Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-0803 Council Mtg PACKETr Important: Any citizen attending Council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you wish to speak, please rise and after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and address. The Chair will then allow you to speak and also inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people wh wish to be heard and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 3, 1993 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7 : 30 P.M. , Council Chambers II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Adjourned Meeting of July 14 , 1993 and Regular Meeting of July 20, 1993 . IV. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2 . Departmental Reports - June 1993 . 3 . Liquor license application from Garo Eldemir and Robin Esteban dba\Garo's Java House, 374 A E. Main Street. � . Memo from Councilor Winthrop re: public involvement in the review of the wetlands study report. 5 . Request from Fire Chief to participate in state-wide earthquake exercise in April, 1994 . V. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Appeal of Planning Commission's decision to deny P.A. 93-067 , extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 26-unit condominium located at 284 Hersey St. (Al Teitelbaum, . Applicant and Appellant) VI . NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: 1. Memo from the City Attorney with respect to an initiative petition to repeal the food and beverage tax. 2 . Request from Public Works Director for authorization to pursue contract for stored water rights from Howard Prairie. 3 . Memo from Public works Director concerning land rental fees for new airport hangars; and resod establishing those !\7 fees. ' VII. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Limited to 3 min. per speaker and 15 min. total) VIII . ORDINANCES RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS: 11. Second reading by title only of "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION �7i�L7 4 . 34 . 020A OF THE A.M. C. TO ADD ICE CREAM AND FROZEN DESSERTS AS TAXABLE ITEMS FROM COMBINATION FACILITIES" . First reading of an ordinance amending Section 9 . 08 . 040.B of the Ashland Municipal Code to allow pot bellied pigs in the City. First reading by title only of "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND AMENDING CHAPTERS 2 . 50 AND 2 . 52 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES AND BIDDER QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. " (Copies provided in accord with the Charter) 4� Reading by title only of a "FIES_OLUTION ADOPTING RULES EXEMPTING CERTAIN CLASSES OF CONTRACTS FROM COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND PERMITTING REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS" . 4/ 5. Agreement transferring a portion of Tolman Creek Road from Jackson County to City of Ashland. IX. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS X. ADJOURNMENT (d;kc cMagmda) MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JULY 14 , 1993 ROLL CALL: 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, Hauck, Acklin, Winthrop, and Arnold were present. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES PLAN ALTERNATIVES: Public Works Director Steve Hall reviewed' his memo which was placed on the tables at the meeting, which outlined a telephone conversation earlier in the day with Anne Squier of Gov. Roberts' office, Fred Hansen and Neil Mullane from DEQ, Brian Almquist, Rob Winthrop and Hall. DEQ's proposal was to consider shipping the effluent to Medford and working with various state agencies to find replacement water- for Bear Creek. On a question from Almquist, Winthrop said DEQ will not consider the B1 option because it will not meet phosphorous standards. Acklin said a regionalized approach is much better than working piece-meal on the problem. Acklin said the State should be told that their proposal was not acted on and needs to be examined in writing. Hauck would like the State's reaction to proposal A2 which involves an exchange with T. I .D. Gary Schrodt, Wetlands Coalition, thought this meeting would be to review documents on alternative B3 , which is the only one which will put Ashland into compliance with DEQ standards concerning flow and temperature of the creek. He said grants can be obtained to help pay construction costs of wetlands, and Ashland will be developing a model for the remainder of the state. He believes DEQ needs to change the way their mandates are carried out. Plato Doundalakis said the 25- acre wetland should be built and the ultimate goal is to clean up the creek, not meet DEQ standards. John Davis, Woodward-Clyde, said alternative B3 cannot meet phosphorous standards imposed by DEQ. Bob Arman, 375 Oxford, is concerned about the odor problem in Quiet Village from the sewage treatment plant, and feels wetlands will only increase that problem. John McClendon, 105 Bush St. , asked if costs to pipeline to Medford include replacement water and was told they do not. Richard Hart, 1026 Main St. , is opposed to piping effluent to Medford, as is Cate Hartzell . Bryce Farwell, 290 Nevada, urged the ban of phospates. Hall suggested reconvening the committee of Gearhart, Winthrop, Davis, and Holroyd, asking the Wetlands Coalition to submit their questions to him, and set up another meeting to answer those questions. Golden left at 9 : 25 P.M. and Acklin presided. Merrill Barnaby 113 High, asked about phosphate levels in detergents and garden fertilizer. Susan Powell, 180 Nutley, is in favor of the larger wetlands, and asked how the proposed golf course on the Billings property would fit with Alternative B3 . Ken Gosling, 777 Jaquelyn, said 2 stores in town will offer alternatives to phosphate detergents. He asked that a member of the Wetlands Coalition be appointed to the Adjourned Meeting - Ashland City Council - July 14 , 1993 - P. 1 reconvened committee, and a discussion was held on this issue. Hall said it is easier to meet with the consultants and then relay information to the Coalition. Marc Prevost, RVCOG, suggested a meeting with the Wetlands Coalition for their input prior to recommendations going to the City Council . Winthrop moved to ask the reconvened committee to prepare a proposal to accomplish further citizen participation. Hauck seconded, all YES on roll call vote. Forest Commission. Acklin asked that she be allowed to allocate a portion of her travel budget ($300-500) for a facilitator to assist the Forest Commission. Arnold moved to place the request on the agenda, Reid seconded, all AYES on voice vote. Hauck moved to allocate up to $500 of Acklin's travel budget to the Forest Commission. Winthrop seconded, all AYES on voice vote. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10 : 00 P.M. Nan E. Franklin Catherine M. Golden City Recorder Mayor (d.1mm7-14-93) Adjourned Meeting - Ashland City Council - July 14 , 1993 - P. 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JULY 20, 1993 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, Hauck, and Arnold were present. Reid, Acklin, and Winthrop were absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 6, 1993 were accepted as presented. CONSENT AGENDA: Arnold asked that item #7 be removed for discussion. Hauck moved to approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda as follows: 1) Minutes of Boards, Commissions & Committees; 2) Departmental Reports - June 1993; 3) Letter from BPA concerning "Super Good Cents Award by Ashland Conservation Division; 4) Election of Laurie McGraw to Ashland Park & Recreation Commission for a term ending December 31, 1994; 5) Mayor's appointments of Rees Jones and Shari Pearlman to the Bicycle Commission for terms ending April 30, 1995; and 6) Liquor license application from Ramon Hedges and David Andrews dba\Hedges Country Market, 1970 Ashland . St. Arnold said he cannot vote on item 7) Set public hearing on August 3 re: appeal from a decision of the Planning Commission denying P.A. 93-067 (Al Teitelbaum, Applicant). Hauck moved approval of same, Laws seconded and the motion carried with Arnold abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING: Water Filter Plant Facilities Plan. Joe Gauthier, CH2M Hill, introduced his colleagues, and said they enjoyed working on this project. He introduced Paul Bergstrom, project manager, who showed slides depicting the treatment plant's history. He said the goal is to meet new regulations, expand capacity, increase reliability of controls, update obsolete equipment, and reduce backwash water use. The equipment dates back to 1948 and 1964 and is in need of upgrading due to current and future standards. The building will be slightly enlarged, and provide better handicapped access. Other improvements include 2 additional filters and a more compact mixing facility with a total cost of $1,911,400. On a question from Arnold, Bergstrom said more extensive improvements would be necessary to provide accommodations for a handicapped employee. The public hearing was opened, no comment and it was closed. Arnold moved to approve the facilities plan with a brief addenda on handicapped access, Hauck seconded, all AYES on voice vote. Golf Course Letter of Intent w/Billings. (Moved forward on agenda): A memo was received from Councilor Winthrop requesting a public hearing on this issue. City Admin. Almquist said it will be set for August 17. Arnold said there are a number of issues e.g. traffic impacts which should be considered prior to signing the letter of intent, and moved to postpone until Aug. 17 for a public hearing, Laws seconded, all AYES on voice vote. Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - July 20, 1993 - P. 1 i UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Sale of Clay Street Property. City Attorney Nolte said if the land is exchanged for pedestrian access the property must be equal in value but no public hearing is required. If it is sold a public hearing is required. Almquist said if its sold the proceeds can be earmarked for a later project, and a minimum bid of $9,000 will be requested. Laws would like a study on the feasibility of a sidewalk on Clay Street and a stairway up to Ashland Street. Arnold requested Staff to research and report back. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: Study Session - Ashland Sanitary Svc. Almquist said the Sanitary Service requested postponement until November. Youth Needs Survey. Councilor Arnold requested that the City share equally with the Chamber of Commerce to fund the survey, and noted a proposal submitted by Kevin Preister of the Peace House. Arnold moved approval, Hauck seconded, all AYES on voice vote. F.A.A. Grant Proposal. The request is for authorization to apply for a $300,000 grant from the Federal Aviation Administration for various airport improvements, including relocation of the access road, relocation of taxiways behind the maintenance hangar, extended tiedown area, and a security fence along Dead Indian Memorial Road. Hauck moved to authorize the grant application, Arnold seconded, all AYES on voice vote. Pot-bellied Pigs. Arnold moved to instruct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance allowing pot-bellied pigs as housepets. Hauck seconded. Laws said they should be subject to leash laws and Hauck suggested a limit of one per household. The motion carried on voice vote. Strawberry Lane L.I.D - Sanitary Sewers. Hall said a petition has been submitted with over 50% signatures of property owners. Staff's concern is that this not open the door to development in the area until transportation issues have been addressed. Arnold moved to approve the resolution and set the public hearing for September 7th on the condition that an appropriate document be signed by property owners indicating their understanding that this may not result in future development. Laws seconded and the motion passed unanimously on roll call vote. (Reso. 93-33) PUBLIC FORUM: A letter was read from Ken Hagen concerning cigarette butts in the Plaza area and suggesting placement of receptacles. The Parks Department will be requested to look into a pilot project. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS: Food & Beverage Tax Amendment. First reading of an ordinance amending Section 4.34.020A of the A.M.C. to add ice cream and frozen desserts as taxable items when purchased from combination facilities. The amended sections were read, and Arnold moved to second reading, Laws seconded, all YES on roll call vote. Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - July 20, 1993 - P. 2 j Prohibit Drum Noise in Parks. A memo from the Parks Commission was read urging adoption. Reed Barrons said there should be a place where drumming is allowed during the day. Arnold said this seems reasonable, and it was decided to postpone the vote until the next meeting. Canvass of the Vote. A resolution was read by title only declaring the canvass of the vote for the election held on June 29, 1993 concerning the recreational and cultural levy. Laws moved adoption, Hauck seconded, all YES on roll call vote. (Reso. 93-32) Building Inspection Services Agreement w/Phoenix. Nolte said the agreement has not yet been seen by the City of Phoenix, but they are anxious to proceed. Staff would like conceptual approval and they will then present it to Phoenix officials. Arnold move to approve the agreement in concept, Hauck seconded, all YES on roll call vote. Lithia Springs Site Lease Extension. A memo was read from the Parks Commission requesting an extension of the lease through March 31, 2008. Laws so moved, Arnold seconded, all YES on roll call vote. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Laws told of SOSC students who are available to work on various projects. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:15 P.M. Nan E. Franklin Catherine M. Golden City Recorder Mayor (d:\min\7-20-931 Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - July 20, 1993 - P. 3 ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES June 22, 1993 The regular monthly meeting of the Board of Trustees of Ashland Community Hospital was held on Tuesday, June 22, 1993, in the conference room at 12:15. PRESENT: Steve Lunt, Bruce Johnson, M.D.; Madeline Hill, Mary Ellen Fleeger; Judy Uherbelau, Dick Nichols, Frank Billovits, and Tom Reid, Trustees. Pat Acklin, City Council Representative; and Clifford A. Hites, M.D. , Medical Staff Representative. Also present: Jimmie Emmons, Auxiliary President; Patty Adams, "Foundation _ - President; James R. Watson, Administrator; Mike McGraw, Controller; Peggy Cockrell, Director of Personnel; and Patrick Flannery, Director of Development. Troy Heie, Reporter for The Daily Tidings. Absent: Mary O'Kief, Trustee; Polly Arnold, Director of Patient Services; and Glenda Cole, Administrative Assistant. I. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Lunt called the meeting to order at 12:20 and introduced everyone. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Lunt called for a review of the minutes of the Executive Committee of May 18, 1993, and the Board of Trustees meeting of May 25, 1993. Following review, Mr. Billovits made the motion to approve the minutes as circulated. Dr. Johnson seconded the motion and the motion carried. III. COMMITTEE REPORTS Mr. Lunt reported that the Joint Advisory Committee met on June 11, 1993. Mr. Lunt reviewed the agenda items of the meeting. He reminded Trustees that attendance at this meeting is on a rotating basis with each Trustee having an opportunity to attend. IV. DECISION ITEMS A. Quarterly Auxiliary Report: Ms. Emmons, President, gave a review of the Auxiliary activities for the last quarter. She reported that they have 97 members of which 17 are associate members. To date more that 11,00 hours have been volunteered in a variety of areas in the Hospital. The Auxiliary will be donating $8,000 to the Hospital this year. This has been earned through a variety of functions and activities. Ms. Emmons reported that the Auxiliary received two awards at the State Convention. The newsletter received first place and the Historian Book received second place in their categories in hospitals under 100 beds. She reported that the State Convention will be in Ashland this year. A tour of the Hospital will be provided for attendees of the convention. Board of Trustees June 22, 1993 Page 2 Mr. Watson presented Ms. Emmons with a gift for her many years' service to the Hospital and Auxiliary. Ms. Hill made the motion to accept the quarterly report. Dr. Johnson seconded the motion and the motion carried. B. Appoint AHEC Board Members: Mr. Watson reviewed the development of the Ashland Healthcare Enhancement Corporation and it's mission. He stated that the By-Laws for the corporation have been filed with the State of Oregon. The next step in the corporation development is to appoint a Board of Directors who will report to the Trustees. The AHEC Board will be made up of five physicians and five non-physicians members. The Nominating Committee has submitted the following individuals for members: Dr. John Maurer, Dr. Jean Keevil, Dr. John Barton, Dr. David Jones, Dr. Jerry Nitzberg, Steve Lunt, Frank Billovits, Madeline Hill, Mary O'Kief, and Jim Watson. Discussion followed regarding terms of the members. Mr. Nichols made the motion to accept the slate of members submitted by the Nominating Committee and the length of terms be determined by the members of the AHEC Board. The motion was seconded by Mr. Reid and the motion carried. C. Conflict of Interest Statements: Mr. Watson distributed copies of the Conflict of Interest Statement and asked the members to review. He reported that this form has been reviewed and approved by Roy Bashaw and Paul Nolte, city attorneys. Following review, Ms. Fleeger suggested a revision -- under instructions, #1, line 1, to insert the word "business" between "all" and "relationships" and delete the sentence in parentheses. Ms. Hill made the motion to approve the form with the suggested changes. Mr. Billovits seconded the motion and the motion carried. D. May Expenditures: Mr. Reid reviewed the May Expenditures and pointed out details of interest. Discussion followed regarding the following: capital expenditures, purchase of mobile x-ray equipment by the Foundation, consulting fees for managed care issues, and Cable Access participation. Mr. McGraw reported that a payback of $112,000 to the welfare system for 1990-1991 was necessary. This was required as the Type "B" Status for Ashland Community Hospital did not take effect until July 1, 1991. Mr. Reid stated that everything was in order and made the motion to approve the expenditures. Mr. Billovits seconded the motion and the motion carried. V. EXECUTIVE SESSION Dr. Johnson made the motion to move into Executive Session pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1) (d) (e) . Ms. Fleeger seconded the motion and the motion carried. Ms. Fleeger made the motion to move out of Executive Session. Ms. Hill seconded the motion and the motion carried. Ms. Hill made the motion to approve the employee wage and benefit package as presented in Executive Session. Mr. Nichols seconded the motion and the motion carried. Board of Trustees June 22, 1993 Page 3 VI. MEDICAL STAFF REPORT Dr. Hites stated that there were no issues to report this month. VII. DISCUSSION A. Strategic Planning Update: Mr. Watson reported on the following strategic planning issues: 1) Talent Office - will be proceeding with construction; 2) Managed Care - board has been appointed and a`meeting will be scheduled; 3) Networking - on hold; and 4) Expansion - on hold. B. Hospital Property Line - West Side: Mr. Watson reported that a letter was received from a neighbor regarding the removal of the fence and the installation of a sidewalk around the perimeter of the hospital. History of the fence was reviewed with the Trustees. After discussion, it was decided that additional information was needed before a decision could be made. Our insurance carrier will be asked for comments regarding the fence and safety issues. Alternatives for a barrier along the property line will be reviewed for safety and privacy for the hospital. Information received will be reviewed at the July meeting. A letter will be sent to the neighbor regarding the progress of his request. Ms. Acklin will discuss this issue with Paul Nolte, city attorney. C. Maple Street Turn Lane Update: Mr. Watson reported that the State of Oregon has made an offer to the owner of the gas station property. The owner refused the offer. The State will be contacting the owner of the property on the East side of Main with an offer. D. JCAHO Report: Mr. Watson reported that Glenda Cole has been in charge of coordinating hospital wide JCAHO survey reporting. He noted and commended her on a job well done. The Hospital has just received its mid-survey report with excellent comments on our activities to date. They are pleased with our progress on issues noted in our survey in April, 1992. E. City Ordinance 10.68.200 - Dogs: Mr. Watson reported that the City Ordinance regarding the restriction of dogs only pertains to Lithia Park. F. Board\Medical Staff Annual Picnic: Mr. Watson announced that the annual Picnic-on-the-Patio has been scheduled for Thursday, September 23rd. G. Retreat\Study Session\Board Meeting: Mr. Watson reported that Paul Nolte, City Attorney, is working on city guidelines. He will report to the City Council with a draft for the second meeting in July. VIII. QUALITY ASSURANCE Mr. Watson reported that the Quality Assurance Committee met on June 6, 1993, and all issues are being handled appropriately. The Joint Advisory Committee met on June 11, 1993, and reviewed the quarterly quality assurance reports from the medical staff and hospital departments. Board of Trustees June 22, 1993 Page 4 IX. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT A. Nursing: No report this month. Ms. Arnold, Director of Patient Services, is on vacation. B. Financial: Mr. McGraw reviewed the financials for the month of May in detail. He noted that the annual audit would be July 26th. The financial statements for the fiscal year will not be finalized until the audit has been completed. It was reported that 12 contracts have been signed and two additional contracts are being negotiated for managed care. C. Personnel\Public Relations: Ms. Cockrell reported on present recruitment issues. She stated that the Hospital has been involved in the sponsorship of a Little League Team; involved in assisting with a Health Fair for Academy 1993; providing a First Aid Booth at the 4th of July activities; and has again scheduled Sports Physicals screening for the Ashland High School. An insert was placed in The Daily Tidings with a listing of the current Medical Staff. D. Foundation: Mr. Flannery distributed a copy of the current financial statement for the Foundation. He also provided a brochure on the Foundation's First Annual Golf Tournament. He noted that the Foundation is one of ten in the State to receive a grant to provide respite care. This program will begin in September and will be provided at a local church. Ms. Hill asked if the City of Ashland Senior Program staff was involved in the respite care program. She asked that the staff there be made aware of this program. Mr. Flannery reviewed the progress of the Talent property development: X. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:15 Pm. Respectfully submitted: APPROVED: Richard A. Nichols, Secretary Stephen B. Lunt, Chairman Ashland Airport Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 CALLED TO ORDER Meeting was called to order by Chairperson Insley. Commissioners present were Yeamans, Deboer, Jones, Katzen, Mace, Mills, Smith. Barlow and Hall represented staff. Minutes were approved. HANGAR CONSTRUCTION. UPDATE Shafer reported that the first 3 hangars should be delivered by July 19. REPORT ON MEETING WITH FAA Barlow reported FAA representative Suzanne Lee-Pang supported the proposed road relocation, hangar extension, security fencing on DIM Road and the $300,000 grant. Hall reported the pre-app process was being completed. Tentative grant offer due March, 1994 to be bid by June. Relocation of road needs to be confirmed with the George's soon. LIABILITY INSURANCE Insley reviewed his figures, plus equal requirements for all airport users and noted objections to City coverage from Bob Nelson, Risk Management Analyst. Insley noted the importance of securing FAA's approval of the requirement. Deboer suggested hangar lessees form a group to get a group rate. Mills thinks the City as property owner should bear liability for hangar contents. Types of insurance and coverage were discussed. Hall will prepare City policy and secure agreement from the FAA. Insley asked that a letter to the FAA state City is requiring $500,000 liability for new hangars and inquire if others have same insurance requirements or rollover of lessees require additional insurance. VOR APPROACH/ILS APPROACH Barlow made contacts regarding this issue. REVIEW OF SAFETY REPORTS Skinner suggested user's group assist in weed control if City would buy supplies. Hall will have Street Department do as possible. Repainting should happen this month. "Ashland" wording on taxiway will not be done by Street Department. It would make a good user's group project. There has been some damage to the asphalt from paint that is being monitored. ALLEN KOFTINOW--LAND USE ISSUE Barlow presented the Koftinow issue. Mace moved to accept the land use with a hold harmless agreement secured from the Koftinows. The motion was seconded and passed. Ashland Airport Commission Minutes - July 7, 1993 page 2 ROBERT BRUCE--LAND USE ISSUE (added to Agenda) Barlow introduced issue. Mace moved to accept with hold harmless agreement secured from Bruce. Motion was seconded and passed. SANDLER FILMS BUSINESS OPERATIONS AT HANGAR: SUBCOMMITTEE Hall suggested a form be created to allow follow-up when necessary on complaints that would include the name of the complainant and allow the complaint to be in written format. Mills noted the form currently used for noise complaints could be used. Insley agreed the complaint should be in writing. AIRPORT BUDGET REPORT Hall presented the budget report to the Commission. The next fiscal year will be very tight. Hall reviewed the details of the specific expenditures. FBO REPORT Skinner reported the fuel truck was on line and had a very busy weekend. This has been good for enticing extra sales. Budget Rent-A-Car is now doing business at Ashland Hills Inn. FBO has own rental cars available. Airport is getting very short of be downs. Operations and shop have been very busy. Tie downs will increase by 3 when construction is completed. Next meeting will review final of new report forms for FBO. Meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Rhonda Moore. Airy\Minutes\7-7-93.min 1 ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Minutes July 7, 1993 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Jim Lewis at 7:38 p.m. Members present were Jim Lewis, Terry Skibby, Le Hook, H.L. Wood, Dana Johnson, Keith Chambers and Steve Ennis. Also present were Associate Planner Bill Molnar, Secretary Sonja Akerman, and City Council Liaison Pat Acklin. Nan Hannon and Jane Dancer were absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Johnson moved and Ennis seconded the Minutes of the June 2, 1993 meeting be approved as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. STAFF REPORTS PA 93-087 Site Review 746 "C" Street Phyllis Sanderson Molnar explained this application is to convert the detached garage at the rear of the property off the alley to a small studio apartment. One parking space off the alley is required and it will need to be unproved with either brick or grass pavers. The only exterior changes will be the addition of an exterior door on the west side, and a window and sliding glass door on the east side. Phyllis Sanderson said there will be no changes on the alley side. When Skibby questioned her about the trim and siding, she stated it will match the existing trim and vertical siding. Johnson moved to recommend approval of this proposal to the Planning Commission. Skibby seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed. PA 93-090 Site Review 58 East Main Street Allan Sandler This was called up for a public hearing. It will be heard in August. PA 93-097 Site Review North Side of"A" Street at end of Second Street John Fields Molnar related this application is for a new 5,100 square foot commercial building. It complies well with the Site Design and Use Standards, and Staff has administratively approved it. Skibby stated this is a good example of what the Commission likes to see. Molnar remarked the only additional condition would be the pedestrian scale lighting along "A" Street shall not exceed 14 feet. Johnson questioned the color and the Commission agreed the color scheme should be discussed at a Review Board meeting. Ennis mentioned required handicapped parking and Molnar said it will be one of the conditions. (Hook arrived at this time - 7:52.) The Commission discussed the entryway and agreed it is important to have it located off"A' Street. Skibby then moved to recommend approval of this action with the conditions the applicant address the color scheme, handicapped parking and provide more detail on the front entrance. Chambers seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. PA 93-092 Conditional Use Permit 247 North Second Street Kevin Cooke There was a previously approved Conditional Use Permit for this site for a portion of the building to be used as office space. This proposal, explained Molnar, is to construct an 1,100 square foot yoga studio, which will offer two classes a day, with six to ten students per class. Three parking spaces off the alley will be provided, and they will be required to be improved either with grass pavers or brick. At the pre-application conference, the applicant had proposed a two story building, however, Staff had said it couldn't support that. Therefore, the applicants came to at least one Review Board meeting and revised the plans for a one story building. The property could accommodate another residence, so the differences need to be weighed. If approved, the approval would only be for the yoga studio. Any other use would require a new Conditional Use Permit. On the positive side, the applicant will also be renting the existing house on the property. Skibby questioned what would happen if the property were sold. Molnar said clarification would be needed from the City Attorney, but it would seem if the applicant stopped leasing Ashland Historic Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 Page 2 the property, it could void the Conditional Use Permit. Skibby said he has talked with the applicant and received a positive impression. The applicant is sensitive to the area and willing to work with the City. Ennis remarked it is difficult to follow up on the encouragement of the applicant for students walling/biking to the classes, and feels this could have a more intensive use than the target use. Molnar commented a yoga studio is not specific in the ordinance, but the ordinance gives the Planning Commission authority to make decisions. The application is consistent with the yoga studio on Beach Street. He added it is possible to place a maximum number of students as a condition. Acklin interjected the State transportation rules will soon be upon us and will not require as many parking spaces in order to promote alternative transportation. Skibby said more parking on the alley would have more of an impact. The Commission then discussed the fact that half the alley is already paved, but the half of the alley toward First Street is not. The parking, as drawn on the site plan, is diagonal, which will encourage people to drive the entire length of the alley. If the parking were straight in, people could go back out onto Second Street. Hook stated he would like to see the stipulation that the siding, windows, roof, and trim all match the existing house, rather than just be "compatible with the house". The Commission agreed the window proportions should also match the existing house. Lewis questioned the potential resale of the structure and the conversion to a residence. Molnar stated nothing will be done inside to preclude the conversion. Ennis questioned the ten foot setback in the rear. Molnar answered the studio could comply with accessory structures, whereby the setback would be three feet. Ennis commented fire and life safety requires a five foot setback in order to have windows on that side. Molnar maintained that in terms of future residential uses, the setback should be ten feet. Ennis then questioned Hook what the Alley Committee would prefer as far as parking on the alley was concerned. Hook said it would be better to have perpendicular parking if possible. Ennis then moved to recommend approval of this application with the following conditions: 1) the maximum number of students be ten, as stated by the applicant; 2) the maximum number of classes be two per day, Monday through Friday, as stated by the applicant; 3) the building materials include composition shingles, horizontal siding, wood double hung windows, and trim to be similar to existing house; 4) the applicant come to a Review Board meeting to present the details; and 5) the applicant design the three parking spaces to be , perpendicular to the alley, with depth to comply with Planning requirements so as to encourage cars to return to Second Street upon leaving the spaces. Hook seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 Page 3 PA 93-093 Site Review Northeast Corner of Fifth and "A" Streets J. Ellen Austin Molnar explained this application is for a two story, 5,500 square feet structure, with 2,300 square feet of commercial space and 3,000 square feet of residential space. Staff is pleased with the look of the building. J. Ellen Austin stated she has come into several problems with banks and insurance companies because the building is both commercial and residential. Because it is zoned E-1, the banks would like it strictly commercial, but the intent of that zoning is to have both. She has talked with five different banks and because this is a hybrid project, it can't be packaged out and she can't get a loan. She wants the City to be aware of the problem. She also stated she will probably have to do this project in two stages and reduce the building to two residential units. She then described changes she would have to make in the plans. After discussing drawbacks of the lending institutions and design modifications, Ms. Austin withdrew her application, and stated she will resubmit it for the next meeting. The Historic Commission will send a memo to the Planning Commission regarding the difficulties of obtaining financing through lending institions for commercial/residential uses. The Commission liked Austin's concept, but felt the streetscape needed attention. PA 93-095 Outline Plan Approval Scenic Drive Access John Barton/Bruce and Pokii Roberts Molnar explained the applicants are proposing a 12 lot subdivision of 7.6 acres of hillside property with various degrees of slope, from 15% to 40%. There will be 11 new lots and the lot off Scenic Drive which includes an existing home. The new driveway off Scenic will be a public street to the cul-de-sac (as shown on the map), and will have two private drives continue from it. The property is in the wildfire zone, so hydrants are required which will need to meet the required flow. The base density given to the property is 18 lots, and the applicants are proposing 12. Since it is hillside property, however, impacts need to be minimised. One of the main concerns is the 1,000 foot private drive to serve lots within a couple hundred feet of the cul-de-sac. Ditch Road is on the open space plan and will eventually be pedestrian/bike oriented. Another concern is the perpendicular parking on the street. Staff is advising some of the spaces be converted to parallel spaces and removing some also. Staff is not recommending approval at this point. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 Page 4 The Commission discussed slope, terracing, retaining walls, the hillside, etc. Although most of the property is outside the Historic District, it is all very visible from the majority of the District. Marc Brown, 171 Church Street, said his back lot is just below and parallels Scenic where the new access drive is proposed and he has several concerns. He then quoted from the Staff Report about the visibility of the site. He agrees the construction should disturb the hillside topography and vegetation as little as possible. He is also concerned with the 1,000 foot private road and the cul-de-sac, especially with the visual impact from not only his neighborhood, but also from downtown. He also stated the applicant did not draw in all existing structures in the area, and cited Lorraine Whitten's garage as one. Chambers questioned Molnar about accessing the development off Logan Drive. He answered that in 1991, the applicant received approval for a five lot subdivision, with his purchase of lot 10 which would allow him to go through to his property from Logan Drive. Chambers said he is concerned with the tiny inaccessible open space. Molnar said this is also a City concern. The open space will be owned and maintained by owners in the subdivision, but it is unclear how it will be accessed. This has not yet been discussed with the applicants. Ron Thurner, 1170 Bellview Avenue, said not only should the Staff Report be considered, but also the town and the impact it will have on the Historic District. He feels it will have major impacts, however they are difficult to judge because the application is incomplete. He also doesn't see it as appropriate. He is not opposed to new construction, but this development is not compatible. Scenic Drive is not the only available access for this project, and that needs to be checked out. He also feels this is taking advantage of the Performance Standards Option to maximize the property. Lacking are street design and landscaping, even though they are not required until the Final Plan is turned in. These will directly affect the impact, so they are relevant now. He also would like to know such details as what kind of impact new street lights will have on the existing homes in the area. The design should attempt to minimize the impact and he can't understand how anyone can appreciate this design of the project. Hook asked if the applicant should work more with Staff before it is heard? Molnar stated criteria C, regarding natural features, needs to be modified. Hook contended the proposal should be rejected and sent back to Staff to work more specifically with concerns already mentioned. Thurner added he believes there is a great deal more than Staff concerns at this point. The burden falls with the applicant and he would hope to limit the concerns with Staff and neighbors. Ed Brubaker, 197 Nutley Street, said he is also concerned with the look of Ashland from the downtown area. Twelve buildings up on the hill will look ridiculous. Two or three Ashland Historic Commission bHnutes July 7, 1993 Page 5 would be alright, but certainly not twelve. Chambers questioned Brubaker about access off Nutley. Brubaker said there is an access road which is not on the map, but as far as he knows, it is to remain open for property off Scenic Drive. This is in the form of an easement he and other neighbors have. He was approached at one time by the applicant regarding this, but he didn't want to sell the easement because he would lose part of his house and a tree. Skibby commented there are too many unanswered questions. Hook moved to recommend denial of the application and send it back to Staff in order for the applicant to address concerns previously mentioned. Chambers seconded the motion, then amended it to include, but not limit items to be addressed: 1) viewscape from downtown, 2) location and access of open space, 3) building envelopes, 4) possible reduction in number of lots; and 5) access off Scenic Drive v. Logan Drive. Johnson seconded the amendment. The motion carried, with all voting aye except Hook. BUILDING PERMITS Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of June follow: 127 Strawberry Lane Michael Sanford Addition 126 Nursery Street Brent Thompson Roof Deck 501 Allison Street Daniel Greenblatt Remodel Attic 291 Gresham Street Steve Faro Remodel&Addition 70 Water Street Bob & Ann Clouse Revision of Addition 150 Susan Lane Michael Wyer Remodel&Addition 261 West Hersey Street Audrey Sochor Remodel 366 "B" Street Steve & Doreen Johnson SIR 370 "B" Street Steve & Doreen Johnson Apartment/Garage 126 Nursery Street Brent Thompson Remodel 482 Iowa Street Roanne Lyall Fourplex 482 Iowa Street Roanne Lyall Duplex 482 Iowa Street Roanne Lyall Laundry Room 116 Lithia Way Grizzly Realty, Inc. Sign 169 East Main Street Udderly's Fresh Yogurts Sign 486 Siskiyou Boulevard Grape Vine Inn Sign 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: July 8 Skibby, Chambers and Wood July 15 Skibby, Hook, Lewis, Johnson, Chambers and Ennis Ashland Historic Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 Page 6 July 22 Skibby, Hook, Lewis and Wood July 29 Skibby, Johnson and Wood OLD BUSINESS Loss of Residential Housing Ennis discussed John McLaughlin's memo regarding CUPS in the Historic Interest area. Because of understaffing and other priorities, this has been put on hold. The Commission does not want to let this drop. The general direction of the subcommittee's proposal is opposite of what the City Council has in mind, as it is too restrictive. Molnar said State law requires ordinances to be clear and objective. Livability is difficult to define. Chambers said he is concerned that they have been wasting their time, however he feels they have tapped into something real. Molnar said Planning Commissioner Susan Powell brought up her frustration at the Joint Study Session meeting with the City Council about getting nowhere on this. Rob Winthrop said it could be initiated with a Resolution passed by the Council to begin public hearings. Molnar related he feels McLaughlin wants to look at the overall Railroad District in general rather than just focusing on the 'B" Street area. Lewis said the special area plan for the Railroad District is #7 on the priority list, and it may be possible to incorporate this. Chambers suggested writing a letter to McLaughlin to this effect. Lewis suggested obtaining a consensus with allied groups also. Cemetery Nominations to National Register A memo was sent to the City Council regarding the progress of the nomination. Heritage Sunday Skibby said between 50-60 people attended Heritage Sunday at Lincoln School. Southern Oregon Historical Society brought artifacts and a video on wagon trains. Also,Bill Emerson had transferred information from the 1800's map onto a current map regarding the location of the Applegate Trail. Goal Setting/Orientation Meeting The meeting will be July 19th. A memo will be sent to the members as a reminder. De Facto Demolitions The virtual demolition of the house on Rock Street was discussed, along with the implications of effect on the 20 year portion of the B & B ordinance. Molnar said there is a loophole regarding the percentage of what needs to remain. It is not currently specified. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 Page 7 NEW BUSINESS Election of Officers Hook moved and Johnson seconded to retain Lewis as Chairperson. The motion was unanimously passed. Hook then moved to retain Skibby as Vice Chairperson and Planning Commission Liaison, and to nominate Wood as City Council Liaison. Johnson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Relocation of Community Development Skibby informed the Commission that the Department of Community Development has been designated to move to a new building behind the Council Chambers. He said the downtown location is critical. The Review Board meets once a week in the Planning Office to review plans and sign permits. Oftentimes, it is important to go to the site, which can usually be accomplished by walking. The new building would be out of the Historic District. Lewis said he has no argument about the new building, but the question is who should use it. There is no doubt the Planning Office is short for space. The Commission agreed Planning is part of downtown and the difference would be noticeable. Hook moved to have the Historic Commission go on record to not move the Department of Community Development out of the downtown area and Historic District. Ennis seconded the motion. The motion carried with all voting aye except Johnson, who abstained. ADJOURNMENT It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 10:40 p.m. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes July 7, 1993 Page 8 ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Minutes July 19, 1993 The Ashland Historic Commission met in the Dankook Room at SOSC for a dinner/orientation/goal setting meeting. Present were members Jim Lewis, H.L. Wood, Terry Skibby, Keith Chambers, Steve Ennis, and Le Hook, Senior Planner Bill Molnar, and Secretary Sonja Akerman. Molnar presented the Commission with a slide show and discussion for orientation of duties. The following goals were decided upon: 1) PROMOTE ADOPTION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE and HERITAGE LANDMARKS LIST. Continue to work towards adoption and educate the public about the Landmarks List and the Preservation Ordinance. 2) INCORPORATION OF SPECIAL AREA PLAN FOR RAILROAD DISTRICT WITH REVISION OF R-2 ZONE. As discussed at the meeting on July 7th, continue with the revisions of Conditional Use Permits in the R-2 zone in the Railroad District. Assimilate this with the Special Area Plan for the Railroad District. 3) SELF GUIDED WALKING TOUR. Develop a pamphlet with maps and descriptions of structures for self guided tours, similar to the park guide. Begin with the downtown area. Lewis, Skibby, and Ennis will work on this. 4) SEEK MORE FUNDING FOR CEMETERY NOMINATIONS TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. Kay Atwood is beginning the research for the first phase of this project. Explore possibilities of funding for the remaining $2,500. 5) CONTINUE TO SUPPORT ALLEY COMMITTEE. Until the alley issues are resolved, the Historic Commission will persist in its present policy. The meeting concluded at 10:05 p.m. o A �shjanb ljoitce Department =pE OF oq�0 1175 E. MAIN ST.. ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 Phone(503)482-5211 Z \4P T ARTME 'S July 26, 1993 GARY E.BROWN Chief of Police TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Gary E. Brown, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Liquor License Application Application has been received from GARO ELDEMIR AND ROBIN ESTEBAN dba\ GARO'S JAVA HOUSE for a LIQUOR license, for an ESTABLISHMENT located at 374 A E. MAIN STREET. A background investigation has been completed on the applicant and approval of this application is recommended. AR E4PLICE CHIEF MC:kmh STATE OF OREGON ' Return To: APPLICATION OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION GENERAL INFORMATION A non-refundable processing fee is assessed when you submit this completed form to the Commission(except for Druggist and Health Care Facility Ucenses).The filing of this application does not commit the Commission to the granting of the license for which you are applying nor does It permit you to operate the business named below. (THIS SPACE IS FOR OLCC OFFICE USE) (THIS SPACE IS FOR CITY OR COUNTY USE) Application Is being made for: NOTICE TO CITIES AND COUNTIES:Do not consider this appllca- ❑ DISPENSER, CLASS A ❑ Add Partner tion unless it has been stamped and signed at the left by an OLCC ❑ DISPENSER, CLASS B ❑ Additional Privilege representative. ❑ DISPENSER, CLASS C ❑ Change Location El PACKAGE STORE El Change Ownership THE CITY COUNCIL, COUNTY COMMISSION, OR COUNTY RESTAURANT ❑ Change of Privilege COURTOF RETAIL MALT BEVERAGE ❑ Greater Privilege (Name on City or County) ❑ SEASONAL DISPENSER ❑ Lessor Privilege RECOMMENDS THATTHIS LICENSE BE: GRANTED ❑ WHOLESALE MALT ,�New Outlet BEVERAGE &WINE ❑ Other ❑ WINERY DENIED DATE OTHER' Sa. 60 £eCGCC c<C ��1�93 BY /�2ce9o�{i TITLE alp atom, CAUTION: If your operation of this business depends on your receiving a liquor license,OLCC cautions you not to purchase,remodel,or start construction until your license is granted. 1. Name of Corporation,1Partnership, or Individual Applicants: n 1 1) _ —7f`�1'A 5_�]e 1M 1 I'- 2) ZA)')11 S-S-}°�,6GU h 3) 4) 5) 6) (EACH PERSON LISTED ABOVE MUST FILE AN INDIVIDUAL HISTORY AND A FVN NGAL STATEMEIO) 2. Present Trade Name 62A 0 'S TA VA ki D VS C 3. New Trade Name Year filed with Corporation Copnmlaiawr 4. Premisesaddress MAIN Pt54{LA)J2 37ACICS0IJ O.P SZO (Nion0w.street Rural Route) (City) (County) (Stets) Rip) -5. Business mailing address 5A W� (P.O.Box,Number,Street,Rural Rome) (City) (State) (Zip) 6. Was premises previously licensed by OLCC? Yes_ No Year 7. If yes,to whom: // Type of license: .6. Will you have a manager: Yes— No X Name (Manger must lilt out IndiM4Val History) 9. Will anyone else not lignin this application share in the ownership or receive a percentage of profits or bonus from the __ ........- .._..... .� __...., business? No� r // 11 I 10. What is the local governing body where your premises is locatedl 6 C1 of n ,.d J- (Name of City or County) 11. OLCC representative making investigatlon may contact: Ga re) .1 1N{LI 1 V (wmei 2?1`9 A 6A2FfEt-D A-5MAPP It 92- 34 28 (Addrap) (Tel.No.—home,gnlnea.menage) CAUTION: The Administrator of the Oregon Liquor Control Commission must be notified if you are contacted by anybody offering to Influence the Commission on your behalf. DATE Applicant(s)Signature 1) on cax of corporation,dory authorized off car thereof) 2) 3) 4) 5) OrIgimi- LonlOeewnfri 6) Form aeNa-aeg (age) CITY OF ASHLAND : ' CITY HALL ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 telephone(Code 503)482 3211 July 27 , 1993 TO: City Council FROM: Cathy, Rob SUBJ: Wetlands study: public involvement We met with Steve Hall yesterday to discuss increasing public involvement in the review of the wetlands study report. As a result we decided to ask Klaas Van De Pol and Greg Williams to participate in the upcoming meeting with our consultants, the aim of which is to resolve ( ??? ) technical disagreements regarding projected costs and attainments of the various wetlands options . Both Klaas and Greg have agreed. Both Klaas and Greg have a technical familiarity with the project . We have asked them as individuals, not as representatives of any organizations . Nonetheless, Klaas is associated with the Wetlands Coalition, and is a registered civil engineer; Greg is a member of the Rogue Flyfishers , and a resident of Quiet Village. We are not proposing to form an on-going review committee at this time. After the upcoming meeting we will be in a better position to evaluate the effectiveness of this type of formalized citizen involvement. cc : Steve Hall Brian Almquist ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM July 22 , 1993 TO Mayor Cathy Golden And City Council FROM Keith E. Woodley, Fire Chief SUBJECT Earthquake Exercise 194 The State of Oregon Department of Emergency Services will be conducting a state-wide earthquake exercise during the week" of April 13 through 15th, 1994 . They are inviting all Oregon locale communities to participate in this event. Although we might feel that our community is not. a high risk area for a seismic event, this exercise is an excellent opportunity to evaluate our community's level of emergency preparedness. The information gained would be invaluable in our effort to prepare for events such as catastrophic wildfire, flood, severe weather or energy shortage emergencies in Ashland. This activity may also serve to address the need to exercise the emergency plans of the City of Ashland, SOSC and Ashland Community Hospital. If the Council supports our involvement in this exercise, we will need to determine our level of commitment of staff time in preparing for the event. I have recently attended a two-day. workshop focusing on emergency local government operations during events. of this nature, and would welcome an opportunity to organize our participation in this project. If we proceed, our next step would be to staff an exercise design committee comprised of representatives of all participating agencies in Ashland. STATE OF OREGON FULL SCALE EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE APRIL 13-24, 1994 PHASE l: First 72 Hours (Days 1-3) DAYS OF OPERATION: Wednesday, April 13th - Friday, April 15th (Note: This type of response exercise is typical of the majority of the exercises currently conducted in the State.) In theory, the first 72 hours after a severe or catastrophic disaster, the majority of the affected populace and local government are 'on their own' with little to no outside help immediately available. The first three days of the exercise will be played along these lines. Local Government: Local government will be in the response phase, responding to calls for assistance, activating EOCs, gathering information, declaring an emergency and identifying assistance needed from State agencies. State Government: The State EOC will be activated and initial information gathering from local government will begin. The Governor will issue a State of Emergency and request federal assistance and a Presidential Disaster Declaration. Federal Government: FEMA Region X will be apprised of the event, and begin preliminary plans to respond to Oregon to conduct a preliminary damage assessment and determine the need of a Presidential Disaster Declaration. Consider activation of the Federal Response Plan (FRP). WEEKEND ACTIVITY.