSMAN
** Subtotal **
8 16
*$ PUBLIC SCHOOLS
** Subtotal **
13 35
** QUILTING
** Subtotal **
1 4
** RECYCLE ACTIVITIES
** Subtotal ** ^
3 10
** SENIOR PROGRAM OFFICE
** Subtotal **
25 74
** SHAKESPEAREAN FESTIVAL
** Subtotal $$
11 48
PAGE NO.
02/13/1993 COMMUNITY SERVICE VOLUNTEERS
SUMMARY MONTHLY REPORT
FOR JANUARY , 1973
VOLUNTEER ACTIVITY SS NUMBER DAYS HOURS
WORKED WORKED
** SHOPPER (NURSING HOME)
** Subtotal **
G 16
**
STATISTICS/ANALYSIS
*� Subtotal **
6 15
** TAX ASSISTANCE
** Subtotal **
2 17
** TRANSPORTATION DRIVER
** Subtotal **
` 2 4
** VACATION HOUSE PATROL
** Subtotal **
6 13
*** Total ***
367 1222
^
'
/
0
ty of4
Memorandum
OgfGpt� ,•
February 17 , 1993
Q. Mayor and City Council
ram: Steven M. Hall, Director of Public Works
pll�ljPGt: Monthly Reports
Enclosed are the monthly reports for the Public Works department
for the month of January, 1993 .
SMH:im\PMMORPT.m=
Enclosures
b ,
ENGINEERING DIVISION REPORT
FOR
JANUARY 1993
1. Issued 8 street excavation permits
2. Issued 5 miscellaneous construction permits
3. Issued 5 address changes or assignments
4. Responded to 8 certificate of occupancy reviews
5. Performed field and office checks on 6 partition plats
6. Performed field and office checks on 2 subdivision plats
7. Arranged for construction of pump mount base for use at the filter plant
8. Performed the following work on the Railroad Village Subdivision:
a. revised the estimated cost for LID improvements for the subdivision,
b. prepared a list of proposed assessment costs per lot,
C. prepared report to council,
d. reviewed title report, and
e. computed costs for services for each lot
9. Mailed updated moratorium list to contractors and utility companies
10. Acquired 2 excavation permits from Jackson County Public Works and 2 from the
Highway Division
11. Performed the following work on the Tolman Creek Road Traffic Signal Project:
a. acquired material invoices and certificates,
b. approved final material submittals, and
C. met'with contractor to discuss project start up
12. Acquired additional right of way on First Street
13. Performed the following work on the 1992 Miscellaneous Concrete Project:
a. staked and computed grades for cub replacement on First Street and Alida St.,
b. marked locations of ramps and miscellaneous concrete work,
C. prepared plans for extra work on "C" Street, and at Third/Gresham and E.
Main St., and
d. inspected work performed by contractor
IU 176w ,y 1993-Ng,2
Sniff Rcpon for Epineering Division-Jmmary 1993
14. Arranged for reconstruction and extension of the fence on N. Main near the "Back
Porch Barbeque"
15. Performed the following work on the Digester Repair Project:
a. inspected work performed by contractor,
b. processed progress payment,
C. reviewed.contract change order no. 2, and
d. met with Engineer to discuss changes and general progress
16. Perform the following work on the NW Area Water Improvement Project:
a. made final review of plans and specifications,
b. distributed bid advertisements to prospective bidders, and
C. distributed plans and specifications
17. Prepared computer maps of all City facilities including City Hall, Waste Water
Treatment Plant, Water Filter Plant and Service Center
18. Prepared computer map of the Ashland Airport
19. Inspected the installation of a water line and fire hydrant on Highway 66
20. Inspected the construction of a 24 inch storm drain line north of Hersey St. near Oak
St.
21. Operated traffic counters at several locations
22. Performed the following work on the tax lot conversion base map:
a. contacted additional companies for quotations,
b. arranged for financing through the various divisions and departments, and
C. prepared contract
JHO:n\ahffmp.jm
Water Quality Monthly Report
January, 1993
Water:
Repaired 3 leaks in City owned water mains.
Repaired 5 leaks in customer service and or meter.
Repaired 4 Lithia leaks. Cut in a new valve, tested the pump,
repaired the air valve and we now have Lithia water flowing to
the Plaza and Gazebo with 10 gallons a minute at the overflow.
Changed out 5 3/4" water meters and 1- 1 1/211 meter.
Installed 9 new water meters with hand valves.
Installed 1 customer hand valve.
Repaired 1 fire hydrant.
Replaced fire hydrant on Beach St. that was broken.
Relocated 2 water services at Barrington Subdivision.
Installed new valve to the irrigation system at the Airport.
Raised valve boot on Hwy 66 near Oak Knoll.
Installed new water service to 697 Terrace.
Plumbed in new chlorine analyzer at Crowson Reservoir..
Replaced torn out water service hit by County.
Sewer:
Installed 2 new 4" sewer laterals.
Replaced 3 sewer laterals.
Built and installed screen at the Waste Water Plant.
Installed 6" sewer main across Highway 66, dug it across after
trying to bore it, as per State specifications.
Responded to 4 service calls, and had 8 repairs.
Jet footage of 17, 896 feet using 49 , 000 gallons of ,water.
Mechanical footage of 7003 feet.
TV footage .of 7 , 043 feet for the year on 1992 .
Miscellaneous:
There were 86 requests for Utility locate calls.
There was 61. 333 million gallons of water treated at the Water
Treatment Plant and 69 . 06 million gallons of water treated at the
Waste Water Treatment Plant.
Used 61 yards of 3/4" minus rock at various jobsites.
^ ^
_-- _--- - - --�- ` - _
City of Ashland -- -
Street Division
--'_-`uaouarv'-19es nepo't
swcspcn/
yw~pt 483-miles. 1.5 Sweepers.
Collected 310 yards of debris.
__-_-nespooaeue to, 72 utility location /equest14.
Graded several streets and alleys.
Patched potholes
and suoken services.
youw and icy cn"uitiuos; sanded for severaz days.
Heavy rains caused washing out of several streets and alleys:
Repaired alley off union below Auburn.
napairen alley .above Ashland between Beach and Liberty. '
Hauled material to and repaired: upper miry Jane, Clever- Lane, Mountain
Grandview or. and E. Nevada. We are continuing these repairs.
`J s113wn; �
Repaired yield sign on- Blaine at oliuu.
�wupzacou onmpx sign an Park o� un a� . �a vo w mzlu, ' .......
Replaced missing stop sign no Iowa at mo""taih.
Removed graffiti frum several signs.
opl+cad sign a"u post on oelwun at Hersey.'
Replaced stop sign on 5th. at e St. .
Replaced unmph sign and post on Mountain Ave. .
L-^-'Maue-anu-installed signs for-tire racks for the'%hpp. --
placed temporary stop sion on Coolidge at No. main.
Replaced zom,* sign on Tolman above Nova.
7---___nepzacuu.pvrD uus. uinn in front or 7-11. -
Replaced post on Gresham at: E,main.
'Relocated stop sign.on Ist. at o Sts. due to street improvements.
�--__�_-_ ---_'---__- - - -- ^- � _ ---_ - - - -- _- - '
STORM onA1wa, ' --- -'
Heavy rains caused many storm drain problems.
-Fxus^wu'ao4/nr ruadeu numerous storm drain systems. -
Cleaned off catch basins.
Cleaned out many catch basins with vacuwn attachment
on new sweepe,.
Z*rinp,u forms and back. ,izzeu with slurry. new.catch basin uo-uoa at e.. ___
Poured a concrete bottom in catch basin on Lincoln St. .
Pulled ^ drainage ditch in the alley next 1222 Iowa St. .
` -'��--Start�u'W�nburn
Way stnrm drain project. Due to the rusting out of an ox- ' ' -
steel culvert and the sinking of a large section of wioburo w^v, it was ^
necessary to saw cut 300 ft. of pavement, install a new ao ft. cross ove `
--storm drain and a new 240 ft. 12 in. storm drain. olco, we had to ramove.-. --
one catch basin arid install a new catch basin.
�
Began Ist. street storm drain project: New sturm drain (12i^. ) fro`/ o oc
tuB St. racross e SL. and new cross over on ist, �bo,e o St. ' There -- ' -
will also be o new catch basins installed.
Began locating "Henry at." 24io. storm
drain for relocating.
--------Cleaned--6th- aoa Ast,rets x/m ditch.
Cleaned ditch on mistletoe and repaired a major °ash-out.
Luc ated Terra/Faith storm drain that russes aiyki found elevations
and �p/anneu out future Faith St. storm drain project.
�
Removed old catch basin at Gresham and E. Main for new one.
� wzsc.
/ � picLeu .up3 wood Stoves `for the Energy oept. .
�-^�---oauleu-nff sweeper -pile; 160
yards.
Helped in shop to install plow and sander on new pick-up. (Several uays-- -'-
Started running rod. sweeper.
7--� 'Hwlpe4- in uhop installing a i yn� u n new ti
re racks. (Several days) .
� Saw-cut several hundred fee/ of asphalt at the Re-cycle center on
' water st, , o�su jack »amme/ea and rem"ved
� .
.__._ xau\eu .270 yards of z/4 pious ruck fruw oualitv Rack on Dead Indian to
u"r a �t. yard.
-- -
/
Hauled 14.18 tons of saou and gravel concrete mix /rum LTw to a 'St. yard
, - `--Rewuvna'saoaer from St. #4 ao* picked up rental back-how front xsssez
�
Tractor in meufuru, `
� Hauled large gates from water St. to cinder y"ra on Glenview o,. .
` masureuath at, from E. Maio t/`ru o at^ iotersectinu. aou -oraoite St.- '- -
from Nutley to newest section for current re-surface list. �-
Cleaned equipment and facilities on u weekly basis.
-Held munthlv.sufct; meetion. Our Upeciaz ooest this.-month: Scott Lewis,
Weatherman for Channel 12 News. Super meeting. - ' -
City of Ashl.-Ind
Fleet Maintenanc 0
----1993 Rc-part
2?�. 5 mechanic--; completed work. on work ordersi
for various types of city equipment and vuhiclus. Thu, divisions and
departments involved arw as
Administration :
_.Airport: 0
building : 0
Cemetery:
Community-Service Volunteer
Electric .18
Energy:
Engineering :
Fire: 2
Police: 1.
R.W.#1
Senior Van :
................
shop:
Warehouse:.
Waste-Water 6
Water:ter 16
The emergency generators at City Hall and the Civic Center Were
--manually..-tested tested weekly.-
and M certificates issued for the month:
City of Ashland:
ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
February 24, 1993
TO Mayor Cathy Golden and City Council
FROM Keith E. Woodley, Fire Chie
SUBJECT Fire Department Fixed Facilities Study
We have included within our current year budget, funds for
consultant services to complete a Fire Department Fixed
Facilities Study for the City of Ashland. A Request For Proposals
was sent to seventeen firms which provide these services. We
received responses from six highly qualified firms within the
field, all of which fell within the budget allocation for this
project. After an exhaustive review and corresponding reference
checks, we have selected Mr. Robert Lewis of Urban Planning
Associates in Mission Viejo, California, to conduct the study. We
expect this process to take approximately two to three months to
complete.
I have contacted a number of individuals who have indicated
their willingness to serve on a community-based committee to work
with the consultant throughout the process. Their role will be to
provide the consultant with an understanding of local emergency
service needs and perspectives, and to review the draft report
prior to completion of the final document. Attached is a list of
community members who will be serving on the committee. We feel
fortunate to have committee members with such broad and extensive
backgrounds to assist us in this important process.
ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT
FIRE DEPARTMENT FIXED FACILITIES STUDY COMMITTEE
Walt Anders Jim Olson
455 Siskiyou Blvd. 200 Dead Indian Road
(W) 482-2770 (W) 488-5357
(H) 482-4066 (H) 482-7529
John McLaughlin Debbie Miller
20 E. Main St. 160 Normal
(W) 488-5305 (W) 488-0120
(H) 482-1432 (H) 482-9720
Phil Arnold Dana Johnson
300 E. Main St. 2323 Greenmeadows Wy
(W) 482-4935 (W) 488-1116
(H) 488-2481
Tim Bewley
1618 Ashland St Barbara Jarvis
(W) 482-4002 1159 Emma
(H) 535-3858 (H) 482-5593
Mike Milligan Neil Benson
1025 Clay St 303 Laurel Street
(W) 770-4453 (W) 482-3333
(H) 482-5927 (H) 482-4682
Peg Cockrell Ken Mickelsen
280 Maple 2370 Lupine Drive
(W) 482-2441 (W) 488-5340
(H) 488-1868
ema ran dum
'•.G4EGG�.•',
February 24 , 1993
0. Mayor and City Council
r .I
ram: Jill Turner, Director of Finance
1Ih Ut Financial Consultants .i
The purpose of this memo is to inform City Council of the upcoming selection
process for a Financial Consultant.
Staff prepared a request for proposal for Financial Consultant for the upcoming
debt issues. The scope of projects as stated in the RFP are as follows:
Anticipated and/or Potential Projects & Financing:
1. Winter/Spring 1994: 10-20 million dollar Sewage Treatment Plant.
2 . Bancroft Bond. Issue $500, 000
Other Financing Possibilities:
1. Open Space Park Land - $2 million
2 . Golf Course Development - $4 million
3 . ACH Foundation - Senior Care Facility
4 . Airport Hangar Revenue Bonds - $250, 000
The City received five responses. A staff committee composed of employees from
the Hospital, Parks and Recreation, and myself are reviewing the proposals.
This staff committee will then choose either two or three consultants for a
personal interview, after which a selection committee will make a recommenda-
tion to the City Council.
The following"persons have agreed to serve on the selection committee: Pat
Acklin, Rob Winthrop, Chuck Butler, Jill Turner, and a representative from
APRC. In addition, the following employees will also be invited to participate
in the process. Mike McGraw, Ken Mickelsen, Jim Watson, Brian Almquist, and
Steve Hall.
This process differs from that in the past, in that the decisions regarding
Financial Consultants were made by the Director of Finance.
H:\jilt\wplcouncil\fmconsu.mem
ASHLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
February 25, 1993
TO: Mayor/City Council
via - City Administrator
FROM: Gary!E, Brown -
RE: Creation of Traffic Enforcement Program
RECOMMENDATION:
The Police Department be authorized to establish a Traffic Enforcement
Unit. The program would involve the creation of a motorcycle officer
assignment. Start up costs would be funded through existing asset
forfeiture funds. Hereafter, the position should be self sustaining. In order
to begin the program this summer requires we purchase the motorcycle,
select the officer and begin training as soon as possible.
BACKGROUND:
Traffic enforcement is a concern. It is especially a problem in the
downtown area. The situation Is heightened due to the lack of
maneuverability of patrol vehicles. As such, traffic violators are often let
go just because of the difficulty In traversing traffic in order to make a
vehicle stop. We've also received numerous complaints about a
perceived lack of enforcement of pedestrian right of way violations in the
downtown core. It is especially difficult to focus on.pedestrian violations
in a motor vehicle.
Our traffic accidents (total) have gone from•363 to 404, an Increase of
10.15%. Injury accidents increased 24.64% (52 to 69). Officers assigned to
patrol duties find little time to concentrate on traffic enforcement.
Effective June 30, 1993, the City will lose funding of its grant for the
Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Officer (PBSO) program. At that time we will
need to find additional funding or eliminate one police officer position.
This would require our giving a proper layoff notice to a current police
officer. At the time the grant was Initially approved there was no promise
of the City absorbing the position, even though that was our desire.
However, this proposal would enable us to keep the position without
requiring additional funding, outside of some start up costs.
DISCUSSION:
Approval of the recommendation would enable us to address the
problems stated previously and of course not lose the presence of a
uniformed officer.
It is estimated a traffic officer would issue an average of six moving
violations a day. Allowing for vacation, sick leave, training, and inclement
weather, 10% non payment of fines and the officer being Involved In some
traffic safety. programs, we estimate the position would generate annually
approximately $50,000 in, new revenues. Our primary intent is to focus on
traffic enforcement and not on raising funds via traffic citations. The latter
naturally happens as a result of the main objective.
There are two police motorcycles designed especially for police traffic
enforcement: Harley-Davidson and Kawasaki. The preliminary cost
figures are within $1,000 of each other (Includes all accessory equipment).
The.primary difference which the decision would probably be based on, is
the factory warranty. Kawasaki has 1 year (all major parts) while Harley-
Davidson's Is four. The estimated total cost of a police motorcycle
(including radio) is approximately $12,000.
The downside of a police motorcycle traffic officer position is that
regardless of the intense, specialized training it can be a hazardous
assignment. To minimize this concern, In selecting the person we would
look for someone who Is mature, responsible, has quick reflexes, agile,
with unrestricted visual acuity/depth perception as well as someone who
has the personality to be able to handle traffic enforcement in a positive
manner. As mentioned previously, inclement weather is also a concern.
However, on rainy, foggy days,or Ice conditions, the traffic officer would
be assigned to a vehicle to work radar and Investigate traffic accidents.
COSTS:
First Year Costs (1 year):
Annual Base pay with fringe benefits, plus 5% hazard pay (standard for
motorcycle assignment): $40,610
Motorcycle: Kawasaki or Harley-Davidson (up to $12,000 with radio) plus
$4,200 per year for gasoline/oil/maintenance/replacement (fleet account).
Estimated operational life of a police motorcycle is 4 years.
Uniform: Leather jacket, boots, pants, helmet (up to $1,500)
Total Start up costs (purchase of equipment) $13,500
Total First Year costs would be approximately $58,500 (equipment,
salaries, maintenance/replacement account).
Second year costs would be approximately $47,000.
Estimated annual revenues generated by the position would be $50,000+
OPTIONS:
1. Approve recommendation, as presented
2. Deny recommendation. Would result In elimination of one police
officer position at end of current fiscal year (1992-93).
3. Assign an existing officer to traffic duty even though the grant
- position would still be eliminated (would detract from existing patrol
operations).
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM.
BENEFITS: 1. Institute specialized traffic enforcement program.
2. . Improve maneuverability of police In Increasing traffic
congested areas.
-3. Focus on accident causing violations and reduce the
number of injury accidents by 10%
4. Increased visibility of uniformed police.
5. Continue public safety program instituted by PBSO
grant officer (part time basis in elementary schools.)
