HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-0104 Council Mtg PACKET Important: Any citizen attending Council meetings may speak on any item on
the agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing which has been
closed. If you wish to speak, please rise and after you have been
recognized by the Chair, give your name and address. The Chair will then
allow you to speak and also inform you as to the amount of time allotted to
you. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of
the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to be heard, and
the length of the agenda.
llnt/
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
January 41 1994
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:30 P.M. , Civic Center Council Chambers
II. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular Meeting of December 21, 1993 .
IV. MAYOR'S ANNUAL ADDRESS
V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS:
1. Presentation by Mary DeLaMare-Schaefer, RVCOG Director, regarding
programs for 1994.
VI. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Departmental Reports - November and December, 1993 .
3 . City Administrator's Monthly Report for December, 1993 .
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Must conclude by 9:30 p.m. )
1. Appeal of a Decision of the Planning Commission Approving a
Building Permit at 635 Thornton Way, based on Solar Access and
Lot Width/Depth (Applicant: Don Johnson, Appellant: Maralee
Sullivan) .
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Memorandum from Director of Public Works regarding update on odor
control project at Wastewater Treatment Plant.
2. Council acceptance of addendum to Wetlands Report.
IX. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Council Election of Citizen Budget Committee Members (2
positions) .
2. Council Election of Chair of the City Council.
3 . Letter from Soda Mountain Wilderness Council requesting Council
endorsement of proposed BLM/Boise Cascade land swap to prevent
clear cut below Pilot Rock.
f
X. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda
(limited to 3 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total) .
XI. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS:
1. First reading of an ordinance amending Section 2 .04. 040 of the
Ashland Municipal Code by changing the order of business at
Council business.
2 . Resolution transferring appropriations within funds for 1993-94
budget.
XII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
y
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
December 21, 1993
CALLED TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. in the Civic Center Council Chambers by
Mayor Catherine Golden. Councillors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Winthrop and Arnold were
present. Councillor Acklin was absent.
APPROVAL OF 11THNUTES
The minutes of the Regular meeting of December 7, 1993 were approved as presented.
CONSENT AGENDA
` 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Departmental Reports - November, 1993.
3. Authorization for Mayor to sign 'Consensus View for the State Transportation
Program. "
4. Authorization for Mayor to sign modification of utility easement in the Hersey
Industrial Complex.
5. Memo from the City Administrator concerning organizational meeting of the Budget
Committee on January 13, 1994. ,
6. Confirmation of Mayor's appointments to Ad Hoc City Space Needs Study
Committee.
7. Recommendation for Historic Commission for Council approval of special tax
assessment for Pelton House at 228 B Street.
8. Memorandum from Director of Public Works regarding update on odor control project
at Wastewater Treatment Plant.
9. Council acceptance of addendum to Wetlands Repon.
10. Set January 4, 1994 to consider modifying water and sewer installation fees.
Items 3, 6, 8, 9, and 10 were pulled from Consent Agenda.
Hauck/Laws m/s to accept items 1,2,4,5,7.
cis=i�•4b-t . ..
4 '
, .,•1 n o 4 b in
3. Authorization for Mayor to sign "Consensus View for the State Transportation
Program."
Winthrop requested the Public Works Director review and resolve improvement list that
includes signal light at Hwy 66 and Tolman Creek Road that has already been installed.
6. Confirmation of Mayor's appointments to Ad Hoc City Space Needs Study
Committee.
Mayor noted that Jac kickels requested his name not be included on the committee due to a
conflict of interest. Mayor asked to have Ron Roth's name included on the committee.
Arnold/Reid m/s to accept committee members. All AYES. Arnold/Laws m/s to request
committee report preliminary recommendations to Council at April 5 meeting. Roll call: Reid
NO; Laws, Arnold,- Hauck, Winthrop YES.
8. Memorandum from Director of Public Works regarding update on odor control
project at Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Winthrop requested item be moved to January 4, 1994 meeting.
9. Council acceptance of addendum to Wetlands Report.
Reid requested item be moved to January 4, 1994 meeting.
10. Set January 4, 1994 to consider modifying water and sewer installation fees.
Laws/Hauck m/s to review this item one week after the completed cost of service study was
received. Voice vote: all AYES.
UNFINISHED BUSINFSS
1. Report by Councillors Arnold and Hauck regarding allocation of C.D.B.G. funds.
(Also letter from Director of Parks & Recreation regarding possible use of C.D.B.G.
funds for local match for possible use of Bear Creek Greenway.Project.)
Winthrop/Reid m/s to discuss at goal setting or some other meeting in January and amend to
allocate 15% for administration costs. Roll call: Hauck, Arnold, Laws NO; Reid, Winthrop
YES.
Reid/Laws m/s to accept scenario A. Roll call: Hauck, Arnold NO; Reid, Laws, Winthrop
YES.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Presentation by Daryl Ackerman regarding comprehensive survey of city facilities and
recommendations for barrier removal for handicapped persons.
Building Official Mike Broomfield presented information on draft report. Darrel Ackerman
information on preliminary study and general ADA guidelines. Laws/Arnold m/s to accept
recommendations listed by City Administrator in memorandum. Voice vote: all AYES.
2. Request by Ashland Sanitary Service to meet with City Council regarding future of
Valley View.landfill and alternative plans for closure.
Council agreed to set study session for Tuesday, January 25 at 5:00 pm.
Councillor Reid left meeting.
3. Request by R. W. Voris for sewer connection.for property located outside the City
Limits at 590 Clover Lane.
Hauck/Laws m/s approval of request with conditions. Voice vote: all AYES.
4. Request by Councillor Arnold to reconstitute the Affordable Housing Committee to
deal with marketing problems caused by program guidelines.
Hauck/Winthrop m/s to accept recommendations from Planning Director John McLaughlin.
Voice vote: all AYES with Arnold abstaining.
5. Request by Director of Public Works,to submit loan application for Wastewater
Treatment Plan.
Winthrop/Hauck m/s authorize application.be submitted. Voice vote: all AYES.
PUBLIC FORUM
None.
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. First reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 2693 by
Repealing All Assessments for the Railroad Park except for the Assessment of Lot 10
of the Railroad Village Subdivision Owned by the City of Ashland." and declaring
an emergency.
Acting City Administrator Paul Nolte requested Council approve ordinance reading with the
inclusion of the emergency clause.
Arnold/Winthrop m/s to approve reading of Ordinance with emergency clause added. Roll
call: Laws, Hauck, Winthrop, Arnold YES. Hauck/Laws move approve second reading by
title only. Roll call: Laws, Hauck, Winthrop, Arnold YES.
2. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Declaring the Canvass of the Vote of the
Election held in and for the City of Ashland, Oregon, on November 9, 1993."
Laws/Arnold m/s adoption of ordinance. Roll call: Laws, Hauck, Winthrop, Arnold YES.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
1. Councillor Winthrop brought forward a request from a citizen to have Public Forum
placed closer to beginning of agenda.
Winthrop/Hauck m/s this be placed on agenda for discussion. Voice vote: all AYES. After
discussion, it was requested.staff draft ordinance changing agenda order to have Public
Forum placed after Public Hearing section on agenda.
2. Councillor Winthrop reported on RVCOG Board meeting information.
Council requested McLaughlin review boundaries of Transportation.Plan and Air Quality
Maintenance Area and report findings to Council for strategic planning issues with County.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
tr.V=*dl&YI-93N
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
DECEMBER 1. 1993
MEETING
Present: Commissioners Insley, Yeamans, Katzen, DeBoer, Mace, Jones, Mills, and Smith.
Staff representatives included Barlow and Officer Clements.
Minutes: Prepared by Lisa Carter
CALLED TO ORDER:
Meeting was called to order by Commissioner Insley. Minutes were approved as presented.
OLD BUSINESS:
Hangars:
Barlow and Nelson are working together to finalize the leases.
Safety Report:
Skinner reported that deer on the runway are still a safety issue. Insley suggested contacting
Mery Wolper at ODFW for suggestions on how to control the deer problem. Displaced
threshold lines need to be repainted.
Pilot Control Runway Lighting:
Skinner and Barlow working on obtaining light system information. More information is
needed before finalizing this area of improvement.
NEW BUSINESS:
Land Use: Robert Revisky
Barlow explained that this property will contain single story buildings complying with HHA
regulations. Owners are aware of the noise created by the airport and are willing to sign a
hold harmless agreement. This agreement would be in effect regardless of the owner of the
property. This issue was motioned and seconded stating that the land use must comply with
noise encroachment, County, and FAA regulations.
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
Airport Security
Officer Clements reported that 7 planes were entered. $96,000 of electrical equipment was
taken. Clements stated that the Police Department patrols the airport at night, however
additional security would be helpful. A detective has been assigned to the case and is
working together with other airports with similar problems.
Yeamans feels that something needs to be done in an active way. Yeamans spoke with
Sonnitrol, a local security company, to get some ideas on how to handle this problem. It
was suggested to have 5 camera set ups, a security cop, motion sensors, lighting control, etc.
The Commission felt that a sub-committee was necessary to look into all aspects. The sub-
committee will report to the Airport Commission and report all options including funding for
this project. The sub-committee will consist of Sandler, Yeamans, Katzen, Skinner, and
Mace.
Minimum Standards:
It was motioned and seconded to table minimum standards discussion until the January
meeting when P.W. Director Steve Hall can be present.
Budget Report:
The request for checks have been turned in.
AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT:
Status of Airport: Presently there are 12 students. Ground school is finishing up. Shop
has been remaining busy. Working on installing heating system. Project should be finishing
up providing heat in the next three weeks. Skinner reported that there are other users who
would like to have gas in private hangars. Skinner Aviation was involved in retrieving
salvage off the mountain from the plane crash.
Financial Report:
December 9th, Jackson County will be holding a public hearing on the Clear Springs project.
The FAA's budget was not passed. Projects will be held off until spring.
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING
JANUARY 5. 1994
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
November 23, 1993
• The regular monthly meeting of the Board of Trustees of Ashland Community
Hospital was held at 12:15 on Tuesday, November 23, 1993, in the conference
room.
PRESENT: Steve Lunt, Mary O'Kief, Madeline Hill, Dick Nichols, Tom Reid, Judy
Uherbelau, Frank Billovits, and Mary Ellen Fleeger, Trustees. Pat Acklin,
City Council Representative; Clifford A. Hite&, M.D. , Medical Staff
Representative; and Patty Adams, Foundation President.
Also present: James R. Watson, Administrator; Mike McGraw, Controller; Polly
Arnold, Director of Patient Services; Peggy Cockrell, Director of Personnel;
Pat Flannery, Director of Development; and Glenda Cole, Administrative
Assistant.
Absent: Bruce Johnson, M.D.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Lunt called the meeting to order at 12:15 and welcomed
everyone to the meeting.
II. MINUTES
A. Marketing Committee: Mr. Lunt called for a review of the
minutes of the November 12, 1992, meeting. Following review, motion was made,
seconded, and carried to approve the minutes as circulated.
B. . Executive Committee: Mr. Lunt called for a review of the
minutes of the October 19, 1993, meeting. Following review, motion was made,
seconded, and carried to approve the minutes as circulated.
C. Board of Trustees: Mr. Lunt called for a review of the
minutes of the October 26, 1993, meeting. Following review, Mr. Nichols made
the motion to approve the minutes as circulated. Ms. O'Kief seconded the
motion and the motion carried.
III. COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Marketing Committee: Mr. Nichols stated that there was a
meeting on November 12, 1993. Ms. Cockrell reviewed the marketing projects
for the past year and possible projects for 1994. There was open discussion
regarding the role of the Marketing Committee. Mr. Nichols stated that it was
a very good meeting.
Board of Trustees
November 23, 1993
Page 2
IV. DECISION ITEMS
A. Board Retreats: Mr. Watson stated that the Executive
Committee had made the decision to move the retreat to February. This will
give time to prepare an inservice on the Estes Park Meeting. He stated that
Mr. Nolte, City Attorney, had recommended that anytime we had a quorum that we
notify the newspaper.
B. Meeting Date: Mr. Watson stated that the Joint Advisory
Committee meeting has been scheduled for Friday, December 17, 1993, in the
conference room. Ms. Hill made the motion to approve this date. Mr.
Billovits seconded the motion and the motion carried.
C. Approve October Expenditures: Mr. Reid stated that he had
reviewed the expenditures for October, that he had found everything in order,
and made the motion to approve them. Mr. Billovits seconded the motion and
the motion carried.
V. MEDICAL STAFF REPORT
"In presenting these names for-credentialing, or recredentialing,
or other changes in status of a medical staff member, or potential medical
staff member, the Executive Committee of the medical staff asserts without
qualification that the affected persons were afforded due process in
accordance with the Medical Staff By-Laws, and the Rules and Regulations of
the Hospital."
Dr. Hites presented the completed application of Helen Trew, M.D. ,
requesting courtesy staff privileges in family practice. He stated that she
had been approved by the Credentials Committee and the Executive Committee of
the Medical Staff. Following discussion, Ms. O'Kief made the motion to
approve Dr. Trew's request for privileges. Ms. Hill seconded the motion and
the motion carried.
VI. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Ms. Hill made the motion to move into. Executive Session pursuant
to ORS 192.660 (1) (a) (c) . Ms. O'Kief seconded the motion and the motion
carried.