• The weekend of April 16th and 17th is designed for local volunteer group activity as part of Phase I. National Guard Troops will be mobilized and begin participation during this weekend. Other groups,such as the Civil Air Patrol (CAP), Amateur Radio (ARES) and Search and Rescue (SAR) could be utilized by local government as part of their exercises. Recommended Functions'of Plan to be Tested and Evaluated: Functions are currently listed as the following on the Emergency Management Exercise Reporting System (EMERS) form: I. Alert and Notification 2. Communications 3. Coordination and Control 4. Emergency Public Information .10. Resource Management 11 . Warning - 2 - Contents of Record for Ashland Planning Action 93-067 PLANNING ACTION 93-067 is a request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 26-unit condominium complex located at 284 Hersey Street. APPLICANT: Albert Teitelbaum Mailed Notice of Council hearing 8/3/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - Appeal request from Carlyle Stout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - Staff Report 93-069 6/8/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 -- Memo from Fire Department 7/23/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 -- Planning Commission Findings for Denial 7/14/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 -- Planning Commission Minutes 6/8/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 -- Application Letter for extension from A. Teitelbaum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 -- Memo from Fire Department 5/18/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 -- Letter from James and Mary Jeffrey 6/2/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 — Letter from Robt. McWilliams 6/8/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 — Letter from neighbors 5/31/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Mailed Notice of hearing 3/10/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 - Mailed Notice of hearing 1/14/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . 27 - Mailed Notice of administrative approval 2/11/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 -- Findings of Approval 4/14/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 -- Planning Commission minutes 3/10/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 — Staff Report 92-009 3/10/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 — Mailed notice of hearing 6/12/90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 -- Findings of Approval 7/10/92 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 — Staff Report 90-121 6/12/90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 -- Findings of Approval 6/12/90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 — Planning Commission minutes 6/10/90 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 -- Type I findings of Approval 5/10/89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 -- Mailed public notice 5/10/89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 — Extension request from A. Teitelbaum 3/31/89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 -- Findings of Approval PA88-034 3/30/88 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 -- Mailed notice of administrative approval 3/30/88 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Notice is hereby given that PUBLIC HEARING on r the following request with respect to the ASHLAND A copy of the application,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the reasonable cost,If requested. A copy of the staff report will be available for ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL on the 3RD DAY inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost. H requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department Qty OF AUGUST, 1993 AT 7:30 P.M. at the HaIL 20 l Main,Ashland,OR 97520. ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main During the Public Hearing,the lshall allow testimony from the applicant and Street, Ashland, Oregon. those in attendance concerning this request.The Mayorshall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable . - ttiterss. . The ordinance criteria applicable to this application am on the reverse of this notices Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, IF you have any questions or comments conceming this request.Please feel free to either in person or by letter,or failure w provide sufficient specificity to afford the contact Susan Yates at the 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 Appals(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. Is PaHT lVCtpr,CM1eRIOGE �. S /I _ . ons ' 0 \Nst' �aN�!i rl 4 AUUa I • ' e R o r �JECT _ i W MAII N\la I. sea HEIASET aW . )y 1 •. ryy eV r q x(614'- 1. .d SAO � _ Y aeoealFAd ' 1 �, e __ r.�r. � �•� .mot—Q� � i. Yt err •� r:. x�' a J i 8 9 W a - n i 1 sa'•1 0_4 1<V b4' eed low r;Se is taw>.• �» " '' /�.r. s . f taco. 'Z. • zs a- .a '". / ' ase •e' / era✓ a ,e -Vie• M..% ^r' Jam' Jsb 71�'•e' 'lY•�i. to w• . j t1aVd 4rW t.:f sd _tom, PLANNING ACTION 93-067 is a request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 26-unit condominium complex located at 284 Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Multi-Family Residential, High Density; Zoning: R- 3; Assessor's Map #: 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. APPLICANT: Albert Teitelbaum LAW OFFICE OF ArrORNEVS: CARLYLE F. STOUT III PARALEGALS. Carlyle F.Stout III Deanna"Dee" Dirks 215 LAUREL STREET MEDFORD,OR 97501 TELEPHONE: (503)776-2020 FAX NUMBER: (503)776-9841 July 14, 1993 Brian Almquist City Administrator City of Ashland City Hall Ashland, OR . 97520 Re: Planning Action 93-869067 A0e Applicant: Albert Teitelbaum Location: 284 Hersey Street, Ashland Zone Designation: R-3 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Multi Family High Density Ordinance Ref: High Density - Multi Family Section 18.28 Site Design and Use Standard: 18.72 Dear Brian: I represent Albert Teitelbaum concerning the above- referenced planning action. It is my understanding that the Planning Commission finally adopted the minutes and findings of its decision on June 8, 1993, wherein it denied my client's request for an extension of a previously approved site review. Therefore,- pursuant to 18. 108.120 of the Land Use Ordinance, the decision became final on July 13, 1993. Pursuant to the city's land use ordinance, Section 18 . 108.070, you are hereby given notice that my client appeals the final decision of the Planning Commission .denying his request for an extension of a previously approved site review. The information required by the ordinance is as follows: 1. Appellant's name: Albert Teitelbaum 2: Appellant's address: 4316 Marina City Drive, No. 933 Marina Del Ray, CA 90292 3. Appellant's agent: Carlyle F. Stout III 4. Agent's address: 215 Laurel Street . Medford, OR 97501 776-2020 . The grounds for which the Planning Commission's decision should be overturned is that the applicant met all the criteria for approval of a site review pursuant to LDO Chapter 18.72. Specifically, all applicable city ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development, all requirements of the site review chapter have been met, the site design complies with C Brian Almquist City Administrator City of Ashland July 14 1993 Page -2- the guidelines adopted by the city for implementation and an adequate capacity 'of city facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development,- electricity, urban storm drainage and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. The extension was requested for good cause because the applicant had lined up financing and the lender, Liberty Federal Bank in Eugene, was unable to process the loan before the expiration of the original approval.. The applicant has now obtained financing and has a commitment from Liberty Federal Bank, but only for a short period of time. Pursuant to Resolution No. 8,8-48, enclosed please find my check in the sum of $100 representing the appeal fee. I am requesting this matter be placed on the City Council agenda for Tuesday, August 3, 1993, because of my client's short time commitment on the loan. He has invested thousands of dollars in this project and also in loan application fees and is therefore under a time deadline. I spoke with Donna this morning about this and she advised me there was sufficient time within which to place this on the August 3 agenda. Thank you for your cooperation. Yours ly, Carlyle F. out III CFS:dd CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Enclosure cc: client • 3 ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT JUNE 8, 1993 PLANNING ACTION: 93-069 APPLICANT. Albert Teitelbaum LOCATION: 284 Hersey Street ZONE DESIGNATION: R-3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family - High Density ORDINANCE REFERENCE: High Density - Multi Family 18.28 Site Design and Use Standards 18.72 REQUEST: Extension of previously approved 26-unit condominium complex. 1. Relevant Facts 1) Background - History of Application: In March 1988, the Planning Commission approved a Site Review for the construction of a 27-unit apartment complex (PA8&034). In May, 1989, a one year extension of the previous approval was granted (PA89-067). In July, 1990 a second extension was approved for the 27-unit apartment complex (PA90-121). The apartment complex approval expired in July 1991. In April 1992, the Planning Commission approved the construction of a 26- unit condominium complex (PA92-009). The project was identical to the previously approved apartment complex, minus one unit due to code amendments concerning provisions for common recreational space. 2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal: This proposal involves.the construction of a 26-unit condominium complex. Five separate buildings incorporating six, three, four, eleven and two units will be developed around a landscaped courtyard. Each unit is approximately 864 square feet in size, with two bedrooms on the upper floor and dining room, living room and kitchen on the bottom floor. Construction materials include T-11 exterior siding, aluminum framed sliding windows and composition shingles. The exterior siding will be painted a light grey with white trim, while the composition shingle will be charcoal. The site design of the project is essentially identical to the previous approval. The parking area will be situated perpendicular to Hersey Street and consist of 48 spaces. A sidewalk will be constructed along the Hersey Street frontage and will be linked to the project's internal walkway system. This is a very similar site design as was originally approved in 1988. II. Proiect Impact Staff's major concern is that this project involves a layout that has essentially remained unchanged for the past five years. During this time, ordinances and citizen concerns have evolved and these considerations have been conditioned.into previous extensions. These have included, sound attenuation measures, recycling facilities, bicycle parking and affordable and conservation housing requirements. There are several issues that appear to warrant further review prior to extending the approval for this application. In addition, we have outlined other items which we believe could enhance the project's appearance along Hersey Street and upon the surrounding neighborhood, while potentially improving its marketability. Some of the items listed below may involve an overall revision to the existing site design, in which case the Commission would need to decide if it would be better to deny this request and allow the applicant to sit down with Staff and comprehensively evaluate the issues. Fire Department Requirements A memorandum from the Fire Department has been submitted requesting an opportunity to have a complete review of the proposal prior to any further PA93-069 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Albert Teitelbaum JUNE 8, 1993 . Page 2 S approval. Previous comments submitted by the Fire Department raised concerns over provisions for a turnaround area for fire apparatus and sufficient work area size around buildings. Building Orientation The present proposal has a large parking area facing Hersey Street creating a less than inviting streetscape, heavily oriented towards the automobile. The City's Site Design and Use Standards require that buildings be oriented towards the street with the parking areas to the side and rear of buildings. Staff believes there may be an opportunity to locate a building up along Hersey Street which exhibits a strong sense of entry, while still allowing adequate width to construct a driveway to the parking area. This would substantially reduce the visual impact of the large parking area upon the Hersey Street frontage and soften the entrance to the development, while being compatible with the scale, massing and rhythm of other buildings along the street in the neighborhood. This idea was not pursued as part of the original application, due to the narrowness of the entry (50% and concerns over providing adequate parking. However, having an area dedicated solely to parking adjacent to the street, though buffered by a 20' landscaped setback, appears to run counter to the current thinking of the Planning Commission. Further, a structure located up towards the street would assist in buffering the noise and associated impacts of the parking area from the other neighbors in the Hersey Street area. Building Color/Massing : The bulk and scale of this project will have a formidable visual impact upon the immediate area. The original approval included one color scheme (grey siding, white trim, charcoal roof) for the entire project. Staff believes that a more creative color strategy should be considered in order to help break up the complex into easily distinguishable, smaller masses. At a minimum m, each building should incorporate an individual color scheme, while still being part of the same overall color group of the entire project. Marketability of Project The existing project was initially reviewed and approved as a multi-family apartment complex. Later, the applicant received approval to allow individual- ownership as condominium units. Staff is concerned whether the current design of the development could effect the project's viability as a condominium complex. We are aware that this may not be a valid concern to be raised as part of a site review, however, the project architect initially designed the project for apartment PA93-069 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Albert Teitelbaum . JUNE 8, 1993 Page 3 living rather than single-family ownership. A re-evaluation of the entire project; incorporating the issues outlined above, and also private spaces and site amenities, may improve the marketability of the project as individually owned units. III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for Site Review approval are found in Chapter 18.72 and area s follows A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have.been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations Overall the current design may be able to be "conditioned" into compliance with the general requirements of the ordinance. However, another opportunity to evaluate the design while keeping in mind the concerns of the Fire Department and the additional issues raised by Staff may result in a better development for project residents, the neighborhood and the applicant. However, based upon additional testimony and evidence presented by the applicant at the bearing, should the Commission choose to approve the application, Staff would recommend that the following conditions be attached to the approval: 1) That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2) That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department be complied with, including the installation of an automatic residential fire sprinkler system in each unit. PA93-069. Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Albert Teitelbaum JUNE 8, 1993 Page 4 7 3) That a storm drainage plan for parking area be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 4) That a water line and meter plan for City water service be approved by the superintendent of the Ashland Sewer and Water Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Each unit shall have a separate water service. 5) That a sewer line plan be approved by the superintendent of the Ashland Sewer and Water Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Each unit shall have a separate sewer service. . 6) That a revised landscaping plan indicating the layout of the irrigation system be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Revised plan to include evergreens planted between the units and the parking area (to reduce the glare from headlights and help to break up the building facade), large canopy shade trees located along the west side of the parking lot and additional conifers situated at the rear by the railroad tracks to provide screening year round. 7) That 26 sheltered bicycle spaces be installed to the standards outlined in 18.92.040 (I) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 8) That a berm or sound wall (minimum 2" solid wood or equivalent) be constructed along property line abutting the railroad tracks, blocking the line of site from the first floor of the units to the rails to a height of 6'10" above finished floor level. Also that the second story portion of the structures be designed such that the interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA during the passage of an average train. 9) That a recycling area be provided for the residents of the development. 10) That the parking area be paved, striped and wheel stops installed prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. 11) That the landscaping be installed as per the approved plan prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. '12) That all trash receptacles be screened by site obscuring fencing material. 13) That a blanket easement on the property for electric utilities be provided. Easement to be provided in buildings for wiring. Owner responsible for excavating, backfilling, compaction, providing protection for transformer and installation of pull boxes. Transformer location to be approved by the City Electrie Department. PA93-069 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Albert Teitelbaum JUNE 8, 1993 Page 5 8 14) That the parking area be adequately screened by a 6' high solid wood fence. Screening to be installed along the eastern side of the parking area Also, that a 3'-6" solid wood fence be installed along the south side of the first two compact spaces at the entrance to the development. 15) That a 4' wide concrete walkway be provided from Hersey Street to the entrance of all units. 16) That the relocation of the irrigation ditch be done to the approval of the Watermaster and the Director of Public Works and that a public utility easement to be granted along the new route of the relocated irrigation line. 17) That a sidewalk be installed along the Hersey Street frontage prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 18) That the applicant enter into an agreement with the City of Ashland guaranteeing that 25 percent of the residential units are affordable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City.Council through procedures contained in such resolution. The City of Ashland will prepare the agreement to be signed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 19) That all residential units in the development comply with the Conservation Housing density bonus requirements referred to under section 18.88.040 B. 20) That color samples for all units be included at the time of a building permit, to be reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor. 0 PA93-069 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Albert Teitelbaum JUNE 8, 1993 Page 6 Q j ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM July 23, 1993 TO Planning Department FROM Don Paul, Fire Marshal SUBJECT Condominiums, 284 Hersey Street At its regular meeting in June of 1993 the Ashland Planning Commission denied the extension of the application for Albert Teitelbaum to develop condominiums on his property at 284 Hersey Street. Subsequent to that meeting I have received a. copy of the plans and have reviewed them in accordance with the current adopted fire code and city development ordinances. Based on the Ashland Municipal Code sections pertaining to fire and life safety and the 1991 Uniform Fire Code as adopted by the State of Oregon and the City of Ashland I have listed below the necessary requirements .to meet approval of the Ashland Fire Department: 1. A fire work area measuring 201x40' shall be provided within 50' of the structures exclusively for the use of fire apparatus. AMC, section 18. 08.255. 2. A fire apparatus access road shall be provided for every portion of a building having an exterior wall of the first story of the building located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. _ This would affect units 1, 2, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, and 27. UFC, section 10. 203 . 3. The driveway appears to be approximately 270' in length. When in excess of 250' a turnaround to accommodate fire apparatus is required. AMC, section 18.88 . 090. 4. An approved fire hydrant shall be installed within 150' of' all structures prior to combustible construction. AMC, section 15.28.070. 5. An approved fire hydrant shall be installed on Hersey Street as indicated on the plan prior to combustible construction. UFC, table No. A-III-B-1. 6. An automatic fire alarm system of .the rate-of- rise type shall be provided in each unit in an approved l location in addition to the required smoke detectors. The rate of rise detection system shall be monitored off and on site. An on site enunciator panel shall be provided in an approved location preferably in the managers apartment. The panel shall have an indicator on the exterior of the building. UFC, section 14. 104 (g) and 14 . 105. 7. Recessed fire extinguisher cabinets shall be provided in the vicinity of units 10, 20 and 3 in accessible locations. Each cabinet shall have an extinguisher with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC installed and maintained by a licensed fire extinguisher company on an annual basis. 8. The development shall install a key security box (Knox Box) in a location approved by the fire department. In the code review process all of the above would be requirements of approval. However the fire department will waive the fire work area, fire apparatus access road, and turnaround if each unit is provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system complying with NFPA 13-R standards. A fire sprinkler system will require control valves in each building cluster in an approved secure location. The on-site fire hydrant may also be waived by addressing item #6. The benefits of early warning by rate-of- rise detection and fire sprinklers is in our opinion two fire` protection features that can save lives prior to on scene firefighting. Each of the other fire protection features are dependent upon our departments on scene efforts. With these requirements met the development appears to be consistent with the needs of our department to provide necessary fire and life safety services. We look forward to assisting the developer with the specifics of the imposed requirements. CITY OF ASHLAND ` CITY HALL ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 telephone(ode 503)492.3211 July 14, 1993 RE: Planning Action # 93-069 Dear Albert Teitelbaum: At its meeting of June 8, 1993, the Ashland Planning Commission denied your request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for the 'property located at 284 Hersey Street. A copy of the Findings and Orders which was adopted at the July 13, 1993 Planning Commission meeting is enclosed. Please feel free to call me at 488-5305 if you have questions. S Y. Bill Molnar Senior Planner Enclosure BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION June 8, 1993 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION 193-069, REQUEST FOR AN) EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE REVIEW FOR A ) FINDINGS, 26-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX LOCATED AT 284 HERSEY ) ' CONCLUSIONS STREET. ) AND ORDERS APPLICANT: ALBERT TEITELBAUM ) ) RECITALS: 1) Tax lot 2303 of 391E 4CB is located at 284 Hersey and is zoned R-3; High Density Multi-Family Residential. 2) The applicant is requesting .an extension of a previously approved 26-unit condominium complex. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for approval of a Site Review are found in Chapter 18.72 and are as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council for implementation of this chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on June 8, 1993, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission denied the application noting that the. applicant had failed to meet the required burden of proof. Now, therefore, The Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" 13 Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an 110" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2. 1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal to construct a 26-unit condominium complex does not comply with all the criteria for site review approval found in Chapter 18.72. 2.3 Written and oral testimony was has been entered in the record concerning the proposed setbacks of 6' and 10' along the south property line. These property owners have requested that these setbacks be increased to reduce the impact from the proposed two- story units. Under section 18.72.100 I. the Planning Commission has the power to amend plans and "increase setbacks up to 20 feet. " The Commission finds that an increase in the setback requirement will allow for additional space and light between adjoining properties. However, such a modification can not be done without necessitating a redesign of the entire site plan. 2.3 The Commission finds that the proposal is inconsistent with the requirements of Ashland's Site Design and Use Standards. Specifically, the standards (II-B-1) require buildings to have their primary orientation toward the street when they are within 20-30 feet of the street. The Commission believes that there is an opportunity to situate a building within 20 feet of the street that exhibits a strong sense of entry, which is characteristic of the streetscape created by neighboring homes in the area. The Commission believes that locating a building along the Hersey Street .frontage will help to buffer the large parking area from adjacent uses in the vicinity, and it is within the .Commission!s powers to amend plans under section 18.72.100 H. The Commission finds that the 56 foot wide frontage could allow for a building to be constructed along the Hersey Street frontage with pedestrian access from the public sidewalk to the front entrance. The Commission. finds that this would reduce the visual impact of the parking area along the street, while being compatible with the scale, massing and rhythm of other buildings along the street. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the request for an extension of' a previously approved. 26-unit condominium complex is not supported by the evidence contained in the record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, We deny Planning Action #93-069. Planning- Commisison Approval Date �Jc Criteria 4 been self-imposed? Partitioning was done by the applicant and now the Commission is struggling with that decision. Thompson moved to approve PA93-053 with Condition 2 "that the alley be improved to its full physical width...." (end at shaded area). Add under Condition 3 "seven parking spaces.....".. Insert "all-weather" in Condition 4 — "include a clear all-weather pedestrian access....". Hibbert seconded the motion. Thompson amended the motion to pave the parking spaces adjacent to the box elder with grass pavers. Hibbert seconded the amendment. Thompson believes that decisions need to be made that give the best end product. Bingham is still concerned about the alley width and he wondered what assurance he can have that this will happen. McLaughlin said the alley has been established on the assessor's plat at 16 feet. The motion carried with Powell, Hibbert, Thompson, Cloer, and Medinger voting "yes" and Armitage, Carr, Bingham, and Jarvis voting "no". Thompson left the meeting. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS The Findings of the May meeting were approved. Change.the date on the Golden/Freeman Findings to April 13, 1993. PLANNING ACTION 93-069 REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE REVIEW FOR A 26-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX LOCATED AT 284 HERSEY STREET. APPLICANT: ALBERT TEITELBAUM Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site visits were made by all except Powell. Bingham drove by and went to Ohio Street and through the back end of the property. He noticed how the property related to Hersey Street and the railroad tracks. Hibbert had no site visit but had seen the property in the past. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION S REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 8,1993 STAFF REPORT Molnar gave a history of this property as.outlined in the Staff Report. The applicant is requesting 26 condominium units. A number of years have gone by and it might be time to take a fresh look at the.project. A point of concern is the large parking area right off Hersey. It was suggested that there could be a potential for minimizing or blocking some parking area by bringing a unit up towards the street either on the east or west side still allowing for a drive. Presently, the exterior color scheme for project is light grey with white trim. Since there are several buildings involved, it would be more appropriate to have a new color scheme with the use of.different colors. Additional colors tend to break up a mass. Originally this proposal was designed as an apartment complex. It would be beneficial to re-evaluate and see if features could be incorporated that would be more suitable for individual ownership, such as covered parking or deck spaces. Molnar noted the memo from the Fire Department with comments regarding the turnaround for fire apparatus. The Fire Department would like an opportunity to review the proposal again. The site review from the Tree Commission and a letter from the neighbors dated May 31, 1993 have been entered into the record. r Hibbert wondered if the setbacks on units 14 and 15 could be increased because they seemed so close to the neighboring property. Molnar felt they could through decreasing the square footage of the units. PUBLIC HEARING DON KIST, represents Al Teitelbaum, the applicant. After the last extension approval for the project, the bank that was to make the loan for the project went under. About this same time, Rist mentioned to the applicant that the City was becoming active in affordable housing and he asked Teitelbaum if he would consider switching his project from an apartment complex to affordable housing. Rist then.approached John Fregonese with the idea and Fregonese responded favorably. Teitelbaum, Rist and Fregonese met shortly thereafter and Teitelbaum was encouraged to do something with affordable housing and Super Good Cents. Rist understood that in the months following the discussion with Fregonese, the plan was revamped, and a unit was dropped, and an effort was made to make the units fit into affordable housing. Presently, there is a lender that is ready to commit the financing to this project and Rist is asking for an extension for the approval of this project from the Planning ASHUWD PLANNING COMMISSION 5 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8,1993 Commission. Hibbert wondered if the setbacks along the two large south and west lines were to be increased, could the applicant reduce the size of the units and still make the project work. Rist said the project Was designed by Bruce Abeloe and he could not answer that, however, he was confident that Teitelbaum would try to work with that idea. Jarvis noted that this project was first presented in 1988 and believed there are different standards such as Fire Department requirements, setbacks, colors, etc., now than when this was started in 1988. She also wondered what had been happening during the last year. Rist thought the year had been spent in revamping the plans and getting it to fit into the affordable housing structure, and obtaining financing. McLaughlin read a letter dated April 13, 1993 from Teitelbaum into the record and from Robert McWilliams, 9700 Highway 66. JAMES JEFFREY, also speaking for Mr. McWilliams, said that if units 14 and 15 (behind Jeffrey's property) and units 16, 17, and 18 (behind McWilliams' property) remain, their houses will be completely walled in like a box. Jeffrey is asking for greater setbacks on these units. He said the Tree Commission had.not reviewed this Project and he felt they wanted to review the screening. Jeffrey would want a six foot fence along the back and screening along the.parking lot. They would also like'a line of trees along.their back fence lines. Staff has also mentioned placing one of the units up toward the front, however, Jeffrey is hoping that will not block his view. He would prefer the parking lot in that location. Jeffrey seemed interested in exploring some different design and setback ideas. DON PAUL, Fire Department, commented that from the time of the original application until today, the Fire Department has been working from three different versions of the Uniform Fire Code and the Uniform Building Code, and thought it would be in the Fire Department's best interest to have.a complete review of this project. McLaughlin noted that the applicant is asking for an extension of a previously approved landscaping plan. DON KIST, rebuttal, stated that when the project was approved for 27 units, the project met all the criteria. He believes the applicant is trying to do something that is right for the City. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - 7 MINUTES JUNE 8,1993 COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Medinger felt this was a very large project and the amount of time it would take to redesign the project could be small compared to the result. He does not believe this would cause undue harm to the applicant. Armitage, Carr, Bingham and Powell agreed. Cloer was uncertain that if the things the Commission would like to see improved in the plans might not also move the project out of affordable housing. Hibbert's concerns mostly surrounded the setbacks and landscape buffering. Jarvis thought the Commission should consider an ordinance on requests for extensions. Carr moved to deny PA93-067. Powell seconded.the motion and it carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 93-070 REQUEST FOR OUTLINE AND FINAL PLAN APPROVAL OF A FIVE-UNIT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1253 QUINCY STREET. APPLICANT: MICHAEL GUTMAN Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site.visits and previous site visits were made by all. STAFF REPORT The applicant is now asking to divide the four units into their own parcels, the house onto its own parcel, and the flag and parking in common open area to be owned by the units. Under base density in R-3, the applicant would be allowed six units so the proposed five units comply. From Staff's review, this application meets all the requirements of the ordinance. If Staff were designing a new multi-family subdivision, this is probably not the way it would be done, but in this instance, the application appears to meet all requirements with the attached 5 Conditions. Cloer asked Staff if Condition 4, regarding-the common wall units complying with the building code, could be met. McLaughlin responded that It could. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 8 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 8,1993 - /9 ll-J-t_-1��_ ll_I [c Hil 1'I;!U'I J11111111i I-1 l__ICI_• IIIi C•JL - I!i 1_!--I C•c_` c 1' .l i_ April. 13, 1993 City of Ashland RE: Request of time extension. Originally the plans called -for a 27 unit project. I applied for a construction loan with Liberty Federal Bank which was approved subject to the usual requirements . At that time this was not planned to be "Affordable Housing. " I met with John Fregonese and he said the City was under great pressure because of the lack of "Affordable Housing" in the City of Ashland. We discussed the fact that I was going to build my new home and move bark to Ashland to live. We discussed my background in working to help make Ashland a better place to live and the work I did when I was chairman of CPAC. John said it would be a great service to the city if I would make these units "Affordable Housing. " I put my financial considerations aside and agreed that all 27 units would be "Affordable Housing. " The planning department next asked that we eliminate one unit in order to gain ,more open space. I agreed but this required us to make changes in the plans and I had the architect make the changes as per the request of your planning department. All this took time and I had to resubmit everything to the Liberty Federal Bank and re-apply for a new loan. By this time the bank was swamped with requests for re-financing of loans due to the new lower interest rates and they delayed acting upon my application for several months. They finally got to my application and approved the construction loan subject to an appraisal of the ptoject. Their appraisal will be received by them this week and the loan should be completed in a few weeks. I respectfully request this extension as the delay was not caused by my negligence but was caused by my willingness to help the City of Ashland by changing the project_ to "Affordable Housing. " Sincerely,� LL A�,Bj!EE/RAT~i TEI TELBAUM ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 18, 1993 TO Planning Department FROM Don Paul, Fire Marshal SUBJECT Earl King Condo's, Hersey St I recently was made aware of the extension request for Mr. King's Condominium project of Hersey Street. The original application was made several years ago and has been amended through passed review processes. The fire department request the opportunity to have a complete review of the proposed project previous to any further approval. If this is not possible with an extension then it would be in our best interest to recommend denial of the extension request. 02 June 2, 1993 To : The Planning Commission City of Ashland From: James & Mary Jeffrey Dean Commissioners : We own, and reside at, 298 West Hersey Street, in Ashland. We have received notice from you concerning Planning Action 93-067, which is a request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 26-unit condominium complex located at 284 West Hersey Street . We understand that this request will be reviewed by you on June 8 at 7 : 00 pm, and we plan to attend. The proposed site is adjacent to our side (east) and rear (north) boundary lines, As we operate a bed & breakfast, "The Drovers ' Inn, " we are very concerned about the effect which the design and use of the complex will have on the well-being of our guests, and of ourselves, and on the value of our business and of our property. At present 'we have a beautiful view of the mountains, both to the north and to the east . We have a rear deck where our guests can relax, and where we can serve them breakfast. We have been very upset to learn that the proposed plan is to build a solid wall of two-story units only six feet from our rear line! As there is already a two-story wall right next to us to the west, we would be completely boxed in on two sides. We have been told that technically the property line adjacent to our rear yard is considered to be a side yard. But normally there would be a back yard adjacent to our back yard, with appropriate open space between residences on the two properties, and we feel that this. is the intent of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. Per Section 18.72 .100 (I ) , the Planning Commission has the power to .amend site plans, including to increase setbacks up to twenty feet. We urgently, request that you exercise this power, and make the setback twenty feet from our rear line. This would give us a minimum of open space and privacy: . We believe that any builder on the site has the obligation to provide adequate screening between the site property and ours. This would include a solid wood fence at least six feet in 'height along our rear line, and along our side line for as far as that height is permitted. Along our rear line screening should also include the planting of trees of appropriate height; conifers would provide year-round privacy for persons living on each of the properties. as If buildings are to be constructed behind us, we would much prefer that they be only one story. We understand that a condition for approval of the site plan is that it include low-cost housing, which it does not now seem to include. We suggest that some one-story studios or one-bedroom .units would provide some lower-cost housing, and if put along our rear line would give more privacy to persons living on each of the properties, and would not destroy our view. The Planning Department Staff Report, on page 3 under "Building Orientation, " states that "there may be an opportunity to locate a building up along Hersey Street . . . " While we appreciate the reasons given for suggesting this, we definitely do not want our view and solar access on our east side to be blocked . Perhaps• a building could be sited so as to avoid this, but, otherwise, we feel that a twenty foot. appropriately landscaped front setback, adjacent to a parking area appropriately screened on each 'side and at the rear, would be preferable . Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully yours, 43 City of Ashland Planning Exhibit E uaaT Q PA N OATE(d89J Stirs I f?�'i� •�-� ' --�GVO�fir../ T l -------�---fix- �� • - ------- .----------------- --- ----=------ - - - - - ---- - -- ----- - 7m; CGr - City of Ashland Planning Exhibit PA p _ Dirc Susr May 31; 1993 City of Ashland Planning Commission Dear Commissioners : We the undersigned live in the building at numbers 300, 302, 304, and 306 West Hersey Street, in Ashland. We understand that a plan to . build a 26-unit condominium complex at 289 West Hersey Street will be reviewed by you on June 8 at 7 :00 pm. At present we enjoy a beautiful view of the mountains, and we are shocked to learn that the proposed plan is to build a solid wall of two-story units only ten feet from our rear fence. Per the Ashland Land Use Ordinance, Section 18 . 72. 100 I, the Planning Commission has the power to amend site plans, including to increase setbacks up to twenty feet. We request that you exercise this power, and make the setback twenty feet from our rear fence. This would give us a minimum of open space and privacy. Also, if buildings have to be constructed behind us, we would much prefer that they be only one story. Thank you for your consideration in this matter . Respectfully yours, a&Ao ac gtz,d 30a 0�5 Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING specifywhich ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your on the following request with respect to the ri ght of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held A copy of the application,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION be provided at reasonable cost,if requested. A copy of the staff report will be HEARINGS BOARD on the 10TH DAY OF MARCH, available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials am available at the Ashland 1992 AT-1:30 P.M. at the ASHLAND CIVIC Planning Department,City Hell,20 Past Main,Ashland,OR 97520. CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, During the Public Hearin&the Chair shag allow testimony from the applicant Oregon. and those in attendance concerning this request.The Chairshall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the The ordinance criteria applicable to this application am attached to this notice. applicable criteria. Oregon lawstates that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, If you have anyquestions oreomments conceming this request,please feel free the i ion ma eran opportunity lure top ndito heissie,pspecificity ecludes your right to contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department city Hall,at488- the derision makeran opportunityto respond to the issue,precludes your right � of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to 530.5 aua �tyc,GYealonE r .L /.� aANOT e OTIS y 1 0 'EJECT Farao Y1,y x?EY ' w . W � • 'vF'r ; , S E A r .IAi. M.•',. , S �• 'W . Hiffr lw . ^ qY0 'r' WJ' �� ! � [>N• 9GfD1G1L I, -�Vyt, S 9 2 r o W d JLO .I I m p.�{ }Y WI •+ - al IyI�t yfi V � KM(. 'd Yaw >G• M � 6 T D 9 Ice E P i 140V Nerd t- / a'e'. � a+D• ace.• i 4j �r / by ` • b/.. IT.: ' Wk .n _ 1 n t* zsar ' xx � ' ' fe• 6tn� KY Dd 'D' Jlvi ^+ 1rID' N� W tT Iwti dined 4FW fn4 ao 1/no• — PLANNING ACITON 92-009 is a request for Site Review for a 26-unit condominium complex located at 284 Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Multi-Family Residential, High Density; Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map #: 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. APPLICANT: Earl King Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING speciCyY 1ichordinancec rit eriont heobjectionisbasedonalsoprecludesyour on the following request with respect to the right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will beheld A copy of the application, all documents and evidence=lied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION be provided at reasonable cost,if requested.A copy of the staff report will be on the14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1992 AT 7.00 available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland P.M.at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER,1175 East Planning Departmcmt City Hall,20 East Main,Ashland,OR 97520. Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. During the Public Hearing,the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant add those in attendance concerning this request.The Chairshall have the right The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the Oregon law states that failure to raise ad objection concerning this application, applicable criteria. either in person orby letter,orfailure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision makeran opportunity to respond to the issue,precludes yourright Ifyou have anyquestions orcomments concerning this request,please feel free of appeal to the land Use Board ofAppeals(LUBA)on that issue.Failure to to contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department,City Hall,at 48& 530.5. / r A.NT ft�fa CAMBRIDGE 8 (� fIN RANnY 3 I ._ DTIS 8 IEERNIER MAPtE O C I G444Gf i r Au-l:1A 1c T . ¢I YNHRSf) SI E W x frr C � 8 / MAN MSA ♦. [ �. lee MERSEY IW f fa,d Y e.�t cmohfAi •' _ _ _ E� _�� r.. s col . _ 1 Is BAid •tea' i+d� b'ro'. M'•a' Ba'o' f+o !9fn" f•r' •JVY• L Q ew e.'r :na% r:+` ysb as}e• .bYe' '- tid coo• PLANNING ACTION 92-009 is a request for Site Review for a 26'-1mit-apartment complex located at 284 Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: High Density Multi-Family Residential;Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map #: 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. APPLICANT: Earl King e+( 7 The Ashland Planning Department preliminarily approved this request on January 22,1992. This action will be reviewed Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this by the Ashland Planning Commission Hearings Board at 1:30 application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient pm on February 11,1992,at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 specificityto afford the decision makeranoppor tunityto respond to the issue, East Main St.,Ashland.OR. No Public Testimony Is allowed precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specifywhich ordinance criterion the objection is baud at this review. on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to A copy of the application,an documents end evidence relied upon by the request, AT NO CHARGE, a public hearing before the applicantand applicable criteria are available forinspection at nocost andwill Ashland Planning Commission on this action. be provided atreasonabie cost,if requested.A copy of the staff report will be g available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost,if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland To exercise this right,a WRITTEN request must be received Planning Department,City Hall,20 East Main,Ashland,OR 97520.. inthe Planning Department,20 East Main St.,priorto 3 pm If you have any questions or comments concerning this request,please feel on February 3, 1992. If you do not SPECIFICALLY REQUEST free to contact Susan Yates of the Ashland Planning Department,City Hall, A PUBLIC HEARING by the time and date stated above, at 489-5305. there will be no Public testimony Permitted. If a hearing is requested, it will be scheduled for the following month. The ordinance criteria applicable to thisappllcstion arc attached to this notice. b g p RAW t(Y�cAMBRIDGE RANDY r i Oil$ IE�EI BRI ER - Y• 1 - V G N R =pu(u I O I °4Aryn u". `\N t r r Atxu I . bJECT ace° t•4y . . ri7 E e 4 : is . MAN TtN' r too HTMY )W I pow r• -i DSO P 4 W�1 • + d' 1 t 'd ew >,' t ., H I •x"41 a r D e IR E p 06•: ,IOnJI .y,< m f I olds nN4 b ` ES 34 tE •. `/I MN ,aH �w Ice i �. .. 92,dA Il•w fHfatr y. -1 ...... lid Z, Ipo.c'T PLANNING ACTION 92-009 is a request for Site Review for a 26-unit condominium complex located at 284 Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Multi-Family Residential, High Density; Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map #: 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. APPLICANT: Earl King t< 0 CITY OF ASHLAND ,' CI, T. Y HALL ' ASHLAND,OREGON 97520. -. telephone(Cade 503)4823211 April 20, 1992 RE: Planning Action # 92-009 Dear Earl King At its meeting of March 10, 1992 the Ashland Planning Commission approved your request for a site Review for the property located at 284 Hersey St . Assessor's Map# 39 lE 4CB ,TaxLot(s 2303 The Findings of Fact and the Commission's Orders, which were adopted at _the April 14 1992 meeting, are enclosed. Please note the following circled items:. 1. A final map prepared by a registered surveyor must be submitted within one year of the date of preliminaryy approval; otherwise, approval becomes invalid. 2. A final plan must be submitted within 18 months of the date of preliminary approval; otherwise, approval becomes invalid. There is a 15 day appeal period which must elapse before a Building Permit may be issued. All of the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission must be fully met before an occupancy permit may be issued. Planning Commission approval is valid for a period of one year only, after which time a new application would have to be submitted. Please feel free to call me at 488-5305 if you have any questions. crS ce Y Bill Molnar Associate Planner JMc/sa Enclosures) � 9 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 10, 1992 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #92-009, REQUEST FOR A ) SITE REVIEW FOR A 26-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX LOCATED ) FINDINGS, AT 284 HERSEY STREET. ) CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS APPLICANT: EARL KING ) RECITALS: 1) Tax lot 2303 of 391E 4CB is located at 284 Hersey and is zoned R-3; High Density Multi-Family Residential. 2) The applicant is requesting site review approval to construct a 26- unit condominium complex. : Site .improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for approval of a Site Review are found . in Chapter 18.72 and are as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City .Council for implementation of this chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on March 10, 1992, at which time testimony,was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore,. The Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered. with an limo SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has. received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal to construct a 26-unit condominium complex meets the criteria for site review, approval found in Chapter 18.72 . 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that all applicable city ordinances have been met by the proposed development. Setback, lot coverage, bicycle parking and density requirements of the zoning district have been met. The base density for the parcel is 19.5 dwelling units. The applicant has been granted a 40 percent density bonus for affordable housing and energy efficient design. 