6. Avoid the loss of one police officer position.
7. Provide an additional career development opportunity.
8. Assist in enforcement of bicycle/skateboard laws in
downtown due to improved mobility. .
9. Program should generate revenues to off set
operational costs.
DOWNSIDE: 1. Potentially a hazardous assignment
2. Inclement weather can reduce operational time
A special note of appreciation to Captain Barnard and Officer Deffenbaugh who
completed the preliminary.analysis and initial draft report for this project.
E
Contents of Record for Ashland Planning Action 90-057
REQUEST FOR STREET REVISIONS AND APPROVAL
OF OUTLINE PLAN FOR A FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION.
APPLICANT: GARY AND DIANE SEITZ
Notice Map and criteria for approval 3/2/1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
-- Memorandum from City Attorney 2/25/1993 . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..3
-- Letter from Sully, Floyd, Oates, Friend, VanDyke to City Council 2/12/1993 5
Letter from Doug Schmor to John McLaughlin 1/11/1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
- Letter from Paul Nolte to Doug Schmor 12/22/1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
-- Memorandum from John McLaughlin to Paul Nolte 12/22/1992 . . . . . . . . 10
Letter from Doug Schmor to Paul Nolte 12/10/1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
LUBA Decision on LUBA No. 92-135 12/4/1992 . . . . . . . . . . .. : . . . . . . . 12
-- Letter from Gary Seitz to Council members 8/17/1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Record of previous hearing before City Council on PA90-057 7/15/1992 . . 26
Council Decision 7/15/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
- City Council meeting minutes 7/7/1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
-- Notice Map to surrounding property owners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Criteria for approval of Outline Plan sent with notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Memo from Paul Nolte to City Council 6/30/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
-- Planning Department Staff Report Addendum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
-- Letter from surrounding neighbors to City Council 6/6/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Letter from Douglass H. Schmor to Paul Nolte 5/29/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Letter from Paul Nolte to Doug Schmor and Dan Thorndike 5/21/92 . . . . 44
LUBA Decision on LUBA No. 90-144 3/12/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Notice is hereby given that PUBLIC HEARING on
!.copy of the applica;iou,all docunwnrs and evidence relied upon by die appl:car:
the following requestwith respect to the ASHLAND and applicable critcri-are available for inspection at no cost and will be pruvi&c i:
LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the II'son°hie cost. if ree,eest.,d, A copy ,f the sniff report wsl be ,wdabl' --
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL on the 2ND DAY. inspectionseven days prior to the hearing and will bepryvided atressonable cost
if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department G:•
OFMARCH, 1993 AT7:30 P.M.at theASH LAND Ha11,20 East Main,Ashland.OR97520.
CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street,Ashland, During the Public Hearing,the Mayor shall allow testimony from the applicant and
Oregon. those inattendance concerning this request.The Mayor shall have the right to limit
the length of testimony and require that comments be reavicted to the applicable
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are on the reverse o(this notice. criteria-
Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, Byou have any questions or comments concerning this request,please feel free to
tither in person or by letter,or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the cenmctSusan Yates attire Ashland Planning Department.City Hall,at 488-5305.
decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue,precludes your right of
appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify
which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of
appeal to LUBA on that criterion.
-a0 utnOrt rw uat
e.oa wo arc
w wvaaro ,,
LOT 2
CMiA dolt
LOT 3
aaosasa scare ,
Oar 1
4
LOT 4 f, s mittaridatrw tt> u,eow
i.aa]1Lla WL
•r 4 uttauwtganwtrtmtran
swtax Oka W SH O
i _ 'sae Ntasta itta
�. _ - wcnttaxt calla is te<tstx tt¢
uat _
I Yt. • - ttw wttauw tr am tat .
1f � d � � / _ ., '• f soar ttso
'� ' o Netn tt6 ORV MM ,
�
:.
F
iLt WCO�ttawsu:.
: 0- SLTr
PLANNING ACTION 80-057 Is a request for street revisions and approval for Outline Plan of a fiveaot subdivision
under the Performance Standards Option, located on Granite Street near the Intersection of Granite and South
Pioneer Streets. Revision involves change In street length of less than 500' for the new street, from Granite to end
of cul-de-sac Pursuant to the Land Use Board of Appeals decision in Seitz v. City of Ashland, LUBA No. 92-135,
the'ffrst issue to be decided by the Council will be to determine.whether it will allow an amended application to be
filed. If an amended application is accepted for filing then the applicable ordinances and criteria in effect.at the time
of the original application shall still apply. Testimony and review shall be limited to the Issue of street length and how
the criteria apply to the change in street length. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential, Rural
Residential, Woodland Residential; Zoning: R-1-10, RR-.5P, WR; Assessor's Map #: 8DD; Tax Lot: 900.
APPLICANTS: Gary and Diane Seitz
CRiT1iRlA FOR OUTLINE' PLAN APPROVAL.
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it
finds the following criteria have been met:
1 ) That the development is consistent" with City plans and with
the stated purpose of this Chapter of the Land Use
Development Ordinance.
2 ) That the existing and natural features of the land have been
considered in the plan of the development and important
features utilized for open space and common areas.
3 ) That the development design minimizes any adverse effect on
the areas beyond the project site and that the character of
the neighborhood be considered in the design of the
development.
4 ) That adequate public facilities can be provided, including,
but not limited to, water, sewer, paved access to and
through the development, electricity, and urban storm
drainage.
5) That the development of the land and provision of services
will not cause shortages of a necessary public facility in
the surrounding area, nor will the potential development of
adjacent lands be impeded.
6) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of
.open space and common areas, that if developments are done
in phases that the early phases have the same or higher
ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire.
7) That the total energy needs of the development have been
considered and are as efficient as is economically feasible,
and the maximum use is made of renewable energy sources,
including solar, where practical.
. 8) That all other applicable City Ordinances will be met by the
proposal.
M y
City Attorney
City of Ashland
(503) 482-3211, Ext. 59
MEMORANDUM
February 25, 1993
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Paul Nolte
SUBJECT: Hearing on amended application by Gary and Diane Seitz for five lot
.subdivision on Granite Street
The applicants have requested a hearing before the council on their amended outline
plan. This matter has'previously been before the council and has been appealed to
the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) twice.
LUBA reversed the decision of the council in the case of Sully v. City of Ashland
(March 12, 1992) holding that the city's interpretation of the land use ordinance was
erroneous as to how the length of a street is to be measured. The council determined
at a hearing regarding the LUBA reversal (July 15, 1992) that since LUBA reversed,
but did not remand, the determination regarding street measurement, the effect of the
LUBA decision was a denial of the application.
The second LUBA decision regarding this matter (Seitz v. City of Ashland, December
4, 1992) held that LUBA's previous reversal did not preclude the City from accepting
an amended application. LUBA remanded the matter back to the city so that the city
"may determine whether it will allow an amended application or require a new
application." That remand, and the applicants' request that you approve an amended
application, has resulted in the hearing scheduled for this coming Tuesday, March 2,
1993.
Two footnotes in the latest LUBA opinion concisely summarize the issues before the
council. . In footnote 4, LUBA states:
". . . we see no reason why the city could not allow petitioners to amend the
original application to correct the deficiency identified in our decision in Sully. In
that event, ORS 227.178(3) would entitle petitioners to a decision on the
amended permit application based on the criteria that were in effect when the
original application was submitted."
3
Memorandum to Mayor and, Council
February 25, 1993
Paoe 2
In footnote 6, LUBA states:
. . . we are aware of no local criteria governing the city's decision concerning
which of these options (allow an amended application or require a new
application) to pursue. However, if there are such criteria, they must be
complied with."
The council must deliberate and decide first whether or not it will allow an amended
application. If the council decides not to allow an amended application then the
council does not get to the second issue of whether or not to approve the amended
application. There are no criteria in the land use ordinance as to whether or not
amended applications are allowed. The applicants have requested and received
information from the city as to what the city's practice has been regarding amended
applications. That information is in your packet. The council should allow the parties
to present arguments on this issue before a decision is made.
(p:planning�cn-s eitz.met(
L
February 12, 1993
T0: Members of the Ashland City Council
Seitz vs. City of Ashland, LUBA No. 92-135; (Planning Action 90-
057)
The case of Gary Seitz and Diane Seitz vs. the City of Ashland;
LUBA No. 92-135 will be brought before the Ashland City Council
for a decision as to whether the old planning action can be
amended under the land use ordinances in effect at the time it was
first appealed to LUBA in October of 1990, or whether the
ordinances and criteria now in effect may be applied to the
proposed developement.
The LUBA ruling (No. 92-135) remands the citys decision so that it
may determine whether it will allow an amended application or
require a new application. This choice is clearly left up to the City
Council.
Nearly three years have passed since Planning Action 90-057 was
introduced to the Ashland Planning Commission for approval. Fire
danger in the forest interface and danger to the Ashland Creek
watershed have ncreased enormously since then. As an example,
the catastrophic Bend fire resulted in millions of dollars in losses
and so did the Oakland, California fire. Both of these began at the
forest interface (or in the case of the Oakland fire, to be more
precise, the chaparral interface). Both locations are in wildfire
areas.
The Ashland Land Use Ordinance and criteria for approval of
subdivisions have been revised to. protect the citizens of Ashland as
a result of recommendations made by Fire Chief Woodley. Recently
we received an educational package from the Ashland Fire
Department. In the package was a brochure entitled: HAS THE
PACIFIC NORTHWEST DROUGHT EXPOSED YOUR HOME TO
FIRE? One of the pages in the brochure was entitled: CAN FIRE
FIGHTERS REACH YOUR HOME? Several statements follow the
question. The first statement is: You should know at least two exit
routes from your neighborhood in case of emergency evacuation.
The second statement is: Make sure any road leading to your house
allows two-way traffic, is nottoo steep, and does not have curves
too sharp to accommodate large emergency vehicles. The fourth
J
statement, is: make sure dead-end roads and long driveways have
turnaround areas that are wide enough for emergency vehicles..
These questions apply directly to the Seitz' application and their
proposed amended application that has already been prepared.
The applicants' attorney wrote (letter to Mr. Gary Seitz dated 3/19/91
with carbon copy to John McLaughlin, City of Ashland)."If the court
finds in favor of petitioners (viz. Sully, et. al.) the project can be
redesigned and constructed as originally planned, but the parking
areas will be steeper and more dangerous to public safety, and
earth removal and excavation will be more severe."
Fire Chief Woodley unsuccessfully attempted to get the maximum
grade of city streets reduced to 12%. In the educational material
given to us by the Ashland Fire Department there is a statement on
page 11 of the booklet "BEFORE WILDFIRE HITS YOUR HOME"
subtitled "HOME PROTECTION GUIDE":
C. Roads should not be excessively steep. Fire
equipment moves with difficulty on grades steeper
than 10 per cent.
The decision the City Council will make in this case will affect not
only Granite Street. but the entire city of Ashland for a very long
time.
In the City Council meeting of 7/7/92. Council person Susan Reid
introduced a motion not to act on the amended application 90-057,
but (and we quote) "to take the opportunity to make this subdivision
conform to the new ordinances and new current standards". This
would be accomplished by requiring a new application.
As a result of our review of the video tape of the City Council
meeting of July 7. it is our impression the motion introduced by .
Susan Reid implied that she believed the City of Ashland had a
choice. The LUBA decision (N0. 92-135) supports the conclusion
that the City has a choice. The tone of her discussion was to the
effect: here is an opportunity for the City Council to demonstrate its
commitment to the safety of Ashland citizens as embodied in the
new Land Use Ordinance.
The motion passed with very little discussion. We strongly support
that decision. We believe it was a good decision because it
considered the welfare of the City as a whole not just the narrow
3
interest of the developers. We believe the City Council should. now
unanimously vote again to require the developers to submit a new
application under the new ordinances and the new criteria.
The conclusion must be drawn that the City Council believes that
the new ordinance and the new criteria provide more opportunity for
fire protection, especially in the forest interface.and in the Ashland
Creek Watershed.. The tools are provided by the new ordinances
and criteria for the Ashland fire Department to fight wildfire in the
forest interface, in the watershed and to protect those that live in
Ashland as awhole.
The City Council should choose an action that will have a long term
benefit for all Ashland citizens
We, the undersigned, urge the City Council to sustain its motion of
July 7, 1992, and require the applicant to submit a new outline plan
under the new ordinances and the new criteria. To do this will have
a long term benefit for all the citizens of Ashland.
w�-
7t4 Gle&l ele 4Ve
77,1
� I
BROPHY. MILLS. SCHMOR
GERKING b; BROPHY
ATl'ORNEYS Al LAW
CnPL IA SROPHY PC 201 WEST :A:IN n O EC- 12b - DEWEYWILSON
LEE A MILLS .YM [ DUn A1:dE
M EDFORD. OR 97501
DOUG LA 55 H SCHMOR
TIMOTHY C. GERKING TELEPdorvl
15031 7727123
B J
TIMOTHY E.
BROPHY January 11 1993
Y / TELECCPlea
'STEVEN L. PATTERSON 15031 772-7249
TODD B. MADDOX IN REPLY REFER TO
Mr. John McLaughlin
Acting Planning Director
City of Ashland
20 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Re: Application of Gary and Diane Seitz .vs. City of Ashland
LUBA No. 92-135
Dear John:
It appears that none of the parties to the Seitz vs. Ashland
LUBA case have appealed the LUBA decision. On behalf of Mr. and
Mrs. Seitz we would request that a hearing be scheduled before the
City Council to consider the amended application of Mr. and Mrs.
Seitz. It is my understanding that all of the documents required
of the applicant were previously submitted to the Planning
Department, but if there are any additional documents or materials
which are required to submit this matter to the Council, please let
us know and we will see that they are prepared and filed with you .
promptly. We would also appreciate it if you could advise us as
soon as possible as to when the new hearing will be scheduled.
Very Truly Yours,
BROPHY, MILLS, SCHMOR
GERKING & BROPHY
Douglas H. Schmor
DHS:ca
cc: Mr. . Paul Nolte
Mr. and Mrs. Gary Seitz
C I T Y O F A 5 H L A N D C I T Y H A L L
ASHLAND.OREGON 97520
telephone(Wde 503)482-3211
December 22, 1992
Douglass H. Schmor
Brophy, Mills, Schmor, Gerking & Brophy
Attorneys at Law
201 West Main
P.O. Box 128
Medford, OR 97501
RE: Application of Gary Seitz and Diane Seitz. v. City of Ashland
LUBA No. 92-135
In response to your letter dated December 10, 1992, I have met
with the Planning Department regarding the practice of our city
in permitting amendments to land use applications. Attached is a
copy of a memorandum from our Planning Department, which
addresses this issue.
Should you need any additional information from my office, please
advise.
Paul Nolte
City Attorney
Attachment
cc: John McLaughlin, Acting Planning Director
Daniel Thorndike, .Attorney (plus attachment and copy of
Schmor's 12-10-92 . 1etter)
C
(cuchni«d.w)
V
9
December 22, 1992
�U- Paul Nolte, City Attorney
ram: John McLaughlin, Acting Planning Director
p�1iUjPtf: Allowing amendments to land use applications
The City, both at the Planning Commission and City Council levels, has
regularly allowed for the amendment of a land use application during the
review process, if it appears likely that the amendment would result in the
application meeting all applicable criteria. Amendments have been accepted
providing additional findings addressing the criteria, and to amend outline plan
designs for subdivision applications. In fact, it has been a very common
practice at the Planning Commission level.to allow for amendments based on
concerns raised by surrounding property owners or Commission members.
Some subdivision applications take two or three Planning Commission
meetings to fully address the issues raised.
An example would be that if an application were submitted that depicted a
dead-end street in excess of that allowed by ordinance, but met all other
applicable criteria, the City would generally allow amendment of the
application, if requested by the applicant, to conform with the code
requirements.
I cannot personally remember an instance where the City has denied an
applicant an opportunity to provide revised or additional information when it
appeared that that information would provide a remedy for a concern raised
during the review process.
BROPHY. MILLS, SCHMOR
GERKING & BROPHY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
or
CARL M. BROPHY, P.C. 201 WEST MAIN P. O. 80% 126 H. DEW EY EY WILSON
LEE A. MILLS MEDFORD, OR 97501 WM. E. DUHAIME
DOUGLASS H. SCHMOR
TIMOTHY C. GERKING TELEPHONE
1772-7123
TIMOTHY E BROPHY December 10, 1992
TELECOPIEN
STEVEN L. PATTERSON 15031772-7249
TODD B. MADDO%
IM wE11 9EFEM TO:
Mr. Paul Nolte
Ashland City Attorney
20 East Main
Ashland, OR , 97520
Re: Application of Gary Seitz and Diane Seitz vs . City of
Ashland; LUBA No. 92-135
Dear Paul:
As you know, we have represented Gary and Diane Seitz in
connection with the land use actions associated with their efforts
to construct a five lot subdivision on their property in Ashland.
The recent decision from LUBA concerning their case states that the
City may permit Petitioners to amend their original application to
correct the deficiency identified in LUBA's first decision.
At the next proceeding before the Council involving this
application, we would like to introduce into the record evidence of
the past practice of the City which we understand has been to
permit applicants to amend land use applications when their initial
application is rejected for failure to comply with a requirement of
the Ashland City Ordinances. We `would request that your office
review this matter with the Planning staff and prepare a brief
report for the record reflecting the practice of. the City in
permitting amendments to -land use applications . It would be
extremely helpful to know your findings in this regard prior to
December 28, 1992 , which is the last date our client may appeal the .
current LUBA decision.
Very Truly Yours,
BROPHY, MILLS, SCHMOR
GERKING & BROPHY
Douglass/H.. Schmor
DHS :ca
cc: Mr— and Mrs . Gary Seitz
j)F%
L S
BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEnLS
2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON r {` Pfi 'j7
3
S GARY SEITZ and DIANE SEITZ, )
5 )
6 Petitioners, )
7 )
8 vs. )
9 )
10 CITY OF ASHLAND, )
11 ) LUBA No. 92-135
12 Respondent, - )
13 ) FINAL OPINION
14 and ) AND ORDER
15 )
16 JOHN SULLY, JEAN SULLY, CARL )
17 OATES, ROASALIE OATES, DENNIS
18 FRIEND, and LINDA FRIEND,
19 )
20 Intervenors-Respondent. )
22
23 Appeal from City of Ashland.
24 -_
25. Douglass H. Schmor, Medford, filed the petition for review
26 and argued on behalf of petitioners. , -With him on the brief was
27 -Brophy, Mills, Schmor, Gerking & Brophy.