Ms. Hill made the motion to move out of Executive Session. Mr.
Nichols seconded the motion and the motion carried.
Board of Trustees
November 23, 1993
Page 3
VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Strategic Planning: Mr. Watson stated that it is the first
anniversary for some of our managed care contracts and Mr. McGraw has
negotiated very good terms again this year. Ashland Healthcare Enhancement
Corporation had chosen Health Futures to do their group purchasing of
medical\surgical, pharmacy, and office supplies. The insurance?agents in town
will be asked to give proposals on group health insurance. Mr. Watson stated
that the remodel of OR area will begin in a few days.
B. Self-Evaluation Forms: Mr. Lunt requested that all Trustees
please complete their Board Self-Evaluation Forms and return them to
administration.
C. Nominating Committee: Mr. Lunt stated that a nominating
committee will be appointed in January.
D. Hospital Christmas Party: Mr. Watson stated that the Hospital
Christmas Party has been scheduled for Saturday, December 18th at the Mark
Antony Hotel. He encouraged Trustees to attend this party.
E. Financial Analysis: Mr. Nichols stated that the Committee had
met with two consultants, Mercer and Coopers & Lybrand, and we are waiting for
proposals now. Following receipt of these proposals, the Executive Committee
will chose one to complete the process. Mr. Nichols stated that he expected
the process of the evaluation of the administrator to be on schedule. He
stated that we have had an excellent response from the Medical Staff and
Employees on their evaluations of the administrator. He 'distributed a summary
of these evaluations and asked that the Trustees complete their evaluation
form and return it to the Executive Committee by December 10th. The Executive
Committee will then meet to formulate some recommendations for Board action at
the December meeting.
F. Landscaping Update: Mr. Watson reviewed the proposed design
for the property behind the hospital.
G. Attendance: Mr. Lunt stated that everyone has been informed
of the attendance requirements.
VIII. QUALITY ASSURANCE
Mr. Watson stated that the Quality Assurance\Improvement Committee
met on November 2, 1993, and all issues are being handled appropriately. He
stated that the Joint Advisory Committee will meet on December 17, 1993, to
review quarterly summaries of QA\I activities for the previous quarter.
Board of Trustees
November 23, 1993
Page 4
IR. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. Nursing: Ms. Arnold stated that due to high utilization and
high numbers of employees being absent due to illnesses and deaths in the
family, we had to use the registry nurses a great deal. Ms. Arnold reviewed
the Swing Bed Program - stating that we are licensed for 6 beds, we have had
57 patients (approximately 3 per month) , that 48 of these patients were
orthopedic patients, that the average length of stay was 4.0 days, that 28 of
these patients went home and the others were transferred to another facility.
Ms. Arnold announced that two nurses delivered baby girls during the month.
B. Financial: Mr. McGraw reviewed the financial statements for
the month of October in detail. He stated that we have been successful in
negotiating good. terms with insurance companies.
C. Personnel\Marketing: Ms. Cockrell stated that she is
recruiting for a pharmacist and some on-call personnel. She stated that we
will be having a function for Joe Sayre on Wednesday, December 15th from 2 to
4 pm. Ms. Cockrell reviewed the initiative regarding PERS and how it will
affect us. Under Marketing, the Medical Forum on Ethics was well received and
she expressed appreciation to Ms. Uherbelau for her participation in the
program. She stated that we will have other Medical Forum beginning in the
new year. We will have an Open House for the Birth Center in January and this
will be the same time that Dr. Yvonne Fried, OB\GYN, will be having her Open
House at her office across the street. We will have a city wide disaster
drill in April.
D. Foundation: Mr. Flannery stated that the dinner\dance was
very successful with 237 people attending. He stated that everyone seemed to
have a wonderful time and the band played an hour longer than there contract.
The Lights for Life campaign is progressing well. We have donations of
approximately $15,000 and the goal is $38,500. The tree lighting is scheduled
at 4:30 pm on Friday, November 26, 1993. The Patrons drive will be starting
soon. We are waiting for the final plans for the Talent Office and it will
then go out for bid. He stated that we may finally have an agreement with
Holiday to build the retirement center. Mr. Flannery reviewed other
properties that are being worked on at this time.
R. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2pm.
Respectfully submitted:
APPROVED:
Richard A. Nichols,
Secretary
Stephen B. Lunt,
Chairman
ASHLAND BIKEWAY COMIVIISSION
NOVEMBER 16, 1993
MEETING AIINUTES
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
Present: Commissioner Arnold called the meeting to order at 12:07. Other
Commissioner present included Jones, Noyes, Haddad, McInteer, and staff
representative Barlow. Shaw and Hagen were also present. Minutes taken by
Carter.
........................................:............................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
Meeting with Parks Commission: RR Bike Path
Park Commission requested more specific information from the Bike Commission.
Commissioners requested a map from Engineering. Rees Jones volunteered to make a
presentation at the Parks Commission meeting, Barlow will also attend.
Oregon Bicycle Commission Meeting in Ashland: Sears
The Oregon Bicycle Commission meeting will be held in Ashland. We will be preparing a
15 minute presentation. Must discuss what items to present to OBC. Ideas for a visual
presentation included taking RVTD from Ashland Hills Inn and riding to Clay Street, then to
the interface area. Barlow requested commissioners to suggest ideas for banquet items. Will
continue to discuss ideas at the December meeting when a decision will be made.
ODOT Bicycle Coordinator: New Bike Lane,Markings
Jones moved to adopt new State standards. It was suggested to leave all of the existing street
signs in place. Hagen suggested that the utility newsletter would be an appropriate place to
introduce the new street marking. In spring when the street markings need to be replaced,
the new marking will be implemented. This motion was seconded and passes stating the
optional arrow will be incorporated.
Education Program Update: McInteer Update
McInteer updated the commissioners. The articles in the Tidings (educational articles) have
been discontinued. Tidings is unable to split the cost of the article. McInteer stated that the
emphasis on the article was to target kids and aide in the education process.
Bicycle Cammiaaim Mims a
P2
Bicycle Lanes in the Downtown:
Arnold does not see the feasibility of having bike lanes in the downtown area. The issue of
downtown loading trucks would create an unsafe area for bicyclists. The main concern is
was to keep bicyclists safe.
Adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 1:15.
...............................................
NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: DECEMBER 21, 1993
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, NOON
HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYONE!!!!!
Q:\biYe\miaums\aew.dee) '
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
December 8, 1993
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Jim Lewis at 7:35 p.m. Members present
were Jim Lewis,Terry Skibby, H.L. Wood, Steve Ennis, Chloe Winston, Dana Johnson and
Le Hook. Also present were Associate Planner Mark Knox and Secretary Sonja Akerman.
Keith Chambers and Casey Mitchell were absent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ennis stated that on page 2 of the November 3, 1993 Minutes, the 11th paragraph should
read "...with a metal flue..." rather than insert. Also, paragraph 5 on page 6 should read
"...east elevation of owner's unit..." rather than property owner. Winston then moved to
approve the Minutes as corrected. Hook seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
STAFF REPORTS
PA 93-140
Site Review
Angus Bowmer Theatre Addition
Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association
Knox explained the applicant proposes a two story addition on the southeast corner of the
Angus Bowmer Theatre. The first floor will be a 766 square foot women's restroom, while
the second floor is proposed to be a 696 square foot mechanical room.
Ennis questioned the loss of seating due to the addition. Dan Sheehan, OSFA, said that
although the preliminary plans called for the removal of seating, there will be no loss now.
Hook asked if the addition will cover any of the brick area. Sheehan answered no, but two
large trees and one smaller one will be removed. Jim McNamara, engineer, presented new
plans which depicted the area in question more clearly. The tree removal was discussed.
Sheehan stated there are not many areas left in the courtyard to plant new trees, but agreed
with Knox they can mitigate the loss of the three trees two to one. Knox said they will need
to be 15 gallons, and the location can be determined later.
Skibby noted the symmetry of the building will be lost with the new addition, but agreed
with Ennis this is a positive extension because it is relatively unattractive now.
Ennis moved to recommend approval of this action with Staff comments on the replacement
of trees. Winston seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
November follow:
115 Bush Street Bill Thomas Addition
94 Pine Street Ken/Barbara Pool Porch Roofs
40 East Main Street Gordon Claycomb Re-roof
234 Vista Street Sid DeBoer Gazebo
255 Scenic Drive Fred/Pat Sehnert SFR
348 East Main Street Rapunzel's Sign
389 East Main Street Investment Management/Research Sign
149 East Main Street Kangaroo Junction Sign
325 "A" Street Sign Directory Sign
340 "A' Street Directory Signage Sign
21 South Second Street The Flat Top 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:
December 9 Skibby, Lewis and Winston
December 16 Skibby, Johnson and Wood
December 23 Skibby, Lewis, Hook and Ennis
December 30 Skibby, Winston, Lewis and Wood
OLD BUSINESS
Relocation of Community Development
After discussing the outcome of the November 30th City Council meeting, Skibby moved
and Hook seconded to write a letter to Mayor Golden requesting Lewis and Skibby be
appointed to the ad hoc committee. The Motion passed unanimously.
Applegate Trail Plaque/Railroad Park
All agreed not to locate the donated plaque on the Plaza due to the final wording. After
considering other sites, Hook moved and Wood seconded to have Skibby contact the Parks
Department about placement of the plaque in the new Railroad Park, which will be down
by Eighth Street. The motion was unanimously passed.
Skibby acknowledged the new Railroad park would be a good location, as that property was
once part of Lindsay Applegate's farm.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December S, 1993 page 2
Lewis, Winston and Skibby will be on the subcommittee for the Golden Spike
memorialization, which will also include the Applegate Trail Plaque. Lewis also noted a
replication of the original gazebo will most likely be built at the opposite end. The Eighth
Street end will be both educational and interpretive. Skibby will communicate with
Southern Oregon Historical Society regarding the plaque and Golden Spike.
NEW BUSINESS
Special Assessment for Pelton House » 228 "B" Street
Hook and Skibby discussed the architectural detail of the cap which was originally on the
roof and the chimneys. Skibby moved and Hook seconded to recommend approval of the
special assessment for the Pelton House, with the support of the Historic Commission to
restore the cap on the roof and replace a "dummy chimney" and the brick detail on the
remaining chimney if the owner so desires. The motion passed unanimously.
Graffiti in Ashland
Skibby presented photos of just a small amount of graffiti that has emerged in the City and
questioned what could be done about it. Winston added she is generally concerned with the
increase of graffiti and vandalism in the entire City, not just the Historic District. Knox
stated City Council could be put on notice and perhaps the fines could be increased. He
offered to speak with Brian Almquist, Paul Nolte and John McLaughlin.
Ron Thurner, 1170 Bellview Avenue, suggested Staff check with the City Attorney because
the offenders would be subject to the court, not the City Council.
Ennis moved and Hook seconded to have Skibby and Wood write a letter to the City
Council regarding graffiti and vandalism after receiving input from Knox. The motion was
passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 8, 1993 Page 3
December 30, 1993
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council
FROM: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Monthly Report - December 1993
The following is a report of my principal activities for the
past month, and a status report on the various City projects and
Council goals for 1993-94.
I. PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES:
1. Met with City Attorney and Allan Sandler regarding
agreement for building encroachment on N. Main Street.
2 . Met with Steve Hall Jill Turner and Pat Acklin regarding
proposed water and sewer rates.
3. Attended DARE presentation of new vehicle at Belleview
School.
4. Met with Ashland Sanitary representatives, landfill
consultants and County Sanitarian concerning closure of Valley
View landfill. Council study session scheduled for January 25.
5. Chaired annual meeting of Oregon Municipal Electric
Utilities in Portland.
6. Attended annual meeting of the Public Power Council in
Portland.
7. Met with Councillors Hauck and Arnold, and Dick W. and
Mac regarding recommendation to Council on CBDG funding.
8. Met with Business agent for Electrical Workers Union
conoerning grievance on city payment for meals on overtime work.
9. Met with new RVCOG director to discuss upcoming COG
projects and priorities.
1
10. Attended monthly meeting of Cable Access Commission.
li. Met with Dave McMechan of the Tidings to review City
plans for 1994 for feature article on December 31.
12 . Met with Tom Weldon, Jill Turner and Adam Hanks to
review final draft of Employee Handbook.
13 . Met with Mary Smelzer of USFS .to review the results of
their strategic planning meeting and its effect on the Ashland
Ranger District. Copy is available in my office.
14. Attended family funeral in Southern California.
15. Attended annual Water Department holiday breakfast at
Ashland Hills Inn.
16. Was interviewed by David Kennedy of Lithiagraph for
upcoming article on city plans and challenges for 1994 .
17. Met with Fire Chief Woodley and Finance Director on
effects of recent arbitration award for fire employees.
18. Met with Mike Broomfield and Mac concerning proposed
adoption of new Energy Conservation Building Code and methods of
funding enforcement efforts.
STATUS OF VARIOUS CITY PROJECTS:
1. Electric Substation. BPA has agreed to pay $158, 400 for
the 2 . 17 acre site for the new substation. Park planner Midge
Thierolf and BPA designers are working together on the master
plan. Construction of the substation is expected to commence in
the Spring and is to be completed by December 1, 1994. A minor
land partition application was approved during December. A
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review will be scheduled for
February or March.
2. Downtown Project. Completed.
3 . Northwest Water Project. Completed. A dedication
ceremony will be scheduled in the .near future. .