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that the project complies with Review chapter, as well as with the the requirements of the Site site design guidelines adopted by the City Council. Pedestrian access is provided from the street to each unit. Eight percent of the total lot area has been dedicated as outdoor recreational space, and is provided in the form of a landscaped courtyard. In addition to the courtyard area, each unit has been submitted 63 swhich foot concrete patio. A landscaping p shows the placement and size of all .plantings, and the layout of the irrigation system. , 2.5. The Planning Commission finds that adequate capacity of city services exists to.accommodate this proposal. City sewer, water and electricity are located adjacent to the site and are sufficient to . serve the development. The proposal has access onto Hersey Street, which is a paved arterial with adequate capacity to accommodate the approximately 156 vehicle. trips estimated to be generated by the project. Storm drainage from the parking area and . from rooftops will be collected on-site and directed by. underground pipe to the drainage ditch along the railroad tracks. Also, each unit will be equipped with an automatic residential fire sprinkler system. SECTION 3 . DECISION 3. 1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal to construct a 26-unit condominium complex is .supported by evidence contained in the ,record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being • J subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #92-009. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 192-009 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2) That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department be complied .with, including the installation of an automatic residential fire sprinkler system in each unit. 3) That a storm drainage plan for parking area be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 4) That a water line and meter plan for City water service be approved by the superintendent of the Ashland Sewer and Water Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Each unit shall have a separate water service. 5) That a sewer line plan be approved by the superintendent of the Ashland Sewer and Water Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Each unit shall have. a separate sewer service. 6) That a revised landscaping plan indicating the layout of the irrigation system be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Revised plan to include evergreens planted between the units and the parking area (to reduce the glare from headlights. and help to break up the building facade) ; large -canopy shade trees located along the west side of the parking lot and additional conifers situated at the rear by the railroad' tracks to provide screening year round. 7) That 26 sheltered bicycle spaces be installed to the standards outlined in 18.92.040 (2) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 8) That a berm or sound wall (minimum 211. solid wood or equivalent) be constructed along property line, abutting the railroad tracks,. blocking the line of site from the first floor of the units to the rails to a height of 6110" above finished floor level. Also that the second story portion of the structures be designed such that the interior noise levels do not exceed 45 .dBA during the passage of an average train. 9) That a recycling area be provided for the residents of the development. 10) That the parking area be paved, striped and wheel stops installed prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. 11) That the landscaping be installed as- per the approved plan prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. .�eC. 12) That all trash receptacles be screened by site obscuring fencing material. 13) That a blanket easement on the property for electric utilities be provided. Easement to be provided in buildings for wiring. owner responsible for excavating, backfilling, compaction, providing protection for transformer and installation of pull boxes. Transformer location to be approved by the City Electric Department. 14) That. the parking area be adequately screened by a 6 ' high solid wood fence. Screening to be installed along the eastern side of the parking area. Also, that a 3 ' -6" solid wood fence be installed along the south side of the first two compact spaces at the entrance to the development. 15) That a 3 ' wide concrete walkway be provided from Hersey Street to the entrance of all units. 16) That the relocation of the 'irrigation ditch be done to the approval of the Watermaster and the Director of Public Works and that a public utility easement to be granted along the new route of the relocated irrigation line. 17) That a sidewalk be installed along the Hersey Street frontage prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 18) That the applicant enter into an agreement with the City of Ashland guaranteeing that 25 percent of the residential units are affordable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in such resolution. The City of Ashland will prepare the agreement to be signed prior to the issuance of a building permit. / �6 1� /9� P anning Commission Approval Date �3 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES MARCH 10, 1992 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Barbara Jarvis. Jenifer Carr was also present. Staff present were McLaughlin, Molnar and Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS The Minutes of the February 11, 1992 Hearings Board were approved. The Findings for Medford Growers Market were approved. The Findings for John Maurer (PA 92- 022) will be held for correction of,Section 3.1 and approved at this evening's meeting. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 92-009 REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW FOR A 26-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX LOCATED AT 284 HERSEY STREET. APPLICANT: EARL KING STAFF REPORT This proposal was originally approved in 1988 for 27.apartment units. At this time, the applicant is proposing a 26-unit condominium complex. Each unit will be two-stories with approximately 865 square feet. Twenty-five percent of the units will meet affordable housing. The units will be oriented around a large landscaped courtyard. Bicycle parking has been added. The pedestrian walkway network has been revised and all walks will eventually lead to Heresy Street. Noise mitigation measures will be taken for the area along the railroad tracks. Automatic sprinkler systems will be included in each unit. McLaughlin showed a video of the property. Jarvis asked that Dennis Barnts' name be deleted from Condition 4 and 5 as someday these might be unenforceable conditions. PUBLIC HEARING log 451.v.«4 Sf. DON KIST, representing the property owner, has agreed to have 25 percent of the units in affordable housing. HELGA MOTLEY, 304 W. Heresy, is very concerned about the density in this area. The construction noises are also very disturbing. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 1 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES MARCH 10, 1992 GARY BREWER, 209 W. Hersey, agrees that it is too dense and particularly with Ashland's drought. When this was first approved there was no density or water problem like there is now. Brewer also is concerned with construction noise, lights and traffic. The alley has been a problem for years. The alley is a minor street and the end of the alley is only about 12 feet wide (toward the Minute Market). Over the years, each development has brought more people up and down the alley to the Minute Market. The cars speed down the narrow alley. Also, cars park in the alley. Brewer would like to see units 6 through 14 eliminated and the parking lot moved away from the entrance into the complex to mitigate the noise, traffic and lights and use the far end for RV storage or for extra vehicles and to landscape along the fence line. That would keep the noise contained in the middle of the complex. He does not want the condominiums at all. MEL CANAL, 240 Ohio, felt the density was extremely high. He agreed with Brewer's alternative. He is concerned with the tree that is close to the property line. Have any precautions been taken to maintain the tree? HELGA MOTLEY, lives right behind the tree that Canal mentioned. She has watched two large redwoods removed.that she was told would be saved. She has seen a lot of destruction to some nice trees. EARL KING, 1309 Talent Avenue, Talent, said the tree that was mentioned is not on his property. He mentioned that they plan to spend $28,000 in landscaping. If units 6 through 14 are cut, it would be impossible under the new energy codes to get affordable housing. There is landscaping (shrubbery) along the street going in. The landscaping plan proposed is by Dale Goes. Jarvis noted the letter in the packet from Mrs. C. F. Quirk opposing the project.. Carr is concerned about capacity (water and sewer, etc.). McLaughlin said the sewer plant is designed for a population of 35,000. The standards for sewage treatment are changing. Given the projected population growth, with minimal conservation measures, water needs can accommodated until the year 2010. Carr wondered if there was any way to request speed bumps for the alley. McLaughlin has consulted with Engineering and Public Works asking that if traffic levels and speeds increase in the future, could the alley be closed except to bikes and pedestrians. If the traffic increased through this construction, it could be closed to through traffic, however, it cannot be tied to the project at this time. Jarvis is concerned about the light glare and the impact of parking on the adjoining neighbors. It appears that the way.the project is configured it would be difficult for the complex residents to get in and out the complex. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES MARCH 10, 1992 �J COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Carr feels the project is extremely dense and a cause for concern. Aesthetically, the design looks very institutional. Jarvis believes that under Condition 14, that the fence height be limited to a six foot high solid wood fence and also.along the railroad side. Carr moved to approve PA92-009 with the attached Conditions. In Condition 4 and 5, delete Dennis Barnts' name and replace with "superintendent". In Condition 14, fence heights should be six feet. Jarvis seconded and the motion was carried. PLANNING ACTION 92-031 REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO WAIVE THE PAVING REQUIREMENT FOR THE DRIVEWAY LOCATED AT 921 PINECREST TERRACE. APPLICANT: Kent Provost Site visits were made by all. STAFF REQUIREMENT The applicant has built a home and constructed a driveway from Pinecrest Terrace up to the residence. The driveway is approximately 300 feet in total length. The applicant is requesting that the paving requirements for the driveway, as required by ordinance and as part of the building permit, be waived. The applicant has also stated that he would be agreeable to the paving of the driveway in the future, should the remainder of Pinecrest Terrace be paved. Staff agrees that it may be best not to require paving of the driveway at this time and deferred until this section of Pinecrest Terrace is paved. At that time, the drainage issue could to be addressed. Staff measured the grade of the driveway with a hand-held instrument and found it to be 24 to 25 percent. Staff believes it should be brought to 20 percent grade. PUBLIC HEARING KENT PROVOST, wanted his wife Laura's name on the application too. Provost said they had an electrical scope put on the driveway and said it was around 20 to 21 percent.. Since it was last scoped, more dirt has been back graded out. Southern Oregon Underground has been doing the grading and measuring. ED BEMIS, 398 Dead Indian Road, contractor for Provosts, agreed with the Staff Report, except for the grade measurement. _ ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 HEARINGS BOARD . MINUTES MARCH 10, 1992 ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT March 10, 1992 PLANNING ACTION: 92-009 APPLICANT: Earl King LOCATION: 284 Hersey Street ZONE DESIGNATION: R-3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-family Residential - High Density ORDINANCE REFERENCE: High Density - Multi Family 18.28 Site Design and Use Standards 18.72 REQUEST: Site Plan approval for the construction of a 26-unit condominium complex. I. Relevant Facts 1) Background - History of Application: In March 1988, the.Planning Commission approved a Site Review for the construction of a 27-unit apartment complex (PA88-034). A one-year extension of that approval was granted in May, 1989 (PA89-067): A second extension was granted in July of 1990 (PA90-121). 2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal: This project involves the construction of a 26-unit condominium complex. The site design of the project is almost identical to that of the previous approvals, with a few minor changes. The overall size of the project has been reduced from 27 units to 26 units. One of the units that was originally located in the courtyard area has been deleted. A more comprehensive walkway system has been indicated on the new plan. Also, sheltered bicycle parking has been included on the plan, as required by the recent changes in the Off-Street Parking ordinance. Bike racks are proposed to be located near the entrance, as well as at the rear of the lot adjacent to the common recreational area. kI. Project Impact. In April of 1991, the Ashland City Council amended the land use ordinance to allow for the construction of condominium units as an outright permitted use, subject to Site Review approval. Prior to that date, the approval of condominiums required a conditional use permit. � 7 The new proposal is essentially identical to the previous approval with the main exception being that the overall density of the project has been reduced by one unit. The parcel is just under an acre in size and has a base density of 19.5 dwelling units. The proposal calls for a 25 percent density bonus for affordable housing, based on the standards established by the City Council. In addition, a 15 percent density bonus is being awarded for energy efficient design. The units have been designed around a landscaped courtyard. The courtyard will be landscaped with lawn, perennials and deciduous shade trees. Another recreational area will be provided along the railroad tracks, at the rear of the property. Outdoor seating will be provided in both areas either in the form of benches and/or picnic tables. In addition to the common recreational areas, each unit will have a 7' x 9' concrete patio.. Staff would suggest that a revised landscaping plan be submitted indicating the design and layout of the irrigation system. We would suggest that some evergreens be planted between the units and the parking area in order.to reduce the glare from headlights and help to break up the building facade. Some large canopy shade trees must be located along the west side of the parking lot, while additional conifers should be placed at the rear by the railroad tracks to provide screening year round. Staff believes that adequate capacity of city services exists to accommodate this proposal. City sewer, water and electricity are located adjacent to the site and are sufficient to serve the development. The proposal has access onto Hersey Street, which is a paved arterial with adequate capacity to accommodate the approximately 156 vehicle trips estimated to be generated by the project. Storm drainage from the parking area and from rooftops will be collected on-site and directed by underground pipe to the drainage ditch along the railroad tracks. Also, each unit will be equipped with an automatic residential fire sprinkler system. III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for approval of a Site Review are found in Chapter 18.72.and are as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. .B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council for implementation of this chapter. PA92-009 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Earl'King March 10, 1992 Page 2 4 D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. 1V. Conclusions and Recommendations Staff recommends approval of the application and requests that the following conditions be attached: 1) That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here.- 2) That the requirements of the Ashland Fire Department be complied with, including the installation of an automatic residential fire sprinkler system in each unit. 3) That a storm drainage plan for parking area be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 4) That a water line and meter plan for City water service be approved by Dennis Barnts of the Ashland Sewer and Water Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Each unit shall have a separate water service. 5) That a sewer line plan be approved by Dennis Barnts of the Ashland Sewer and Water Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Each unit shall have a separate sewer service. 6) That a revised landscaping plan indicating the layout of the irrigation system be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Revised plan to include evergreens planted between the units and the parking area (to reduce the glare from headlights and help to break up the building facade), large canopy shade trees located along the west side of the parking lot and additional conifers situated at.the rear by the railroad tracks to provide screening year round. 7) That 26 sheltered bicycle spaces be installed to the standards outlined in 18.92.040 (1) prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 8) That a berm or sound wall (minimum 2" solid wood or equivalent) be constructed along property line abutting the railroad tracks, blocking the line of site from the first floor of the units to the rails to a height of 6'10" above finished floor level. Also that the second story portion of the structures be designed such that the interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA during the passage of an average train. PA92-009 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Earl King March 10, 1992 Page 3 9) That a recycling area be provided for the residents of the development. 10) That the parking area be paved, striped and wheel stops installed prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. 11) That the landscaping be installed as per the approved plan prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 12) That all trash receptacles be screened by site obscuring fencing material. 13) That a blanket easement on the property for electric utilities be provided. Easement to be provided in buildings for wiring. Owner responsible for excavating, backfilling, compaction, providing protection for transformer and installation of pull boxes. Transformer location to be approved by the City Electric Department. 14) That -the parking area be adequately screened by a 5'-6' high solid wood fence. Screening to be installed along the eastern side of the parking area. Also, that a 3'-6" solid wood fence be installed along the south side of the first two compact spaces at the entrance to the development. 15) That a 3' wide concrete walkway be provided from Hersey Street to the entrance of all units. 16) That the relocation of the irrigation ditch be done to the approval of the Watermaster and the Director of Public Works and that a public utility easement to be granted along the new route of the relocated irrigation line. 17) That a sidewalk be installed along the Hersey Street frontage prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 18) That the applicant enter into an agreement with the City of Ashland guaranteeing that 25 percent of the residential units are affordable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in such resolution. The City of Ashland will prepare the agreement to be signed prior to the issuance of a building permit. PA92-009 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report Earl King March 10, 1992 Page 4 �za Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING the decision maAeranopportunity to respond to the issue,precludes your right on the following request with respect to the of appeal to the land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA). Failurctospecifywhich ordinance criteria the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal. ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost,if requested. A copy of the staff report will bcr HEARINGS BOARD onthe-12TH DAY OF JUNE, availableforinspection seven days prior to the hearingand will be provided at reasonable cost,*if requested. All materials arc available at the Ashland 1990 AT 1:30 P.M. at the ASHLAND CIVIC Planning Department,city Hall,20 East Main,Ashland,OR 97520. CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, During the Public Hearing,the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant Oregon. and those in attendance concerning this request.The Chairshall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. 7tleordinance criteria applicable to this applicalionarc attached to this notice. Oregon lawstatesthat failure to raise an objection concerningthis application, Ifyou have anyquestionsorcommenis concerning this request,please feel free eitherin person orby letter,or failure to providesufftcient specificity to afford tocontaa Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department,City l fall,at488- 5305. Ex{ hS� oh y p/ Iw�c'oDS i �cY/JT701Y ':l 4 ". V r yI CATALUM f.J NURSE C is I~ F La _ ...3 . r Jjlyf�\ r u N -yl M -• ...., -=c cv,,._. . ._� I.n —fir-1 . SITE PLAN_ i .n' r PLANNING ACTION 90-121 is'a request for an extension of a previously approved site review for a 27-unit apartment complex located on the lot between 298 and 268 Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: High' Density Residential; Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map #: 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. APPLICANT: AI Teitelbaum C I T . Y O F AS H L A N D C I T Y H A LL ASHLAND.OREGON 97520 telephone(code 503)482-3211 July 13, 1990 RE: Planning Ac•lion 90-121 Dear Al Teitelbaum At its meeting of June 12, 1990 I the Ashland Planning Commission apl)rovcdyour request fur an Extension of Previously Approved Site Review for the property located on lot between 298 and 268 Hersey Street Assessor's Map# 39 1E 4CB 1'ax 1-01(s) 2303 The Findings of Fact and the Commission's Orders, which were adopted at the July 10, 1990 meeting, are enclosed. Please no(e the follow iu(\)g cn-cled ipen)s: `- ---\/ 1. A final n)ap prepared by a registered surveyor must be submitted within one year of the date of preliminary approval; otherwise, approval becomes invalid. " 2. A final plan must be submitted within 18 ti)onths of the date of preliminary approval; otherwise, approval becomes invalid. 3. There is a la clay appeal period which must elapse before a Building Permit may be issued. C4.) All of the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission must be fully met before an occupancy permit may be issued. 05. Planning Commission approval is valid for a period of one year only, after which time h new application would have to 'bc submitted. Please feel free to call me at 488-5305 if-you have any questions. ' Sin •erey� C. %� � �? � / John Mc l aughlin" CSenior 1) ner ( / JMc/sa Enclosure(s) ' ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT June 12, 1990 PLANNING ACTION: 90-121 APPLICANT. Earl King LOCATION: between 298 and 268 Hersey Street ZONE DESIGNATION: R-3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: High Density Residential ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.72 Site Review REQUEST: Extension of a previously approved site review for a 27-unit apartment complex. I. Relevant Facts 1) Background - History of Application In March 1988, the Planning Commission approved a Site Review for the 27-unit apartment complex (PA88-034). A one-year extension of that approval was granted in May, 1989.. 2) Detailed Description of Site and Proposal: The project is the same as originally submitted in 1988. II. Project Impact Normally, extensions are granted at the Type I level This generally applies to the fast extension request, and may apply to a second request if there have been no substantial changes in the ordinances or Commission interpretations of the ordinances. Staffs only concern in this application involves the sound attenuation along the railroad tracks. This application was one of the first processed that included'a condition to mitigate sound associated with the railroad. Since the time of this approval, Staff has refined the sound attenuation requirements and we would like to include those as a revised condition of the approval. III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for approval of a Site Review are found in 18.72 and are as follows: �3 A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will.be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council for implementation of this chapter. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations Staff believes that the design of the complex is still in compliance with the criteria for approval of a site review, but we would recommend that following conditions be added to the approval: 1) That Condition 10 of the original approval (PA88-034) be modified as follows: That a berm or sound wall (minimum 2" solid wood or equivalent) be constructed along property line abutting the railroad tracks, blocking the line of site from the first floor of the units to the rails to a height of 6'10" above finished floor level. Also that the second story portion of the structures be designed such that the interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA during the passage.of an average train. 2) That all other conditions of the original approval (PA88-034) shall remain valid. PA90-121 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report Earl King June 12, 1990 Page 2 Z/ / BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION June 12 , 1990 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #90-121, REQUEST FOR AN) EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE REVIEW FOR A 27 ) FINDINGS, UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED ON THE LOT BETWEEN 298 ) CONCLUSIONS AND 268 HERSEY STREET. ) AND ORDERS APPLICANT: AL TEITELBAUM ) RECITALS: 1) Tax lot 2303 of 391E 4CB. is located on the lot between 268 and 298 Hersey Street and is zoned R-3 ; Multi-Family Residential. 2) The applicant is requesting an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 27-unit apartment complex. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Department of Community development. 3) The criteria for Site Review approval are found in Chapter 18 . 7.2 and are as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines' adopted by the City Council for implementation of this chapter 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on June 12, 1990, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore, The Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: . SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an 110" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an limo SECTION 2 . CONCLUS09Y FINDINGS 2 . 