28 .
29 No appearance .by respondent.
30
31 Daniel C. . Thorndike, Medford, filed a response. brief and
32 argued on behalf . of intervenors-respondent. With him on the
33 brief was Blackhurst, Hornecker, Hassen & Thorndike & Ervin B.
34 Hogan.
35
36 HOLSTUN, Referee; SHERTON, Chief Referee; KELLINGTON,-
37 Referee, participated in the decision.
38
39 REMANDED 12/04/92
90
41 You are entitled to judicial review -of this Order.
42.• -Judicial review is governed by the provisions'df ORS 197.850.
Page I
,a
1 Opinion by Holstun.
2 NATURE OF THE DECISION
3 Petitioners seek review of . a city decision denying their
4 request for approval of a revised application for subdivision
5 outline plan approval.
6 MOTION TO INTERVENE
7 John Sully, Jean Sully, Carl Oates, Roasalie Oates, Dennis
8 Friend and Linda Friend move to intervene on the side of
9 respondent in this matter. There is no :objection to the motion, .
10 and it is allowed.
11 FACTS
12 In Sully v. City of Ashland, Or LUBA (LUBA No.
13 .90-144, March 12, 1992) , we reversed a prior city decision .
14 granting subdivision .outline plan approval for property owned by
15 petitioners . We held the city incorrectly construed city
16 requirements limiting the permissible length of cul-de-sac
17 _ streets within•subdivisions. _- Because 'the cul-de-sac -proposed in
18 , .the- application originally submitted by petitioners was longer
19 ; 'than permitted under city requirements,--we.*reversed . the city's
20 decision.
1 Following our decision, petitioners submitted an amended
22 application.,,, The cul-de=sac proposed: in the amended application
23 was shortened to comply with city requirements. Petitioners
24 took the position below. that the city was required to allow the
25 . original application : to be amended and that the standards in
26 effect when the original application was first submitted govern .
Page 2 _
1 the amended application as well . Intervenors argued below that
2 our decision in Sim had the effect of denving the initial
3 application and that a new application is therefore required.
4 Intervenors further argue the new application must comply with
5 the current standards governing subdivision outline plan
6 approval.'
7 FIRST ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
8 Petitioners argue. in the first assignment of error that
9 under ORS 227 . 173 (1) , they are entitled to, have their
10 , application approved or denied based on criteria set forth in
11 the . city comprehensive plan and applicable city development
12 ordinances .2 Moreover, petitioners argue they are entitled
13 under ORS 227.178 (3) to have a decision' from the city on their
14 application based on the city criteria in effect on the date the
15 application was first submitted.3
'The standards governing subdivision outline plan approval at the time
the original application in this matter was submitted subsequently were
amended.
20RS 227.173(1) provides as follows:
"Approval or denial of a discretionary permit application shall
be based on standards and criteria, which shall be set forth in
the development ordinance and which shall relate approval or
denial of a discretionary permit application Lo_the development
ordinance and to the comprehensive plan for the area in which
the development would occur and to the development ordinance
and comprehensive plan for the city as a whole."
30RS 227.178(3) provides as follows:
"If -the 'application was complete when first submitted'or the
applicant submits the requested additional_ information within
- 180 days of the date the application was first, submitted and
the 'city has a comprehensive plan and land use regulations
Page 3
fy
1 With regard to the original application, petitioners '
2 understanding of their rights under ORS 227 . 173 (1) and
3 ' ORs 227 . 178 (3) is correct : The first question presented under
4 this assignment of error is whether ORS 227.178(3) reoijrPs both
5 that the city allow petitioners to amend their original
6 application and that the city apply the criteria in existence
7 when the original !application was submitted to the amended
8 application. For the reasons explained below, we conclude that .
9 ORS 227 .178 (3) does not impose such a requirement. The second
10 question' presented under this assignment of. eiror is whether our
11 reversal in Sully precludes the city . from (1) allowing
12 petitioners to submit an amended application, and (2) reviewing
13 that amended application under the city criteria in existence at
14 the time the original application was submitted. For the
15 reasons explained below, . we conclude the city erroneously reads
16 our decision in Sully to preclude it from selecting this option.
17 : . A. .. Reversal vs. Remand
18 As an initial point, intervenors assign particular
19 significance to the fact that our decision in Sully reversed
20 rather than -remanded the city's decision. With regard to the
21 issues_-presented in' this `appeal, the distinction .between a
22 reversal and..remand is: not, dispositive. A reversal .of a land
23 use decision by this Board, unlike a remand, means that a local
acknowledged under .ORS ..197.251, , approval. or denial of the
application shall be based upon the.standards and criteria that
were applicable at the time :the ..application . was . first
submitted.°
Page 4 —
1 government will not be able to correct all of the identified
2 errors by adopting new findings, by accepting additional
3 evidence, or both. In other words, reversal of a land use
4 decision approving a application for permit approval simply
5 means the subject application, as submitted, cannot be approved
6 under the applicable criteria, as a matter of law. This means .
7 that an amended Dm a new application is required to correct at
8 least one of the allegations of error sustained in the Board's
9 final opinion reversing the decision-. A reversal does not
10 PXSXJ_u�d& a local government from accepting an amended
11 application. .
12 B . ORS 227.178 (3)
13 ORS 227.178 (3) , _x - n 3 mupxA, assures permit applicants
14 that a .city cannot .change the applicable approval standards
15.. , after an application for 4 . permit is -submitted. SPP K rD i
16 Light Satsana v DouglAs County, 96 Or. App 207, 212, 772 P2d
17 944, modiffied 97 Or. ' App 614, . rev dPn 308 Or 382 (1989) .
18 Petitioners attempt. to extend this rule regarding the applicable
19 approval criteria much further -than the. - statute provides.
. 20 Petitioners essentially argue that because the city's decision
21 approving the original application was based on an erroneous
- 22 construction of its cul—de—sac length. criteria, !following remand
23 ...of:-that decision,- the statute -guarantees the applicant a right
24 to amend its application so that 'it may agaiaibe reviewed by. the
25 city based on a correct interpretation of the criteria.
26 Whatever policy arguments - there might be, in favor of
Page 5
1 �
1 petitioners ' position, ORS 227 . 178 (3) simply does not impose
2 such a requirement on the city. When the city reviewed the
3 original application and granted approval, albeit based in part
4 on an erroneous construction of the city's criteria. restricting
5 the length of cul-de-sacs, petitioners received everything they
6 were entitled to. under ORS 227 . 178 (3) , with regard to the
7 original application.4 ORS 227 . 178 (3) entitles petitioners to a
8 decision on their permit application based on the criteria that
9 were in effect when the . application was submitted. This
10 _particular statutory provision does not guarantee petitioners a
11 decision, based on those criteria, that correctly interprets and
12 applies those criteria.s
13 In summary, ORS 227.178 (3) identifies ' the 'criteria that
14 must. be applied-to a.permit application. ORS 227.178 (3) has na
15 bearing on whether- the city must, following .reversal or remand
16.; of a permit :.decision by this Board, (1) - accept' an amended
17 -application - -(and. review.:-that ' amended application against the
18. criteria in effect. when "the original application was submitted) ,
19 or :.,(2) .w.re'quire. a new 'application -(and '-review that new
_4A3 explained later in this opinion, we see no reason why.the city could
..not allow, petitioners to.amend the original application to correct the
deficiency identified in our decision in Sully-. In that event; '
_.--ORS 227.178(3) _;would entitle petitioners: to a .decision on the amended
permit application based on the criteria that were in effect when the
original application was submitted.
�^ Sof course other statutes entitle petitioners, -as. well as other parties
to the local'proceedinga, to appellate review of. such decision, and to
reversal or remand. of suc ecis on if it improperly ,cons XYuea the
applicable law:.
Page 6 —
17
I application against the criteria in effect when the new
2 application is submitted) .
3 C . Discretion to Allow Modification
/4 While ORS 227 .178 (3) does not rega,_ire that the city allow
5 petitioners to modify their original application, and thereafter
6 review that application based on the standards in effect when
7 the original application was submitted, neither does
8 ORS 227.178 (3) or any other statutory provision or authority we
9 are aware of, F eriudP the city from doing so. Petitioners
10 argue, incorrectly, that our :decision .•in Wantland v. City of
11 Portland, Or LUBA (LUBA. No. 92-0151 June 3, 1992) ,
12 requires the city, after reversal or remand, to (1) allow the
13 original permit.- application to be amended, and (2) apply the
14 . _ criteria. that_ governed the original application. Wentland holds
15 ;.that .the city_; mav _do so, absent local, requirements to the
16 contrary; it .does , not hold that the city must_ do so. We
17 explained as follows:
18 "We * * * conclude the city did not err in failing to
19 require that a new application be filed. This
20 conclusion is •consistent with our prior cases
21 considering the effect of amendments to a permit
22 application prior to the local government's initial
23 decision on the application. In that context we have
.µ24 , held that the local government need not,. in all cases,,'
25 require that amendments to the permit application be
26 treated as new permit.. applications. .Bonner v. rity of
27 : 'Portland, 11 Or•LUBA 40, 60. (1980) ; Incg Billington v.
28' Polk cr+unty, 13 Or LUBA 1250 135-36. (1985) . -We see no. .
29 reason why a different rule should apply where the
30 modification to the permit application occurs
31 following remand *of the initial permit decision by
32 this Board. " Wentland, sj]Dra, slip op at 7-8. .
33 Turning to the city's decision in this matter, we conclude
Page 7
1 the city erroneously interpreted our decision in S111y to
2 preclude it from allowing petitioners to submit an amended
3 application and reviewing that application under the criteria in
4 existence when the original application was submitted.
5 The city's decision concludes as follows :
6 "The council, having heard the arguments by the
7 parties regarding the status of this case as a result
8 of the LUBA decision, enters this order:
9 "Because LUBA reversed this council' s previous
10 decision, approving the outline plan, the council will
11 not further consider this case or the amendment to the
12 application submitted by the applicants. The effect
13 of LUBA's "decision > is to deny `the original
14 application. If the applicants wish to proceed, they
15 must submit a new application." -Record 1. -
-16 ___Reading the second of the above 'quoted paragraphs as a
17 whole, we believe it concludes the city cannot -allow a amended
18 application and approve -that ' application ' if ' it "meets the
19 criteria in effect- when the original application was submitted.
20 Because that conclusion is erroneous, we sustain the first
21 assignment of error, in .part, and remand the city's decisions /
22 that .it .-.may- determine :7whether - it will allow an amended
y ..-
23 application or require a new applicationi6
X24 The first: assignment of error is sustained in part.
25 SECOND ASSIGNMENT 'or ERROR
26 . .. "The- City _ of -Ashland s, -decision is flawed by
27 Epro..cedural.. errors" that prejudice the substantial
28 -.rights of petitioners.! ..
6As noted"earlier in -this. opinion, we are aware of no local criteria
governing the city's decision concerning which of these options to pursue.
However, if there are such criteria, they must be complied with.
Page 8 _
1 Under this assignment of error, petitioners allege the
2 notice of the city council 's July 7, 1992 public hearing failed
3 to adequately advise them that the legal effect of this Board's
4 decision in St, lv would be decided by the city council.
5 The alleged errors in the notice are procedural errors and
6 would only provide a basis for reversal or remand if
7 petitioners ' substantial rights were prejudiced .
8 ORS 197.835 (7) (a) (B) . Although this case must be remanded in
•9 any event,' we agree with intervenors that petitioners fail to
10 demonstrate that their substantial rights .to present arguments
11 concerning the legal effect of our decision in BmJJ_ were
12 prejudiced in any way by the. alleged defects in the notice of
13 public hearing.
14' The second assignment of error is denied.
15 The city's decision is remanded.
16
Page 9
ao
1 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
2
3
4 I hereby certify that I served the foregoing Final Opinion'
5 and Order for LUBA No. 92-135, on December 4, 1992, by mailing
6 to said parties or their attorney a true copy thereof contained
7 in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid addressed to said
8 parties or their attorney as follows:
9
10 • Douglass H. Schmor
11 Brophy, Mills, et al
12 201 West Main
13 Medford,, OR . 97501
14
15 Paul Nolte
16 Ashland City Attorney
17 20 E. Main Street
18 Ashland, OR 97520
19 _
20 Daniel C. Thorndike
21 Blackhurst, . Hornecker, et al
22 129 North Oakdale -
23 Medford,:.OR -:_97501== _ _ ,_..
24
25
26 Dated this 4t4 day of December, 1992.
27
28
29
30
31
32 J Zwem}
33 fice Manager
34
� f
1136 Ril Circle
Anchorage, AK 99504
August 17, 1992
Ashland Planning Department
City of Ashland
City Hall
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Attn: John McLaughlin
Re: Ashland Decision File #87-183
The attached letter has been sent to Mayor Catherine Golden and
all members of the Ashland City Council. A copy is enclosed for,
your information.
Sincerely yours,
Gary Seitz
r�
1136 Ril Circle
Anchorage, AK 99504
August 7, 1992
Mayor Catherine Golden G pN
886 Oak St. I 1
Ashland, Oregon
Re: Ashland Decision File #87-183
This letter is in response to the Ashland City Council's decision of .
July 7, 1992, to deny the approval of our application for an
outline plan for a five-lot subdivision off of.Granite Street
We have owned this property for 18 years and plan to build a
home and live in Ashland upon retirement. Our application has
been delayed again and again because the adjoining lot owners
wish our property to continue as their private backyard. This
property is zoned residential and is within the urban growth area
of Ashland.
We have asked for no variances from the City design standards.
We have worked closely with the Ashland Planning Department
over the last four years and voluntarily incorporated additional
features into the design. These include:
(1) A reduction in the number of lots from 7 to 5 to lower
the density. The lots are now one-half acre or larger.
(2) An open space of 3 acres to be held as a common area
for the subdivision to further reduce the lot density and
enhance the development.
(3) An agreement to increase the property set-back line
from the City standard of 10 feet to 30 feet to provide more
privacy for existing homes.
(4) Generously agreed to donate approximately 14 acres
to the City of Ashland for their open space program.
(5) Agreed to to give the City an easement for a recreation
trail through the property.
Through the years we have had a good working relationship with
the Ashland Planning Department. The staff has been supportive
and helped us with our plans to make this a very nice small
subdivision. Yet at the July 7th meeting the Council ignored the
advice of both the Planning Department and the Ashland city
attorney and issued a decision that ignored the stated purpose of
the hearing.
We are disappointed and disturbed that after making the trip to
Ashland for the July hearing we were not allowed to speak before
the Council. Living so far away has been a disadvantage in
working on this project and travelling from Alaska for repetitive
hearings is expensive. Please remember that we, too, have been
taxpayers in your City for many years and as such deserve fair
and impartial consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Gary Seitz
Diane Seitz
ay
Letter also sent to members of the Ashland City Council:
Patricia Acklin
332 Bridge St.
Ashland, OR
Susan Reid
171 Granite St.
Ashland, OR
Greg Williams
744 Heiman
Ashland, OR
Rob Winthrop
347 Gutherie
Ashland, OR
Philip Arnold
300 E. Main
Ashland, OR
Don Laws
968 Hillview Dr.
Ashland, OR
as
BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS
OF THE STATE OF OREGON
GARY SEITZ AND DIANE SEITZ, )
Petitioners, ) LUBA NO. 92-135
VS. ) ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION 87-183
)
CITY OF ASHLAND, )
)
Respondent. )
RECORD
Contents of Record for Ashland Planning Action 90-057
REQUEST FOR STREET REVISIONS AND APPROVAL
OF OUTLINE PLAN FOR A FIVE-LOT SUBDIVISION.
APPLICANT: GARY AND DIANE SEITZ
Council Decision 7/15/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,Z8
-- City Council meeting minutes 7/7/1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . it?
Notice Map to surrounding property owners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Criteria for approval of Outline Plan sent with notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 /
- Memo from Paul Nolte to City Council 6/30/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Planning Department Staff Report Addendum III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
- Letter from surrounding neighbors to City Council 6/6/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 39
- Letter from Douglass H. Schmor to Paul,Nolte 5/29/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ` A
Letter from Paul Nolte to Doug Schmor and Dan Thorndike 5/21/92 . . . . yq
LUBA Decision on LUBA No. 90-144 3/12/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L(s
OVERSIZED EXHIBITS RETAINED BY THE CITY OF ASHLAND
Revised Outline Plan map indicating new street location
- Tapes of the Hearing before City Council on 7/15/92
a7
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
July 7 , 3.992
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Golden called the meeting to order and led the
Pledge of Allegiance at 7 : 30 P.M. on the above date in the Council
Chambers. Laws, Reid, Acklin, Winthrop and Arnold were present.
Williams was absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Laws moved to approve the minutes of the Regular
Meeting of June 16, 1992 , Arnold seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
CONSENT AGENDA: Reid asked that the Hospital Board minutes be pulled
for discussion. Winthrop moved to approve the remaining items as
follows: 1) Minutes of Boards, Commissions & Committees; 2) Liquor
license application for Papa D's, 1448 Ashland St. ; 3) Liquor license
application for Senor Sams, 1634 Ashland St. Laws seconded, all AYES
on voice vote. On a question from Reid, City Attorney Nolte said all
real property acquisition and sales by the Hospital Board must come
before the Council for approval. Winthrop moved acceptance of
Hospital Board minutes, Laws seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: P.A. 90-057, Street revisions & Outline Plan
approval of five-lot subdivision on Granite Street. (Gary & Diane
Seitz; Applicants) On a question from Laws, Nolte urged Council to
hear the parties on the street length issue prior to a decision on
holding the public hearing. Doug, Schmor, Attorney for the Applicants,
said LUBA's decision on this issue stated that Council incorrectly
interpreted the Ashland Land-Use Ordinance relative to the length of
the cul-de-sac; and the criteria in effect when the application was
filed should be applied. The applicant can meet the criteria by
shortening the street. Dennis Friend, 355 Granite St. , read a
statement into the record signed by the following Appellants: Dennis
& Linda Friend, Carl & Rosalie Oates, and Jean & John Sully; in which
they feel that LUBA reversed the Council's approval of P.A. 90-057, .
and a new application should be filed meeting current standards. Reid
said this is an opportunity to apply current standards to this
development, and moved to not review the application or hold the
public hearing. Winthrop seconded the motion which passed as follows
on roll call vote: Reid, Winthrop, and Arnold, YES; Laws and Acklin,
NO. Arnold moved to instruct the City Attorney to research Council's
authority to waive the one-year re-application period, and take that
action if possible. Winthrop seconded the motion which passed
unanimously on roll call vote.