4. Open Space, Program. Ken and I are proceeding with
initial negotiations on several parcels on the Open Space Plan
and I will keep you advised on our progress.
5. Digester Roof. Completed.
6. Tolman Traffic Signal. Completed.
2
7 . Wetlands Study. The 20/50 Committee has begun its work
to facilitate a basinwide solution to water quality and quantity.
The DEQ stated its commitment to facilitating such a solution
once the City commits itself to an option acceptable to DEQ.
8. Forest Fire Management Project. Additional work is
scheduled for next Winter which will complete the recommended
project list from McCormick and Associates. Following
completion, the park land will be dedicated to the Parks
Commission for maintenance. We have submitted a grant request
under Clinton's new program to complete all the projects in the
Forest Plan.
9. Capital Improvement Plan. In light of the Ad Hoc
committee work on the building addition, it would perhaps be
better to wait on a public hearing on the plan until February or
March.
10. Office Addition at Civic Center. Working drawings and
specifications have been completed. The Council at its November
30 meeting voted to postpone the project pending the completion
of a review by an Ad Hoc committee appointed by the. Mayor.
III. STATUS OF COUNCIL GOALS:
1. Amend the Fair Housing Ordinance. Completed on May 18.
2 . Modify all municipal buildings to make them fully
handicapped accessible. Study of all facilities has been
completed by the consultant and presented to Council on December
21. Council requested that Staff prioritize the recommendations
and return with an implementation schedule for Council approval.
3 . Deal more effectively with public/media issues. The City
Council agreed to become more active in writing guest editorials
and in responding to letters to the editor during the coming
year.
4 . Review personnel policy effectiveness. The Council
directed a review of our present employee evaluation process,
training, and overall personnel policies. A committee of middle
management personnel has been reviewing the last issue, and I
hope to report to the Council on this later this month.
5. Give consideration to affordable housing policies
whenever other growth management or utility policies are
changed. Ongoing.
6. Take a proactive role in opposing proposals to upzone
secondary lands adiacent to the city's Urban Growth
Boundary. Planning Director McLaughlin and Mayor Golden
3
have written a joint letter to the County expressing our views.
Both have appeared at the Ashland area hearings to reiterate our
opposition, particularly in the interface areas. The County's
latest proposal seems to add only three new parcels.
/ rian L. Almquist
City Administrator
BA:ba
4
Contents of Record for Ashland Planning Action 93-128
APPEAL OF THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 635 THORTON WAY.
APPEAL BASED UPON SOLAR ACCESS ORDINANCE, AND
LOT WIDTH/DEPTH REQUIREMENTS. COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN DESIGNATION: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL;
ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 lE 05BD; TAX
LOT: 1900.
APPELLANT: MARALEE SULLIVAN
APPLICANT: DON JOHNSON
Notice of Public Hearing before City Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Planning Department Staff Report Addendum I 1/4/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Minor Land Partition Approval Letter 9/10/75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Planning Commission Minutes 9/8/75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Tentative Partition Map, approved 9/8/75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appeal Letter 11/8/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Findings of Planning Commission Decision 10/13/93 11
Notice of Public Hearing before the Planning Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Planning Department Staff Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Planning Commission Minutes 10/13/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Appellant's Hearing Report 10/13/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Memorandum from James Olson 9/9/93 . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Appeal of Staff Decision 9/2/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Letter from Judith Uherbelau to John McLaughlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Memorandum from James.Olson 8/30/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Letter from Judith Uherbelau to John McLaughlin 8/20/93 . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Letter from Judith Uherbelau to Don Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Letter from Judith Uherbelau to Chair of Plan. Comm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
r +
Notice is hereby given that PUBLIC HEARING on
A copy of die application,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant
the following request with respect tothe ASHLAND and applicabiecriteria 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 CITYCOUNCILonthe4thDAYOF m specuonsev en reasonable
if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department,Ctty
JANUARY, 1994 AT 7:30 P.M. at the Hall,20 Est Main,Ashland,OR 97520.
ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main During the Public Hearing,the Mayor shall allow testimony from the applicant and
Street, Ashland, Oregon. those in attendance concerning this request.The Mayor shall have the right to limit
the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable
criteria.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application am on the reverse of this notice.
Oregon law states that failure m raise an objection concerning this application" If you have any questions or comments concerning this request please feel free to
either in person or by letter,or failure to 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 Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify
which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of
appeal to LUBA on that criterion.
, I
'�SHERIDAN�"
PR-5 5
l
-- N l n° r ' --
]]c.eT
- � 1
,.I e02' e01 •• .
200 - 9:'.3
1 c3
�ai STREET
TUCKER
tie - r
f
1900+---
I
� u Ar°sl
yI 7L 14
0 �n z
905 I 1901, W b
teride,ce N�RNTON
:908.
1
-— C:IRIS TINA SURD%V/SiON,,:-)
j
PLANNING ACTION 93-128 is an appeal of the issuance of a building permit for the
property located at 635 Thornton Way. Appeal based upon solar access ordinance,
and lot width/depth requirements. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family
Residential; Zoning: R-1-7-5; Assessor's Map #: 391 E051313; Tax Lot: 1900.
APPELLANT: Maralee Sullivan APPLICANT: Don Johnson
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
ADDENDUMI
January 4, 1994
PLANNING ACTION: 93-128
APPLICANT: Don Johnson
APPELLANT: Maralee Sullivan
LOCATION: 635 Thornton Way
ZONE DESIGNATION: R-1-7.5
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential
ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.20 R-1 District
18.70 Solar Access
REQUEST: Appeal of the issuance of a building permit, based upon solar access
ordinance and lot width/depth requirements.
I. Additional Information
As noted in the findings of the Planning Commission on this matter, they found
that the staff did not make a land use decision in the issuance of a building
permit for the residence.
LEGAL STATUS OF PARCEL
An issue was raised in the Appellant's Hearing Report as to the status of the lot -
whether it is a legally created parcel or not.
Staff further researched the issue and found that the parcel was legally created by
a minor land partition approved by the City of Ashland in September, 1975. A
copy of the approved tentative map and approval letter are included as part of
this addendum.
Therefore, since this parcel was created under an approval process of the City, the
lot is recognized as a legal parcel complying with all ordinance requirements at
the time of creation. There were no conditions attached to the approval
restricting the construction of a single family home on the lot.
r r
SOLAR ACCESS
As with most ordinances, the Solar Access ordinance is not perfect. In originally
drafting this ordinance, it was impossible to consider all odd possibilities that may
arise. However, the ordinance has worked very well in providing solar protection.
Admittedly, in this instance, the precise application of the ordinance wording does
not provide the intended solar access protection. But the ordinance does not give
the Staff the discretion or direction as to what to do when the strict application
ends up as in this instance. Staff has no option but to follow the strict application
of the code. And while it took a little while to get there, this building permit was
issued under strict adherence to the solar access ordinance without discretion, and
therefore no land use decision was made.
But this does not mean that no consideration was given to solar access to the
north of the proposed home. In fact, during the home design process, the
designer was directed to design the house so that the shadow would be no greater
than 16' tall (Criteria "B") at the property line separating the two homes. Without
this direction, and under strict adherence to the ordinance, the applicant could
have gained approval for a 35' tall home, creating a shadow in excess of 30' high
at the property line. The applicant also located the home as far to west while still
being within the City's jurisdiction. This, in effeci, greatly reduces the solar
impact by not placing the structure due south of the Sullivan home, still allowing
for direct southerly solar access.
What Staff has done is attempt to allow construction on the odd shaped portion
within the City, as allowed by ordinance, with the least solar impact on the
downhill property. This is not an interpretation that allows for construction, but
the actual wording of the ordinance that allows the construction.
And that appears to be the major concern, that the ordinance allows for
construction in an area of the parcel that was considered unbuildable by the
appellant. And while Staff may agree that this is not the most desirable location
for a new home, the ordinance clearly allows for it, without the making of a land
use decision by the City of Ashland.
II1. Conclusions and Recommendations
It is Staff's opinion that no legal judgement, exercise of policy, or discretionary
decisions were made as part of this building permit. The previous staff report
outlines the process that supports the Staffs issuance of the permit. Further, after
review, it was found that the parcel was legally created by a minor land partition
approved by the City, clearly allowing for construction of a single family home.
PA93-128 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report ADDENDUM'I
Don Johnson January 4, 1994
Page 2
• 1
The solar determinations, while somewhat complex and perhaps confusing, are
very clear in relation to the wording of the ordinance. Therefore, Staff does not
believe that a land use decision was made on this action, and recommends that
the issuance of the building permit be upheld as previously issued, and confirmed
on appeal by the Planning Commission.
PA93-128 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report ADDENDUM I
Don Johnson January 4, 1994
Page 3
n x
i
September 10, 1975
Duane F. Smith
209 Terrace Street
Ashland, OP. 97520
Dear Duane :
On September £s , 1975 , the Ashland Planning Coranissian denied your
request for Zone Variance No. 226 to allow a reduction in the
front yard setback of seven lots to a distance hetveen five (51
and fiftccn (l5; in a n-1:5-5 , residential single-family zone.
At the same meeting the Commission approved your request for
Minor Land Partition No. 251 to allow the division of one lot
into two parcels in a R-1:B-8 residential single-famiJ.y zone .
If you have any questions regarding the action of the Planning
Commission, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Dale O. Rimes
Planner
DOH/em
MINOR LAND PARTI- Request for Minor Land Partition No. 251 to allow the
TION NO, 251 division of onn lot into two parcels in a R-I : B-8 ,
DUANE F. SMITH residential single-family zone . Site is located east
and west of Thointon. Way bcLween Tucker and Wiley
Strectsj tax lot 1900 assessor ' s Map 5BD. Mr . Smith
was present.
dimes showed photo slides of the area to be partitioned.
and suggested that an additional 30 feet of right of wa-,.
be obtained for Prim St-_-ct as a condition of approval .
Mortis said the people on the upper side of, the street,
should be protected so they would not lose access to
their .driveways and garages if the street were widened .
Billings maintained that many streets are not suitable
for widaning because of the slope Of the land, and shoulc_-z
be left at present width.
)3iljj:ngs moved to APPROVE minor land partition • 51
without the condition suggested by staff . Second by
Sims . PASSED by roll call vote - Hampton, E . Hansen,
Sims , and Billings voting YES; Morris and Wenker votin'-7,
.. - M
�S :n O
•• S�Oa n
O m r
rD A m m
m
D --A v <
A --I CD
a Zl w� .d n O ._ -•
W O n m A
.�O (D 0 Nm S J O
� 7 0
10 (D D I d
N d
's 3 co
(DD
C) • F
CD O J a O Z f
J
N _� Z O C
iw 420' W O 0
\v w CVJi O (,
O
O I p
I+
1 m -
r � r
I O Va O
_ 1
CD
N �
1i
r i
°o z 210' --' --
I
.CO
CD W O
3 0
ro CD
—f n
Am n r S
n _
! ` I
jUl j �° •° 0 A` T.L . 19oo rD j
A N rD A O ..__
CO
!D O
' m
rD 47' .
J
F �
O
I
,?
-.�
770' + � �
I �
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
GLENN H. MUNSELL
607 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD - POST OFFICE BOX 640 '
JUDITH H. UHERSELAU*
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 MICHAEL H. WELLS*
_ 15031 4821511 15031 482-2621 SCOTT A NORRIS
FAX 15031 773-5325 *ALSO ADMITTED
IN CALIFORNIA
OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
November 8, 1993
Brian Almquist
City Administrator
City of Ashland
20 E . Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Re : Maralee Sullivan
550 Tucker St. , Ashland
Planning Action No . 93-128
Our File No . 9357
Dear Mr. Almquist:
Pursuant to 18 . 108 . 070 , Ashland Municipal Code , and on behalf of
Maralee Sullivan ,. I hereby file this appeal of the Planning
Commission' s "Findings Conclusions and Orders" dated October 26 ,
1993 , in Planning Action No. 93-128 . The matter before the
Planning Commission was an appeal by our client concerning a
building permit issued to Don Johnson for a single-family dwelling.
Ms . Sullivan owns Tax Lot 2000 in 39 lE 5BD , otherwise known as 550
Tucker Street , which lies immediately to the north and east of Mr.
Johnson ' s property, Tax Lot 1900 , located in 39 lE 5BD , also known
as 635 Thorton Way. A map of the area is attached to this letter.
Also , a copy of the findings , conclusions and orders of the
Planning Commission , dated October 26 , 1993 , is enclosed for .your
convenience .
The Planning Commission found that the Planning Department staff
did not make a land use decision in the issuance of the building
permit in question , and therefore denied the appeal . The Planning
Commission also found that the staff followed the procedure for
determining solar access pursuant to Chapter 18 . 70 of the Ashland
Land Use Ordinance and did not use discretion in that determina-
tion. Additionally, the Planning Commission found that the staff
did not use discretion in determining lot standards . Finally, the
commission found that the issue of lot creation is not relevant in
this case , but rather is an enforcement matter on the. part of the
City.
Ms . Sullivan disputes the Planning Commission ' s' finding that there
was no land use decision made. in this case by the Planning
Department staff . Ordinarily, the denial or approval of a building
permit is not a land use decision , however, when the decision on a
building permit is not based on clear and objective land use
8
Brian Almquist
November 8, 1993
Page two
dards, then issuance of a building permit is a land use decision.