1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2 .2 The Planning Commission ' finds that the request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 27-unit apartment complex still is in compliance with the criteria for approval of a Site Review found in chapter 18 . 72 . SECTION 3. DECISION 3 . 1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 27-unit apartment complex is supported by evidence contained in the record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and. upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #90-121. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any whatsoever, then Planning Action #90-121 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That Condition 10 of the original approval (PA88-034) be modified as follows: That a berm or sound wall (minimum 2" solid wood or equivalent) be constructed along property line abutting the railroad tracks, blocking the line of site from the first floor of the units to the rails to a height of 6110" above finished floor level. Also that the second story portion of the structures be designed such that the interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA during the passage of an average train. . 2) That all other conditions of the original approval (PA88-034) shall remain valid. 3) That a recycling area be provided for the residents of the development. 4) That bike parking be provided as per the newly adopted standards. G / Pl nn'ng Commission Approval bate T(o DICK JACKSON, 583 Normal Avenue, pastor of the church, stated that there could be up to ten vehicles during the periods requested. OSCAR BJORLIE, 611 Normal Avenue, has owned Lots 600 and 1200. Never in 40 years has there been excess noise or traffic problems. There was.a call from Mike Hillenga requesting that the visitors use their own trash receptacles. A correction to Condition 2 should be Tax Lot 800. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Powell moved to approve PA90-106 with the added condition that the applicant control refuse on the site and contain on their own property. Morgan seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 90-121 REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE REVIEW FOR A 27-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED ON THE LOT BETWEEN 298 AND 268 HERSEY STREET. APPLICANT: AL TEITELBAUM Site visits were made by all. STAFF REPORT This action was approved in 1988 with an extension in 1989. Staff has modified a condition from the original application to include a sound wall (refer to Condition 1). PUBLIC HEARING DON RIST, 310 Bridge Street, represents Teitelbaum and could see no problem with._ ; the added condition nor with adding conditions requiring recycling and bike parking.' _ COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND MOTION Morgan moved to approve PA90-121 with the attached Conditions and add Condition 3 that a recycling area be provided for the residents and Condition 4 that bike parking as per the transportation code be added. Powell seconded the motion and it was carried unanimously. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 7 HEARINGS BOARD - MINUTES - .. . JUNE 10,1990 - ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSIO N FINDINGS & ORDERS May 10, 1989 PLANNING ACTION 89-067 is a request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 27 unit apartment complex to be located on the lot between 298 and 268 W. Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: High Density Residential; Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map #: 4CB; Tax Lot #: 2303. APPLYCANT: Al Teitelbaum On Wednesday, April 26, 1989, at 8:30 am., an administrative hearing was held in the Planning Office to review this application. In attendance were Acting Planning Director Dick Wanderscheid,Assistant Planner Bill Molnar and Associate Planner John McLaughlin serving as Hearings Officer. McLaughlin stated that this application was approved as a Type I planning action in May, 1988, approving a Site Review for 27 apartment units. Wanderscheid asked if the applicant was requesting any modifications to the approved plan. McLaughlin stated that the applicant was only requesting an extension, and that no other changes were proposed. He also stated that no changes in the ordinances relating to this review had been changed. McLaughlin then found that-the application was still in compliance with all criteria for approval of a Site Review and that a one-year extension would not negatively impact the previous approval. Based on our overall conclusions and on the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action 89-067. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 89-067 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the . approval: 1) That all conditions from PA88-034 shall remain valid. If no appeal is filed, this request will become final when reviewed by the Ashland Planning Commission on April 10, 1989. 301m Fregfese, Panning Director Date The Ashland Planning Dt, .rtment preliminarily approved this . _,guest on April 26, 1989. Questions concerning this request should be directed to the Ashland Planning Department located in the City Hall, or by calling 488-5305. This request will be reviewed by the Ashland Planning Commission Hearings Board at its MAY 10TH, 1989 MEETING AT 8:00 AM. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main, Ashland, OR. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to request, AT NO CHARGE, a hearing before the Ashland Planning Commission on this item. To exercise this right, a written request must be received in the Planning Department prior to 3:00 p.m. on May 8, 1989. However, if you do not specifically request a public hearing by the time and date stated above, there will be no public testimony permitted before the Planning Commission. If a public hearing is requested, it will be scheduled for the following month. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, precludes your right of appeal. Failure to specify which ordinance criteria the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal. If you have any questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Department, City Hall, at 488-5305. W0005 5 Si +G FZavi e w1 O�' !HC$FlT r JI c_. _ CATALIUA NURSE 1 S SA I�_pinID I SL .._YY r. , llT \ N.... M D �5 SITE PLAN cry r i Hew ST PLANNING ACTION 89-067 is a request for an extension of a previously approved Site Review for a 27 unit apartment complex to be located on the lot between 298 and 268 W. Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: High Density Residential: Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map : 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. Applicant: Al ,Teitelbaum �9 Al ALBERT I` TEI.BAUM Real Estate • Management • Investments 4267 MARINA CITY DRIVE - SUITE W-1114, MARINA DEL REY, CA 90292 Telephone(213)822.0673 March 31, 1989 City of Ashland Planning Department Ashland, Oregon Gentlemen: The fluctuations in the interest rates have . created problems for me in securing a construction loan at a rate that I can support. I would appreciate an extention of my building permit as approved by you previously. As you will note everything was checked and approved by you when original permit was approved. We will not request any changes from what you had already approved. Thank you for your help, I am Sincerely _yours AL TEITELBAUM P.S. Check for $150. 00 is enclosed w ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS AND ORDERS March 30, 1988 PLANNING ACTION 88-034 is a request for a Site Review for a 27 unit apartment complex to be located on the lot between 298 and . 268 W. Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: High Density Residential; Zoning: R-3; Assessor' s Map: 4CB Tax lot: 2303. APPLICANT: Al Teitelbaum On March 15, 1988 at 10 am an administrative hearing was held in the Planning Office to review this application. In attendance were Ear], King, Bruce Abeloe, John Fregonese serving as Hearings Officer, and Associate Planner John McLaughlin. Al Williams, of the Electric Department, also attended the first portion of the hearing. Fregonese- noted that this request was only for a Site Review and that no variances were being requested. He reviewed the Site Plan and initially looked at the recreational and open space. Abeloe, the architect for the project, explained the open space and recreational space calculations he had submitted. McLaughlin stated that the interior floor space of the units was 864 sq. ft. per unit, and for 27 units the requirement for open space would be approximately 5832 sq. ft. Fregonese analyzed the site plan and found that the open space and recreational space requirements had been met, specifically by the open space near the railroad tracks, the central courtyard areas, and with the private yard spaces of each unit. Fregonese stated that the number of parking spaces met the code requirement in total, and that the number of compact spaces met the 408 criteria, along with .the required handicapped spaces. Fregonese then reviewed the Guidelines, specifically the recommendations for orientation and design, and found that the units orientation was of a good design, and that the choice of trees initially presented, as well as their location, was good. A review of the submitted landscaping plan followed, and Fregonese suggested that some of the landscaping between the units and the parking area be modified. Abeloe and King agreed, also explaining the grade changes between the parking lot and the units and how that will help mitigate problems. with car headlights. Fregonese suggested that the perennials be moved to the inner court area and that the mugo pines and other evetgreens be moved nearer the parking area. King agreed and stated that he would submit a revised plan. Landscaping coverage by lawn met the 508 requirements. Fregonese then studied the siding and roofing materials. Abeloe i stated there would be horizontal siding and King stated that it s� would actually bE -1-11 siding. Concerning ilors, King stated that he was not aware that he had to submit samples, but that the siding would be painted a gray, with white trim, and the roofing material would be composite with charcoal gray color. Al Williams then discussed the transformer placement. He and Abeloe discussed options and well as where to gang electric meters. These changes were noted by Williams and he found them to be acceptable. Abeloe submitted a grading plan for the lot, with final grades for the parking area and the building area. Fregonese then discussed the lighting standards and informed the applicants that lights could not shine onto adjacent properties. Fregonese further reviewed the site plan for -compliance with the Site Design Guidelines and the criteria for approval , which are: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council for implementation of this chapter. Fregonese found that the applicant' s site plan adequately met the the above criteria. Based on our overall conclusions and on the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action 88-034. Further, if any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 88-034 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That a site, size, and species specific landscaping plan be submitted for review by the Tree Commission and Staff Advisor prior .to expiration of the appeal period. Plan to be subject to any modifications deemed necessary by the Staff Advisor. Plan to include summary of common open areas and private outdoor spaces. 2) That the existing Ashland Creek irrigation line on the property be maintained in an open 'and operating condition. Maintenance shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Relocation and/or culverting shall be done only .after contacting the Watermaster' s Office. 3) That the parking area be paved,striped and wheel stops installed prior to occupancy of the units. 5� 4) That the landscaping be installed as per the approved plans prior to occupancy. 5) That two street trees be installed along the Hersey St. frontage prior to occupancy. Also that a minimum of 5 trees be provided in the parking area for shading. 6 ) That the site plan be revised to show structural connections between buildings, or that the site plan be modified to allow a minimum of 12 ' between principal buildings. fence. 7) That the parking area be adequately screened by a 5 '-6 ' Screening to be all along the eastern property line, and the western line abutting the parking area . ✓ 8 ) That all information required on the energy checklist be provided prior to building permit application, and be reviewed by the Energy Conservation Coordinator. 9 ) . That one additional fire hydrant be installed on-site and one in the Hersey St. right-of-way prior to the commencement of construction. Hydrant locations to be determined by the Fire Department. 10) That sound attenuation measures be taken for units 1-6 . These measures to include structural means to reduce railroad noise. All measures to be approved by the Staff Advisor prior to building permit issuance. Wall to have STC rating of 35 or greater, with no more than one glazing. 11) That all trash areas be screened by a site obscuring fencing material. 12) That the installation of electric service be done to the satisfaction. of the City Electric Department, including the placement of transformers. 13 ) That sewer and water service be coordinated with the Public Works Department, and that any sewer service under the railroad tracks be done only after receiving approval for Southern Pacific Railroad. 16) That the construction of the driveway approach to Hersey St. be coordinated with the Public Works Department to ensure proper grades prior to the improvement of Hersey St. 17) That a fence or hedge be installed along the northern property line between the parcel and the railroad tracks. 18) That all lighting be adequately directed so as to not shine on to adjacent properties. S3 If no appeal is filed, this request will become final when reviewed by the Ashland Planning Commission on March 30, 1988 . Joh Fregone e, Panning Director Date 5-q The Ashland Planning Department preliminarily approved this request on - March 15, 1988. Questions concerning this request should be directed to the Ashland Planning Department located in the City Hall , or by calling 488- 5305. This request will be reviewed and approved by the Ashland Planning Commission at its March 30, 1988 meeting. Any affected property or resident has a right to request, AT NO CHARGE, a hearing before the Ashland Planning Commission on this item. To exercise this right, a written request must be received in the Planning Department prior to 3:00 p.m. on March 28; 1988. However, if you do not s ecificall ue reqst a public hearing by the time and date stated above, there will a no public testimony before the Planning Commission and will become effective March 30, 1988. If a public hearing is requested, it will be ... scheduled for the following month. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, precludes your right of appeal . Failure to specify which ordinance criteria the objection is based on also precludes your ,right of appeal . If you have any questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Department, City-Hall , at 488- 5305. ;�r1,Z�6 a 1Z,- y4,e' 9a �i > 1�Fttbs ! 'cr inaV 1. _ UieLtlY ♦ f w — Le. 99 •�_ ,. _ n i/ n — n w — arriva w.. =J SITE PLAN 4n PLANNING ACTION 88-034 is a request for a Site Review fo.r a 27 unit apartment complex to be located on the lot between 298 and 268 W. Hersey Street. Comprehensive Plan Designation: High Density Residential : Zoning: R-3; Assessor's Map: 4CB; Tax Lot: 2303. APPLICANT: Al Teitelbaum b Earl King " S J City Attorney City of Ashland (503) 482-3211, Ext. 59 MEMORANDUM July 26, 1993 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: -Paul Nolte SUBJECT: Procedure following filing of initiative petition to repeal food and beverage tax The city recorder has received sufficient verified signatures on the petition to repeal the food and beverage tax to trigger the next step under the statutes. When she receives such signatures she is required to file with you the "initiated measure"' at your next meeting (meaning August 3, 1993). You have 30 days from August 3, 1993 to adopt the measure or reject it.2 If you do not adopt it, state law requires that it be submitted for a vote at the election not less than 90 days from the date it was filed with you (in other words on November 2, 1993). You may refer a competing measure to the voters at the same election. If you decide to submit a competing measure, the measure must be prepared not later than the 30th day after the initiated measure is filed with you (30 days from August 3, 1993). The city recorder has been advised that for the November election, a voters' pamphlet will be published. Under ORS 251.345, the city council is to submit "an impartial, simple and understandable statement explaining the (initiated) measure and its effect" for the voters' pamphlet. This statement must be submitted by September 2, 19933. If you so desire I will prepare an explanatory statement for your review and approval at the next council meeting (August 17) which is the only regularly scheduled council meeting before the deadline. (p:alolinit-pro.mem) ' ORS 250.325(1): "If an initiative petition contains the required number of verified signatures, the city elections officer shall file the initiated measure with the city governing body at its next meeting." 2 ORS 250.325(2). 3 OAR 165-22-010(2)(b). I .arrW.Irr ri Of As Pma ran dum O4F60� July 27, 1993 II. MAYOR GOLDEN AND ASHLAND CITY COUNCILORS C 9U11 . NAN FRANKLIN, CITY RECORDER Qti. INITIATIVE PETITION The initiative petition, "REPEALS FOOD AND BEVERAGE TAX" , circulated by Curtis Hayden, was filed with signatures in the City Recorder ' s office on July 1 and July 21, 1993. It was taken to the Jackson County Election Department on the above dates for signature verification. The County Election Deparment has verified 1480 signatures. (1441 are requited for the necessary 158 to place an initiative measure on the ballot) . As required by ORS 250. 325 (copy attached) , I am required to file the initiated measure with the governing body at its next meeting . The ballot title, prepared by the City Attorney, is also attached. City Attorney /ee�A� --X . City of Ashland (503) 482-3211, Ext. 59 MEMORANDUM May 17, 1993 TO: Nan Franklin FROM: Paul Nolte SUBJECT: Initiative Petition - Food and Beverage Tax Pursuant to ORS 250.275(3), 1 am providing you with the ballot title for the prospective petition for a local initiative measure regarding the food and beverage tax. CAPTION: 'Repeals Food and Beverage Tax" QUESTION: "Shall the food and beverage tax adopted by the voters in March, 1993 be repealed?" EXPLANATION: 'The food and beverage tax was adopted by the voters in March 1993. The tax is imposed on food and beverages sold in restaurants and other similar facilities. The tax is required to be used for acquisition of open space lands and easements.and for state mandated sewage treatment methods. A yes vote will repeal this tax." 1p:orcRt xf&brexap) . .. '.�n N n7 0.<❑°N'•�n�An S n=.T G:"v�<T NwO n J 9 n O n N^^n.'' 5'`n a`P..fin.0°P°,..9 r v P�r pn�A^•R=p 0" :x,-f•�J'R]rW rnY. °'-'�-(n'C<�3.Wa N v n 'a7 SP v n e0..�n 0.nyG�° ^OG q°R O �o]"..n 0.O U n nN � 7 �Otil R!-n•,'� ^y'n n °nn o -301 Y 9 9nn ° °o Iny•V r�ryv O n •< ° ^ Nn L' ° o =R TC f goo n ?nP n O ` n ]n 9 On ^ - << o n 0`C ^ , n C O -v V n < 7 . . ` .^�q -0Q< < a . 0 ^ Z 0 0.7 70 0 ,-= gN^ n ] OPn J n d0. ' 0 q ] 0. p An' GSO N 7�C n V a . n ' C » O Ty p pW n7 a ;.] 9 P � W n ^n 73 C. �p O C 1 O 7.Se0�,VN o.�{ ' 1 : '-no 3 =•`G S w o. ^7 °°_ p p W ]•0 7 G"U 'O j R . 0 00 O. 7X q n r4„.q<n vNG..W AY 0 �n 1 ^ GOn °° Y O O I o �!na n �P 7 •w 0• 0' n 3 O O TN:y v n P N n y n •°n m�•G ii O (p^.9 0 2 'LN S' T.C^.`-.0 y 7 c` '^c0, n " . Y - o yO +7 W V O a T-N I 0 O n S L O. Pp p U n 0 . 0 `n n 0 Z O ^" yoo N 0 C.n m p-0 'o I"CM ° ° n _ 0.n'0 N 0 a 0 1< a.0 0 O +o �• 0 0.o 0 N ,°y'� a 0 no n ra 7 nn`G<•3 03 3 a�coow� Or Y'0 W Tn n ° -oG p 3 R p oo G o n c . '+eo c n an •� °. - ] o on -n n ^n n n 0.° ^ ° �? n 7•p ° . 0 R o P . 00 wo ' ° Y =In o �" G m 7'n, n 0 Tnv {`' r Fi NV !°+�? n� Weni W-L WT�nW� 0CA =30`< 0.yn NY0.^^.^'77 Sn Ry Mn ' 0 Y 7 n A.V. nW nGOY p � nc o0y .0 ^.n«.nj ' _ 'SG� Cq .. < O =�•O'�.<..m m .n..e� :n- m P 7 O 0 Gb < gOti-❑ 7y ^ 7 ., p0. n e oOO - < .(/]nfi S< n G `�< C� en�n OA o m,Ty O C �P R nnG aq 0.pNY N0V SAE ° 7"en+"'W ri 0.7•y = � N ] G n W. o m W n !0� p'C'nq ^ r ° pr =ao�^.^.� L a<� '-'i n,F„O r. ,�je STO �.n NS,^•n.0a< P.7NnAn�.r .N+ �fYNNCpJ �o7n NC.'n nPa C7 -?p]G G. W].]yO..]On<`nC S< LYn C•_-...�:n f _�°� o^m n Tn n YnC S n nC PPn .c7 n. R.°7 n.7Sn°^�•On°7 O nN�C ,fA>C• a°C�'+ �Oc.-m 7n--��^-�w. <C ,* N7 2 ns� nA�n gn`T1 Y°.^. OO n n S°N N'•._O3 g r?�n p .^°w w..m O p 7 G p.0......•��P Un n P'nl Onn n ya P^�]y O -ff -d0 n-< W r 0 0 c- m n U:p W o � ^ ^q ° n 30 O � O =ro ° 0 ° na p�O' G NN n^�r n .' a N n :1nLY3 C7 U Rn GH0 •'GTO'vtC Yi!''i'1.o7N ljn^nn^'.0�7�0��r R w L -,z_0 nn o s�en. _�•."��:'f:��__0��' �oo-°Y7ro i,,, .�-N„��o__j:-e_,a'.`-�_n-�:So�u. n:u,.o woco n'a y a y 3c f0.]i ^Sv.]`N 3-1 �C 5_�nnC.Y'.A 7^n U w c,^° ,-Y<Tn pOc x n ] n3,^n+n n R n�m G7n nr G�r^Nw p n3 cn iUm`nc J,n nT c7 OYn°°•��R n:]mn.n�"O'=G3<�•T3�yn RT0.or�Pn Y]'T°<.j K r r34•L^p+i .0 Nn En n�^n:.'o:n^NRGm-a...tYA Cr 0 O,j 9 w�_uno.oo.Wo]Nnon ]U m m^yw y"oy]C O ° 3 n �� -�- c t4n n --5'o SOC O p Y 0]7 n Tp' w^w]c0 nn^3 N i W.,N::7 a^G°'7 3 p...�gy�'_•S 3OL Y LO 0 V N C ° U 0 n W a V� G n ] - r R = S G0 W n 3TN 0 0 0.0.0N�q E' c ao xnTo < n p Tod tarn U 0_O< V 0 o 0 0, Q 0 n 0 OQ ` < O T p-0 0- C 7`n a n n.- `.T^.�. .-a^A;^e•; w_j, N"°cuo o.° =1.<v�.i.' OF`�N�y:•. Emorandum A. O4EGOt� July 21, 1993 V1a: Brian Almquist, City Administrator Wram: Steven Hall, Public Works Director Subject Howard Prairie Water Rights ACTION REQUESTED City Council authorize Public Works Director to pursue contract for stored water rights with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the Talent Irrigation District (TID). City Council authorize Public Works Director to pursue permanent stored water rights with the USBR,TID and the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD). - BACKGROUND The City has a contract with TID for 795 acre-feet of water that expires in 1996. All of the water projections for Ashland assumed TID would not renew that contract based on conversations with the TID Board of Commissioners. In June, 1992,a request was initiated with TID to allow the conversion of the contract to permanent stored water rights.In March, 1993,TID forwarded a letter to USBR requesting information on the process to convert the contract to permanent stored water rights. In April, 1993, I requested clarification on several issues (including the water storage rights issue)from USBR. On June 25, 1993,the USBR forwarded a letter to me in response to the questions posed to them.The response from USBR indicated that 2,195.acne-feet of water for municipal and industrial use(M&I)was established by the OWRD in 1979. Currently,the City of Talent has a contract with TID'and USBR for 600 acre-feat of the stored water at Hoviard Prairie. Staff is requesting Council mahoriration to pursue the remaining 1,395 acre w of water initially on a oDnhac ual agreement and ultimately in the form of permanent stored water,rights. The current budget has $111,000 set aside for the cost of accjuii•ing water rights. This provides a bright side to the rather bleak outlook of 3 years ago when we assumed we were going to lose the current 795 acre-feet of stored water. Now there.is a good possibility that the City can acquire 1,395 acre-feet of stored-water. Staff recommends approval of request. SMH:nn\Water\USBRTID.mein cc: Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent Hollie Cannon, Secretary-Manager, TID Marc Prevost, Water Quality Coordinator, RVCOG encl: USBR letter ENT F, d�Pj " �F.y TAKES � j g United States Department of the Interior PRIDE MER e BUREAU OF RECLAMATIO y _ CH �e' Pacific Northwest Region ��'t 1150 North Curtis Road - y ' IN Rert.r - + RUT.RTO: Boise,Idaho 837061234 ���� q 1 PN-150/442 G 8 1993 t Mr. Steven M. Hal l JUN 2 199 Public Works Director City of Ashland Ashland OR 97520 Subject% Reuse of Treated Wastewater (Your letter dated April 7, 1993) (Water Service Contract) Dear Mr. Hall: Thank you .for your letter requesting information in regard to the planned upgrade of the City of Ashland (Ashland) wastewater treatment plant. As you are aware, there have been previous discussions between Ashland and the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) concerning this topic, and we wish to be of assistance in this matter. We have reviewed your letter and offer the following comments for Ashland's use in its decisionmaking process. Background: The Talent Division of the Rogue River Basin Project (Project) was constructed in 1957-61 under authorization of the Act of August 20, 1954 (Public Law 83-606). Recognition of Talent Irrigation District's (District) existing contractual arrangement to deliver 800 acre-feet annually. to Ashland was included in the design, construction, and repayment of the Project works. The State of Oregon's (State) position has been that the State's withdrawal of water for the Talent Division at that time was for the purposes of irrigation and domestic farmstead use only and thus, did not permit municipal and industrial (M&I) 'uses. Subsequently, in 1979, the State issued a permit for the United. States to store 2,195 acre-feet of water in Howard Prairie- Reservoir for municipal use within described service areas for the cities of Ashland and Talent. This permit enabled implementation of a 1978 water service contract, among the United States, City of Talent (Talent) and the District, which provides up to 600 acre-feet annually to Talent for M&I use from the Project's Howard Prairie Reservoir. Accordingly, it is our interpretation that the existing State permit would not require any modifications in order to allow an additional 795 acre-feet of Howard Prairie Reservoir storage to be made available to Ashland and Talent for municipal- use. Please be aware the State does not consider a permit to be a "perfected" water right; that status would not be achieved until such time a water right certificate is issued by the State. Water exchange: We have no objection to the concept of a 1:1 water supply exchange between Ashland and the District for the purposes outlined in your letter; however, we would want to review and approve the details of such an exchange prior to final arrangements between the two parties. Reguest for additional water supply: The process becomes more complicated should Ashland desire to obtain an additional Project water supply. In the interest of time and simplicity, Ashland also might want to pursue the possibility of obtaining 2 additional Project water through a fixed-term, three-party, water.service contract with the United States and the District, similar in concept to the above-mentioned contract with Talent. Such a contract would, of course, be dependent upon Ashland- District arrangements for physical delivery of the water and approval by the State. The maximum term of contract permitted under our current contracting policy is 25 years. We have not established the Federal water service charge for such use, but would advise it very likely would be at least three or four times the $10.00 per acre-foot determination used in the 1978 contract with Talent. We do not rule out the future possibility of Ashland somehow acquiring storage water rights through the purchase of agricultural lands, but caution this would involve the resolution of many new issues and the cooperation of many parties. National Environmental Policy Act requirements: You requested information on Reclamation's requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Prior to taking Federal action, Reclamation must comply with provisions of NEPA as well as other environmental and biological compliance laws and regulations such as the Endangered Species Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Archeological and Historic Preservation Act, Clean Water Act, as well as Protection of Wetlands and Floodplain Management Executive Orders. Federal actions may include approval of the wastewater reuse proposal or could involve issuance of crossing agreements or permits where other alternative actions affect Reclamation facilities. Regardless of the type of action proposed, respective NEPA and other environmental and biological compliance actions- would be required. It is Reclamation's responsibility to determine what environmental and biological compliance actions are required and the level of NEPA documentation. Reclamation has determined that Ashland's wastewater reuse proposal may have tangible or controversial environmental effects. In this case, .public perception of using treated wastewater would be a key issue as would maintenance of instream flows and water quality. Therefore, Ashland would be required to submit an Environmental Report (ER) which fully analyzes the environmental impacts of the proposed action and viable alternatives. The ER Would form the basis of Reclamation's NEPA document, which in this case would be at least an environmental assessment .