P.A. 92-033, Land-Use Ordinance amendments re: E-1/C-1 zones.
Planning Dir. Fregonese reviewed the proposed changes which include. a
new Section 18. 32 . 025 for Special Permitted Uses which formerly were
conditional uses. On a question from Acklin, Fregonese said public
parking lots are conditional uses due to impacts on traffic, air
pollution, etc. Regarding Section 18 . 40. 030A. , Golden said many
bakeries make deliveries in the early hours and Winthrop asked that
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - July 7, .1992 - P. 1
a�
PUB LIC HEARING o,' , nl5:,nd:.'ie:neerdied......
FLAN by gPU 3 I'2 rj ll @Si A�'ICh 1 CSl7 eCC CO Che ASHLAND rpp�iaobl. nnurla o,: e•'nilablc tin msp ,1A1 at a eosl and will lu p...... , c awo(lhe vuffmpon•till
be ar ORDINANCE will be held before the id 'illb rovided.treasonable cost,ifrcque,
DAY materials areavailabl<atthcA haand Planning Dcpamnent,City 11.11,20 Fas CITY COUNCIL on the 7TH 11 d ott y s2o.
992 AT 7:30 P.M. ac the ASH LAND
TER, 1175 East Main Street,Ashland, During the Public Hearing.the Mayor shall allowesimony(romhcapplianta
those in attendance concern,ngthis request a Chairuted have the right to limit
i
Oregon. length of testimony and require that comma,
lN1 rfu ens,C 0i, - in This request,please feel free to
Theordinanee criteria applicable to this application are aµaahadtothis notice:Oregon If you haw ,ty,questions Ashland gent,Cl Hall,at488-5305,
law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application,either In person contact Susan Yata at the Ashland PlannmgOepanm City
or by Inver,or failure to provide sufficient specificity 10 afford the decision maker an
opportunity to respond to the issue,precludes your right of appeal to the land Use
Board ofAppeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criter ion
the objection is based on also precludes your right ofappeal to LUBA on that criterion.
i xo•vsmrr Toes rni \ ..
CM
°"
I == (DT 2 1 1
riAKxa 1
((YT 3
22.06l mn LOT 1
• 2,,aait son
4
• a140h0e WX Wax 0 WAD am
A 'M
aym ydtl"i' Aa a Mae 00M
aasuTaC 4 NaII lb aM
j ��yyi _ ar slam(00 ft 1 MIT
rMan
WAIaa1Ma6 as r a tR
sraqw V"
-- l0Q ' •.1 - ' OK W aOaD
NOMx 116
l •iS
1 T 5
♦ \�C•J•, 1116 .
�. �/ x' � • - \. .,lea r..,wax , � a .
\ 1
6 I B � `kit\ `.
PLANNING ACTION 90-057 is a request for street revisions and approval for Outline
Plan of a five-lot subdivision under the Performance Standards Option, located on
Granite Street near the intersection of Granite and South Pioneer Streets. Revision
involves change in street length to less than 500' for the new street, from Granite to end
of cul-de-sac. Applicable ordinances and criteria.in effect at the time of the original
application shall still apply. Testimony and review shall be limited to the issue of street
length and how the criteria apply to the change in street length. Comprehensive Plan
Designation: Single Family Residential, Rural Residential, Woodland Residential;
Zoning: R-1-10, RR-.5-P, WR; Assessor's Maap: 8DD; Tax Lot: 900.
.,"T Tf-ANTT'C- r;ary and Diane Seitz
CRITERIA FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it
finds the following criteria have been met:
1 ) That the development is consistent with City plans and with
the stated purpose of this Chapter of the Land Use
Development Ordinance.
Z) That the existing and natural features of the land have been
considered in the plan of the development and important '
features utilized for. open space and common areas.
3) That the development design minimizes any adverse effect on
the areas beyond the project site and that the character of
the neighborhood be considered in the design of the
development.
4) That adequate public facilities can be provided, including,
but not limited to, water, sewer, paved access to and
through the development, electricity, and urban storm
drainage.
5) That the development of the land and provision of services
sill not cause shortages of a necessary public facility in
the surrounding area, nor will the potential development of
adjacent lands be impeded.
6> That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of
open space and common areas, that if developments are done
in phases that the early phases have the same or Higher
ratio of amenities as *
in the entire. '
7) That the total energy needs of the development have been
considered and are as efficient 'as is economically feasible,
and the maximum use is made of renewable energy sources,
including solar, where practical.
8) That all other applicable City Ordinances will be met by the
proposal.
i
City Attorney
City of Ashland
(503) 482-321 1 , exi. 20
MEMORANDUM
June 30, 1992
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Paul Nolte
SUBJECT: Land use hearing scheduled for July 7, 1992
Legal status of Sully v. City of Ashland
On March 12, 1992 the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) reversed the decision of
the city which granted outline plan approval for a five-lot residential subdivision. The
reversal' by LUBA, rather than a remand, raises an issue as to the status of the case
and the criteria to be applied.
The council has been requested to review additional information submitted by the
applicant as a result of the LUBA decision. There are at least three resolutions to the
issues presented by a LUBA reversal as opposed to a remand by LUBA. Neither the
statutes nor LUBA rules define the effect of a reversal. The three resolutions are as
follows:
1. The case is ended and there is nothing for the council to consider. The
applicant must submit a new application in order for this subdivision to be considered .
by the city2.
2. The case is before the council as if the council has made no decision. The
reversal does not operate as a denial of the subdivision because there has been no
decision of denial supported by findings.
3. The revised plan is before the council as a supplementation to the
application in response to LUBA's definition of the length of a cul-de-sac.
I have advised the planning staff to use the criteria in existence at the time this
application was initially filed in evaluating the additional information submitted by the
applicant as a result of the LUBA opinion. The parties to this action•have the right and
obligation to raise other issues they believe pertinent.
' LUBA rules provide that LUBA shall reverse a land use
decision when "the decision violates a provision of applicable
Jaw and is prohibited as a matter of law. " OAR 661-10-071(1) (c)
The holding in this case was that the city's interpretation of
the length of a cul-de-sac street violated the city's ordinance.
Z . AMC §18.108. 140 requires that a denied application is hot
eligible for resubmission "for one year from date of said.
denial. "
3a
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
ADDEENDUM III
July 7, 1992
PLANNING ACTION: 90-057
APPLICANT: Gary and Diane Seitz
LOCATION: Granite Street near the intersection of Granite and South Pioneer Streets.
REQUEST: Street revisions and approval for outline Plan of a five-lot subdivision under
the Performance Standards Option, located on Granite Street near the intersection of
Granite and South Pioneer Streets. Revision involves change in street length to less than
500' for the new street, from Granite to end of cul-de=sac. Applicable ordinancbs and
criteria in effect at the time of the original application shall still apply. Testimony and
review shall be limited to the issue of street length and how the criteria apply to the
change in street length.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
This application has a very long history. The application was first
presented to the Planning Commission in April, 1990, however, the
applicant requested a one-month delay to address additional staff concerns.
A public hearing was held in May 1990, at which time the Planning
Commission approved the request, with several conditions modifying the
subdivision design.
The applicant requested a delay in the adoption of the findings to allow for
an alternative plan to be developed, encompassing the Planning
Commissions conditions, but resulting in a more efficient design. The
Planning Commission reviewed the modified design in a public hearing in
July, 1990, and adopted findings of approval in August, 1990.
The approved application was appealed by several surrounding property
owners and was heard by the City Council in September, 1990. The
Council approved the application essentially in the same form as approved
by the Planning Commission. Findings of the approval were adopted in
October, 1990.
The action was then appealed to LUBA, where in January, 1991, the
LUBA referees determined that they did not have jurisdiction over this
application, since it involved a subdivision request. Under Oregon Revised
Statutes in effect at the time, the definition of a land use decision
1'eV1eAAetb1G by LUBA CXCIudCU utWiVIS101Is. Duc to the decision, the case
was transferred to Jackson County Circuit Court.
In February, 1991, the Oregon Court of Appeals determined that LUBA
must review all challenged decisions appealed to them to determine if they
were made "consistent with land use standards." If the decision was found
to comply with standards, then LUBA would not have jurisdiction, and the
application would be transferred to a circuit court. If it were not made
consistent with the standards, then LUBA would rule on the action.
Based on this Court of Appeals decision, the Jackson County Circuit Court
referred this case to the Oregon Court of Appeals for a determination of
jurisdiction. In October 1991, the Court of Appeals determined that the
case would be transferred back to LUBA for review.
In March; 1992, LUBA reversed the decision of the City,stating that the
City erred in determining the length of,the street, basically saying that the
length of the street will include the cul-de-sac turn-around area. An
opinion by the previous City Attorney stated that the length of the street
did not include the turn-around portion. The LUBA decision only
addressed the issue of cul-de-sac length and no other issues of the
subdivision.
2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal:
The application involves a 9.58 acre parcel, which is divided by three
zoning districts. The flag drive portion of the property nearest Granite
Street is zoned R-1-10, while the area proposed for development below.the
ditch is zoned RR-.S.. The remainder of the property is zoned WR,
Woodland Resource.
The applicant is proposing a modification to the previous City approval,
which involved a 5 lot subdivision with common open space, and a
dedication to the City's open space plan of the remainder of the property
(3.86 acres) as well as the adjoining tax lot, also owned by the applicants
(9.10 acres).
This action is being brought back before the City Council, with the
applicant providing a revised plan addressing the recent LUBA decision.
On the revised plan, the new street length is shown to be 490.95', from the
edge of the.Granite Street right-of-way to the farthest point of the cut-de-
sac right-of-way. The lots have had some slight redesign to adjust to the
PA90-057 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report — Addendum III
Gary and Diane Seitz July 7,1992
�� Page 2
inUUIiICU iifCCt locatloll, but esscml:llly 'arc III alnlU,i the sallle locations.
The driveway accesses have also been slightly modified to adapt to the new
«lade changes associated with the street relocation.
The most dramatic change in the new street design is in the location of the
cul-de-sac. In order to accommodate the cul-de-sac for the shorter street,
and maintain the grade requirements, the cul-de-sac was relocated slightly
further down the hill, closer to the easterly property line of the
development.
11. Project Impact
In this portion of the history of this application, the impact review is limited to
the changes associated with the new street design. The other impact issues have
been determined to be addressed under the previous hearings and decisions.
The new location for the cul-de-sac results in it being somewhat closer to the
eastern property line of the development, and therefore closer to the existing
residences on the property between the development and Granite Street.
This new location, along with the shortened length, results in less excavation and
fill for the street than would have been required before. The main change is for
the driveways off of the end of the cul-de-sac, which had to be modified due to
the changes in grade.
Overall, the new design will have a lesser impact on the site in terms of
excavation and fill. The moving of the street somewhat closer to the eastern
property line will have little effect, due to the small number of homes accessing
off of it, and therefore very limited traffic. We believe that this modification
complies with the interpretation.advanced by LUBA, while remaining in
compliance with the criteria for approval established at the time of the original
approval by the City Council.
III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof
The criteria are those that were in effect at the time of the original approval and
are as follows:
a) That.the development is consistent with City plans and with the stated purpose of
this Chapter of the Land Use Ordinance.
PA90-057 Ashland Planning Department Staff Report — Addendum 111
Gary and Diane Seitz July 7, 1992
�5 Page 3
b) 7hui the e.iisritts and of the land have.been considered in the
plan of the development and important features utilized for open space and convnon
ruCcis.
c) That the development design minimizes any adverse effect on the areas beyond
the project site and that the character of the neighborhood be considered in the
design of the development.
d) That adequate public facilities can be provided including, but not limited to,
water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, and urban
storm drainage.
e) That the development of the land and provision of services will not cause
shortages of a necessary public facility in the surrounding area, nor will the potential
development of adjacent lands be impeded.
f) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and
common areas, that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have
the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire.
g) That the total energy needs of the development have been considered and are as
efficient as is economically feasible, and the maximum use is made of renewable
energy sources, including solar, where practical
it) That all other applicable City Ordinances will be met by the proposal
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
Staff recommends approval of the revised application will the following conditions
from the original approval:
1) That a 10' wide pedestrian easement be dedicated to the City of Ashland
along the irrigation ditch. Pedestrian easement to be shown on Final Plan and
recorded on the survey plat.
2) That building envelopes be presented on the Final Plan.
3) That all requirements of the Fire Department concerning hydrant
improvements be met.
4) — That a final erosion control plan be submitted at_the time of Final Plan,
addressing the interim and.permanent measures associated with the development
PA90-057 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report — Addendum III
Gary and Diane Seitz July 7,.1992
3� Page 4
tlIc Jl:" sirCC1, 111 i��:��-;i�-� and home cunstniction. Plan to indudc the uSe of
terracing and rock xvalls on cut slopes and netting and re-vegetation on the fill
Slopes, with provisions for irrigation and maintenance.
5) That a final tree management plan be submitted at the time of Final Plan,
addressing the removal of trees during street construction, driveway construction,
and home building. All trees outside the street right-of-way and building
envelopes shall be clearly marked on a map and on site for review and approval
by the Staff Advisor and Tree Commission. Consideration shall be given to
erosion control and wildfire potential.
6) That all new structures have non-combustible roofing material and comply
with the wildfire land requirements of 18.62.090. Such requirements to be
included in the CC&R's.
7) That all requirements of the Electric Department be met, including
locating a transformer, if required.
8) That all easements for sewer, water, electric, and slopes be provided as
required by the City of Ashland.
9) That a drainage plan be submitted for review and approval by the Public
Works Department, specifically addressing the storm water drainage.
10) That the 13.3 acres above the common open space area be dedicated to
the City of Ashland.
11) That the applicant grant the City an easement to the 13.3 acres through the
development in the vicinity of the boundary between lots 3 and 4 for maintenance
purposes only. -
r
12) That a street plug be maintained along the north side of the new street
where it abuts private property.
13) That no driveway exceed a slope of 20 percent or that stipulated by the
building code, whichever is more restrictive.
14) That the finished street grade shall be consistent with the requirements of
ALUO subsection 18.88.050(B). The Ashland Public Works Department shall
examine the engineering construction plans for the project to determine that
finished street grades are consistent with the cited standards. The grades will also
be checked and certified by the department on the site following rough grading of
PA90-057 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report —.Addendum III
Gary and Diane Seitz July 7, 1992
37 Page 5 .
the road. Costs incurred by the City to cheek sleet grades Shall he paid by the
applicant.
15) That the proposed street name be unique within the City of Ashland and
not readily confused with another street existing within the City. Such proposed
street name to be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director prior to
signature of the final survey plat of the subdivision by the City of Ashland..
PA90-0, 7 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report —.Addendum 111
Gary and Diane Seitz July 7, 1992
Q Page 6
G7 i i
June 6, 1990
File Ref . : PA 90-057 Seitz
Susan Reid -
171 Granite Street
Ashland , OR 97520
Honorable Councilman Reid :
On October 29, 1990 final approval was granted by the Ashland
City Council for Outline Plan for a five-Lot subdivision . under
the Performance Standards Option located near the intersection of
Granite Street and south Pioneer Street - Planning Action 90-057,
Seitz . That action was appealed by the undersigned to LUBA.
LUBA reversed ' the decision of the Ashland City Council on
03/12/92. Recent correspondence (copy attached) from ,ttle City
Attorney' s Office leads us to believe the Planning Actioh will
again be brought before the City Council .
The following is our position on the issue.
Ci A F2 (
rn ec�Y CovNe,� ER�oNS /tr,d
39'
e_
Statement of Facts Concerning Proposed Actions by City Council
With Regard to Petition by Seitz , et . al . - Planning Action 90-
057 .
LUBA No. 90-144 FINAL OPINION AND ORDER states in its closing:
"We agree with petitioners The assignment of error is
sustained .
THE CITY 'S DECISION IS REVERSED . " (emphasis added ) .
the City Council approved the action by the Planning Commission
on appeal . The reversal of an approval is a denial , as used in
this context . It is. NOT a remand by LUBA to the Ashland City
Council for further action .
This means that approval of Planning Action 90-057, Outlihe Plan
approval of a five-lot subdivision under the Performance
Standards Option; has been reversed/denied . The planning action
is dead , no longer exists; the same as it. would have been if the
City Council had denied it. Planning Action 90-057 should not be
before the City Council at all.
If the Intervenors-Respondents (the Seitz and their attorney) did
not agree with the LUBA decision they were entitled to judicial
review of the decision. They have not exercised that right.
PL 90-057, is a Type II Planning Action as used in Section .
18. 108.050. - Paragraph A. subparagraph 3 (AMC 18. 88) . In the
section on appeals.: . 18. 108.070, paragraph A, sub . . 3, "The
decision of the City Council shall be the final decision of the
City on appeals of all planning actions subject to the Type II
Planning Procedure. "
18. 308. 070 does not ay .that the City Council will hear and
approv s
e planning actions denied by LUBA. 90-057 is dead . Not to
recognize that fact is a defiance of the LUBA ruling.
The Seitz, for that reason, must reapply for a new planning
action, Outline Plan Approval, after one year from the date of
the ruling by LUBA. Such an application should come under the
new ordinances .and new criteria; not the old.
What the Seitzs ' attorney is asking is that the old criteria
should apply, EXCEPT for the change made for their benefit in
18 . 88.050, sub . 6: Street Standards. Dead End . This is new.
In addition , it is in conflict with other parts of the land use
ordinance regarding street design and dead end streets by the
City Attorney 's own admission . They cannot have it both ways:
the new. ordinance for the cul-de-sac and the old ordinances for
wildfire areas and street grades.
T�
( Z )
Starting over ( a new application ) means refiling with the
Planning Department with review by all City Departments,
especially the Fire Department , notification of all the
neighbors , a hearing before the Planning Commission . It does not ,
mean asking the City Council to approve the Planning Action now
before it .