Clearly, this decision was not based upon clear and objective
standards, as demonstrated by the staff ' s own actions .
The original Building and Zoning Permit, issued August 16 , 1992 ,
approved Solar "B" Criteria based upon that portion of the Johnson
lot lying in the city. A subsequent amended permit was issued in
August 24 , 1993, . changing the Solar Criteria to "A" based upon
Johnson ' s entire lot, both within and without the city.
The difficulty of this case arises from the unusual shape of Mr.
Johnson ' s lot, Tax Lot 1900. In addition, a further complication
is that part of the lot is within the city limits , and the other
part is outside of the city limits , but within the urban growth
boundary. As indicated on the map enclosed with this letter, the
proposed location of Mr. Johnson ' s house is just within the city
limits , so that he may obtain city services . In granting the
building permit, the Planning Department staff had to make
decisions about whether the proposed location of the house met with
the requirements of the solar access ordinance , and whether the
parcel met with other setbacks and standards .
The Planning Department staff had to determine whether only the
portion, of Mr. Johnson ' s parcel which is within the city was to be
considered for these measurements , or whether the entire parcel was
to be considered . In addition, the Planning Department staff had
to determine which lot line was the "northern" lot line , for
purposes of making the calculations necessary under the solar
access ordinance .
These were the land use decisions which the Planning Department
staff had to make in order to approve this building permit. There
was no clear and objective standard to guide the Planning Depart-
ment staff to decide whether the entire parcel was to be examined ,
or only the portion within the city. Likewise , there was no clear
and objective standard for the Planning Department staff to use in
determining which lot line to use as the "northern lot line" in
making their calculations required by the solar access Ordinance .
The staff changed their mind at least once on these issues .
Due to the interpretations made by the Planning Department staff ,
the Planning Department staff has effectively ignored the impact
that Mr. Johnson ' s proposed residence would have on the solar
access of Hs . Sullivan , as required by the solar access ordinance ,
and means that the Planning Department staff considered property
not within the jurisdiction' of the city in determining whether the
other setbacks and standards were met . For these reasons , the
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIYOU BLVD. P.O. BOX 640
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
15031 482-2621
rn (503, 482-1511 -
0
Brian Almquist
November 8, 1993
Page three
Planning Department staff has made land use decisions in -granting
this building permit, and the decision of the Planning Commission
and of the Planning Department staff in granting this building
permit should be reversed.
Finally, the land use decision that was made . by the staff was
incorrect, as they considered the land, both within and without the
city in allowing the building permit. If only the land within the
city was considered, the solar standards plus both yard setback and
other standards are violated by the proposed placing of the
improvement.
Sincerely,
H011 & HUNSELL
Profe sional Corporation
dith H. Uherbelau
JHU: dd : 02
CC : his . Sullivan
Enclosures
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIYOU BLVD.. P.O. BOX 640
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520
15031 482-2621 '
15031 462-1511 O
FAX 15031 773-5325 - -
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
October 13 , 1993
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #93-128 , AN APPEAL OF )
THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION ) FINDINGS,
OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT, 635 THORTON WAY. ) CONCLUSIONS
APPEAL BASED ON SOLAR ACCESS ORDINANCE AND LOT WIDTH/ ) AND ORDERS
DEPTH REQUIREMENTS. )
APPELLANT: MARALEE SULLIVAN ).
APPLICANT: DON JOHNSON )
------------°-------------------------------------------
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 1900 of 391E 05BD is located at 635 Thorton Way. The
property is located across the city limits line, with lands under the
jurisdiction of the City and the County. The City portion is zoned R-1-
7 . 5, Single Family Residential.
2) The applicant is requesting a building permit for the construction
of a single family home on that portion of the property within the City
of Ashland.
The appellant is appealing the issuance of the building permit by the
City of Ashland, claiming that the Planning Staff did not approve the
permit under clear and objective standards, but rather used discretion,
thereby making the decision a land use decision. The appellant further
claims that the City erred in issuing the permit, and that the building
permit approval should be denied .
3) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a
Public Hearing on October 13 , 1993 , at which time testimony was received
and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission found that the
Planning Staff did not make a land use decision in the approval of the
building permit, and that it was issued under clear and objective
standards. The Planning Commission therefore denied the appeal .
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 "O"
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an
nMu
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 Staff, as stated in the
Staff report, followed clear and objective in the issuance of the
building permit.
The Commission specifically finds that the Staff followed the
procedure for determination of solar access as outlined in Chapter
18 . 70 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance and did not use discretion
in that determination.
Further, the Commission finds that the Staff did not use discretion
in the determination of lot standards. The Commission finds that
the issue of lot creation is not relevant to this action, but
rather an enforcement action on the part of the City. Should the
lot be found to have been illegally created, then the building
permit is void. If the lot is legal, then the issue is moot.
SECTION 3 . DECISION
3 . 1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the
Planning Commission concludes that from the information contained in the
record, the City of Ashland Planning Staff did not make a land use
decision in the issuance of the building permit for the single family
residence at 635 Thorton Way.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, we deny the appeal of the
building permit in Planning Action 93-128 .
I;
Planning Commi eon Approval Date
l�
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILED FINDINGS
On November 2 19 93 , the attached
Findings for Planning Action # 93-128 were mailed by
Nancy Slocum to the attached mailing list.
The total number of Findings mailed was 5
By Nancy Slocum
Date November 2, 1993
Property Owner X
Applicant X
13
i;
E
MARALEE SULLIVAN
550 TUCKER
ASHLAND OR 97520
x;
JUDITH UHRBELAU x`
HOWSER & MUNSELL PC
P 0 BOX 640
ASHLAND OR 97520
DON JOHNSON
802 BEACH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520
EDWARD BERNARD
639 PRIM ST
ASHLAND OR 97520
JEFF MAYFIELD
2381 PERRY PL -
MEDFORD OR 97504
Notice is hereby given that a PUB L.0 HEARING on Which ordinance criterion -,e objection is based on also precludes your right of
the following request with respect to the ASHLAND appeal to LUBA on that criterion.
LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the Acopy of the application,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on the and applicable criteria are available for impaction at no cost and will be provided at
reasonable cost,if requested. A copy of the staff report will be available for
13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1993 AT 7:00 P.M. impaction seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost,
at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER I f75 EAST
if requested. Ail materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department,Cny
CENTER, _ Hill,20 fast Main,Ashland,OR 97520.
MAIN STREET, Ashland, Oregon.
During the Public Hearing,the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and
those in attendance concerning this request The Chair shall have the right to limit
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted m the applicable
Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, criteria
ddxr in person or by letter,or failure to provide sufficient spedficity to afford the
decision maker an opportunity to respond m the issue,precludes your right of If you have any questions or comments concerning this request.please feel free to
appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. failure to specify contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department.City Hall,at 488-5305.
z3,r
.Je» 'I .. .•.. r I
t5W tor. OCC Je n.r
5 - 11 v SHERIDAN ,.
I
RR•5 "5 _
� 1
.i
to
n
IJ �I I
802 001 - Ia00 j '13
__.. .TUCKER— STREET
.
r31 02 e F
Cpl r �r i rrI
Ic
` �
- ! 7 'leo� of d .: _
r raw r�
�� 190 190] e
{estdenee,
Boa
. .,
IT C ..
�. ;:#?IST/N,4 SUSDIVISION�
1
1
PLANNING ACTION 93-128 is an appeal of the issuance of a building permit for the
property located at 635 Thornton Way. Appeal based upon solar access ordinance, and lot
width/depth requirements. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential;
Zoning: R-1-7.5; Assessor's Map #: 391E05BD; Tax Lot: 1900.
APPELLANT: Maralee Sullivan APPLICANT: Don Johnson
/5
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
October 12, 1993
PLANNING ACTION: 93-128
APPLICANT: Don Johnson City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit
APPELLANT: Maralee Sullivan ExHiBIT S . 14 PA# 93.1z 8
DATE IO 'YJ STAFF
LOCATION: 635 Thornton Way
ZONE DESIGNATION: R-1-7.5
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential
ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.20 R-1 District
18.70 Solar Access
REQUEST: Appeal of the issuance of a building permit, based upon solar access
ordinance and lot width/depth requirements.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
There are no recent planning actions of record for this site.
In August, 1993, a single family home building permit was issued for this
site.
2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal:
The site is an oddly configured parcel that includes lands both in the City
and in the County. The entire parcel is within the Urban Growth
Boundary. The building permit was requested for a single family home on
that portion of the lot that lies within the City.
The appellant has stated that the City erred in granting the building
permit, specifically as it related to solar access. Further, the appellant has
stated that the City erred in disregarding lot depth and lot width
requirements in the issuance of this permit.
Before the permit was issued, the City received a letter from the
appellant's attorney, stating that the permit would be appealed. Prior to
issuance of the building permit, the Staff carefully re-examined the process
used in determining the approval of the permit, and ended up modifying
the approval, although not in favor of the appellant.
The appellant has stated that the Staff used discretion in the determination
of several issues regarding this permit, and therefore made a land use
decision without providing notice. Staff contends that all decisions were
made based upon clear and objective determinations used in standard
building permit issuance and that no "land use decision" was made as part
of this building permit.
Given the technical nature of the application, Staff will step through the
solar access determination process, indicating the approach taken in the
issuance of the permit. Since it is a somewhat complicated process, Staff
would advise the Commissioners to note any questions regarding the
process and have those ready at the hearing.
11. Process Explanation
SOLAR ACCESS
The first step in solar access review is the determination of the slope of the
property in a due north direction. The applicant's home designer had calculated
this to be 23.3% downhill in a northerly direction. Northerly slopes are stated as
negative figures, therefore it is -23.3%..
Next, the lot classification is determined, based upon a formula, tables, and the
north-south lot dimension. Lot classification indicates the amount of shading
allowed. Standard "A" allows for a 6' high shadow to be cast at the north
property line, while Standard "B" allows for a 16' high shadow. Standard "B"
allows for a significantly higher structure. The lot classification is determined as
indicated in 18.70.020
This is a critical point in the solar calculations involved with this permit. The
north-south lot dimension (as defined in 18.70.020 E.) is the average distance in
feet between the northern lot line to a line drawn east-west and intersecting the
southernmost point of the lot. The northern lot line (as defined in 18.70.020 D.)
is any lot line or lines legs than 45 degrees southeast or southwest of a line drawn
east-west and intersecting the northernmost point of the lot. This is basically a
long-winded way to say that the northern lot line is that line at the northernmost
point of the lot. In considering this parcel, that line is clearly that line shown on
the attached drawing. Therefore, the north-south lot dimension is 411.30', or the
distance between the defined northern lot line and the southernmost point of the
PA93-128 Ashland Planning Department Staff Report
Don Johnson October. 12, 1993
Page 2
17
lot.
Once the north-south dimension is determined, it is used with the slope to classify
the parcel: Using Formula I in 18.70.030, the following calculation is made:
30' 30' = 141.5
0.445 + (-.233) .212
Under the ordinance, if the north-south lot dimension of the parcel is greater than
141.5', the parcel is classified as Standard "A", allowing for a 6' shadow at the
northern property line. In this instance, 411.30' is clearly greater than 141.5',
requiring Standard "A'. This was revised on the building permit prior to issuance.
Once the lot classification is determined, then solar setback is calculated. This is
done as per 18.70.040. Specifically, this section states the following:
A. Setback Standard A. This setback is designed to insure that shadows
are no greater than six (6) feet at the north property line (emphasis added).
Buildings on lots which are classified as Standard A, and zoned for residential
uses, shall be set back from the northern lot line according to the following
formula:
SSB = H - 6'
0.445 + S
Where:
SSB = the minimum distance in feet that the tallest shadow producing
point which creates the longest shadow onto the northerly
property must be set back from the northern property line
(emphasis added)..
H = the height in feet of the highest shade producing point of the
structure which casts the longest shadow beyond the northern
property line.
S = the slope of the lot, as defined in this Chapter.
By this calculation, the structure must be located 61.4' back from the northern
property line.
The key point here, and it was highlighted, is the northern property line. By
PA93-128 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
Don Johnson October 12, 1993
Page 3
ra
definition, this is the line at the northernmost point of the property. It is not the
line between the Johnson and Sullivan properties. Therefore, all solar setback
measurements are made, by ordinance definition, from the northern lot line
rather than from the lot line separating the two homes.
This is the main point of the solar argument by the appellant. It is their opinion
that the solar setback should be determined from this common property line
between the two homes, and not by the defined northern property line, since it
has little to do with solar access protection for the Sullivan property.
While it may be argued that this is not the intent of the ordinance, it is very clear
that it is-what the ordinance states, and it is unambiguous in its wording.
Therefore, Staff does not believe that any discretion. was used in the
determination of the northern lot line, solar classification, or solar setbacks. It
was all calculated and determined in a very clear and objective manner, without
discretion.
LOT WIDTH/DEPTH
The appellant has not clearly addressed this issue other than to say that Staff
disregarded lot with and depth requirements. In this application, Staff considered
this as an existing legal lot. Whether is complies with lot width and depth
requirements is irrelevant at this point. Lot dimensions are necessary for the
determination of compliance when new lots are created, to ensure minimum area
and dimensions. However, existing lots are considered at buildable parcels,
complying with ordinance requirements at the time they were created.