(EA). If, after public review. no significant environmental effects were identified, Reclamation would finalize the EA and prepare a Finding of No Significant .Impact (FONSI) and take the necessary steps to approve the action. This total process may take a few months or up to a year to complete depending on the complexity of the proposed action and the issues raised. We do not wish to speculate at this time as to any possible challenges by other agencies to a FONSI or the potential impacts of any such challenges. If through the EA review process, significant or highly controversial environmental effects were identified, Reclamation would be required to proceed with preparation of a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) based on an updated and more detailed ER from Ashland. The draft EIS would be sent out for public review and comment and a public hearing(s) would be held. A final EIS would then be prepared based on the comments received. The final EIS would also be sent out for public review, after which Reclamation would prepare a Record of Decision. If the decision were favorable, Reclamation would take the necessary steps to approve the action. This total process may take up to 2 years or longer depending on the complexity of the proposed action and the issues raised. 3 Operation and maintenance (0&M) of certain canal portions: We would prefer not to change the present arrangement whereby the District is responsible for 0&M of the Project distribution system, both inside and outside the city limits of Ashland. Easements: If Ashland pursues the water service contract approach, we assume your question concerning prepayment of certain canal portions would be moot. In any event, easements would not be transferred from the United States to either the District or Ashland. We hope the above discussion is helpful to Ashland in developing its wastewater treatment program. Further questions undoubtedly will arise; feel free to contact Robert "Hap" Boyer of this office at (208) 378-5334. Sincerely, 4� Regional Director. cc: Mr. Hollie Cannon Secretary-Manager Talent Irrigation District PO Box 467 Talent OR 97540-0467 Mr. Al Cook Southwest Regional Manager Oregon Water Resources Department 101 NW..A St. Grants Pass OR 90526 .�,.`oeA4H4�c Emar � ricE �tm °4E007,•, July 26, 1993 Z a: Brian Almyuist, City Administrator l� A MI Steven Hall, Public Works Director. � l� ram: JJJ��V)1 �ubjPtt: Airport Fees ACTION REQUESTED City Council: 1. Adopt the attached resolution establishing land rental fees for 6 individual hangars now under construction and a deposit fee for hangar reservation list. 2. Approve amendment to fixed base operator lease. BACKGROUND The City has recently consummated 6 land leases with individuals to construct individual aircraft hangars abutting the airport access road. The individual lease agreements include a $20 per month land lease fee. The land lease fee shall increase at one-half the Engineering News Record Construction Cost annually. The Airport Commission is recommending that the City Council establish a deposit fee for those wishing to continue on a hangar reservation list. This will partially offset costs incurred in maintaining a list plus "weed out" those who are not serious and provide the City with a more realistic listing. The fixed base operator will collect and retain $5 of the fee for processing and maintaining the hangar waiting list. A refund of$35 will be given if anyone on the list wishes to be deleted or a credit of $45 will be made towards the first month's rent of a City T-hangar when a hangar is available. In addition, the fixed base operator lease with Skinner Aviation will have to be amended to cover the deposit fee/list. Staff recommends approval 5 W i:rmV\iryNuFeea.mem cc: Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant Airport Commission Bob Skinner, Skinner Aviation encl: Lease Amendment Fee Resolution FIRST ADDENDUM TO FIXED BASE OPERATOR LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT First addendum to lease agreement made this August 3, 1993 between the City of Ashland ("City") and Robert A. Skinner ("Lessee"). Recitals: A. On January 10, 1993, City and Lessee entered into a "FIXED BASE OPERATOR LEASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT" (further referred to in this addendum as "the agreement"). B. The parties desire to amend the agreement to provide for hangar reservation deposits. City and Lessee agree to amend the agreement in the following manner: L. A new paragraph is added to paragraph 3 of the agreement immediately following the paragraph entitled "Fuel and inventory" as follows: Hangar Reservation Deposit. Lessee agrees to develop and maintain a hangar reservation list for persons desiring to lease T-hangars when a T-hangar becomes available. Lessee shall post the list for public inspection in the fixed base operator office. Lessee shall collect a deposit from each person who is placed on the list and remit it to the City. The amount of the deposit and any refund shall be established by City Council resolution. Prior to remittance to the City, Lessee may retain $5.00 from each deposit for the cost of collecting the fee and maintaining the list. The initial list priority will be based on the current list maintained by the city for a period of six months from the date of approval of this amendment. After the first six months, all requests will be added to the end of the hangar list in order of receipt of hangar reservation deposit. Any disputes as to priority dates on the list shall be resolved by Lessee. If the dispute cannot be resolved, the Airport Commission will make the final determination of priority date. II.. Except as modified above the terms of the agreement shall remain in full force and effect. LESSEE CITY By: Robert A. Skinner City Administrator PAGE 2-FIRST ADDENDUM TO LEASE a:v�n mo-�.nan RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RATES FOR T-HANGARS, TIE DOWN SPACES, INDIVIDUAL HANGAR LAND LEASES AND HANGAR RESERVATION DEPOSITS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 92-40. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following rental/lease rates are established for facilities at the Ashland Municipal Airport: A. T-hangars with doors $115.00 per month B. T-hangars without doors $100.00 per month C. Tiedown space $ 24.00 per month D. Tiedown space $ 3.00 per overnight E. Individual land lease $ 20.00 per month (See Exhibit A) SECTION 2. The rates in section I.A. through 1.D will be increased annually on July lst based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR). The rate in section I.E. will be increased by one half the ENR beginning July 1,,1994 and each year following. The initial ENR is established as 4927 for LA through 1.D and 5260 for I.E. SECTION 3. The following hangar reservation fee is established for any person or business prior to placing the name on the hangar reservation list. A. Hangar reservation fee $ 50.00 B. Refund if request made to remove name from reservation list $ 35.00 C. If T-hangar rented, amount of refund to be applied to first month rental fee. $ 45.00 SECTION 4. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Sections 1 and 3 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section l lb of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 5. The rates in sections I.A. through LD were in effect July 1, 1992. The other rates will be effective the date of passage of this resolution. The foregoing resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the 3rd day of August, 1993. Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of August, 1993. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor PAGE 3-FIRST ADDENDUM TO LEASE Ummon�4t.Adn ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 9 . 08.040.E OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW POT BELLIED, PIGS IN THE . CITY. ANNOTATED TO SHOW DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS. DELETIONS ARE NCH AND ADDITIONS ARE SIIAU,Bp,. FOOTNOTES ARE EXPLANATORY ONLY AND NOT PART OF THE ORDINANCE." THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 9 . 08. 040. B of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 9 . 08.040 Keeping of Animals. A. Except as otherwise permitted by ordinance, no person shall keep or maintain more than three (3) dogs over the age of three (3) months on any one (1) parcel or tract of land. B No person shall keep or maintain swine Natwzthstandanc tihe pr�Ged�.ng. sentence or the prouzszons' of seetzon 28.20. t120�„ kepanz carI� ntan9ng swine catnmanyeferredj to as Mit�latuxe uzetnaniese, �t�znese ' or +3rsental :pot bellied p .qs (skis scrota vlttatus? a.s eliowed'f s�Ib jQCt to the foTlowingz " 1 ..:Such gigs shall not exceed a maximum height of 18 finches at the;;shoulder' ar wealth mare than 9 5 pounds. � <2�o savre than, one such pig shall be kept at any one, parcel or tract of land , 3 :Such pigs shall a Be oonfned hy' faTtce, leash ar obedience traanznq to tYie property of the person keepzngor maintaining them ar to the �SS~aperty af. anathe�- i� such other person has! g�,ven express. permission, b Be aarit;fined to car ,;or truck when ofi property where otherwise cbnfzned, or d. Be on a.: leash not longer than sax feet in length.: 4 Such pigs shall have access to ail enclosed structure sufficient: to protect them from wind, rain; snow !ar sun and which has. adeguate bedding to protect against cold and AMC S 18 . 20. 020. D is the only other mention of swine in the code. This section permits in the R-1 zone: "D'. The keeping of livestock, except swine, provided that: 1. No livestock shall be kept on any lot less than one (1), acre in area. 2 . No more than two (2) head of livestock over the age of six (6) months may be maintained per acre. 3 . Barns, stables, and other buildings and structures to house said livestock shall not be located closer than fifty (50) feet to any property line. " (Emphasis added. ) dampness Can.fineme"nt areas mustbe kept clean and free from waste or ot)i- con+_ nantsi 5 Notwithstanding any;;of the; above no ;such pig. shall; ke allowed in art X pazl C. No person shall keep or maintain. poultry within seventy-five (75) feet of another dwelling. D. No person shall keep or maintain rabbits within one hundred (100) feet of another dwelling or within seventy-five (75) feet of a street or sidewalk. E. No person shall keep or maintain a bee hive, bees, apiary, comb, or container of any kind or character wherein bees are hived, within one hundred fifty (150) feet of another dwelling or within one hundred fifty (150) feet of a street or sidewalk. F. No person shall keep or maintain a stable within one hundred (100) feet of another dwelling. G. Where the conditions imposed by subsections (B) to (F) of this section differ from those imposed by another ordinance, the provision which is more restrictive shall control. (p:ord\swim.o) City Attorney City of Ashland (503) 482-3211, Ext. 59 MEMORANDUM July 21, 1993 TO:. The Mayor and Council FROM: Paul Nolte SUBJECT: Attached Ordinance of the City of Ashland Amending Chapters 2.50 and 2.52 of the Ashland Municipal Code to Update Competitive Bidding Procedures and Bidder Qualification Requirements The attached ordinance is being sent to you at this time pursuant to Article X of the municipal charter. This charter provision permits reading the ordinance by title only when council members are provided a copy one week in advance of the meeting. Attachment cc: Brian Almquist-- Mike Biondi Jill Turner Y Nan FranklirCcs) (sicwndNcrb.me ) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND AMENDING CHAPTERS 2.50 and 2.52 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES AND BIDDER QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. ANNOTATED TO SHOW DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS. DELETIONS ARE LINED-THROUGH AND ADDITIONS ARE 90M. FOOTNOTES ARE EXPLANATORY ONLY AND NOT PART OF THE ORDINANCE. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 2.50 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Chapter 2.50 LOCAL PUBLIC CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD Sections: 2.50.010 Contract Review Board 2.50.020 Definitions 2:50.030 Competitive Bids--Exemptions 2.50.040 Emergency contracts 2.50.060 Bid refee�+eR. bi(c bidc�ng rules 2.50.070 f?ubG irrprQtiri~ ent cantract ile5 2.50.090 Additional Authority of the Board 2.50.010 Contract Review Board. The City Council of the City of Ashland is hereby designated as the local Contract Review Board and, relative to contract concerns, the City Council of the City of Ashland shall have all the powers granted to the State Public Contracts Review Board. 2 50 020 Definitions The IJO _ f�allow€ng wtsrdsstid phrases>rrh+3r�ever used iii this cfi�pter shsl be construed as defneE �n, issectt�rt urt(ess ftarne t anteXt a dI#fria tt meting �s >tfended A. Public contract. Any purchase,lease or sale by the City of Ashland of personal property, public improvements or services, other than agreements which are exclusively for personal service. B. Public improvement. Any eeAStFuetien Of iffiffevements of Ashland stCUafilrrx recans�rpGtian....... r molar enau id n ,rt3 r� ;by r ra the W .As��nd °�u�ic�mprpu�t�ar��° do„�s PAGE 1-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (w.dVab.md)(July 21, 19931 / /// 3?/{v�/ /•;& ') /f�'kf//wit<n aa' v �.,tns a sy(���7�Q�4� � �.• ..."•&...�..iw�ii/" /i.,..,. .. C Board. The Local Contract Review Board as established in Section 2.50.01 0-ef4his-ehapteF i ^ri vh, sanGas that C/e: �dr not hays baan reasonaks[y fgra,Saer ate;�a'�ta gat=�T�„�t�f�sa, dama�e�t�t�rrupti6h at�erurnr;�€�rea�:��rths �� �� �,yN�,r'`sa �a�r�tres prcimpt,��Cec�cfn afa corttra��o remedy�[�e 2 50 030 Competitive bids--Exemptions. A. All contracts shall be based upon competitive bids except�56/4.... expr sstX"sxdudgd b!S atuia3 dt X pid[I 2S ��,¢�fl �al3f Munieipal Gede. eempany, individual OF . B. The GentFaet Review Board may by resolution exempt other contracts from competitive bidding if it finds: 1. The lack of bids will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract; and 2. The exemption will result in substantial cost savings. ORS 279.011 (7) 2 ORS 279.011(4) 3 The statutes currently exempt: 1. Contracts made with other public agencies or the Federal Government. [ORS 279.015 (1) (a) ] 2 . Contracts made with qualified nonprofit agencies providing -employment opportunities for disabled individuals [ORS 279.015 (1) (b) ] 3 . Insurance and service contracts as provided for under ORS 414 . 115, 414 . 125, 414 . 135 and 414. 145. [ORS 279. 015 (1) (e) ] 4. Contracts where emergency conditions require prompt execution of the contract. [ORS 279. 015(3) (a) ] 5. sale of surplus property where the number, value and nature of the items to be sold make it probable that the cost of conducting a sale by competitive bid will be such that a liquidation sale will result in substantially greater net revenue. (ORS 279 . 015 (3) (b) ] PAGE 2-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE 1v:otdVwb.wdu3u1y 21. 19931 In making such findings, the Board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid, and such other factors as the Board may deem appropriate Where appropnate, the t3eard shall direct the use of alternate Cgritragtin end�aurchasrng praCfices`that take;account of market realities and modern pr;trtnAVafrYggntraCtlttg and'purChasing methods, which are alSq Cpnsistent with;the pwbGc ptalisry/of erteburgrl7g competrEian The Board shall addpt written fultlmgs that suppgrt thi; warding of particular p_ub6C contract or,a class of pulal(c eontrapts without cotri�etr#sve bidding The fintligs mustshow that the exemption of a cont.racf gtCla55 qf.'; onttacts Cgmplies,with the requirements of this seCtgrl`. 2.50.040 Emergency Contracts. A contract may also be exempted from competitive bidding if the Board, by unanimous vote, determines that emergency conditions require prompt execution of the contract. A determination of such an emergency shall be entered into the record of the meeting at which the determination was made. In the event of an emergency involving an immediate hazard to the public health, safety or welfare, the City Administrator may secure necessary materials without competitive bidding, provided that the Board at their its next regular meeting, are is furnished with a full report of the circumstances, and costs of the materials secured. menu faSt r seller unless the pFed et is exempted frr.m this 8n1 by the Beard LjndeF this seetien. HeweveF, this seetien shall net be eenstFued te pFevent FeqHiFed. B. The Beard FR ay h)i r of 1'n mn1 GeFtain Fed Mn n Glosses of preduets upen any ef the following findings: awarding of the eentFact OF substantially diminish competitien. 2. The speGifieatiaR of a prE)duGt by brand name or FAaF!(, or the ..A et of ., altie der m u fact oF elleF would . lt in substantial oast s os d. quality reElHiFe A Cif n" n1 til6zatiG of o iStiR equipmeRt OF supplies FeqUiF8 the 5 2.50.060 pFE)eedUFes and requirements and may Fejeet a'! bids if it is in the publie intelrest te d-e se- Public B riding Rules The Oraggn Attarnejr General's Model f'u6fiC Qntract Ru(r~s: Manual, Div[sion 3€3 entitled APublic Bidding Rules"rs adopted as;the t;ity of Ashfarid's ORS 279 . 015 (5) 5 Already provided by statute: ORS 279 . 017 PAGE 3-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE IP:o,aacrn.a,muuly 21. 19931 2 50 070 B. The peFsen does net have equipment available te peFferm the eentraet; �wbtcti ti�3pxu�rt �rortttcitx..es e,Oregon Attbmey Genefar's Md rubGe ':antrac Rute3, Anu , nr% %entteUbG� rrr�prrvment: nntrall �s`adtd 21 yas the`��t}riaf Ast$art�s pGbt[�r�(prave�ent�ntraet:r�ti�s The G�ty Cohnatx C Adt�tfst .ai rrI'll", >Agr tl�suna>ed iri Sec 2 52�3Q s [#rave the disqualifieatien, notify the Gity ReeeFdeF, OA WFitin�g, thm: they wish te appeal theiF aut#inr�yta ac#�n tzQhatf%Af tI'te �zrder tbes� rules. �' RbeE)FdeF shall notify the BE)aFd. appealing ef the I:-- the heaFing. 1 and eeide the appeal withiR ten, (10) days afteF Feee;V;Rgthe R, 279.046(3), deeisiens 6 and shall set feFth 2 50 090 Additional Authority of the Board. In addition to the powers and duties established by this chapter, the Board shall have such additional powers as authorized by State law and the City Charter. SECTION 3. Chapter 2.52 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Bidder qualification rules are in the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contract Rules Manual adopted in 52.50.060. ' PAGE 4-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (p:orml«b.adiwuir 21, 1993) Chapter 2.52 PURCHASING AGENT Sections: 2.52.010 General authority and responsibilities. 2.52.020 Adequacy of appropriations and resources. 2.52.030 Exclusions--Limitations. 2.52.040 Bids- Inviting AWaFdlng Rejeeting Preference. erderS. 2.52.070 Disposal of surplus property. 2.52.080 Cooperation with City Departments. 2.52.090 Forms--Procedures. 2.52.010 General authority and responsibilities. The Purchasing Agent for the City shall be the Director of Finance, or such other officer or employee as may be designated by City ordinance. The Purchasing Agent is authorized and directed to acquire the optimum quantity of satisfactory quality materials, equipment, and services at the least cost for the City, within the limitations of federal and state law, the City Charter Aftfancf M€ntC�pal_code Chapter 2 5Q and the subsequent sections of this chapter, under the supervision of the City Administrator. 2.52.020 Adequacy of appropriations and resources. Before obligating City funds, the Purchasing Agent shall ascertain that there is to the credit of the using Department a sufficient unencumbered appropriation balance to defray the amount of the order, and also that sufficient financial resources are available or can be made available. 2.52.030 Exclusions--Limitations. Contracts for the construction of public improvements, real property purchases, wholesale electrical energy purchases, employee benefit programs, and acquisition of professional services (such as engineering and architectural consulting) are not responsibilities of the Purchasing Agent, unless so directed by the City Administrator. The Purchasing Agent is authorized to act on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Ashland Community Hospital, but only upon the request of those agencies. 2.52.040 Bids Preference. The PUFehasing Agent shall bends and/eF peFfeFFnanee bends if these are deemed neeessaFy. PAGE 5-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (p:ordMcrb.ord)Quly 21. 1993) i .............. 'Will....... ---------- m ME7 ... .................. m r -MMEN-M W.M. .. ........... ............... zi .......... ....... . ........... LEM M r.� .-M AA neluding business tax, utility bell ef-et"--F ehaffles; PFOVided, heweveF, that any sueh H 2.52.070 Disposal of surplus property. The Purchasing Agent shall have the authority to dispose of surplus personal property by any means determined to be in the best interests of the City, including but not limited to transfer to other departments, sale, trade, auction, or destruction; provided, however, that disposal of personal property having a residual value of more than $t0,pfjp pp shall be subject to City Council authorization. 2.52.080 Cooperation with City departments. Operating departments and the Purchasing Agent shall cooperate to provide efficient, courteous service to the public in the most economical manner possible. 2.52.090 Forms--Procedures. Subject to the provisions set forth herein and the approval of the City Administrator, the Purchasing Agent shall be empowered to provide the necessary forms and written procedures to implement this chapter. e see footnote 6. PAGE 7-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (o:.,dVcrb.o,a)wuiv 21, 1993) BEFORE THE CITY OF ASHLAND CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION ADOPTING RULES EXEMPTING CERTAIN ) CLASSES OF CONTRACTS FROM COMPETITIVE ) LCRB RESOLUTION BIDDING AND PERMITTING REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS ) NO. The Local Contract Review Board resolves that the following rules be adopted: 1. DEFINITIONS: For purposes of these rules, unless the context requires otherwise, the following words and phrases mean: 1.1. Administrator means the City Administrator. 1.2. Board means the City of Ashland Contract Review Board. 1.3. City means the City of Ashland. 1 1.4. Council means the Ashland City Council. 1.5. Purchasing Agent means the Director of Finance, or such other officer or employee as may be designated by City ordinance. 2. STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS: As provided by ORS 279.015, all public contracts shall be based upon competitive bids except: 2.1. Contracts made with other public agencies or the Federal Government. 2.2. Contracts made with qualified nonprofit agencies providing employment opportunities for disabled individuals. 2.3. A contract for supplies if the value of the contract is less than $2,500. 2.4. Insurance and service contracts as provided for under ORS 414.115, 414.125, 414.135 and 414.145. 2.5. When emergency conditions require prompt execution of the contract. 3. ADDITIONAL EXEMPTIONS: The LCRB finds the following contracts exempt from competitive bids upon these findings: It is unlikely such exemptions will encourage favoritism or substantially diminish competition. The LCRB also finds that the awarding of public contracts pursuant to the exemptions will result in substantial cost savings. 3.1. Contracts under $25,000. Contracts not to exceed $25,000 for the purchase of goods, materials, supplies and services if the Purchasing Agent has determined that the awarding of the contract without formal competitive bidding will result in cost savings and the following conditions are complied with: 3.1.1. The contract is for a single project, and is not a component of or related to any other project; 3.1.2. When the amount of the contract does not exceed $2,500, competitive quotes are obtained, where feasible; 3.1.3. When the amount of the contract is more than $2,500, but less than $25,000, a minimum of three competitive quotes shall be obtained. The Purchasing Agent shall_ keep a written record of the source and amount of the quotes received. If three quotes are not available, a lesser number will suffice provided that a written record is made of the effort to obtain the quotes; 3.2. Contracts for Price Regulated Items or Supplier Regulated Items. Contracts for the purchase of goods or services where the rate or price for the goods Page 1-CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RULES (p:ardMubrule.re I(July 26. 