If this action is approved by the City Council, WE CAN ASSURE
YOU, THE CITY COUNCIL, THE ACTION WILL BE APPEALED TO LUBA
y/
/ BROPHY. DUHAIME, MILLS. SCHMOR
GERKING & BROPHY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CA1>L M 9140n11Y PC 201 WCST MAIN - n O 80� 128 DC.1YE1 AVILS0N
WM E DUHAIME PC'
LEE A MILLS
MEDFOP0 OR 97501
'
DOUGLASS H SCHMOR .503, 772 1173
TIMOTHY C GERKING _ '- -
.-.
TIMOTHY E DROPHT May 29 , 1992 a.�
':; : - , ,5031 T
STEVEN L PATTERSON
TODD B MADDOX , p�f
Mr. Paul Nolte, City Attorney 1`11 w
City of Ashland
Ashland City Hall J
Ashland OR 97520
Re: Gary and Dianne Seitz
Dear Paul :
We are in receipt of your letter dated May 21 , 1992. We are
concerned that your letter seems to reflect some confusion on the
part of the city as to which criteria govern the application after
LUBA' s recent decision. We agree you made the correct decision in
advising the planning staff to use the criteria in existence at the
time the original application was filed.'
Because the original application was complete when originally filed
and acted upon by the city; the Seitz have a right to rely on
certainty of .approval standards as guaranteed by ORS 227. 178 (3) .
Even though the city ordinance as to the length of cul-de-sacs has
been effectively changed due to LUBA's interpretation, the city
cannot require the Seitz to submit a new application, and must
apply the criteria for approval in existence when their original
application was submitted. Kirpal Light Satsang v Douglas County,
96 Or App 207, . 212, modified on reconsideration 97 Or Ap 614 rev
den 308 Or 382 ( 1989) (Construing ORS 215.428 (3) , analog to ORS
227. 178 (3) applicable to counties) .
At most, the Seitz ' revised plan should be considered as a
supplementation or submittal of additional information in response
to LUBA's differing interpretation of the city ordinance. Had the
city properly interpreted the ordinance relating to cul-de-sacs, '
the Seitz' original application would have reflected the allowable
cul-de-.sac length. Because LUBA ruled that the city erred the .
Seitz have submitted additional information to conform to LUBA's
view of the requirements of the ordinance. Even though additional
information was effectively required and has been .submitted, the
city is still bound to apply. the approval criteria in existence at
the outset. Kirpal Light Satsang ' v Douglas County, supra.
' In your letter you also suggested that the opponents may cite ALUO
§18 . 108. 140 and argue that the Seitz may not have their application
reconsidered for a year. Such an argument would be ill advised for
two reasons . First, the ordinance on its face applies only to
T
applications "denied by the Commission or denied on appcai by the
Council" . The City of Ashland approved the application, and only
through an error in interpreting its own ordinance was the city
approval reversed . There is nothing in the ALUO to prevent or
restrict a revision or supplementation of an already approved
application in response to a reversal on appeal by LUBA, especially
when such appeal addressed only one very narrow issue in the
overall application .
Secondly:, even if the LUBA reversal could be construed as a denial
within the terms of the ordinance, the ordinance provides that
applications can be resubmitted where "evidence is submitted that
conditions, the application or the project design have changed to
an extent that further consideration is warranted" . LUBA' s .
differing interpretation of the ordinance created a situation where
further consideration of the Seitz' application is warranted .
We are sending the authorities cited in this letter to confirm your
decision to advise the planning staff to use the criteria in
existence at the time the Seitz filed their application.
Very truly yours,
BROPHY, DUHAIME, MILLS, SCHMOR
GERKING & BROPHY
Douglass H. Schmor
DHS: jmj
cc : Dan Thorndike
Gary and Dianne Seitz
Dale Hofer
y3
CITY OF ASHLAND ` p CITY . HAL
ASHLAND.OREGON 97520
tl'-P rw Ike 5071 492-7211
May 21, 1992
Douglass H. Schmo�
/DI , DU IA ME, MILLS, SCHMOR
G BROPHY
'
R 97501
horndikc
RST, HORNECKER, HASSEN &
DIKE& ERVIN B. HOGAN.
dale, Suite 1
R 97501
As you know LUBA on March 12, 1992, reversed the decision of the Ashland City Council in the case of
Sully v. City of Ashland, LUBA No. 90.144. On May 5, 119' Gary and Diane Seitz submitted a revised
outline plan representing that the revised plan,conforms with the LUBA decision.
A public hearing before the City Council will be scheduled to determine the ap.propriatc action to be taken
by the City as a result of the LUBA decision and the riling of the revised outline plan. Because LUBA
chose to reverse the decision of the council, rather than remand, the criteria for approval of the revised plan
are in dispute. 1 anticipate that the applicant will maintain that the criteria for this decision are the same as
thou for the initial application, as applied only to those.limited changes indicated in the revised outline plan.
I anticipate that the opponents will maintain that this is a new application and therefor the criteria in
existence at the-time the revised plan was submitted apply. In addition,the opponents may maintain that the
revision may not be fled at this time because ALUO §18.108.140 requires that a denied application is not
eligible for resubmission.'for one year from date of said denial.' I am sure other issues will be raised by
both sides as well.
In order to gel this matter at issue so that the council is in a position to make a decision, I.have advised the
planning staff to use the criteria in existence at the time the original application was filed as the applicable
criteria for the hearing to be scheduled before the council. When the hearing date is determined, all parties
will be formally notified of the hcaringand the criteria.
Paul Nolte
City Attorney
:John MacLaughlin
yy ,,�
1 BEFORE THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS A'D US
3 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 9 27 4� '92
JOHN SULLY, JEAN SULLY, CARL - )
5 OATES, ROASALIE OATES, DENNIS )
6 FRIEND, LINDA FRIEND, BRAD )
7 LAVINE and CAROL LAVINE, )
8 )
9 Petitioners, ) LUBA No. 90-144
10 )
11 Vs. ) FINAL OPINION
12 ) AND ORDER
13 CITY OF ASHLAND, )
14 )
15 Respondent, )
16 )
17 and )
18 )
19 GARY SEITZ and DIANE SEITZ, )
20 )
21 Intervenors-Respondent. ")
22
23
24 Appeal from.City of Ashland.,
25
26. Daniel C. Thorndike, Medford, filed the petition for review
27 and argued on behalf of petitioner. - . With him on the brief was
28 Blackhurst, Hornecker., ..Hassen .& Thorndike Ervin B. Hogan. .
29
30 No- appearance by respondent.
31
32 Douglas H. Schmor, .Medford, ...filed -the .response brief and
33 argued on behalf of intervenors-respondent. With him on the.
34 brief was Brophy,. Duhaime, Mills;':Schmo
35 r,_ Gerking & Brophy. .
36 HOLSTUN, Chief Referee; SHERTON, ' Referee; KELLINGTON, .
37 Referee, participated in the decision.
38
39 REVERSED 03/12/92
40
41 You are entitled. to judicial review of this Order.
42 Judicial review is governed by the provisions of ORS 197.850.
� . P
Page
y5 -
I Opinion by Holstun .
7 NATURE OF THE DECISION
3 Petitioners appeal a city decision granting outline plan
4 approval for a five-lot residential subdivision located within .
5 the city's acknowledged urban growth boundary.
6 MOTION TO INTERVENE
7 Gary Seitz and Diane Seitz, the applicants below, move to
8 intervene on the side. of respondent . There is no opposition to
9 the motion, and it is allowed.
10 JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
11 In Sully v. City of Ashland, Or LUBA (LUBA No.
12 90-144, January 31, 1991) (Sully i) , we determined that because
13 the challenged decision ' granting subdivision outline plan
14 approval simply applies existing land use regulations and does
15 not amend the plan or land use regulations or. grant variances or
16 approval for other actions modifying or amending standards
17 governing the subdivision approval decision, we lacked
18 jurisdiction under former ORS 197.015(10)_ (b) (B) .1 In accordance
TORS 197.825(1) limits our jurisdiction to "land use decisions." prior
to its amendment in 1991, ORS 197.015(10) (b) (B) provided that land use
decisions do not include local government decisions which approve or deny
^a subdivision * * * located within an urban growth boundary where
dor.4slon is consistent with land use standards (._)^ (Emphasis added.)
Prior to our decision in u ly L we had construed the emphasized language
in ORS 197.015(10) '(b) (B) not to require that we review a challenged urban
land division on the merits for consistency .with land use standards to
determine whether we have jurisdiction. Instead, . we interpreted that
language to limit our. jurisdiction to cases where the applicable plan or
land use regulations were being amended or modified in some way. SAe
Bart la v 6 r4ty of Portland. -Or, LUBA - (LUBA No. 90-111, December 3,
1990}; :Sout_hifgod Ho .owners Assoc, v. City of Philomath, Or LUBA
(LUBA' No. 90-103, November 15, 1990) , 'rev'd 106 Or App 21 (1991).; Roffman
Page. 2
�p
T�
I with ORS 19 . 230 and OAR 661-10-075 (10) , we ,:_ansferred this
2 appeal to the Jackson County Circuit Court on January 31, 1991 ,
3 On February 21, 1991, in Southwood Homeownpars v r • t-
9 Cotn .il of Philometh, 106 Or App 21, 806 P2d 162 (1991) , the
5 Court of Appeals determined this Board incorrectly, interpreted
6 former ORS 197 . 015 (10) (b) (B) and that LUBA must review
7 . . challenges of urban land division decisions on the merits' to
8 make the jurisdictional determination, i ,e . , whether. the
9 challenged decision was made "consistent with land use
10 standards." In SOHthwoOd, the Court of Appeals determined that .
11 if we conclude the challenged decision is not consistent with
12 land use standards we are to reverse or remand the decision; if
13 we determine the challenged decision is consistent with land use
14 standards, we are to transfer the decision to circuit court
15 pursuant to ORS 19.230.
-16 On July. 12, 1991, the. Jackson County Circuit Court referred
17 this case to the Court of Appeals for a determination of
18 Jurisdiction n-pursuantto ORS 119:230.(5). On October 2, 1991, the
19 Court of Appeals determined that the circuit court had authority
20 to transfer this case back to LUBA to determine whether the
21 decision is consistent with .land use standards. The circuit
22 court transferred the record to LUBA on November 22, 1991 and
23 oral argument was held 'February 6, 1992. -
v- �` v of rakp nampao• Or LUBA _- (LUBA No. -90-067, September 26,
1990); 2ieadowbronk `nev opment v ' C'ty of Sp^aidp Or LUBA (LUBA
No. 90-060, September 18, 1990) ; Rprmenfer v wall count , 19 Or LUBA
271 (1990) .
Page-3
1. For the reason c>:pl.ained below, the challenged decision is
2 inconsistent. with applicable land use standards and, therefore,.
3 subject to our jurisdiction.
4 FACTS
5 The subdivision challenged in this appeal creates,- a new
6 cul-de-sac street, Diane ' s Hill Street . 2 The Diane' s Hill
7 Street right of way begins at Granite Street, which provides the
8 only access to Diane's Hill Street. The sole dispute in this
9 appeal is whether Diane's Hill" Street exceeds the .500 foot
10 length limitation imposed by Ashland Land Use Ordinance..(ALUO)
11 18 .8Q.020 (11) and 18.88.050 (A) (6) . If those ALUO provisions
12 require that the turnaround portion of cul-de-sacs be included
13 for purposes of calculating the length of the cul-de-sacs, as
14 petitioners argue, Diane's Hill Street. is longer than 500 feet.
15 However, if, as the city found, the turnaround portion of a
16 cul-de-sac is excluded for purposes of computing the length of
17 the cul-de-sac, Diane's Hill Street is less than 500 feet long.3
zA cul-de-sac is a deadend street with a vehicular turnaround at the end
of the street.
3The city found that the consequence of shortening the cul-de-sac so
that it would comply with the 500 foot length limitation (regardless of how
the relevant ALUO sections are correctly interpreted) would be that the
turnaround portion of the street would .bee .located on much steeper slopes,
making construction more ' difficult, expensive and potentially . more
environmentally damaging. Petitioners do not dispute the accuracy of that
finding. However, they point out that the difficulty, expense and
potential environmental problems of complying with the relevant ALUO
provisions does not provide a basis for violating those ALUO provisions if
petitioners' interpretation of those provisions is correct. Petitioners
contend a variance is required if the city wishes to approve a cul-de-sac
violating the requirements of ALUO 18.80.020(11) and 18.88.050(A) (6) .
Page. 4
1 ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
2 "The City of Ashland erred in determining that the
3 proposed street does not exceed the 500 feet maximum
4 length under [ALUO ] 18 . 80 . 020 ( 11 ) and
5 18 . 88 . 050 (A) (6) . "
6 ALUO 18 . 08 . 700 defines cul-de-sac street as " [a) short
7 dead-end street terminated . by a vehicle turnaround . ^
8 ALUO 18 . 80 . 020 (11) provides the following limit on the
9 permissible length .of cul-de-sacs:
10 "A cul-de-sac shall be as short as possible and shall
11 have a maximum length of five hundred feet. All
12 cul-de-sacs shall terminate with a circular turnaround
13 unless alternate designs for turning and revefs2�ng
. 14 direction are approved by the Planning Commission. "
15 The parties' agree the challenged subdivision was properly
16 considered under the performance standards applicable. to planned
17 unit developments under ALUO chapter 18. 88 . ALUO 18 .88.050
18 establishes the following street standards for planned unit
19 developments:
20 "A. Street Types
21 "*
22 "6. Dead End. Only lanes may be dead end
23 roads. No dead end road shall exceed 500
24 feet in length. Dead end roads must
25 terminate in an improved turnaround as
26 defined in the Performance Standards
27 guidelines as provided in Section
28 18.88.090.
29
30 ALUO 18.88;090(A) provides that the city council may adopt
31 guidelines for .PUDs including " (m]inimum standards for
32 turnaround and other street standards * * * . " Intervenors-
Page 5
I respondent attach to their brief minimum turnaround standards,
2 which apparently have been adopted by the city pursuant to
3 ALUO 18 . 88 .090 (A) . Under those standards a cul-de-sac may be
4 terminated in a hammerhead shaped turnaround (resulting in a
5 cul-de-sac that resembles a croquet mallet) , a conventional
6 circular turnaround (resulting in a cul-de-sac that resembles a
7 tennis racquet) or a rectangular turnaround at a right angle to
8 the cul-de-sac (resulting . in a cul-de-sac that resembles a golf
9 club or a hockey stick, depending on the length of the
10 rectangular turnaround) .4
11 As an' Anitial . point, we are ' aware ..of no statutory,
12 administrative rule or statewide planning goal requirement that
13 cul-de-sacs be limited to 500 feet or that the city impose any
14 limitation on the length of cul-de-sacs. Therefore, if the city
15 ' wishes to impose a limitation on the length of. cul-de-sacs; it
16 is also within the city's discretion to establish in its land
17 use regulations how the limitation is to be calculated. If the
18 city.. explicitly provides,.. in :its code where to begin and where to
19 stop measuring, the length `of a cul-de-sac, this Board likely
20 would be bound to give effect to such provisions.5 However,
4Both the circular and rectangular turnarounds may have parking spaces
in the center of the turnaround. As We understand the city's, minimum
standards, ',there: is no maximum limitation on the length of the parking area
included within a. 'rectangular turnaround, so the effective total length of
such a cul-de-sac (including the turnaround) could. significantly exceed'500
feet from the beginning of the cul-de-sac.
51n fact, after the decision challenged in this appeal was adopted and
appealed to this Board, the city apparently amended ALVO 18.88.050(A) (6) ,
but not ALUO 18.80.020(11) , to .explicitly provide that the turnaround
Page 6
50
I where, as here, the applicable land use regulations do not
2 explicitly provide how to measure the length of a cul-de-sac,
` 3 we, like the city, must make that determination applying the '
4 land use regulations as they are written and applying. the plain
5 and ordinary meaning of the operative term "length. " SPe Sarti
6 v. C;tv cif iakP 04APQn, 106 Or App 594, 597, 809 P2d 701 (1991)
7 In reaching its conclusion that the allowable length of a
8 deadend street is measured under the ALUO by excluding the
9 turnaround portion of the deadend street, the city relied on an
10 opinion of the city attorney. That opinion first observes that
11 the question is properly decided by the language of. the ALUO ;
12 rather than by "previous decisions of LUBA or the Courts . "
13 Intervenors-Respondent 's Brief Appendix C. For the reasons
14 explained above, we agree with that observation: The opinion
15 then quotes ALUO 18:80.020 (11) , and concludes that the language
16 of that section, viewed by itself, suggests that the 500 foot
17 limit 1nc1 ,d2s the turnaround. As explained below, we agree
Portion of a cul-de-sac is excluded in applying the 500 foot limitation.
If, at the time the subject application was filed, the ALUO explicitly
Provided that in calculating the 500 foot cul-de-sac length limitation the
turnaround is not considered, the city's decision would be affirmed..
However, the ALUO provisions applicable to the challenged decision are
those that were in effect when the subject application was filed, not
subsequently amended ALUO provisions. ORS 227.178(3); xi rna T. qht a-tsano
y'Dnugl a9 County, 97 Or App 614, 616-17, 776 P2d 1312 r
den(1989) . . v den 308 Or 382
Intervernora-respondent attach to their brief code sections from other
Jurisdictions that take different approaches in measuring the length, of
cul-de-sacs. Although none of those code sections explicitly provide that
in .measuring the. length of a cul-de-sac the turnaround portion of the
cul-de-sac is to'be 'excluded, we see no reason why a local government could
not explicitly provide that the length be calculated in. that manner.
Page 7
5/
1 with that conclusion as well . The .opi.nion then notes that while
2 ALUO 18 . 80 . 020 (11) was adopted in 1980, the standards for
3 turnarounds adopted by the city pursuant to ALUO 18 .88. 090 were
4 not adopted until 1989 . In view of these separately and
5 subsequently adopted standards for cul-de-sac turnarounds, the
6 opinion concludes cul-de-sacs terminate at the bgginnina of the
7 turnaround and do not include the turnaround for purposes of
8 applying the .500 foot length limitation imposed by ALUO
9 18 .80 . 020(11) and 18 .88.050 (A) (6) . The city adopted this
10 interpretation in the challenged decision.