Under this thinking, any non-conforming lot-would be unbuildable, even if the
proposed home complied with all setback requirements. This has never been the
position of the City.
IN/OUT CITY
The appellant states that the City exercised legal judgement in determining if the
whole lot, or just that portion within the City, should be considered when
approving this building permit. Staff reviewed the definition of "Lot" (18.08.350)
which states that a lot is a unit of land created by a partition or a subdivision, or a
unit or contiguous units of land under single ownership, which complies with all
applicable laws at the time such lot's were created. It is clear that this parcel,
even though it is in two jurisdictions, is one unit of land, and must be considered
as a whole, not a two separate pieces. Staff believes that this is very clear from
the ordinance, and does not involve the use of discretion.
PA93-128 Ashland Planning Department =- Staff Report
Don Johnson October 12, 1993
Page 4
rq
III. Conclusions and Recommendations
It is Staff's opinion that no legal judgement, exercise of policy, or discretionary
decisions were made as part of this building permit. The determinations, while
somewhat complex and perhaps confusing, are very clear in relation to the
wording of the ordinance. Therefore, Staff does not believe that a land use
decision was made on this action, and recommends that the issuance of the
building permit be upheld as previously issued.
PA93-128 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
Don Johnson October 12, 1993
�0 Page 5
kcf 4,;te-o
jo
Q>11aP�ed
SI�
City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit
EXMIEIT S - 3
PA# %3-/A 8
Dore LO-S•`G9 Suss
I
ASHI AND PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARINGS BOARD
MINUTES
OCTOBER 13, 1993
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Vice Chairperson Steve Armitage.
Other Commissioners present were Jarvis, Medinger and Bingham. Staff present were
McLaughlin, Molnar, Knox, and Yates. .
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forth to speak.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
.PLANNING ACTION 93-128 IS AN APPEAL OF THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING
PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 635 THORNTON WAY. APPEAL
BASED UPON SOLAR ACCESS ORDINANCE, AND LOT WIDTH/DEPTH
REQUIREMENTS.
APPELLANT: MARALEE SULLIVAN
APPLICANT: DON JOHNSON
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Bingham and Jarvis had a site visit.
Medinger had no site visit but he is familiar with the property.
STAFF REPORT
McLaughlin reported the appellant placed a packet of information into the record.
McLaughlin stated this application involves the appeal of a building permit. When
issuing a building permit, the City also issues a zoning permit. The appellants are
appealing the solar on this site, as well as lot width and lot depth.
The reason it may appear there was bizarre intrepretation to the solar ordinance is
because this is a bizarre lot. The words of the ordinance have been followed. The
main concern is where the solar access is measured from. McLaughlin showed the
overhead and explained how Staff arrived at the northern property line. This was also
reviewed with the City Attorney. When a.section of the ordinance is unclear, Staff
refers to the Purpose and Intents sections. However, the explanation of a northern lot
line is very clear.
The lot width and depth was another issue. The appellant says this lot was not
42A
recorded until 1986. If this is the case, it may not be a legal parcel and would not be
recognized by the City as a buildable site. If, however, the lot is legal, if the building is
within setbacks, the owner can build.
Bingham believes the intent of the law would be to protect Sullivan's solar rights. If
the ordinance is strictly read, Staff's intrepretation would be fine. McLaughlin said if
there is some ambiguity that requires intrepretation, then they would go back to the
Purpose and Intent.
Bingham referred to page 6 of the appellant's document and a pamphlet handed out
by the Planning office. The pamphlet is not the wording in the ordinance. At that
point, McLaughlin said the ordinance is the document to which would be referred.
Medinger would have interpreted the northern lot line to the secondary northern line
instead of the far north that Staff interpreted.
PUBLIC HEARING
JUDITH UHERBELAU, 607 Siskiyou Blvd., representing Maralee Sullivan said she put
her client's comments in writing because didn't feel she would have enough time. The
Staff Report raised some issues not in the written material. In applying the zoning
ordinance, which part of the lot does one look at? The vast majority of the lot is in the
County. The building permit was first signed off by Planning on August 16th. If you
apply the definition of a lot, it can apply only to a lot in Ashland, so even though it is
not written, it has to be applied to the definition. The definition of a lot must be
ambiguous because Staff had a problem. Planning made a land use planning decision
when they ignored lot width and depth requirements. Given the definition of the
grandfather clause, there is real ambiguity. What has to be recorded? The phrase
'.which does not meet", that includes not only a substandard lot, but why not a lot that
is.too big.
Technically, the zoning ordinance calls for the northern property line but that
completely defeats the purpose of the solar ordinance and thus voids the ordinance.
It is obvious the applicant wants city services. If this permit is not allowed, that does
not make his lot unbuildable. He could annex. If the building goes forward, it denies
the Sullivan's solar access and will cast a shadow. (She did not know how far.).
McLaughlin said the house was designed to meet solar setback B so there is 16 foot
shadow at the secondary northern lot line.
MARALEE SULLIVAN, .550 Tucker Street, said it is hard to get perspective of the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2
HEARINGS BOARD
OCTOBER 13, 1993
MINUTES
proposed house and how it will effect her property. There is a steep hill leading up to
the lot. There will be a two-story house looming. She understood the solar access
ordinance would protect them. Even though the math might work out, the purpose
and intent of the solar access ordinance would be violated. She is just asking for a
right to sun.
EDWARD BERNARD, 639 Prim Street, thought it appeared that this dwelling is trying to
sneak into the city limits to get city services and is barely meeting the minimum
standards. This lot is uncharacteristic of the neighborhood. Why can't it be moved
further up Thornton and be annexed into the City and make it a home that would fit
into the neighborhood?
JEFF MAYFIELD, 2381 Place, Medford, is the designer of the house for Dr. Johnson.
In addressing the solar issue, it was complicated and discussed extensively with the
Planning Staff to come up with a fair interpretation to all concerned. With the terrain,
as explained by the last two.people, the tallest point of the building will not even come
up to. the curb height on south portion of the lot. The actual shadow length will cast
no mre shadow than the current terrain of the street. Also, the building does not
quite reach a height that would throw 16 foot shadow. He tried to fit it against the
contours of the land. He agrees with Planning Staff's intrepretation. He is not aware
of a legal lot issue.
Jarvis wondered if we can apply our ordinances to a lot line that is not in the City.
McLaughlin said the lot is the whole boundary and all lines must be used. The City
has jurisdiction over what is in the City limits.
Jarvis asked if this was a legal lot (width and depth). McLaughlin said yes, based on
the parcel as the parent parcel.
McLaughlin said the City's initial thought was to look at the part within the City and
apply reasonable standards and follow Criteria B. After the idea of an appeal was
brought to Staff's attention, Staff stepped through the solar ordinance word for word
before releasing the building permit. After going through that process a clear
progression was followed, arriving at what is outlined in the Staff Report.
JUDY UHERBELAU, rebuttal, said there are drawings showing the proposed house will
shadow the Sullivan's property.
DON JOHNSON, 802 Beach Street, noted there is 0.4 of an acre in the City. The
house was designed in consideration of solar regulations and was pushed to the west
as far as possible so it would not cast a shadow on the neighbors. The shadow will
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3
HEARINGS BOARD
OCTOBER 13, 1993
MINUTES
I
not actually fall on Sullivan's house. The lot was purchased in August of 1989. The
title and sales contract was reviewed by a local attorney and determined to be
accurate and he has every reason to believe it is a legal lot. Johnson feels the appeal
of the permit should not be approved and that the building plans do meet the
ordinances as specified.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Medinger thought the intent of the ordinance is to protect the downhill people. It was
written for steep northern slopes. However, how difficult would it be to go through an
annexation?
Jarvis believes Staff made a legal decision, not discretionary. _ She did see a problem
as to the size of the lot and whether or not it is a legal lot.
Armitage felt the solar ordinance has been met if the northern most property was used
or the secondary northern property line was used.
Bingham said that by.looking at the site, he did not believe Staff made a land use
decision.
Jarvis moved to deny the appeal on PA93-128 and find there was not a land use
decision made by Staff. Medinger seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 93-125
REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR REACTIVATION OF A NON-
CONFORMING USE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 930 TOLMAN CREEK ROAD
(FORMERLY BELLVIEW MOLDING MILL). SPACE TO BE USED FOR
MANUFACTURE AND DISTRIBUTION OF MEDICAL
APPLICANT: DEAN CROPPER
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts.
Bingham had a site visit. A couple of neighbors came by but did not talk about the
merits of the case.
—Medinger did not have a site visit but he is familiar with the property:
—Jarvis had a site visit.
Armitage had no site visit.
STAFF REPORT
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4
HEARINGS BOARD
OCTOBER 13, 1993
MINUTES
City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit 0
PA# 93-1A6
DATE( f3 STAFF
BEFORE THE CITY OF ASHLAND
PLANNING COMMISSION
In Re )
Planning Action 93-128
Maralee Sullivan, )
APPELLANT'S
Appellant . ) HEARING REPORT
INTRODUCTION
Donald J . Johnson applied for a single family home building
permit for Tax Lot 1900. The property involved has only a small
portion within the City. Most of it is in the County and zoned
RR-5.. A building permit was issued in August , 1993 . Maralee
Sullivan, who owns property adjacent and to the north of Dr .
Johnson, has appealed the issuance of that building permit . The
initial issue to be decided on this appeal is whether a land use
decision was made . The staff takes the position that a land use
decision was not made as part of the building permit . It is
appellant ' s position that it was clearly a land use decision.
LAND USE DECISION
The approval or denial of a building permit issued under clear
and objective land use standards is not a land use decision . ORS
197 .020. However , the initial decision made by the Planning
Department was not made under clear and objective standards .
Certainly, they were not clear and objective to the planning staff ,
themselves . Attached hereto , marked Exhibit "A" , is a copy of the
-1- APPELLANT'S HEARING REPORT 6
Building and Zoning Permit related to this matter. On August 16 ,
1993 , Planning Department' approval was given, providing for the
application of Solar "B" Criteria and a north setback of 14. 15
feet. Attached hereto, marked Exhibit "B" , is a copy of a letter
from counsel for the appellant to Mr. McLaughlin, Planning
Director, dated August 20, 1993 , pointing out some problems that
the planning staff had in allowing the permit signed off on August
16th. For example, the only way Solar Criteria "B" , and a 14 . 15
foot north setback would be applicable is if the planning staff
took into consideration only that portion of Tax Lot 1900 lying
within the City, and yet if you looked only at the property for
other setbacks , such as the rear yard requirement , they had to also
be looking at the portion lying within the County. This is because
the proposed building backed right up against the City limits , with
at least a small portion falling over the line . See Exhibit "C"
attached hereto, which is a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing
pertaining to Planning Action 93-128 . After Exhibit "B" was sent
to the Planning Director , the Building and Zoning Permit was
amended and signed off on August 24, 1993 , changing the Solar
Criteria to "A" and requiring a north setback of 61 . 4 feet .
Given the planning staff ' s own confusion, how can they say
there were clear and objective standards? In the staff report ,
they rely on the definition of lot in 18 .08 . 350 to support their
position that you look at the entire lot . The staff admits that
there are two jurisdictions involved, i . e . the County and the City .
-2- APPELLANT ' S HEARING REPORT 2 7
Indeed, the Commission should make note of the fact that that
portion within the City is minuscule in comparison to the entire
3-acre parcel , most of which lies in the County, albeit the Urban
Growth Boundary. Municipal Code 18.080. 350 must be read to imply
that a "unit of land" is referring to a unit of land in the City of
Ashland; otherwise, using the staff ' s interpretation, it could be
referring to a unit of land in Phoenix, in Medford, or even in
California. A common sense reading of the Ordinance must imply
that it refers to a unit of land in the City of Ashland. Contrary
to what the staff argues , it is not at all clear that the Ordinance
refers to a unit of land wherever it lies , and again I would refer
this Committee to the staff ' s own actions .
One other interesting aspect of the City' s determination that
the entire lot should be taken into consideration when applying the
zoning regulations that only affect the City portion, is that both
under case law and the Urban Growth Boundary Agreement .between the
City and the County, the City cannot use its zoning regulations in
that portion of the Urban Growth Boundary falling within the County
at this time, because the City has not annexed the property and has
only made recommendations as to zoning. See Section 4 , page 6 , of
the Ashland/Jackson County Urban Growth Boundary Agreement dated
May 20, 1982 , attached hereto , marked Exhibit "D" .
In Multnomah County v . City of Fairview, 96 Or App 14 ( 1989) ,
the City annexed property in the Urban Growth Boundary.. At the
time , the City' s plan provided that the land use classifications
-3- APPELLANT' S HEARING REPORT �$
for the areas in the Urban Growth Boundaries were only recommenda-
tions. The Court ruled that the County zoning regulations had to
be applied. In this case, we are not even to the state of annexa-
tion, so it is clear that the City zoning law cannot apply to the
County area. Thus , not only is the City making a legal decision
when it considered the County area , its legal decision is in-'
correct .
Finally, on the issue of whether the staff decision was a land
use decision, it is appellant ' s position that it was when the
"staff considered this as an existing legal lot" which made the lot
depth and width requirements irrelevant at this point . The staff ,
in its report , did not cite any ordinance related to its decision;
however , they could only have been referring to 18 . 68. 130. That
ordinance provides , in essence , that if a .lot held in single
ownership and recorded in the office of the County Clerk, at the
time of passage of 18 . 68 . 130 , "which does not meet the lot size
requirements" , may still be . occupied by a use permitted. outright .