1993) or services being purchased is established by federal, state or local regulating authority. 3.3. Copyrighted materials. Contracts for the purchase of copyrighted materials where there is only one supplier available within a reasonable purchase area for such goods. 3.4. Advertising Contracts. Contracts for the purchase of advertising including that intended for the purpose of giving public or legal notice. 3.5. Requirements Contracts. Purchases of goods or services pursuant to a requirements contract which was established by competitive bidding. Purchases may also be made at prices established by a requirements contract or other agreement between another public body and a contractor if the requirements contract or other agreement was established by competitive bidding. 3.6. Investment Contracts. Contracts for the purpose of investment of public funds or the borrowing of funds. 3.7. Single Seller or Price or Product Required. Contracts for purchase where there is only one seller or price of a product of the quality required available within a reasonable purchase area. 3.8. Repair or Conversion Contracts for the purchase of services, equipment or supplies for maintenance, repair or conversion of existing equipment if required for efficient utilization of such equipment. 3.9. Contract Amendments. Any contract amendment including change orders, extra work, field orders, or other change in the original specifications which changes the original contract price or alters the work to be performed, may be made with the contractor subject to the following conditions: 3.9.1. The original contract imposes and binding obligation on the parties covering the terms and conditions regarding changes in the work; or 3.9.2. The amended contract does not substantially alter the scope or nature of the project; or 3.9.3. If the amendment has the effect of substantially altering the scope or nature of the project, the amount of the aggregate cost change resulting from all amendments creating such new obligations shall not exceed 20% of the initial contract. 3.10. Banking Services. Contracts for the procurement of banking services. 3.11. City Services. Contracts for purchase or sale.of water, electricity, cemetery lots and other services or materials traditionally provided by the City. 4. Request for Proposals. The Purchasing Agent may use request-for-proposal com- petitive procurement methods subject to the following conditions: 4.1. Contractual requirements are stated clearly in the solicitation document. 4.2. Evaluation criteria to be applied in awarding the contract and the role of an evaluation committee are stated clearly in the solicitation document. Criteria used to identify the proposal may include but are not limited to cost, quality, service, compatibility, product reliability, operating efficiency and expansion potential. 4.3. Solicitation document clearly states all complaint processes and remedies available. 4.4. Solicitation document states the provisions made for vendors to comment on any specifications which they feel limit competition. Page 2-CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RULES (p:ord\Icrhru1e.ra )JJu1y 28. 19931 r ) _ 4.5. The selection process shall not inhibit competition or encourage favoritism and will result in cost savings to the city. 5. EMERGENCY CONDITIONS: The council, by resolution, may exempt any contract from competitive bidding if emergency conditions require prompt execution of the contract. The council shall, in the resolution, state with specificity the emergency conditions necessitating the prompt execution of the contract. 5.1. The administrator, by declaration, may exempt any contract under $25,000 from competitive bidding if emergency conditions require prompt execution of the contract. The administrator shall make written findings describing the emergency conditions necessitating prompt execution of the contract. 5.2. If an emergency is declared, any contract awarded under this rule must be awarded within 60 days following the declaration of the emergency unless the Board grants an extension. r This resolution was READ BY TITLE ONLY and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the day of 1993. Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1993. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney i Page 3-CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RULES (p:ordperbrute.m)(July 28, 1993) .•'pF ASN �{ emor �tn � nm '•,p4E60� ,. July 26, 1993 X110. Brian Almquist, City Administrator �XO+_IIl. Steven Hall, Public Works Director �ubjgd.- Jurisdictional Transfer-Tolman Creek Road ACTION REQUESTED City Council authorize Mayor to sign the attached agreement transferring Tolman Creek Road from the Southem Pacific Railroad tracks to Siskiyou Boulevard. BACKGROUND Jackson County is in the last year of contributing for the costs of paving a street if a city is willing to accept the street under those conditions. This is the first of three recommended transfers. The other two are Fordyce Sheet and the gravel portion of upper Granite Street. This section of Tolman Creek Road was improved a few years ago by the Jackson County Department of Public Works with a major resurfacing. The road still has open ditches and no pedestrian facilities. Jim Olson,Jerry Glossop and I have discussed the pros and cons of accepting this section of Tolman Creels Road with a lump sum payment of$68,820. This is similar to what occurred on the Tolman Creek LID above and below Ashland Street. Staff is reoommerding that the funds be placed in a separate line item and be held until such time as an LID can be formed to bring this section of Tolman Creek Road up to City standards including curbs, sidewalks and bikepaths via the LID process. Staff recommends the City Council approve the transfer of jurisdiction. SMH:nn\PW\Th=Tsfr.man encl: Agreement pp JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON JOSEPH'LE STRAHL,PUBLIC • 11111• 200 ANTELOPE ROAD WHITE CITY,OREGON 97503 (503)803)82&185503)77&7288 FAX:p fpnnr?n,rr-, !' July 15, 1993 JUL 19 1993 1 Attention: Steve Hall City of Ashland City Hall Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Jurisdictional Transfer of a Portion of Tolman Creek Road Dear Tony: Enclosed is the agreement to surrender jurisdiction of a portion of Tolman Creek Road from the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks to Siskiyou Blvd. to the City. Please note that the date for the transfer of funds is set for no later than January 10, 1994 . If for any reason the mayor would be unable to sign the agreement by October 10, 1993, please change the date of transfer of funds in paragraph V to be three months after the date the mayor signs the agreement as that time is needed for Jackson County to conduct a hearing as required by law. Please return all copies to this office for further execution. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sinc ely, Da trasek, P.E. County Engineer DP: sw BFARCRHR�A• BVaTf Q fIHf NANAaev9V/ NCTQRro / PMKS rtom IINOVf6V.ONtf VEOFl4110N MANAfIBNE1VI 777237 82"?22 82"f22 77&7339 77 77WI 82"722 82"122 4 AGREEMENT This agreement is made between Jackson County, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called "County" and the City of Ashland, an Oregon municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City" : AITNESSETH: . I Tolman Creek Road, from the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks to Sisikyou Boulevard, said section of road as shown on Exhibit "A", is a county road within Ashland city limits. For reasons pertaining to its geographical location, the cost of maintenance and improvements to said road has become burdensome to County and it is desirable that the County surrender jurisdiction over said section of road to City. II City, being involved in an ongoing street improvement program for roads and streets within the city limits, has need of funds in order to perpetuate said program. III In order to further the interest of both entities, it is mutually desirable that County contribute a sum of money or equivalent resources to City and City accept the jurisdiction of said section of county road within the city limits. This agreement is for the purpose of furthering said mutual interests. AGREEMENT - 1 it Y IV Following execution of this agreement, City shall formally request that County surrender its jurisdiction over, Tolman Creek ., Road, from the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks to Sisikyou Boulevard, said section of road as shown on Exhibit "A" and shall adopt such ordinances and resolutions as shall be necessary for the transfer of jurisdiction of said section of road pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute 373 .270. V Following the jurisdictional transfer, but no later than January 10, 1994, County shall pay City the amount specified in paragraph VI for the road work, subject to the obligations and for the purposes therein provided. VI City shall acquire, construct, improve, or repair the following street or road sections: Tolman Creek Road, from the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks to Sisikyou Boulevard, said section of road as shown on Exhibit "A" to urban standards. County's contribution to these improvements shall be $68,820.00 for the road work. AGREEMENT - 2 VII If this agreement is payable beyond the budget year in which it was made, it is payable from such county road funds received pursuant to O.R.S. 294.060 as may then be appropriated for the particular purpose of discharging the contract. VIII In cases of litigation arising out of this contract between County and City, the prevailing party to the litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees. Executed this day of , 1993 . CITY OF ASHLAND: JACKSON COUNTY: By: By: Mayor County Administrator, APPROVED AS TO FORM: County ounsel AGREEMENT - 3 City Attorney City of Ashland (503) 482-3211, Ext. 59 MEMORANDUM July 26, 1993 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: &/ Paul Nolte SUBJECT: Procedure following filing of initiative petition to repeal food and beverage tax The city recorder has received sufficient verified signatures on the petition to repeal the food and beverage tax to trigger the next step under the statutes. When she receives such signatures she is required to file with you the "initiated measure"' at your next meeting (meaning August 3, 1993). You have 30 days from August 3, 1993 to adopt the measure or reject it.2 If you do not adopt it, state law requires that it be submitted for a vote at the election not less than 90 days from the date it was filed with you (in other words on November 2, 1993). You may refer a competing measure to the voters at the same election. If you decide to submit a competing measure, the measure must be prepared not later than the 30th day after the initiated measure is filed with you (30 days from August 3, 1993). The city recorder has been advised that for the November election, a voters' pamphlet will be published. Under ORS 251.345, the city council is to submit "an impartial, simple and understandable statement explaining the (initiated) measure and its effect" for the voters' pamphlet. This statement must be submitted by September 2, 19933. If you so desire I will prepare an explanatory statement for your review and approval at the next council meeting (August 17) which is the only regularly scheduled council meeting before the deadline. )p:eloV.it-pro.mem) ' ORS 250.325(1): "If an initiative petition contains the required number of verified signatures, the city elections officer shall file the initiated measure with the city governing body at its next meeting." z ORS 250.325(2). 3 OAR 165-22-010(2)(b). CITY OF ASHLAND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ODOR ISSUES August 3, 1993 by Steven M. Hall, P.E. Public Works Director With the ongoing issue of odor complaints, I felt it best to present a history of how we got to this point and discuss how we have dealt with the odor issue. 1. WAA;'4'�'HAS CIl[3SRT3 •THE ?PRPBLEM?:; A. In 1991 the anaerobic digester (closed tank) began to show serious cracking in the concrete roof. B. The City retained a structural engineer to evaluate the safety of the concrete roof. The report indicated a need to replace the roof in the near future. C. The City retained an engineering firm to design and oversee the project. D. A contract was awarded and the anaerobic digester was taken out of service October 15, 1992. E. The aerobic digester (open tank) had to be used during that period of time. An aerobic digester does not function well during the cold winter months, but this was the best time to rebuild the anaerobic digester. F. The anaerobic digester was returned to service on March 23, 1993. G. The anaerobic digester was fully operational and meeting standards on April 28, 1993. The month long period was required to place a "culture" of sludge in the anaerobic digester and bring the digester to required standards. This process is very difficult and must be done slowly to attempt to keep all of the parameters in balance. This is not an exact science! 2. IS PI SS A Nci} . , O"P RATIONlt pROBLEM� , A. No, two factors contributed to the odor problems, the repairs of the anaerobic digester and the long wet spring and summer. 3. Wur :SS Tft* W A2 lER A:PRQBLEM?: A. During a normal year, sludge (processed -sewage) can be hauled from the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) and applied to fields between mid-March and October, weather permitting. The fields must be approved by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the land owner. B. During a normal year, sludge is hauled from the (WWTP) beginning in mid-March through September. C. This winter and spring, the rain was just what we needed for our water supply, but exactly what we did not need for sludge application. DEQ will not allow us to place sludge on fields during rainy periods. D. When the ground is wet, our sludge truck often cannot get into the fields although we can spray a short distance from the edge of the fields. E. This year, because of the rain, we were not able to begin hauling sludge on a regular basis until now. Iu July this year, we were only able to haul sludge for about two weeks because of lack of fields available for sludge application. F. Because we could only occaisionally haul sludge from mid-March through July, we had to store the sludge at the plant. We are using the aerobic digester, one aeration basin and the old open sludge drying beds to store sludge. W P Oda. N,z 4. WHAT;:T$.'C..AUSIOG THE:oApRS>. A. In two words, aerobic sludge. Aerobic sludge has stronger and more pungent odors than anaerobic sludge. Anaerobic sludge has a mild "musty" odor and is barely detectable at the fence perimeter of the plant. B. The initial odors during winter were from the aerobic digester. As noted, this unit does not function well during cold weather, but with the needed repairs to the anaerobic digester, we had no other option available. C. During the startup of the anaerobic digester (March 23 through April 28) , the extreme odors were from the anaerobic digester as the operators began to bring the unit back on line. The anaerobic digester works much as our stomachs, and minor changes in pH and temperature can cause "indigestion". The corrective actions often take over a week to reach equilibrium because of the size of the anaerobic digester. D. Another source of odors was the open sludge drying beds. Every time it rained, the sludge would be "reactivated" by the water and produce strong odors. The sludge is still in the drying beds and, without rain, should be dry enough to transport to the solid waste fill in a few weeks. E. During that time, some odors were emitted from the aerobic digester because the mechanical aerators had to be used to control the pH of the liquid. 5. MILL; THE PLANT EVER,_BE 'TOTALLY ODORS^FREE, A. No, the plant is a natural process and will, with current technology, never be totally free of odors. B. With the existing plant, wide temperature variations can cause the plant to emit odors from the aeration basins. The release of odors often happens during the evening hours when temperature changes may be from 100 degrees in the daytime to 60 degrees at nightime. During the summer, it can often take two to three weeks to totally rebalance the system. C. With the proposed improvements to the plant, the installation of fine. bubble aerators in the aeration basins will greatly diminish the odors .from the basins. The current aerators are large and "throw" the sewage into the air which causes turbulence and exposes the sewage to the air which releases odors into the air. Fine bubblers do not cause turbulance and work similar to an aerator in a fish aquarium. 6. WHA2'<._TS $Ltaq,..3NE to 91kii Y.Z$ TH$. L1AOR5?; A. We have been using misters at the plant to "mask" the odor. That program is being expanded to provide a more thorough masking of the odors. B. We have tried a new product in the misters and found it not to be as effective as the original product. C. We have been placing soda ash on the sludge beds to.minimize odors during rain periods and to neutralize the "digestive" process. D. With the long term forcast and the availability of an additional field, we will begin hauling sludge on a 12 hour day basis, monday through friday. One of the field owners has agreed to allow us to use their field for the extended hours. W W�P Odms Pog? 7. HOW I:©NG WILDR TAKE TO CLhiiR THE PLANT QF. SI(1D6 '; A. Currently, there are 380,000 gallons of sludge in the aerobic digester and 290,000 gallons of sludge in the aeration basin. The plant is also continuing to produce sludge at the rate of about 15,000 gallons per day. B. Assuming no rain, equipment failure, unforseen complications, hauling 12 hours per day, 5 days per week, it will take about 5 weeks to clear the plant of existing sludge. This would place us in mid to late September this year. C. With no rain, the sludge drying beds should be empty by the end of this month. 8. sik7$2 1OTHER S( OAT 1EEM OPTIONS WILL 42EpLFCE OpgRB A. A recent study by Brown and Caldwell recommends the following short term projects which will be completed shortly: 1. Use lime to minimize odors from grit storage barrels. Note: we have placed lids on the containers and use misters and a masking agent to minimize odors in this area. In addition we will be installing misters at the headworks. 2. Place a solid hatch on the top of the scum pit. 3. Don't use -sludge drying beds. Note: These have been abandoned with the exception of the extraordinary conditions encountered this year) 4. Improve odor masking misting system. Note: This project will be completed by the end of this week. 9. WHAS `D4ES THEE FUTIIREHOLD': A. The proposed long term improvements to the plant will eliminate or minimize the potential of odors from the plant. B. The proposed new WWTP will produce 3 to 4 times the volume of sludge as the existing plant. It is highly possible that the sludge will have to be trucked up to 20 or 30 miles to find suitable grass crop land for application. This means larger and more sludge transport trucks. Finding additional land and DEQ approval is getting more difficult as new regulations on sludge are approved. C. Currently, we. have 5 fields available for applying sludge. The fields total 200 acres. Several fields are closed because of crops and one because of a threatened law suit against the property owner. Currently, 50 acres are available and an additional 50 acres will be available within a few days. 10. ART ;t AS 5TAFk' BEEN PQIfFO T17 'SN4 OPTIONS? A. Biomass was contacted to see if they could burn a dried sludge. Their permit with DEQ would not allow them to burn the sludge. A thickening press would be required to produce sludge for burning at a cost of an estimated $1,000,000. Biomass indicated that the amount of sludge produced did not make it economically feasible to for them to attempt to see if DEQ would.change their permit. B. Discussed the transfer of sludge to the regional wastewater plant in White City. Medford officials indicated they were not interested in the process because of their liablity, other legal and practical issues. C. For several years, individual contacts have been made with land owners and most are not interested in sludge application or the land does not meet DEQ standards for permitting. D. Add an additional axle to the rear of the sludge truck allowing 4,000 gallons to be hauled instead of 3,000 gallons. W p odors Pog 4 ...................... ...................... 11. SITMMAAiF ...................... ...................... ...................... ...................... A. This years odor problems were caused by the necessary repair to the anaerobic digester and inclimate weather. B. Staff has investigated potential resolutions to this one-time extreme case of odor problems and found a few short term solutions which have or will be implemented. C. only the long term improvements to the plant can minimize odors. A PERSONAL INVITATION YOU ARE INVITED TO VISIT THE ASHLAND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT YOU WILL FIND THE TOUR INFORMATIVE AND EDUCATIONAL PLEASE CONTACT: DICK MARSHALL PLANT SUPERVISOR 488-5348 CITY OF ASHLAND ' CITY HALL ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 August 3, 1993 :eleohone (Code 503) 4823211 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Rob Winthrop 0 SUBJ: odor problems, wastewater treatment plant For various reasons, the extreme odor problem at the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is still with us . A resolution to the problem, which we expected (and promised) for the spring, has not materialized. Steve has been kind enough to prepare a memo outlining the history of the problem, and actions taken to date. I would strongly urge that we give resolution of the -odor problem a high priority, before we are lynched or recalled by the .-increasingly angry residents of Quiet Village. In--shor-t; I suggest going beyond the measures considered in Steve' s -memo. I have the following ideas : ( 1 ) Keep resolution of this problem separate from the long- term issue of meeting TMDL standards . (2 ) -Request Public Works to expedite removal .of sludge - currently at the plant. Measures might include 24-hour hauling, and renting additional sludge-hauling trucks . This will cost money: we need to be -prepared to spend it . ( 3 ) Request Steve to prepare proposals (with cost estimates ) at our next meeting for both short-term and mid-term ( 6 months to 1 year) actions to improve the on-going odor problem. This could build on the 7/1/93 memo from Brown & Caldwell, which lacks cost figures or priorities . I suggest that we will need to spend money on some odor-control systems this year, rather than waiting for a decision on the TMDL upgrade. ( 4 ) Have this issue as an agenda item on 8/17 , with public comments invited . ( 5) Organize a neighborhood meeting in Quiet Village (at Helman School? ) to allow the neighbors to comment, and staff to explain what we propose to do. �S�.C�tXC� �I7�tCE �P��CX�tttPYt� OF 0 1175 E. MAIN ST. ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 Phone(503) 482-5211 0 m , N' 2 �FAAg7ME� � July 29, 1993 Gp[iV E.BROWN ief Police Mayor and Council m FROM: Gary E. Brown, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Liquor License Greater Privilege Application has been received from TOM CAN HUANG, FENG LNN MAI HUANG dba\ PANDA GARDEN for a LIQUOR license, for an ESTABLISHMENT located at 1757 HIGHWAY 66, ASHLAND. A background investigation has been completed on the applicant and approval of this application is recommended. GARY ROWN CHIEF POLICE MC:kmh j STATE OF OREGON Return 70: APPLICATION OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION GENERAL INFORMATION A non-refundable processing fee is assessed when you submit this completed form to the Commission(except for Druggist and Health Care Facility Ucenses).The filing of this application does not commit the Commission to the granting of the license for which you are applying nor does It permit you to operate the business named below. SiJ � 2 (THIS SPACE IS FOR OLCC OFFICE USE) (THIS SPACE IS FOR CRY OR COUNTY USE) Application Is being made for: NOTICE TO CRIES AND COUNTIES:Do not consider this applica- ❑ DISPENSER. CLASS A ❑ Add Partner .lion unless it has been stamped and slgne4 at the left by an OLCC ❑ DISPENSER, CLASS B ❑ Additional Privilege representative. X-0 DISPENSER, CLASS C ❑ Change Location PACKAGE STORE ❑ Change Ownership THE CITY COUNCIL, COUNTY COMMISSION, OR COUNTY ❑ RESTAURANT ❑ Change of Privilege COURTOF ❑ RETAIL MALT BEVERAGE C<Greater Privilege (Name of City or County) El SEASONAL DISPENSER Lesser Privilege RECOMMENDS THAT THIS LICENSE BE: GRANTED ❑ WHOLESALE MALT ❑ New Outlet BEVERAGE &WINE ❑ Other • ❑ WINERY DENIED DATE OTHER' 104) tw- 9`330, 520 0�/--1 BY del TITLE CAUTION: If your operation of this business depends on your receiving a liquor license.OLCC cautions you not to purchase,remodel,or start construction until your license is granted. 1. Name of Corporation. Partnership, or Individual Applicants: 1) r.41 G„ A1 2) Z�A4 L , M4,' llf,ctel 3) 4) 5) 6) (E/AICH PERSON LISTED ABOVE MUST RLE AN INOMWAL HISTORY AND A FINAIICWL STATEMENT) 2. Present Trade Name _ 017af/ct (-02�psf 3. New Trade Name Year filed I with Corporation Canmissioner 4. Premises address 1757 fi��FU.c:Y li� A�/c �.c�'Scr7 OP 975'Zv (Nunobm,S�/-le) (City) ' / / (County) (Stale) (Zip) S. Business mailing address yZC7 LY,i�•- �l AWGUN O/ff 975'7-0 (P.O.Boa,Number,SireN.Rural Route) (City) (State) (Zp) 6. Was premises previously flcensed by OLCC? Yes�_ No Year CU✓f7Pwr Fj,dA�1/C yf 7. If yes,to whom: 'g Type of license: 8. Will you have a manager: Yes_ No_x Name (Meneaer novel fill out awmeual Hstofyl 9. Will anyone else not signing this application share in (he ownership or receive a percentage of profits or bonus from the business? Yes_ No-.X"- 10. What is the local governing body where your premises is located? -� (Nerve of City or County) 11. OLCC representative making investigation may contact: /w+•+rt ek IF (Neural /7-V7 6`6' 11504-1. OK 4TS2.o bu,'-4e25-1&2--29kO L. - tfPZ-WS9 (Addrem) (Tel.No — gme.bwirofe.frmvpe7 CAUTION: The Administrator of the Oregon Liquor Control Commission must be notified if you are contacted by anybody offering to influence the Commission on your behalf. 7y� y/74, DATE / Applicant(s) Signature 1) )• �Lt�` LLZ9 ZLG (In case of corporation,duly authorized!officer(hereof) j 2) �! `� %•^-''1 r ��-�� 7 y7- � 3) 4) 5) Orryinal- Leon Government 6) Form ea545JB0 (3-90) .