11 Petitioners argue there is simply no sufficient basis in
12 the relevant ALUO language for excluding the turnaround portion
13 of a cul-de-sac from the 500 foot length limitation, and contend
14 the city erred in .doiag so in this case. Petitioners' argument
15 is strengthened in our view by the fact that the turnaround is
16 certainly part of the cul-de-sac right of way, .and nothing in
17 the ALUO explicitly provides that the portion of the right of
18 way occupied:by-:the turnaround is to be treated differently from
19 the rest of the right of. way. Again, while .we see no reason why
20 the city may not amend the ALUO specifically to provide that the
21 turnaround portion of a . cul-de-sac right of way is to be
22 excluded from the length limitation, the question is whether the .
23 applicable ALUO provisions do so as written.
24 It is possible to construe the language in ALUO 18.08.700
25 defining cul-de-sac as a road "terminated hy- .a vehicle
26 turnaround" as providing it is the turnaround that terminates.
Page 8
1 ( i . n _ ends) the cul-de-sac for purposes of measurino the 500
2 foot limitation_ To the extent such a construction is possible,
3 it supports the city ' s interpretation. However, the city did
4 not base its decision on this language of ALUO 18 . 08 . 700, and
5 the limitation imposed by ALUO 18 .80 .020 (11) and 18 .88.050 (A) (6)
6 suggests a contrary conclusion. ALUO 18 . 80 .020 (11) requires
7 that cul-de-sacs "shall terminate with a circular turnaround
8 unless alternate designs * * * are approved" and ALUO
9 18 .88.050 (A) (6) requires that deadend roads "terminate in an
10 improved turnaround . * * *. " We believe that in deternidAing the
11 length of a ,street that terminates "with" or terminates "in" a
12 turnaround, the turnaround portion of the street must be
13 included. .
14 The city's contrary decision relies on the city attorney's
15 opinion, which assigns determinative weight to the fact adoption
16 of the minimum standards for turnarounds postdated the 500 foot
17 limit on cul-de-sacs provided by ALUO 18 . 80 . 020 (11) and
18 18.88.050 (A) (6) . We fail to see how the timing of the city's .
19 adoption of such minimum standards for turnarounds is relevant,
20 much less determinative. Presumably, prior to adoption of these
21 standards, circular, hammerhead and rectangular turnarounds all
22 were permissible, and the dimensions of the turnaround were not
23 directly limited. As we understand petitioners' argument, prior
. 24 to the city's adoption of minimum standards for turnarounds, a.
25 cul-de=sac could employ a turnaround of whatever shape or
26 dimension a developer wished, so long as the 500 foot total
Page, 9
53
1 length limitation on the street right of way was not exceeded.
2 We understand petitioners to argue the same is true under the
3 minimum turnaround standards adopted pursuant to ALUO 18 .88.090,
9 except that in addition to the 500 foot total cul-de-sac
5 limitation,_ the minimum turnaround dimensions must be :observed
6 and included within the 500 foot total cul-de-sac limitation. 6
7 We agree with petitioners that under the relevant ALUO
8 provisions, excluding the turnaround portion of a cul-de-sac
9 right of way from the 500 foot length limitation is unreasonable
10 and .incorrect. The language of the ALUO provides no basis for
11 making such • a distinction, and the city's decision to the
12 contrary is erroneous. The city may amend the ALUO to achieve
13 that result, but it may not do so by interpreting the relevant
14. - code language in a manner contrary to its plain and -ordinary
15 meaning. A cul-de-sac street is generally understood to
16 continue to the end of whatever turnaround is provided; it is
17 not generally understood to end at the point the right of way
18 begins to widen to accommodate' the -turnaround.
19 The assignment of error is sustained.
20 The city's decision is reversed.
21
6A noted above at n 5, ALUO 18.88.050(A) (6) was -amended after the
subject application was filed, and we express' no position concerning the
correct manner of measuring- the length of cul-de-sacs in planned unit
developments under current ALUO provisions.
Page, 10
61
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I certify that on August 10, 1992 , I served a true and correct
copy of this Record of Proceedings by first class mail on the
following persons:
Douglass H. Schmor, Attorney
Brophy, Mills, Schmor, Gerking & Brophy
Attorneys at Law
201 West Main
P.O. Box 128
Medford, OR 97501
John and Jean Sully
Dennis and Linda Friend
Carl and Rosalie Oates
c/o Carl and Rosalie Oates
776 Glendale Avenue
Ashland, OR 97520
Dated August 10, 1992 rp' � r•
Paul Nolte, OSB 69129
City Attorney
City of Ashland
20 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
(503) 482-2441, Ext. 59
(s:\seitz.cos)
`{0F4ASH4y" Hemorandnm
ry
OREGO,,'
March 2, 1993
0: Ashland City Council
ram Ashland Planning Commission
,$11UjCCt: Affordable Housing
On January 12, 1993,the Planning Commission reviewed and prioritized projects for the Planning
Department for the coming year. At that meeting,the issue of Affordable Housing was prioritized as
number 6 out of 7 top projects. The following recommendations regarding affordable housing were
discussed.
The Planning Commission resolved to recommend to the City Council that they appoint an ombudsperson
for a part time position assisting with affordable housing. The Commission recommends that the position
could be funded with monies from the Park Place (Garfield Street) affordable housing project.
The ombudsperson could assist in affordable housing grant preparation, assisting citizens in
obtaining/developing affordable housing and also act as a centralized contact person for the city regarding
affordable housing issues.
The Commission also recommends that the Affordable Housing Committee be ro-formed to function as an
advisory body encouraging affordable housing within Ashland on an on-going basis.
The Commission respectfully recommends that the Council carefully consider these recommendations and
take appropriate actions regarding their implementation.
i
February 26, 1993
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council
FROM: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Monthly=Report - February 1993
The following is a report of my principal activities for the
past month, and a status report on the various City projects and
Council goals for 1992-93 .
I. PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES:
1. A major amount of my time this past month was spent in
meetings with Department Heads and the Finance Director reviewing
and modifying the budgets of various departments and Funds.
2 . Met with Midge Mauer regarding the preparation of a plan
, to install automatic irrigation in the Siskiyou Blvd. islands and
to remove the underlying asphalt. She will prepare a cost
estimate for her services. The long-range plan is to tie into the
Parks Department's system to save water.
3 . Met with Gary Brown, Steve Hall, and Keith Woodley to
consider the effects of bus parking on Hargadine. Agreed that
this should be addressed by the Traffic Safety Commission.
4. Met with French Sister City subcommittee and OSFA to
discuss upcoming exchange of Artistic Directors with Sarlat.
5. Attended monthly meeting of Cable Access Commission. The
principal topic of discussion was the utilization of the three
new access channels which should be operational by. March 1.
6. Met with architect Gary Afseth to discuss the development
of a phasing plan and cost estimates for office addition at Civic
Center.
7. Jill Turner and I met with officials of Ashland Community
Hospital and the Foundation to discuss bonding alternatives for
the proposed congregate care facility on North Main Street.
8. Met with Consultant Henry Richter, Chief Brown, Linda .
Hoggatt and Capt.Bernard, along with the City Managers and Police
Chiefs of Medford and Central Point to discuss findings and
recommendations on study of radio and communications
alternatives.
9 . Met with Public Works and Parks to discuss ODOT's
proposed realignment of Highway 66 at Crowson. Agreed that plan
was unacceptable and to request Traffic Safety to study a request
to the State Speed Control Board to reduce speed limit from 55 to
40 MPH from Golf Course, entrance, Southerly.
10. Met with Ben Benjamin to discuss his suggested
compromise to the proposed Hospital Care zone, which was to limit
the zone to the Hospital campus only. Suggested that he first
review the findings and then decide whether his stated intent to
file a LUBA appeal would be viable.
z 11. Participated in conference call regarding Cooper- .lawsuit
between our attorneys, and City Attorney Paul Nolte under a
settlement conference ordered by Federal Judge Michael Hogan in
Eugene.
12 . Attended annual Council .Goal-setting session facilitated
by Dr.Jonathan Lange at Carpenter Hall.
13. Met with City Attorney, Public Works Director and two
members of Airport_ Commission to establish final requirements for
land lease proposals for hangars. These proposals should be on
the March 16' Council agenda.
14 . Attended meeting of SOSC Ed-net Committee to discuss
proposed use of three new access channels and possible
coordination with Ed-net.
15. Al Williams and I had breakfast with BPA officials on
the morning following the open house regarding substation site
alternatives. They have virtually eliminated the City Yard site
due to recent Council action to locate the bikeway on the West
side of the railroad through the site.
16. Attended two hour live show at Cable Access to celebrate
the third anniversary of the station.
17. Attended first meeting of the Research Committee of the
Rogue Valley Civic League and agreed to serve as liaison to a
special committee which will be evaluating the alternatives for
community college services in the Rogue Valley.
18 . Attended public hearing on Airport Master Plan.
19. Met with Budget Committee Chair John Riordan to discuss
budget process and Economic Development Subcommittee
responsibilities.
STATUS OF VARIOUS CITY PROJECTS:
1. Electric Substation. BPA conducted a second open house
on February 15 to allow residents to review alternate sites
proposed by residents since January 25 meeting. The Council's
recent decision to locate a bike way through the yard may
eliminate the City site as an option. BPA is awaiting some
direction from the City.
2 . Downtown Project. Completed, except for remaining island
and Holiday tree in front of City Hall. Bid was awarded on
January 15. After handicapped ramps are finished, the island
will be installed which will take about thirty days to complete.
3 . Northwest Water Project. Construction on the pipeline is
now complete. The bid for the reservoir on Hitt Road was awarded
this week and came in within budget. Work could begin as early as
April of this year.
4 . Open Space Program. Council adopted prepared food and
beverage proposal to place on March 23 ballot at its January 19
meeting.
5. Digester Roof. Construction is nearly complete.
6. Tolman Traffic Signal. The bid has been awarded and
construction should begin at any time. Completion is still
expected around the first part of April.
7 . Wetlands Study. The consultant has begun work on the
study, commencing with a community work session on January 27.
We are on a very tight time schedule to meet our July 1 deadline.
8. Forest Fire Management Project. Parks has agreed to
supervise project work recommended by McCormick & Assoc. Work on
this project has been completed for this year. Additional work is
scheduled for next Winter which will complete the recommended
project list from McCormick and Associates.
9 . Capital Improvement Plan. The draft plan was delivered
to the Council on January 29. We need to schedule a study
session to begin our review of the plan.
III. STATUS OF COUNCIL GOALS:
A report was presented at the Council Goal-setting session. The
next report will be prepared in April.
Brian L. Alm st
City Adminis rat
BA:ba
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION ON MAY 18, 1993, IN THE CITY OF ASHLAND FOR
THE PURPOSES OF SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY A MEASURE FOR A THREE-YEAR
SERIAL TAX RATE LEVY TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE
CITY SWIMMING POOL PROGRAM AND RECREATION FACILITIES; WITH THE LEVY TO BE ASSESSED
BEYOND THAT NOW AUTHORIZED BY ARTICLE XI, SECTION 11, OF THE OREGON CONSTITUTION.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASHLAND AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A Special Election is called to be held in the city of Ashland, Oregon, on May 18, 1993, at
which election there shall be referred to the voters for their adoption or rejection the following proposed
measure:
CAPTION: THREE-YEAR SWIMMING POOL AND RECREATION FACILITY MAINTENANCE
SERIAL LEVY.
QUESTION: Shall Ashland levy 8e per thousand dollars assessed value to operate swimming
pool programs and maintain recreation facilities beginning 1993-1994?
EXPLANATION: This measure authorizes a maximum levy of eight cents (8¢) per thousand
dollars of true cash value of taxable property to permit swimming pool program
fees to be at a reasonable rate and to provide maintenance of recreation
facilities. It is estimated that a levy of 80 per thousand dollars of assessed value
would provide $63,000 in 1993-94, $66,800 in 1994-95, and $72,200 in 1995-96.
The tax levy is subject to the other governmental limits of Section 11 b, Article XI,
of the Oregon Constitution.
SECTION 2. The city recorder is requested and directed to give due notice of such special election as
provided in the laws of the State of Oregon and the charter and ordinances of the City of Ashland,
Oregon.
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 1993.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1993.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
R iewed as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
PAGE 1-RESOLUTION (p:o \Pnmmn.Pa )
t
`��•Of ASH Y -
Pmorandum
'..OREGOa:
25 February 1993
ZBrian Almquist, Steve Hall, Dennis Barms, John McLaughlin
D:
ram: James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer
pUFjPtt: Proposed North Mountain Avenue Sanitary Sewer L.I.D.
Mrs. Madeline Hill delivered a petition to the Engineering Office on Friday, 19
February 1993, requesting that a local improvement district be formed to provide sanitary
sewer services to the area of North Mountain Avenue, north of Bear Creek.
NATURE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
The proposed sanitary sewer system would include approximately 780 linear feet of
sewer in N. Mountain Avenue, beginning 575 north of Bear Creek, and extending to the top
of the N. Mountain Avenue grade. Additional lines would run in Nevada Street from N.
Mountain Avenue to Bear Creek and also along Bear Creek just outside of the platted flood
way. A pump station would be required at Nevada Street to pump the flow to the existing
Bear Creek Trunk Line on the west side of the creek. Numerous easements would be
required and we have received written agreements from the property owners that these would
be provided without cost to the City or to the L.I.D. (copies attached).
PROPOSED L.I.D. COSTS
The proposed sanitary sewer system would serve 12 tax lots totaling 62.8 acres of
land.
Preliminary engineering has been provided by Marquess & Associates as has the
preliminary cost figures. It is estimated that the improvements will cost $336,855.13
including engineering services (by Marquess & Associates) at $39,500.00, City costs at
$12,067.50 and a 15 percent contingency factor of$43,937.63. Contract costs are estimate
at $241,350.00.
It is the general consensus of the L.I.D. ownership that the cost be assessed based
upon area in the following manner = $336,855.13 _ 62.82 acres = $5,362.23 per acre.
The attached sheet lists the proposed cost per each of the lots in the district. Based upon an
area assessment, the smallest assessment would be $3,646.32 while the largest would be
$827417.48.
PETITION RESULTS
The petitions represent 100% of the assessment area. While several lots could
actually receive benefits from the sewer construction, they have not been forced into the
proposed L.I.D. Only those persons wishing to be included in the L.I.D. have been and all
12 lots in the assessment area are included at their option.
There are three residences located on lots 4AC - 200, 4AC - 300, and 4DB - 200
which are outside of the assessment district boundary, but may be within 100 feet of the
sewer main. Section 14.08.020D states that residences within 100 feet of a sewer main shall
be required to connect to the system within 6 months of the date of installation. It may be
well to discuss this situation further, perhaps at the public hearing to determine if these
residences can be exempted from these requirements.
ACTION REQUESTED
Can this proposal be placed on the 2 March 1993 Council Agenda to set a public
hearing date? The following information is provided:
1. copy of petitions
2. preliminary cost estimate
3. copy of agreements to grant easements
4. estimated cost per lot
5. map of preliminary.sewer layout
6. map of L.I.D. boundary
7. list of ownership for notification
JHO:ratvmamt.aew
25 February 1993-2 of 3 -
Proposed North Mountain Avenue Sanitary Sewer L.I.D.
City of Ashland
Department of Public Works - Engineering Division
Estimated Cost per Lot for:
North Mountain Avenue Sewer L.I.D.
Map No. Lot No. Owner Area (acres) Unit Cost Total Cost
39-1E-4AC 400 Harper 9.63 $5,362.23 $51,638.27
39-1E-4AC 401 Cislo 0.68 $5,362.23 $3,646.32
39-1E-4AC 500 White 0.73 $5,362.23 $3,914.43
39-1E-4AC 501 White . 2.00 $5,362.23 $10,724.46
39-1E-4AC 600 Johnson 0.95 $5,362.23 $5,094.12
39-1E-4AC 700 White 3.85 $5,362.23 $20,644.59
39-1E-4AC 800 Quinn 2.00 $5,362.23 $10,724.46
39-1E-4AC 900 Conrad 14.00 $5,362.23 $75,071.22
39-1E-4AC 901 Conrad 2.16 $5,362.23 $11,582.42
39-1E-4AD 200 Hill 15.37 $5,362.23 $82,417.48
39-1E4DA 100 Hill 6.45 $5,362.23 $34,586.38
39-1E-4DB 100 Hart/Todd 5.00 $5,362.23 $26,811.15
TOTAL 62.82 $336,855.30
7NO:ralnmwntaew
25 Febnury 1993-3 of 3
Propored North Mountain Avenue Sanitary Sewer L.I.D.
Ashland , Or 97520
F eY`r ua__ 25 ,
to : City of Ashland
re : Proposed Sewer LTD
North Mountain Avenue area
Prelim Sewer Layout map of 2/10/93
Enclosed are original signed petitions (three pages) for a sewer
Local Improvement District to service 62 . 82 acres of private
property or. both sides of North Mountain Avenue within the city
limits of Ashland.
This L . I .D. request is being initiated by one hundred percent
(100%) of the property owners within the proposed L. I .D.
Boundaries are outlined on the Preliminary Sanitary Sewer Layout
map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled "Revision #1
dated 2/10/93" (copy enclosed) .
A "Preliminary Cost Estimate" of $336 , 855 . 13 was prepared by Dale
Hofer of Marquess & Associates , Inc . , consulting engineers (copy
enclosed) . The estimate is dated 2/10/93 .
A detailed list of tax lot numbers , acres/tax lot and owner names
is also enclosed. An updated list of owner names , addresses and
phone numbers has been provided fo the City of Ashland
Engineering Department.
All property owners have indicated their intention to grant
easements , at no charge, for sewer lines and related equipment .
Original signatures are enclosed from 100% of the property. owners
for these easements (eight owners , eight pages) .
Please note that the owners of five tax lots which adjoin (but
are outside the boundaries) of our proposed L . I .D. are still
considering the option of participating. In the event that the
owners of any of these five tax lots sign in favor of the sewer
L. I .D. between now and the evening of the City Council Public
Hearing, you should know that we do have separate engineering
cost estimates and a separate sewer layout map that includes
these five tax lots . We of course hope that one or more of these
property owners will decide to join with us , but be assured that
we intend to proceed with or without them. The five tax lots are
39-1E-4AC tax lots 100 , 200 , 300 and 39-1E-4DB tax lots 200 and
300 . Your city engineering department has indicated that
official notification of the L . I . D. public hearing will be mailed
to the owners of these five tax lots , so that timely official
notification requirements will be me*_ if they do decide to
participate.