First, this lot , as a defined lot , was not recorded in the
Office of the County Clerk until 1986 . Attached hereto, marked
Exhibit "E" , is a history of the larger lot from which Tax Lot 1900
came . In 1975 , portions of the larger lot were deeded. See
Document No . 75-02516 . The splitting off of those particular
pieces , which the Tax Assessor' s Office calls a "split parent" (see
Exhibit "F" ) , resulted in a remainder of what is now Tax Lot 1900 .
Tax Lot 1900 , however , was never specifically described and re-
-4- APPELLANT ' S HEARING REPORT �9
corded until 1986, when it was conveyed in Document No. 86-25612 .
Given the language of 18. 68 . 130, that the lot must be "recorded in
the office of the County Clerk" , there is not a clear and objective
standdrd in this case for what is an existing legal lot. Further,
18 . 68. 130 applies the grandfather clause to a lot area "which does
not meet the lot size . " "Which does not meet" lends itself more to
a meaning that there is a substandard lot than that there is too
large of a lot (which is our case, when taking into consideration
the County portion of the lot) . In fact , that is how it has been
discussed in case law.
For all of the above reasons , this Commission should find
that there was a land use decision, since there were no objective
standards .
APPLICATION OF STANDARDS
The strongest objection that appellant has concerns the denial
of her solar access , which occurs because of the City' s decision.
While the staff spends 2h pages on the solar access formula, that
is irrelevant to appellant 's objections : If , indeed, you use the
north lot line that the City used, and plug the figures into the
formula , you do end up with a 61 . 4-foot north setback requirement .
The real issue is the north lot line . Appellant would request the
Commission to focus on Exhibit "G" , which is a copy of a Site/
Vicinity Map . That exhibit makes it clear how small the portion is
within the City. It also demonstrates what the planning staff
-5- APPELLANT ' S HEARING REPORT 3
considers the north lot line. If you compare that with Exhibit
"H" , which is a copy of a plat map of this area, you can see that
the north lot line of 1900, if projected out, actually is north of
the north lot line of Tax Lot 2000, which appellant owns. Using
that north lot line, instead of the north lot line where Dr.
Johnson is locating his residence , totally discounts Tax Lot 2000 ,
even though that is the property impacted. When you are measuring
from a line just north of the building, you have, in reality, wiped
out that lot.
Attached hereto, marked Exhibit "I" is a copy of a document
handed out by the planning staff to the public , entitled "What Is
Solar Access? " The second paragraph, . on page 1 , states as follows : .
"The purpose of the Solar Access Ordinance is to assure that no
structure casts a shadow across the northern property line greater
than that which would be cast by a 6 foot tall fence located at 'the
northerly property line. " If you put a 6-foot fence on the
northerly property line , used by the planning staff, it would cast
a shadow on Tax Lot 2200, and have absolutely no impact on Tax Lot
2000 . You would be putting the 6-foot fence in a location far from
where Dr . Johnson is actually building his residence.
On page 6 of the document "What Is Solar Access? " , you read as
follows : "The provisions set forth in the Solar Access Ordinance
were designed to protect another person' s solar access rights from
your development . " Using the north property line of the County
portion of the property does absolutely nothing to protect any
-6- APPELLANT ' S HEARING REPORT 3'
solar rights of the appellant within the City.
The north lot line, first used by the planning staff , which
was the south lot line of Tax Lot 2000, and which considers only
the portion of the property in the City, was the appropriate
approach. The problem with this approach, however , is that the
residence cannot meet the required setbacks under the zoning
ordinances , and so the staff had to look elsewhere to allow this
building permit .
Dr . Johnson has 3 acres to build on. Appellant is not
objecting to the allowance of the building permit because she does
not want Dr . Johnson to build on his property. What she does
object to , though, is the interference of her right to solar
access . It is only by building in the City that Dr . Johnson has
accessed sewer and water , without annexation. The appellant ' s
rights should not be denied in allowing Dr . Johnson to build on
what , in most instances , would be the access to a back lot , and
violates the purpose of the planning Ordinances , just so that Dr .
Johnson has access to the sewer and water services . Rather than
engage in these tortuous legal gyrations to allow this substandard
development , planning should just face the facts and tell Dr .
Johnson to annex his property so that he can build and thereby
obtain City services properly.
The appellant has also objected to the planning decision
because it has ignored certain dimension requirements . For
example . 18 . 20 . 040(c) provides for a maximum depth of 150 feet
-7- APPELLANT ' S HEARING REPORT 3
"unless lot configuration prevents further development of the back
of the lot . " Further, no lot shall exceed 150 feet in width. The
maximum depth and width are far exceeded, when you also take into
consideration the County portion of the lot .
For the reasons stated above in the discussion of whether a
land use decision was involved in this process , staff ' s position
that the grandfather clause applies is incorrect . Staff is also
wrong in saying that under appellant ' s thinking "any non-conforming
lot would be unbuildable , even if the proposed home complied with
all setback requirements . " Dr . Johnson' s lot line in the County is
not unbuildable and, in fact , this would be true in many other
situations . There is always the possibility of partitioning or
subdividing, if it meets those requirements . A blanket statement
-that the land is unbuildable is not supported.
Dated this day of October , 1993 .
Respectfully submitted ,
HOWS MUNSELL,
Pr fens .T 'C'or'poration
B
J dith H. Uherbelau, OSB #82150
f Attorneys for Appellant
JUU:k
-8- APPELLANT ' S HEARING REPORT 3 Z .
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
607 SIS KIYOU BOULEVARD POST OFFICE 50% 540 GLENN H. MUNSELL
JUDITH H. UHERBELAU'
ASHLAND. OREGON 87520
'ALSO A..MEO
(503) 452-1511 (503) 482-2621 IN CALIFORNIA
FAX 95031 773-5325 OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
August 20, 1993
John McLaughlin
Planning Director
City of Ashland Planning Division
20 E . Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE: Maralee Sullivan
Our File No. 9357
Dear Mr. McLaughlin:
We represent Maralee Sullivan, who owns Tax Lot 2000,, more
commonly known as 550 Tucker Street , Ashland, which property also
lies along Thornton Way and is adjacent to Don Johnson's pro-
perty, which is Tax Lot 1900. It is my understanding that the
City has signed off on a building permit to Dr. Johnson for a 2-
story home, to be located on that small triangular portion of Tax
Lot 1900 which is within the City limits .
This is to notify you that Ms . Sullivan believes that the
building permit is not in compliance with Municipal Code
15 .04 .090. As you know, Planning Division approval must verify
that the contemplated project is in accord with all applicable
zoning and planning regulations . We do not feel that the contem-
plated project is in compliance. Specifically, we think there
are problems in the following areas :
1 . Compliance with Chapter 18. 70 , Solar Access , of the
Municipal Code ; and
2 . Municipal Code 18 . 20 .040 , General Regulations ,
dealing with minimum lot area , minimum lot width, lot
depth, standard yard requirements and maximum coverage .
As you know, Tax Lot 1900 falls both within the county and
the city. It appears as if the Planning staff permitted the
applicant to use measurements of only that portion of the lot
falling within the city in some situations. (solar access measure-
35 Exhibit —a
John McLaughlin
August 20, 1993
Page Two
ments) , and allowed the applicant to look at the entire lot in
other situations (rear yard requirement) . You can' t have it both
ways. The Planning staff ' s decision as to whether the entire lot
or only a portion of the lot should be used in determining
whether this project met certain requirements is a land use
decision because it requires "interpretation or the exercise of
factual, policy or legal judgment . " See, ORS 197 .015( 10) (b) (C) ;
Campbell v. Board of County Commissioners , 107 Or App 611 ( 1991) .
Ms . Sullivan is in the process of having a surveyor review
the information that we have from the Planning Division file as
to dimensions and measurements , and from other public records.
Once that review is done, she expects to ask for a hearing before
the Planning Commission as to those decisions that were land use
decisions and may seek judicial review of any decisions that were
in violation of the objective standards found in the applicable
municipal ordinances . If Ms. Sullivan does file a lawsuit , she
will name the City, the Planning Director, and Dr. Johnson.
Although the Planning Division did not treat this as a land
use decision and give notice to the appropriate parties , it is
our position that the staff decision and interpretation is made
as of the date the building permit is issued and that , under
Municipal Code 18 . 108 .078 , we have 15 days to appeal that staff
decision. According to information I received yesterday, while
the planning staff has signed off on the permit , it has not yet
been issued.
Sincerely,
HOWSER & MUNSELL ,
Professional Corporation
Judith H . Uherbelau
JHU: kn
Cc: Maralee Sullivan .
Donald J . Johnson, O . D.
Paul Nolte , City Attorney
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIVOU BLVD.. P.O. BOX 640 -ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 2
15031 48 2-26 21 J
15031 4H2 1511 -
Notice is hereby given that a PUB L..: HEARING on which ordinance criterion objection is based on also predudes your right of
the following request with respect to the ASHLAND appeal to LUBA on that criterion.
LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the A copy of the appjk2don,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on the 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"in be available for
13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1993 AT 7:00 P.M. Inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost.
ff requested Ail materiah are available at the Ashland Planning Departinent,City
at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1 175 EAST Han.20 East Main.Ashland.OR 97520.
MAIN STREET, Ashland, Oregon.
During the Public Hearing,the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and
chase in attendance eoncernhng this request The Chairshall have the rtghtm limk
The ordinance criteria applicable m this application are amched m this notkc },doestinsorry and require that comments be restricted m the applicable
Oregon 6w:cares that tenure m nut an objection concerning this application, criteria. -
either in person or by letter,or failure m provide sufficient sped"to afford the
decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issues predudes,your right of yyou have any questions oreomments concerning this request please fed free m
appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(CUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Deparonent City Hall.at 488-5305.
• zv, . II +. r
' a5W ter. pE•l:]a ��'
5 - 11 I, tirSHERIDAN
no< _
RR-5 5 _
-- •... to ,�
2203 —_7-�—
7- 7o6
♦ is i.
j: �• Q NOZ Bq aW ao]
o-
'•.
ere' ...... 2]1.o3'
— - — T-UCKER STREET
29oo I60 ma ley: II • i]oo 16o0
�E
} vu • 1 I
Ia no< IL IaL- 11
:IJ
n,
• 1906 1907
pro - '� cacti 9 06
_- _wILEr
/STl SUBD/
N,4 V/S/ONE
PLANNING ACTION 93-128 is an appeal of the issuance of a building permit for the
property located at 635 Thornton Way. Appeal based upon solar access ordinance, and lot
width/depth requirements. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single Family Residential;
Zoning: R-1-7.5; Assessor's Map k: 391F-05BD; Tax LoC 1900.
APPELLANT: Maralee'Sullivan APPLICANT: Don Johnson
contract annexation may be delayed indefinitely upon agreement by the
City, County and the party to which the. annexation would occur. In
- such a case, annexation shall occur at the City's option.
D) Infill in unincorporated urban areas as defined- shall be exempt
from the burden of proof required in (B) above.
4. Policies Governing Urbanizable Areas.
A) A change in the use of urbanizable lands from land uses designated 5
on the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan to uses shown on the City's
Comprehensive Plan shall only occur upon annexation to the City or a
contracted annexation between the City, County and other involved
parties.
B) Development of land for uses designated on the City's Comprehensive
Plan will be encouraged to occur on undeveloped land encompassed by the
existing city limits prior to conversion of other lands within the
boundary.
C) The City, County and affected agencies shall coordinate the
planning, expansion and development of all urban/public facilities and
services within the urbanizable area. Existing or new urban/public
facilities and services must be adequate in condition and capacity to
accommodate the additional level of growth as designated by the City's
Comprehensive Plan prior to or concurrent with the land use changes.
D) Jackson County shall retain final- jurisdiction over land use
decisions within the unincorporated urbanizable area, and such
decisions shall conform to these adopted policies.
UGBA-7 -6- -
Page _
COPY
547 ti age '2
. 1(r'i'3U ,z 973 ��vi. --=`�
k,2
F -
WARRANTY DEED
'• KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That THORNTON S. WILEY, also
�! known as T. S. Wiley, and FREDRICA M. WILEY, hie wife, Grantors,
in consideration of Ten and no/100 ($10.00) Dollars, to them paid
.i by-FRANCIS TAMNEY and EVELYN P. TAMNEY, husband and wife, Grantees,
do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said Grantees,
as tenants by the entirety, their heirs and assigns, all the follow-
ing real property, with the tenements, hereditaments and appurten-
ances, situated in the County of Jackson and State of Oregon,
bounded and described as follows, to-wits
TRACT I: Commencing at the southwest corner of Donation
Land Claim No. 38 in Township 39 South; Range 1 East of
the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon, . thence
West 495.0 feet, thence South 165.0 feet to the true point
of beginning; thence continue South 630.0 feet, more or
.�' less, to the north line of the Northeast Quarter of the
�# Southwest Quarter of Section 5, in said Township and Range;
thence North 89'48' West along said line, 350.0 feet, more
or less, to the northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 5; thence North
0'27' West along the west line of said quarter-quarter
629.93 feet; thence East 349.80 feet to the true point
of beginning.
TRACT II: Beginning at the northwest corner of the NICKELL
PLATE ADDITION to the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon, according to the official plat thereof, now of .
record; thence along the north line of said Addition, South
r 89053' East 770.882 feet; thence North 0'27' West 660.06
feet; thence North 89'48' West 776.82 feet; thence South
0'27' East 661.05 feet to the point of beginning.
TRACT III: Beginning at a point 425.44 feet South and
0.56 feet West of the southwest corner of Donation Land
Claim No. 38 in Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the
Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon; thence East
276.80 feet; thence South 0'45' East 156.48 feet; thence
West 287.69 feet; thence North 3 014' East 156.73 feet to
the point of beginning. ALSO, commencing at a point 425.44
feet South and 0.56 feet West of the southwest corner of
i Donation Land Claim No. 38 in said Township and Range, .
thence South 3°14' West 176.76 feet to the true point of
beginning; thence East 284.11 feet; thence South 0°45'
}: East 196.95 feet; thence North 89'48' West 297.75 feet;
r
r
i
3q i_x;ibit
Page ??
thence North 3'14' East 196.19 feet to the true point of
beginning. ALSO, Commencing at a point 425.44 feet South
and 40.56 feet West of the southwest corner of Donation
Land Claim No. 38 in said Township and Range; thence South
3°14' West 202.80 feet to the true point of beginning;
thence West 202 .56 feet; thence North 202.48 feet; thence
West 330.41 fee%; thence South 370.39 feet; thence South
89048' East 523.38 feet; thence North 3'14' East 170.0
feet to the true point of beginning. ALSO, Beginning at
a point 40.0 feet West of the southwest corner of Donation
Land Claim No. 38 in said Township and Range; thence West
228.97 feet; thence South 385.44 feet; thence East 228.97
feet; thence North 385.44 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO, Beginning at a point 268.97 feet West of the south-
west corner of Donation Land Claim No. 38 in said Township
and Range; thence West 226.03 feet; thence South 192.72-
" feet; thence East 226.03 feet; thence North 192.72 feet -
to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the follow-
ing: Beginning at the intersection of the south side-line
of Tucker Street in the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon, with the east side-line of Prim Street in said
City, which point is 425.44 feet South of the southwest
corner of Donation Lana Claim No. 38 in Township 39 South,
Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian In Jackson County,'
Oregon; thence East along the south side-line of said
Tucker Street 276.80 feet to a 20.0 foot alley; thence
South 0°45' East along the west side-line of said alley,
156.46 feet; thence West 287.69 feet to the east side-
line of Prim Street; thence North 3°14' East, along said '
line, to,the point of beginning. Also, EXCEPTING THEREFROM
the following: Commencing at the intersection of the south
side-line of Tucker Street, with the west side-line of Prim
Street, in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon,
thence West 254.0 feet to the true point of beginning;
thence South 202.46 feet; thence West 200.41 feet; thence
North 202.46 feet to the south side-line of Tucker Street;
thence East 200.41 feet to the true point of beginning.
TRACT IV: Lots Nine (9) , Ten (10) , Fifteen (15) , Sixteen
(16) , Seventeen (17) "and Eighteen (18) of the NICIT LL PLATE
ADDITION to the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon,
according to the official plat thereof, now of record.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following: Beginning at the south-
east corner of Lot 10 of the Nickell Plate Addition to the
City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, according to the .
official plat thereof, now of record; thence along the
south line of said Lots 10 and 15, South 89°54' West 247.07
feet; thence North 0°27' West 154.44 feet to a point on the
south line of Lot 16 of said Addition; thence along the
south line of said Lot 16, South 89'54' West 7.5 feet;
thence North 0'27' West 158.94 feet; thence North 89°54'
East 227.77 feet to the west line of Prim Street extended;
thence along said line, South 0027' East 20.73 feet; thence
South 38°40' East 43.32 feet to a point on the east line
of Lot 9 of said Addition; thence along the east line of
Lots 9 and 10, South 0027' East 258.88 feet to the point
of beginning.
i%
. yo rA),�cic
SUDJECT TOi
(1) That part lying within public roads.
(2) Existinq rights of way for ditches or canals.
(3) That port conveyed to City of Ashland by deed
recorded in Volume 315 page 232 of the Deed Records of
Jackson County, Oregon. (Affects Tract iI)
(4) Right o£ way for an irrigation ditch. granted to
the_West Ashland Ditch Company No. 2, reserved in deed
recorded in Volume 11 page 455 of the Deed Records of
Jackson County, Oregon. (Affects Tract II)
(5) Easement for laying and maintaining pipeline or
lines for the distribution of water, and rights in con-
nection therewith, granted to the City of Ashland, by
instrument recorded in Volume 154 page 145 of the Deed
Records of Jackson County, Oregon. (Affects Tracts II
and III)
To Have and to Hold the above described and granted premises
unto the said Grantees as tenants by the entirety, their heirs and
assigns forever.
And the Grantors covenant that they are lawfully seized in fee
simple of the above granted premises free from all encumbrances,
- except as hereinabove stated, and that they will and their heirs,
executors and administrators, shall warrant and forever defend the
above granted premises, and every part and parcel thereof, against -
the lawful claims and demands of all perso{n-s� wh 4s
-
Witness their hands and seals this /! dae, 1963.
S LAI, (SEAL)
(SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON ) -
). ss.
7 county of Jackson )
On this of June, 1963, before me, the undersigned,
a t;otary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared
the within named Thornton S. Wiley, also known as T. S. Wiley, and
a
C�
7�
Exhibit 1.
3 _
j
- Fa�e
Fredrica M. Wiley, his wife, who are known to me to be the
identical individuals described in and who executed the within
instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same
freely and voluntarily.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed _
my official seal the day and year last above writt n.
pub q e4o
,'. io xpi
n.
i
a
I
'.ialc ci Greuw. County c' lacksca S5.
the %-(uu instrument eived and filod;at....'.-� o'c!uc(
/_. ?
1..11, the _..�f�.._.day of...... Lz.r 'c....._l'...._..
reco;daJ /.. 1 a d.._.......ft¢c Ioi lackxa(,4oun1Y
heLun........6...J�r.. G `` f-c Coe.U.
e.
y� – page"-4C5 3
I 74 13893 MARSHAL'S DEED ON FORECLOSURE co
p
DEED, a di September, between EVERETT g,LANOFORD, United StaesMarshal eDstrictOf gon. he r called ehal" and the UNITHD STATES OF AHRC 'called nds
" its aucoesra and assigns, hereinafter
WITN8881THi
WHEREAS, in a suit in th
of Oregon, between the United State e United States District Court for the District
a of America. Plaintiff, and FRANCIS J. TAMNEY
also known as Francis Tamnay, and EVALYN P. TAMNEY, also known as Evelyn P. Tamnay,
husband and wife; and OREGON CITY HOSPITAL, INC., an Oregon Corporation, Defendants,
mortgagee Judgment
onand thedecree
real property entered
described below; and
for the foreclosure Of three
WHEREAS, the court thereafter issued a writ of execution, and pursuant
thereto on July 26, 1974, all of the right,:title, interest and
, glaitaef..the Defendants
in the real property described below�waa sold`at:public`auetioAj..Nith;no''right
of redemption, is the manner provided by law�','for the sum of 858,955.40, to said
Grantees, the highest bidder; and
WHEREAS, the Marshal thereafter -tiled the return of seta with the court
and an order confirming the sale was entered on August 29, 1974,',�':, _
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum paid for;the real property,
the Marshal done hereby convey to said Grants& all of the right
of the Defendants in and to the following described real property sitaatad.In
the County of Jackson, State of e Oregon, to-wits - tsita tad interest
Parcel No. 1:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of Donation Land• claim No. 38,
Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson
County, Oregon; thence West, 495.0 feet; thence South30.0 feet,
165.0.
to the true point of beginning; thence continue eet,
h,
more or less, to the North line of the Northeast quarter 0. the
Southwest quarter Of Section 5, said Township and Range; thence
North 89048' West, along said line, 350.0 feet, more or leas,
to the Northwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest'
quarter of said Section 5;
west line of thence North 0.27' West, along the
ea id quarter-quarter,' 629.93.feet; thence East, i
349.80 feet, to the true point of beginning, , '
ALSO: Commencing at a point 425.44 fast South and 40.56 teat
West of the Southwest corner of D
Township 39 South, Range onstioaLaad Claim No. 38,
.
l East, Willamette Meridian Jackson
.County; Oregon; thence South 30141.West, 202.80.feet, to the` •
true point of beginning; thence West 202.56 .feet; thence North,
thence South C9°48o East, 523.98 fas ; t hence;Souths.370.39.'faet7��..:, '
202.48 feet;170.0 feet to feet; thence North 3, 14' East at
the truePoint:_of beginning .-P, ;, 1
ALSO: Beginning eta point 40.0 feet Waetof the Southwest
i
corner of Donation Land Claim No 38k.Township;,39 South, Rangel; +
East Willamette Meridian, Jackson. County,:;Oregon, thence WaeC,
220.97 feet thence South, 385,44.feet7 thence East, 228
_ set, thence North, 385,44 fee;, to Che o -
P l,ntrof begiwiino, " i o k
f a';'�lk4d�k»1`-h1,1 "k'r -'�, < <.. rr r ul, f r
order,ofgDon ationLLandilalm¢NoP4r'fRdeG,Nee'_fiha$a8thweatTl��k,'' �' l,,yvif ,�
rEaet WS31 , rSa Towaship'99 6outb 'Ra i '"114T ` "fit'
< �,. .v ! 1 , tmette Merididn,�Jaekaon•:pouatq;OragoairaFhaACe Wese ,' :a � ya`�� r',,
226;03 feet; [hence'S0 uth,Gl92,1T`feat
theuea Nortb,�192 72, ad ' 7 ithacca pEa�aCa•.226.03 eat � t� r �-
i F,tr. �yi,y � Y, cf na.a✓,Y.�}-a'rLjYr� f.�,F f th 'yolnf �'be { _�.�y� F F�liie t�
Y t �
,� �,�' ,{{'.l}?i,'�7.�.��i�i c- � T,y.'{ � 1 L , n 7t 2r •i�� ��iL�j�.
. . ,'a5, ���! �':��ir r�f4;��C���`�� . . 4� nr. y 4y�VN. �g{�!�<�p�t17,.4J,;•
.. .. _ l
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following: Commencing at the intersection
of the South side line of Tucker Street, with the West tide line
of Prim Street, in the City of Ashland, Jackson.county, Oregon;
thence West, 254.0 feet, to tho true point of begfnafng; th�aca.
South, 202,4' f' thance.Waet, 2QOt41 ltap thaac' North+(
202,46 laces eo,;the 8outh.4 lint oL fiiokelr8t=eaf
Best,, 200.4111 ygj�t4 to Cruq polyn�e�'o , Igtdnln8l ,,w, r:; 1,, • '.:
+4
ALSO HXCEPTIN0.THE KAFRON.the loliwiinglyr�omanoing
intersection of Cha.North line ol.Tua 0r�8[taat�'vlth the ntiilr
Oregon; thence Wust, ale ngethat orth'lin�ot Tuck On8trestr1'','�
455 feet, to the-Southwest corner of t property dascribed in
Volume 471, Page 348, JAckson'Countya Oregon, Dead Records, -
. the place of beginning; thence Waat, 40 feat; thence North,
192;72 feet; thence East 40 last; thence South, along the Westerly
aide line of the property described in Volume 471, Page 348,
said Dead Records, 192.72 feet, to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following, Beginning at a point
425 feat South, and 254.56 l
Donation Lend Claim no. 38, T act West of the BouthwssC corner of
ownship 39 South, Rangs.l East,
Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence South,
202.46 feet; thence West, 30 feet; thence North, 202.48 feet; thence
East, 30 feet, to the point of beginning.
ParcelNo. 2:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of the NICKELL PLATE ADDITION,;.? ,Jacks On the cline ofhsaid$Addition,CSouth X89*53' .62
Oregon;t , 778nfeet;
thence North 0' 27' West, 660.06 feet; thence North 69.48'
West, 778.62 feet; thence South 0027' East,.661.05 feet, to
the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying within the boundaries
of FRANEVA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, in the City of Ashland, Jackson
County, Oregon,
theALSO: Late 15, 16, 17, and 18, of NICKEL PLATE ADDITION, to _
City of Ashland, Jackson County,.Oregon. .
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying within the boundaries of
FRANEVA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION and THORNTON SUBDIVISION, in the
City of Ashland, Jackson County; Oregon. - . - -
ALSO: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6; 7; 8, and 9�of-Block 1; also. Lots 7,
8, 9, 10, 11, and 12, of block 2, all',Sn,PRANEVA HEIGHTS ; - '
SUBDIVISION in the City of Ashland, -Jackson Count y,,Oregon. .