It is cur hope --ha_ the Ashland City Council ail : ccnsider our
request at the1: meecing or March 2nd, and that the Council Wi '_ '_
hold the Public Hearing during their meeting of March 15th.
According to City Engineering , such a project needs extensive
lead time if we are to finish the work before winter weather sets
i:i. if the Public Hearing is held on March 16Th, it will still
be possible to do the work during 1993 .
Thank you for your assistance with this matter .
Signed by Madeline Hill for:
Richard and Roberta Harper
Peter and Deborah Cislo
Dan and Charlotte White
Robert and Florence Johnson
Kelly and victoria Quinn
Hunton and Sheila Conrad
Madeline and Hunter Hill
Dorothy Todd
copies to:
Marvin & Mary Jeska (tax lot 4AC-300 )
Marianne L Beagle trust ( tax lots 4AC-200 and 4DB-200 & 300)
Billie Jean Fetz , Marianne Nelso & Sally Price (tax lot 4AC-100 )
PETITION FOR SEWER SERVICE
LOCATION : North Mountain Avenue area within city limits
SUBJECT : Forming a Local Improvement District for the
installation of City Sewer to our properties
We the undersigned property owners in the North Mountain Avenue
area hereby request that the City of Ashland help us form a Local
Improvement District for the installation of City Sewer to our
properties . We request that allocation be based on potential pe-r-
lot basis congruent with current zoning. We are the owners of
the real property within the boundaries of the proposed LID area .
PROPERTY OWNER(S ) SIGNATURE TAX LOT (s )
�� - ----- -------------------------�'�
--
h`
- ---------------------------- ��- - - -°--°---
YAK Y-°-L----
--------- -/
LOAA c..�L c� —----------------- `L
----- --- 39a lE- Os '� -acx9
_
3y - Ix- ay
------------------------ ��_=
� � 3-R= aY_C�0_
3q - i �- oy - c - Sp0
__fLL Z6Cr hr�-- --- ----------------------------------
------ - -4z ------- 3-g=-F =oY_ J) B _/DO
-- -- -- - - ------------- -�_� -C9
-- -----
- -----------------------SJ(^' ---------------
----- d
-------------------------------------------------------------=---
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or
purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of
real property within the boundaries of the proposed Local
Improvement District . If title to any parcel is in the of
two or more persons, all must sign . When signing, use , u11=u
as it appears on the records of ownership. X\��W
FEB 1993 Z\.
Fs3� K �a
Ef.',�1aEC!;1 Div.
If
•tea.-, _ _.
PETITION FOR SEWER SERVICE
LOCATION : North Mountain Avenue area within city limits
SUBJECT : Forming a Local Improvement District for the
installation of City Sewer to our. properties
We the undersigned property owners in the North Mountain Avenue
area hereby request that the City of Ashland help us form a Local
Improvement District for the installation of City Sewer to our
properties . We request that allocation be based on potential per
lot basis congruent with current zoning.. We are the owners of
the real property within the boundaries of the proposed LID area .
PROPERTY OWNER( S ) SIGNATURE -TAX LOT (s )
--------------------39=1E�y_�C T_ASLots9lbtpo/
-- CJ---------------�2/�_� la _�P_ar soL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------.-------.-------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------=------------------------------------=-----------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or
purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of
real property within the boundaries of the proposed Local
Improvement District . If title to any parcel is in the name of
two or more persons, all must sign. When signing, use your name
as it appears on the records of ownership.
PETITION FOR SEWER SERVICE
LOCATION : North Mountain Avenue area within city limits
SUBJECT : Forming a Local Improvement District for the
installation of City Sewer to our properties
We the undersigned property owners in the North Mountain Avenue
area hereby request that the City of Ashland help us form a Local
Improvement District for the installation of City Sewer to our
properties . We request that allocation be based on potential per
lot basis congruent -with —current zoning. We are the owners of
the real property within the boundaries of the proposed LID area .
P PE Y OWN R(S ) GNATURE-- ----- ---
- --TAX-LOT- (s )
/ (j — /O 0
.-�ZIL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or
purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of
real property within the boundaries of the proposed Local
Improvement District . If title to any parcel is in the name of
two or more persons, all must sign. When signing, use your name
as it appears on the records of ownership .
„�,iSUH VE Hs
v G��GW EEgiq,CG• .Q n
Q
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Al
a a
F sixcr ivsr G ^`s
+CELLENG 1120 EAST JACKSON STREET P.O. BOX 490 MEDFORD,OREGON 97501 TELEPHONE:(503)772-7115
STgU cl&P
FAX: (503) 779-4079
NORTH MOUNTAIN SEWER L.I.D. JOB 1-4403. 1
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE 2-10-93
ASHLAND, OREGON ( \123\4403)
NO. ITEM QUANTITYUNIT PRICE TOTAL COST
--- --------------------=------------------------- -------------------------
1 . SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE, 48" 15 EA 1250.00 $18, 750.00
2 . SANITARY -SEWER CLEAN OUTS 2 EA 350.00 $700. 00
3. 10" PVC SAN. SEWER (NATIVE BACKFILL) 1065 LF 16.00 $17, 040.00
4 . 8" PVC SAN. SEWER (NATIVE BACKFILL) 3660 LF 14 .00 $51,240.00
5. 6" PVC SAN. SEWER (NATIVE BACKFILL) 160 LF 12.00 $1,920.00
6. COMPACTED GRAVEL TRENCH BACKFILL (ADD) 1000 LF 10.00 $10,000.00
7. D.I.P. PRESSURE SANITARY SEWER
TRENCH AND BACKFILL 380 LF 30.00 $11,400.00
8. PRESSURE LINE UNDER CREEK 70 LF 100.00 $7,000.00
9 . 8" DIP SAN. SEWER BORED UNDER MT. AV. 120 LF 100.00 $12,000.00
10. 4" PVC SAN. SERVICES, TRENCH & BACKFILL 400 LF 10.00 $4, 000. 00
11. SANITARY SERVICE TEES OR WYES 1 LS 500.00 $500. 00
12 . FURNISH & INSTALL 51x16' GATES ON EASE. 6 EA 300.00 $1,800.00
13. MOBILIZATION, FLAGMEN, FENCING,
CLEANUP, & MISC. 1 EA 5000.00 $5,000.00
14. PACKAGE PUMPING STATION 1 EA 100000.00 $100, 000.00
SUB-TOTAL OF CONTRACT ITEMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $241,350.00
--------------
15. ENGINEERING SERVICES 1 EA 39500.00 $39,500.00
16. CITY SERVICES @ 5% OF CONTT. 1 EA 12067 .50 $12,067.50
------------------------------=------------------------------------------
SUB-TOTAL $292,917 .50
CONTINGENCIES @ 15% $43,937.63
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS $336,855. 13
--------------
--------------
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
HOF i R; E.
SEWER E:SEMEN`" NORT-H MOUNTAIN AVENUE AREA
(with city .im_ts , northeast side of Bear Creek)
As part of the sewer Local Improvement District proposed for our
neig^borhod of Nor", Mountain Avenue, I (we) intend to grant , at no
charge, easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally outlined on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/93" .
I understand that legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
Signed: 'n Date:
Signed:_-`'�`��t ei�A Date : °2
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 kC —
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
1id3
S"ivR3 z:.SEME?I=' , i•iCRT 0J:'I^_?.?_i z_`JENli=
( Wi th1 P_ Ci t,i li Hilt ncr theast
As part of the sewer Local Improvement Distric`_ procosed te_
neigh of Ncrth Mcur.tain Avenue , I (we) intend to grant , at no
charge , easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally outlined on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/93" .
I understand that legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
f1 'y7
Signed:_ 1 � _ L�nti Dn .a Date :-. -). //Q/f� _
Signed :_ h171d%�, �9X!/Gll Date:_
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 '8' C- A-nX 900
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04�}e +AX 1 0f- / 0 I
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
lid-
SE-NE ; EASEMENT, NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE AREF
(within city 1.imits , northeast side of Bear Creek)
As part of the sewer Local Improvement District proposed for our
neighIDornod of North Mountain Avenue, I (we) intend to grant , at no
charge , easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally out on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/ 93" .
I understand that legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
Signed: -v g Dater
Signed:- Leas /7 . ln�_2 � Date: ! r
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 ITS 'V O/'
Tax Lot # 3971E-04_
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
lid3
SE-NEF.. EASEMENT , Nrn Ta MOUNTAIN AVENUE 33nF.
(within city limits , northeast side of near Creel ;
As part of the sewer Local Improvement District propo=sed for our
neighborhod of North Mountain Avenue, I (we'; intend to grant , at no,
charge, easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally outlined on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout mao prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/93" .
I understand that legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
� � f lYl
Signed: \ Date: � 3
Signed: li.f . ,.� 1) ,7t� / E /� Date :
—�- L
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
lid3
.�.i4 E, gV:-; r,lm
NORTH MOUN72.IN AVENUE ARE%
(U i_mitS , nort:^.=ast side of Bear Creel:
As part of the sewer Local Improvement District proposed for our
___ighborhod of Ncrth Mountain Avenue , I (we) intend to grant , at nc
charge , easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally outlined on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/ 93" .
I understand that. legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
Signed: �� �''/ Date:
Signed: X7 �C= � Date:
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 D � ;V 667V00
Tax Lot '# 39-1E-04 7-,* la A' (f) C)
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
lid3
n ricR ... S EMe: _ NORTH� hi0 U., ._I 2i nVEFIZ�E
, northeast s, de o- wear Creel`
As ,part of the sewer Local Improvement District proposed for our
neichborlicd of Nortn Moul:ta_n :Avenue ,, I \we ; =^te^.d to grant , at no
charge , easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally out!-ned on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/93" .
. I understand that legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
Signed: 41�'
Date:
Signed: Date : 2—j 0 C3
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 I i G AY 'f 1 eoo
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
lid3
SEWS: EASEMENT , NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE -
( within city limits , northeast side of Bear Creel--. '/
As part of the sewer Local Improvement District propose,--' for our
reighborhod of North Mountain Avenue, I (we) intend to grant , at no
charge, easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally outlined on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/93" .
I understand that legal descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
Si gned:
v/ Date: G'
Cj
Signed: Date:
Tax Lot # 39-1E-0QB — � Oo
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04
lid3
SEW R EASEME1,;T , ?`TORT: K!0 UNTn-.iN AJENUE T.
n city limit£ , northeast side of se a Cree;:
As part c= the sewer Lc--al Improvement District proposed for our
neighborhed of N^rth Mountain Avenue, _ ( we) intend to gran , at no
charge , easements to allow installation of sewer lines and related
equipment , as generally outlined on Preliminary Sanitary Sewer
Layout map prepared by Marquess and Associates entitled
"Revision #1 dated 2/10/ 93" .
I understand that- Iegal- descriptions and formal easement documents
are not yet available. These will be presented to the land owners
for approval after the Local Improvement District is formed by the
City of Ashland and engineering plans and specifications are
completed.
Signe [XJ.��✓W Date :-17
Signed: 44 OLA Date:
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04_�G J ��
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 /7 CG �J�
Tax Lot # 39-1E-04 1Ke�
lid3
_� a___.
Y6 N fy1
NNHNNNNNL.N.rN >
.._
5-1 Pe 1 A N D
I ND I � 5 !o
i.1
- 1 1
!o -
i
W ,\A
5_1
S «.__..•
!T
f
t -
PROPOSED NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE
SANITARY SEWER L.I.D. BOUNDARY
CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION
REDUCED SCALE - -
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO PROVIDE FOR SANITARY SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE AREA OF NORTH
MOUNTAIN AVENUE NORTH OF BEAR CREEK.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. The council intends to make local improvements to
provide a sanitary sewer system to the North Mountain Avenue area
north of Bear Creek. These local improvements consist of
approximately 780 .1inear feet of sewer in N. Mountain Avenue,
beginning 575 {feet) north of Bear Creek, and extending to the
top of the N. Mountain Avenue grade. Additional lines would run
in Nevada Street from N. Mountain Avenue to Bear Creek and also
along Bear Creek just outside of the platted flood way. A pump
station would be required at Nevada Street to pump the flow to
the existing Bear Creek Trunk Line on the west side of the creek.
Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to
be $336, 855 all of which will be paid by special assessments on
benefitted properties. Costs will be allocated on the basis on
the size of the 12 tax lots to be served by the system. Those
tax lots would be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit
A.
SECTION 2. The local improvement district shall consist of all
the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. Warrants for the interim financing of the
improvements shall bear interest at the prevailing rates and
shall constitute general obligations on the City of Ashland and
shall be issued according to the terms and conditions in ORS
287 . 502 to 287 .510 inclusively.
SECTION 4. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is
characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to
ORS 305.583 (4) .
SECTION 5. The City of Ashland, Oregon (the "City") expects to
cause certain capital expenditures to be incurred for the North
Mountain Avenue Sewer Local Improvement District. The City
intends to reimburse itself for such capital expenditures with
the proceeds of borrowing incurred by the City (the
"Reimbursement Bonds") . United States Treasury Regulation 1. 103-
18 sets forth certain requirements that must be complied with in
order for the proceeds of Reimbursement Bonds to qualify as an
expenditure of bond proceeds. One such requirement is that on or
before the date the expenditure that is being reimbursed is paid,
the issuer of Reimbursement Bonds must declare a reasonable
official intent to reimburse itself for the capital expenditure.
It is the reasonable intent of the City to reimburse the capital
. expenditures for the proposed North Mountain Avenue Sanitary
Sewer improvements with the proceeds of Reimbursement Bonds in
the principal amount estimated to be $336, 855.
PAGE 1-RESOLUTION
SECTION 6 . Pursuant to AMC §13 . 20 . 050, whenever all of the
owners of property to be benefitted and assessed have signed a
petition directed and presented to the city council requesting
such local improvement, the city council may initiate and
construct such local improvement without publishing or mailing
notice to the owners of the affected property and without holding
a public hearing regarding the proposed local improvement. All
of the owners of the property to be benefitted have petitioned
the city council requesting such local improvements, and therefor
no notice or public hearing is necessary.
This Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Ashland, Oregon on March 2 , 1993 .
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1993 .
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
PAGE 2-RESOLUT16N (p:n-mt-avuma)
L n I D I I H
City of Ashland
Deoarment of Public Works - Engineering Division
Estimated Cost per Lot for:
North Mountain Avenue Sewer L.I.D.
Map No. Lot No. Owner Area (acres) Unit Cost Total Cost
39-1E-4AC 400 Harper 9.63 $5,362.23 $51,638.27
39-1E-4AC 401 Cislo 0.68 $5,362.23 $3,646.32
39-1E-4AC 500 White 0.73 $5,362.23 $3,914.43
39-1E-4AC 501 White 2.00 $5,362.23 $10,724.46
39-1E-4AC 600 Johnson 0.95 $5,362.23 $5;094.12
39-1E-4AC 700 White 3.85 $5,362.23 $20,644.59
39-1E-4AC 800 Quinn 2.00 $5,362.23 $10,724.46
39-1E-4AC 900 Conrad 14.00 $5,362.23 $75,071.22
39-1E-4AC 901 Conrad 2.16 $5,362.23 $11,582.42
39-1E-4AD 200 Hill 15.37 $5,362.23 $82,417.48
39-1E-4DA 100 Hill 6.45 $5,362.23 $34,586.38
39-1E-4DB 100 Hart/Todd 5.00 $5,362.23 $26,811.15
TOTAL 62.82
$336,855.30
JHO:nWnormtxw
25 Fe6nury 1993-3 of 3
Propord North Ma Uin Avenue Smiury Sewer LI.D.
NORTH MOUNTAIN SEWER L . I . D .
OWNER LIST
(all 39-1E-04)
39-lE-4-AC-300 Marvin E. & Mary 0. Jeska, 375 E . Nevada St ,
Ashland, OR 97520 , phone 482-1943 (2 . 24 acres )
----------------------------------------------------------------
4-AC-200 William W. Beagle, Trustee, 475 E.Nevada, 482-1927
( 1 . 25 ac) Marianne L. Beagle, Trustee, 475 E .Nevada, 482-1927
Billie Jean Fetz , Trustee, 1610 Foley , La Grande, OR 97850
Marianne Nelson, Trustee, 21080 S .C_ascaberry , Oregon City, OR
97045 , phone 632-6293
Sally Beagle Price, Trustee, 1415 N. W . Hillcrest Drive,
Corvallis , OR 97330 , phone 754-6224
ALL FOR MARIANNE L. BEAGLE TRUST (not recorded)
also 4-DB-200 (3 .00 acres) plus 4-DB-300 (7 .77 acres)
--------------------------------------------=--------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4-AC-100 Billie Jean Fetz, 161Q Foley, La Grande, OR 97850
(1 . 55 ac) Marianne Nelson, 21080' S.Cascaberry,Oregon City 97045
Sally Beagle Price, 1415 N.W.Hillcrest Dr, Corvallis 97330
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
4-AC-400 Richard E. & Roberta L. Harper, P .O.Box 35 , Winchester,
OR 97495 , phone 673-5641 (9 . 63 acres)
4-AC-500 Danial R & Charlotte L. White, 945 N . Mountain Avenue,
Ashland, OR 97520 phone 482-0147 (0 .73 acres)
also 4-AC-501 (2 .00 acres) plus 4-AC-700 (3 .85 acres)
-----------------------------------------
4-AC-600 Robert L. & Florence H. Johnson, . 955 N . Mountain Ave. ,
Ashland, OR 97520 , phone 482-2558 (0 . 95 acres)
------------------------------------------------------------------
4-AC-800 Kelly G. & Victoria A. Quinn, . 905 N. Mountain Avenue,
Ashland, OR 97520 , phone 482-3604 (2 .00 acres)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4-AC-900 Hunton A. & Sheila R. Conrad, P. O. Box 653 , Kula, HI
96790 , phone (808) 878-2924 (13 .77 acres)
also 4-AC-901 (2 .16 acres)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4-AC-401 Peter J . & Deborah L. Cislo, 400 E. Nevada Street,
Ashland, OR 97520 , phone 488-1237 (0 . 68 acres)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4-AD-200 Hunter S. & Madeline S. Hill , P. 0. Box 1334, Ashland,
OR 97520 , phone 482-1806 (15 . 37 acres) '
also 4-DA-100 (6. 45 acres)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
4-DB-100 Dorothy Todd, 855 N. Mountain Ave, Ashland, OR 97520
phone 482-3890 (5 .00 acres)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
compiled 1/29/93 from information provided by Dale W. Hofer,
.Marquess & Associates , Inc. , Consulting Engineers (772-7115) .
Check with Mr . Hofer for accuracy.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO PROVIDE FOR SANITARY SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE AREA OF NORTH
MOUNTAIN AVENUE NORTH OF BEAR CREEK.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES:
SECTION 1. The council intends to make local improvements to
provide a sanitary sewer system to the North Mountain Avenue area
north of Bear Creek. These local improvements consist of
approximately 780 linear feet of sewer in N. Mountain Avenue,
beginning 575 >{feet) north of Bear Creek, and extending to the 4
top of the N. Mountain Avenue grade. Additional lines would run
in Nevada Street from N. Mountain Avenue to Bear Creek and also
along Bear Creek just outside of the platted flood way. A pump
station would be required at Nevada Street to pump the flow to
the existing Bear Creek Trunk Line on the west side of the creek.
Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to
be $336, 855 all of which will be paid by special assessments on
benefitted properties. Costs will be allocated on the basis on
the size of the 12 tax lots to be served by the system. Those
tax lots would be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit
A.
SECTION 2. The local improvement district shall consist of all
the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A.
SECTION 3. Warrants for the interim financing of the
improvements shall bear interest at the prevailing rates and
shall constitute general obligations on the City of Ashland and
shall be issued according to the terms and conditions in ORS
287 . 502 to 287. 510 inclusively.
SECTION 4. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is
characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to
ORS 305.583 (4) .
SECTION S. The City of Ashland, Oregon (the "City") expects to
cause certain capital expenditures to be incurred for the North
Mountain Avenue Sewer Local Improvement District. The City
intends to reimburse itself for such capital expenditures with
the proceeds of borrowing incurred by the City (the
"Reimbursement Bonds") . United States Treasury Regulation 1. 103-
18 sets forth certain requirements that must be complied with in
order for the proceeds of Reimbursement Bonds to qualify as an
expenditure of bond proceeds. One such requirement is that on or
before the date the expenditure that is being reimbursed is paid,
the issuer of Reimbursement Bonds must declare a reasonable
official intent to reimburse itself for the capital expenditure.
It is the reasonable intent. of the City to reimburse the capital
expenditures for the proposed North Mountain Avenue Sanitary
Sewer Improvements with the proceeds of Reimbursement Bonds in
the principal amount estimated to be $336, 855.
PAGE 1-RESOLUTION (p:(a-on-ave.m)
SECTION 6. Pursuant to AMC §13 . 20 . 050, whenever all of the
owners of property to be benefitted and assessed have signed a
petition directed an& presented to the city council requesting
such local improvement, the city council may initiate and
construct such local improvement without publishing or mailing
notice to the owners of the affected property and without holding
a public hearing regarding the proposed local improvement. All
of the owners of the property to be benefitted have petitioned
the city council requesting such local improvements, and therefor
no notice or public hearing is necessary.
This Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of
1 - .:the City Council of the City of Ashland, Oregon on March- 2,x199.3::-
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 1993 .
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Approved as to form:
PG-'� �LL
Paul Nolte, Ci y Attorney
PAGE 2-RESOLUTION (p:m-ml-ave.m)
N , �
EXHIBIT A
City of Ashland
Department of Public Works - Engineering Division
Estimated Cost per Lot for:
North Mountain Avenue Sewer L.I.D.
L
Map No. Lot No. Owner Area (acres) Unit Cost . Total Cost
39-1E-4AC 400 Harper 9.63 $5,362.23 $51,638.27
39-1E-4AC 401 Cislo 0.68 $5,362.23 $3,646.32
39-1E-4AC 500 White 0.73 $5,362.23 $3,914.43
39-1E-4AC 501 White 2.00 $5,362.23 $10,724.46
39-1E-4AC 600 Johnson 0.95 $5,362.23 $5,094.12
39-1E-4AC 700 White i 3.85 $5,362.23 $20,644.59
39-1E-4AC 800 Quinn 2.00 $5,362.23 $10,724.46
39-1E-4AC 900 Conrad 14.00 $5,362.23 $75,071.22
39-1E-4AC 901 Conrad 2.16 $5,362.23 $11,582.42
39-1E-4AD 200 Hill 15.37 $5,362.23 $82,417.48
39-1E-4DA 100 Hill 6.45 $5,362.23 $34,586.38
39-1E-4DB 100 Hart/Todd 5.00 $5,362.23 $26,811.15
TOTAL 62.82 $336,855.30
3HO:nlomauotaew
25 Febnury 1993-3 of 3 -
P,uporod North Maintain Avenue SawtM Sevef L.I.D. . . .
rmaraitdum
A
�R[ood March 2, 1993
�. Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator
r
rum- Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Supt.
ll�ljPtf: 843 Fox St - Sewer Connect Request,
Tax Lot 300, .39-1E-5
ACTION REOUESTED
City Council authorize 843 Fox Street to be connected to City
sanitary sewer in accordance with Section 14 . 08 . 030 of the
Ashland Municipal Code.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY
Attached is a letter from Modene Groepper Miles who owns 843 Fox
Street, requesting connection to City sewer facilities.
According to County Assessor's records, the home was built in
1940.
The property is outside the City limits but within the Urban
Growth Boundary. A Consent to Annexation accompanies the letter
requesting sewer service. .
City Council may allow connection to City sewers as per AMC
14 . 08 . 030 if:
- There is adequate capacity within the sewer system and the
treatment plant to serve the residence.
- Requirements will be met by the property owner as listed
in the attached section of the Ashland Municipal Code.
- Applicant can meet all the requirements of the Municipal
Code.
Staff recommends approval of application for sewer connection of
843 Fox Street subject to meeting City requirements.
cc: Modene Groepper Miles, applicant
John McLaughlin, Acting Planning Director
Steve Hall, Public Works Director
Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
Encls: . Groepper Miles letter
Sec. 14 . 08 . 030, AMC
Map
TOi ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MODENE GROEPPER MILES
RE: EMERGENCY SEWER HOOK.-UP
AT: 843 FOX STREET
PURSUANT TO SECTION 14. 08.030 OF ASHLAND CITY STATUTES -
CONNECTION - OUTSIDE CITY - I AM REQUESTING SEWER HOOK.-UP
AT 843 FOX STREET DUE TO A FAILING SEPTIC SYSTEM. I BELIEVE
IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND AS
WRIGHT 'S CREEK IS AT THE BACK. OF SAID PROPERTY AND DOWNHILL
FROM THE SEPTIC SYSTEM. AS THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
IT SHOULD NOT BE PLACING ANY UNDUE BURDEN TO THE CITY 'S
SEWAGE FACILITIES.
I AGREE TO PAY THE CONNECTION FEE AS SET FORTH IN SECTION
14.08.025, PLUS THE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT ANNEXATION CHARGE AS
SET FORTH IN SECTION 4. 16. 010.
THE DWELLING AT 643 FOX STREET HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE
1940.
THERE IS A PRESENTLY EXISTING SEWER MAIN WITHIN 100 FEET OF
THE DWELLING TO WHICH THE RESIDENCE MAY BE CONNECTED.
I AM INCLUDING A SIGNED AND NOTARIZED IRREVOCABLE CONSENT TO
ANNEXATION.
A DEED RESTRICTION PREVENTING PARTITIONING OR SUBDIVIDING OF
THIS PROPERTY WILL BE EXECUTED PRIOR TO ANNEXATION TO THE
CITY.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 4.220. 030, I AGREE TO PAY THE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT SYSTEMS CHARGES CONCURRENT WITH APPLICATION
FOR SEWER SERVICE.
THE PROPERTY AT 843 FOX STREET IS NEXT TO THE ASHLAND CITY
LIMITS AND WITHIN THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF
ASHLAND.
THANK. YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
SINCERELY
MODENE GROEPPER MILES, 0 NER
IRREVOCABLE CONSENT TO ANNEXATION
The undersigned, referred to in this document as "Owner" whether singular or plural,
owns or is the purchaser under a recorded land sale contract of real property in Jackson
County, Oregon, described below and referred to in this document as "the property":
In consideration of the City of Ashland permitting the connection of Owner's building
sewer from the residence on the property to the sewer system of the City of Ashland,
Owner declares and agrees that the property shall be held, sold, and conveyed subject
to the following covenants, conditions and restrictions, which shall constitute covenants
running with the land and shall be binding on all parties having any right, title or interest
in the property or any part, ti Heir heirs, successors and assigns:
Whenever a proposal to annex the property is initiated by the City.of Ashland or
otherwise, Owner shall consent and does consent to the annexation of the property to
the City of Ashland. Owner agrees this consent to annexation is irrevocable.
DATE p /q93 SIGNATURE
Printed Name e a t4olne P-7 roe- De
SIGNAKfl
URE n i E 1
Printed Name 4,e Cr e
SIGNATURE
Printed Name
State of �U GivH
County of KLicrlrl�
This ' strument s k �✓vledg6 re me n ��/�a✓�jj ygg
It i,/✓
J
Publ for
My commission expires: ;
Ip:plwning�wnexxnsl
ADDENDUM TO SALE AGREEMENT & RECEIPT FOR EARNEST MONEY
Exhibit,A_ Earnest Money Receipt No.�7g�ra1
Date of. ❑Sale Agreement M Counteroffer 2-14-93
Buyer: Judy Gin-Beebe
Seller: Modene Grnenner
j Properly Address: 843 Eoz St A<hland, Or 9799n
Buyer and Seller serer to tha fnllnlyi no-
1) All contingencies to be removed by 2-19-93 are hereby removed.
i
21 It is further agreed that this transaction is ontingent Subjert to approval of the
City of Ashland by 3-2-93 for the purpose of this property 043 Fox St n hland Or`
legally known as 391 OS tax lot Hann tn h hnnketl Bp tn the city sewer seryice dne
i
to a failing septic system. Expenses incurred in annexation and hook up to the city
sewers stem, purchas
UNNwhen—thgy become due In the eventsrly er qok r
� not aRR QYefLOf hY�hP riSY of
Ashland the buyer shall have the right to terminate this agreeMent, all a sociat d
expenses shall be paid by seller, and the buyers earne5t Mngy shall be refunded
-
3). Seller agrees to provide a new legal description to the buyer at sellers expense
reflecting the proposed lot line adiustment, .
4). Change of escrow date xf3om 2-25 93 to 3 5 93,
I
I
Seller aleL�zS/93 BUYer A - ..Date
Seller B Dale Buyer Date 1!
Listing offic�ll Seasons Real Estate - Selling office)RA _
Licensee Date 1.4fwef— 19-93 or
J B Kell Don Wiljamaa b Susan pabrielle f9 9S
I.INa WITH THIS SYM11%0 RVgVIRf 4 6I94143Lgf Q3141111445 $YAk17es Jrupals_,_, !
14.00.030 Conuuct ion - Outside. City.. Premises torn teU out-
aide the C ty of Ash�d muy un connected to the sewer Systom when
' such connection is determined by the Ashland City Council to be
in the best interest of the City of Ashland and to not be detri-
mental. to the City's sewage facilities and such connection shall
• be on such terms as are set forth herein, or as may be modified
or added to by the Ashland City Council:
A. That the applicant for service pay the connection fee as
set forth in Section 14.08.025 hereof, plus the systems
development annexation.charge set forth in Section 4.16.010. The
latter sum 1s in part to compensate the City for the cost of the
existing sewer system and treatment facilities and which sum shall
be placed in the Capital Improvements Fund for sewer system -
improvements. (Ord. 1954 S3, 19781 Ord. 2019, S3, 19791 Ord. 2092
S3, 19801 Ord. 2147 S1 L 2, 19811 Ord. 2263 S3, 19831 Ord. 2316
S3, 19841 Ord, 2322 S1, 19841 Ord. 2449 S3, 1988)
B. Be for the use and benefit of dwellings and buildings
completed and existing on July 1, 1973. In the event dwellings
or buildings are connected In accord with this section and are
subsequently. replaced for any reason, then the replacement build-
ing or dwelling may continue to be connected to the sewer system
of the City as long as the use of the sewer system will not be
substantially increased in the opinion of the Director of Public
Works;
C. There is a presently existing sewer main or line to
which the premises can be connected in accord with the monthly
rate Schedules on file In the office of tl,e City llecerder;
(Ord. 1820, 1974)
D. Furnish to the City a consent to the annexation of the
land, signed by the owners of record and notarized so that It may
be recorded by the City and binding on future owners of the land.
Said consent shall also provide for payment to the City at the
time of annexation any balance due for the Systems Development
Annexation Charge set forth in Section 4.16.010 after the applica-
tion of sebsection A, above. Further, it shall provide for the
payment to the City by the owners at the time of annexation of an
amount equal to the current assessment for liabilities and indebt-
edness previously contracted by a public service district, such
as Jackson County Fire District No. 5, multiplied by the number
of years remaining on such indebtedness, eu that the land may be
withdrawn from such public service districts in accord with ORS
222.520 at no present or future expense to Lila City; (Ord. 1820,
1974; Ord. 2147 S2, 1981; Ord. 2314 S2, 1984; Ord. 2322 S1, 1964)
E. That the owner execute a deed restriction preventing
the partitioning or subdivision of the land prior to Its annexa-
tion to the City.
F. That the owner agrees to pay the Wastewater Treatment
Plant Systems Charges sat forth in Section 4.20.030 upon and con-
current with application for sewer service.
G. That the land is within the Urban Growth Boundary;
(Ord. 2322 32, 1984) -
N. New single family dwellings,may also be connected to the
City's sewage system subject to the above provisions, except item
B. and the following supplemental conditions:
1) That the owner execute a deed restriction preventing
the partitioning or subdivision of the land prior to its annexa-
tion to the City.
2) That the land is not contiguous to the present City
limits, but is within the Urban Growth Boundary:
3) That the owner agree to pay the Systems Development
Annexation Charge set forth In Chapter 4.16 upon application for
sever service. In such cases, only, the. regular sewer connect
fee shall be charged, rather than the outside city sewer contact
fee.
4) That the owner agree to pay the Wastewater Treatment
Plant Systems Charge set forth in Section 4.20.030 upon and
concurrent with application for sever service.
5) That electric service is available from existing City
distribution lines.
6) That the City Council finds that the sever connection
is in the best interests of the City. (Ord. 2297, 1984).'
14.08.035 Sever User Char es. The Sever Rate Schedules
shall a esta s e y e .1 ut on of the City Council, three (3)
copies of which shall be maintained in the office of the City
Recorder, and shall set forth the sever rates for use of'the
sewer system within and without the City limits from the municipal
sewer system. (Ord. 1775, 19731 Ord. 1777, 1973; Ord. 1859, 1975•
Ord. 2021,. 19791 Ord 2127, 1981; Ord. 2196, 1982; Ord. 2304, 19845.
14.08.050 Penalties. Any person violating a provisions of
this chapter is guilty of an infraction and shalny l a subject to
the penalties as set forth in Section 1.08.020. (Ord. 175 $5,
1973; Ord. 2382 s16, 1986).
\\ \\✓ \=� � 200
\�\ C y/ \ \ S 1 • `•
O
\X \ \ S.W. COR.
\ DLC. SI •'0
llo
V
`•. • \ ) \ BAN GG AEG) �' 3
\\\\ N.W. CDR.
k`\\ DLC 37 O DLC 38 DLC 31
\ (103. 16
'C9/ -
A GOVT LOT 7� � x.
• I �� � ( 26.75 )
SEE MA , �
391E 5 B B �>i�� EFU
'i SEE MAP
391E5BA
O+ / (ABANDONED \
S.E. COR.
.•A r r.B
DLC 37 \
r ••• 0 SCOFIELD ST
DO 0 s00
0.0
S.VW
100 S'W. COR.
S MAP I
DLC. 3e ¢
39 E5BD L —_
sN�nN s� r
o-vso• I I GOVT L
( 21.81
100 000 b. 1301 n GO LOT 6 —
/ ",� • 33.66 ) ¢ GRANT _
�5 a
=1 SE
TUCKER gT— tal
— � , Yq
CRERflY JI I 39
��( •��• — — —.. _4'15.00 � I GREE RRIL
00 1200
I - I
1e1.B1- i • wILEY
_._ST--
00 BI-q„1
(P-g936)
1
SEE MAP —I —
apbBO 1 fM4P=E
1400 1391E5CA I 131 ASF
zsa
RR- 5
3 1 I 1j II
III is
5 - II
i.ICOM
I w� HOS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Ashland City Council will hold a
public hearing on March 2 , 1993 at 7 : 30 P.M. at the Civic Center
Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main St. , to consider the following:
P.A. 92-057 , request for street revisions and approval for
outline plan of five-lot subdivision on Granite St. near its
intersection with S. Pioneer St. Revision involves change in
street length of less than 500_' for the new street from
Granite to the end of cul-de-sac. Testimony will be limited
to thL issue of street length and how the criteria apply to
the change in street length. Zoning: R-1-10, RR-. 5P, WR;
Assessor's Map #8DD 900. (Applicants: Gary & Diane Seitz)
BY ORDER OF THE ASHLAND
CITY COUNCIL
Publish: Daily Tidings
February 20, 1993
(&%c=de %93votice)
MF1R- 2-93 TUE 7 . 59 OREGON ST U- DEPT HORT P _ e l �f.
Sally Price
1415 N.W. Hillcrest Dr.
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
To: The Mayor and City Council
Ashland, Oregon
Fax: 488-5311
Re: North Mountain Avenue Sewer LID
I am writing for my father, William Beagle. Mr. Beagle lives at 475 E. Nevada St.
just outside the boundaries of the proposed Mountain Avenue area LID.
We are concerned about the city ordinance that requires sewer hookup if a household is
within 100 yards of a sewer line. Since the households within the LID are not required
to hookup if they do not wish, we feel it would be unfair to force my father to hookup
unless he chooses to do so.
If the LID will have effects such as this,outside its boundaries, we feel a public hearing
is appropriate before its adoption. We would like the council to know that if the
ordinace requiring sewer hookup could be changed we have no objections to the LID'
and do not fool a hoaring would be ncccessary.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Sally Price