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following: - Beginning aLa 3/4" 3:
iron pin FRANEVA diet sat in concrete being,Lha Snitisf
, point of FRANEVA HEICHTB SUBDIVISION. to'tha City.,of Ashland
Jackson County, Oregon{ thence South'0•30'25!' Eaet, .aloag..tAa
East line of said subdivision, 51441 fact; S/B'.!, 0 0a'pin '
at the Northeast corner o
for the f Lot 19,-Block 2 of. a�d'adbEivlai0a,
It point of beginning; thence:South'85.e59:!15'!:Wcat .
along the North'line'of said Lot 13„and,ite Weeterly.'ptol act lon, '
125.00 feet, to intersect the East line'of Lot 1;'iHlok 2 ;r' •-
said subdivision, a 5/8 ;iron pin;';thenee h`0*c ,30'25”`. •`
` West, along said East line'ofLot l a 8letanc o r
to the Northeast,,'corner of said lots „¢ f;.9,99 faet `Lt
North 69:.59'15��,East '105,00-POet'`"� *t ;)XS/§,��ronJpin,ethonce^'MSttX
1 e toy;syflydpcth East lingo Y _i3 z.
y ,, ,��4"'�,�r„��"of Lot 12; Block 2,p�al�t( �ubdivfa�pn t7,oa� Soul '� •30! .,�,' ^x, " �.k"•
1"`•��.,'7c?tEase,kalcug,pa� �`.�.t`12 r eat ""+' }4+i .,_�. t i.H 13ya;
f�
vv '
_µMl
f✓fi' 11'�! Y.f 4)Y� ttP + ysy. � '.
4t ,�3x Itu'�v;�S `t�'tv ��a vsY`�Ljd' Z v _*.. l �v.. � � ,...��Cr�5w• 4 1,
1y t y�
.IN
ALSO
._I Begin"ing at • point 9,65 chains North and 20,77 chains
- Eaat of the Southwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section 5, Township 39 South, Range 1
East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson county, Oregoal thence '
North, 10.35- chain* thence West, .8.00 chains and 24,0 fast,
thence South, 10.36 chainaT thence East, 8,00 chains and 24.0
feet, to the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the lollowingi Beal nning_at a point on
Jackson�County. Oregon, the 666Y90 fast North and
quarter feat East of the Southwest corner of the Northeast
quarter of the Southwest quarter of said section 51 thence
North, along said street line, 150,0 feet{ thence West, 115.0
feety-thence South, parallel with :a!d :treat line, 150,0
feet{ thence East, 115.0 fast, to the point of beginning,
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the above described
tract lying East. of the West line of Walnut street.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM those portion* along the Northerly
line thereof, conveyed to the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon, for street purposes, by deeds recorded as Document
No. 66-07654, and Document No, 69-10350, Official Record: r
of Jackson County, Oregon,
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM those three parcels described in
deeds recorded as Document No. 66-004
and Document 53 and Document No. 70-Document 72-13033, Official Record: of Jaekgon County, Oregon.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises, with appurtenances thereto,
unto said Grantee, its, successors and assigns, forever, free from all claim'
thereon upon the part of said Defendants, as fully and absolutely es l law said
Grantee can or ought to have or to hold the aame hereunder.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I, the said Marshal, bave bereuato set,
ate' r
and seal the day and gear:first above written L e au• �' hand , r
r 1„,j ckii COantyj()rt oa �- "w IT y.♦r KI.(�` �� 1� 1\�`^s��'c N��`�,),'I y�f 35r ti._
8 , i°fq„ •fit-e,3Siu Y,na, y:1S�'iJ '-36, a't. y, ,
'Recorded „ , i:�' •y''xi� �r '1R'_. �»-.:•N� .r 4�1\i � '
s NOm[f'jAL RECORDS
�?•QI OCT221974 Pasti; E
TT_R.,LANGFORD ,t �� *w •+'* ':
�'HAItRl CI-I1PA4AN ited States'HarRD, " �fp 't'� "
RKm R CO I:R District of Oregon � �����?'i = (fr.
STATE OF OREGON
t ._ iO o `• v
COUNTY OF HULTNOMAH ).
On this the zzday of September, 1974, bsfozeme.,
in and for said County, personally came`the pit1974, before Note "
United States Marsha: rY Public r s;;
Party described is for the District of'Ore oa $'ER81'1' R,"l.ANGPOAD, ;
and who as such Hershel-executed ctheY thin li��.the identical
acknowledged to me that he executed the eame
. � rumbat, and
IN WITNESS ;1
day and year in this certificate first abovatwrit! mY band and official'seal the ,`.
' r cif n ,.� yk her:.
, � ,1.V•4. �. ✓ ,o '' rS.r���7�v51r�, i � ^fit v.
.yyy',� t th<'ar�.}•\f�'rA',
-•jt�` �ri} 7, Y. 'RJ' �`t 1 �'• tk�"�`' =�
'J I'. 1 y { f0 ''// '� h nA
UA�IG ! , �'tr kq d ry Ca\ Pub , K.Oregogt
�`FI Md}1 W s + ippr, a tr
j.? • r,Y GO , �' � �^ gala 1 \ 7 I 'F fA' r h
Oi1Q'. �:k� '"!'^
- �Q1µ�� � y 4� ��e •r 7i'7 �.^ nr�1
y'.r�� Xi.l,' 3 � N :Z t 5���";.g•�.r><w' xi-t k Z n .:� ,� n' I k! l- (
i
�� Jr. - :.
sit
WIN
w
mum
UNITED armers Home Administration OF AGRICULTURE C py
"15^0251G Farmers Noma Admf¢fetratfo¢ 1\wJll
QUITCLAIH DEED -
KNOW ALL MEN BY THE68 PRESENTS .That the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
sating through the State Director of the farmers Home Administra-
tion, for and in consideration of THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS
(434,000.00), release@ and quitalafma to ALPRED W. BURGOYNE and PHOEBE S.
BUROOYNS, husband and wife, 4107 Old stage Road, Cant ral Point, Oregon
97501,, all interest -in the fclloving-described real a;: ilk the County
of Jackson, State of Oregon, to-vitt
Parcel No, It
_ Commencing at the Southwest corner of Donation Land claim No. 38,
- Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson
County, Oregon; thence West, 495.0 feet, thence South, 165.0 feet,
to the true point of beginning; thence continua South, 630.0 feet,
more or lase, to the North lint of the Northeast quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section 5, said Township and Range; thence
North 89148' West, along said line, 350,0 feet, more or lees,
to the Northwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the southwest
quarter of said Section 5; thence North 0°27' West, along the'
West Line of said quarter-quarter, 629.93 feat; thence East,
349.80 feat, to the true point of beginning.
ALSO: Commencing at a point 425.44 feet South and 40.56 feet
West of the Southwest corner of Donation Land Claim No, 38,
Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson
County, Oregon; thelace South 3°14' West, 202.80 feet, to the
true point of beginning; thence West 202.56 feet; thence North,
202.48 feet; thence West, 330,41 feet; thence South 370.39.feet;
thence South 89°48' East, 523.38 feet; thence North X3'14' East,
170.0 feet, to bias true point of'beginning.
ALSO: Beginning at a point 40,0 feet West of the Southwest
corner of Donation Land Claim No. 38, Township 39 South, Range 1
East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence West,
228.97 feet; thence South, 385.44 feet; thence East, 228.97
feet; thence North, 385,44 feet, to the point of beginning.
ALSO: Beginning at a point 268.97 feet West of the Southwest
corner of Donation Land Claim No. 38, Township 39 South, Range 1
East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence West,
226.03 feet; thence South, 192.72 feet; thence East 226.03 feet;
thence North, 192.72 feet, to the point of beginning,
�i S an"���11�xYr � u -°rY��tM�R`a r j1e ��I '4' A ��'Y. c.•
7 w5 . � S o � I w ��� A��S �>� �'� .r�S.xy "`i i t a •-,.
k\. 31 {( Y 4 q( .� �.�1 M4 l (l* 'y• (r' yi l I
I Y I adP_yi-T�iii y�aK v.a �
i
YS-0251(;
2
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following; pommsncing at the Intersection
of the South aide line of Tucker Btrsat, with the Wait aide line
of Prim Street, in the City of Ashlandpd# Jackson County, Oregon;
South, true
00.41!laatl thence North
202.46 fact, to the South aide line of Tucker 8trastl thence
East, 200.41 feet, to the true point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following, Commencing at the
intersection of the North line of Tucker Street, with the Westerly
line of Prim Street, in the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon; thence West, along the North line of Tucker Street,
455- fact, to the Southwest corner of the property described in
Volume 471, Page 348, Jackson County, Oregon, Dead Records,
the place of beginningl thence West, 40 feet; thence North,.
192.72 feet, thence East 40 feetl thence South, along the Westerly
aide line of the property described in Volume 471, Page 348,
said Deed Records, 192.72 feet, to the pain[ of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following, Beginning at a point
425 feet South, and 254.56 feet West of the Southwest corner of
Donation Land Claim no. 38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East,
Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence south,
202.48 feet; thence West, 30 feet; thence North, 202.48 feet; thence
East, 30 feet, to the point of beginning.
Parcel No. 2:
Beginning At thl'Northvest corner of the NICKELL PLATE ADDITION,
to the City of 'Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon; thence along
the North line oY said Addition, South 89'53' East, 778.82 feet;
thence North 0' 27' West, 660.06 feet, thence North 89'48'
West, 778.82 feet; thence South 0'27' East, 661.05 feet, to
the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying within the boundaries
of FRANEVA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, in the City of Ashland, Jackson
County, Oregon.
ALSO: Lots 15, 16, 17, and 18, of NICKEL PLATE ADDITION, to ,
the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying within the boundaries of
FRANEVA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION and THORNTON SUBDIVISIOII, in the
City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon,
ALSO: Lo to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,'8, and 9 of Block 1; also, Lots 7,
8,99, 10, 11, and 12, of block 2, all in FRANEVA. HEIGHTS
SUBDIVISION in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon,
V
I
.. .. . r..
rui, ] ^
J'
'JS^O,L51G 5
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following, Beginning at a 3/4" R 30"
iron pin with bronae dime let in concrete being the initial
point of FPANEVA HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION to the City of Ashland,
Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 0'30125" East, along the
East line of said subdivision, 514.81 test, to a 5/8" iron pin
at the Northeast corner of Lot 13, Block 2 of said subdivision,
for the true point of beginning; thence South 89'59'15" West,
along the North line of said Lot 13, and its Westerly projection,
125,00 feet, to intersect the seat line of Lot 1, Block 2,
said subdivision, at a 5/8" iron pin, thence North 0030125"
Walt, along said East line of Lot 1, a distance of 9.99 feet,
to the Northeast corner of.aaid lot, at a 518" iron ping thence
-North 89'59'15" East, 105.00 feet, to intersect the East line
of Lot 12, Block 2, said subdivision; thence South 00'30125"
East, along said lot line, 9.99 feat, to the true point of
beginning.
ALSO: Beginning at a point 9.65 chains North and 20.77 chains
East of the Southwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section 5, Township 39 South, Range 1
East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon{ thence
North, 10.35 chains; thence West, 8.00 chains and 24.0 feet;
thence South, 10.36 chains; thence East, 8.00 chains and 24.0
feet, to the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following; Beginning at a point on
the West line of Walnut Street, in the City of Ashland,
Jackaon County, Oregon, which point is 666.90 feet.Horth and
- 1346.82 feet Bt t,,of the Southwest corner of:the'Northeast +-
quarter of .[he',8authvest quarter of saidSacflon 5, thence -
North, a loag,sitd'stseet line, 150.0 feet; -thence:Welt,^115.0 �'. i -;'.,'; , '�'
feet; thence8outh, parallel with 'laid street line, 150.0 . .
feet; thence East, ll5eO feet, to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the above described
tract lying East of the West line of Walnut Street.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM those portions along the Northerly
line thereof, conveyed to the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon, for street purposes, by deeds recorded as Document
No. 66-07654, and Document No. 69-10350, Official Records
of Jackson County, Oregon,
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM those three parcels described in
deeds recorded as Document No. 66-00453 and Document No. 7046661;
and Document 72-13035, Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon,
r
Is
75^0251G 4
Until a ohangs is requested, all tax statements shall be seat
to the following addresst
4107 Old Stage Road, Central Point, Oregon 97501
DATED this 24th day of February , 1975.
USIT8D STATES OF AMERIOA
State� Dlrector .
farmers Home Administration
U. S. Department of Agriculture
STATE OF OREGON )
eat
COUNTY OF NULTNONAH )
t
On this 24th day
of February , 1975, before me, a Notary
Public in and for said county and state, appeared _Kenneth R. R.ndell
known to me to be the State Director, Farmers Home Administratio,a,
U.S.D.A., and -the person who executed the instrument on behalf of the
United States of America and acknowledged tome that the United States.
of America.executed the-Sam_.
IN WITNESS WHEREOP,:I hereunto set my hand and seal at Portland,
Oregon, the day aod.:ytar aforesaid.
SEAL) Notary Public and�p
Stara of Oregon
\p•.�.•.� C .., Ny Commission Expires -5-29-78
J■cbm County,Oregm
Racer
bFFl RHCORDS .
-''HARB:x'CHIPhIAN
• O Cr. QRnam � (.AS�Y'SS) '.�.00
8ti-03376 BARGAIN AND SALE Deep �� C�
KNOW ALL MEN BY TIICSE PRESENTS, That U
Alfred W. Burgoyne and Phoebe S. Burgoyne
hereinafter called grantor, _for the cons l erat on here np ter stated, does hereby grant, bargain,
i
sell and convey unto
j Duane F. Smith
hereinafter called grantee,
and unto grantee's heirst successors and assigns all of that certain
real prnpeity with the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances
thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, situated in the
County of Jackson , State of Oregon, described as followsl
to wit:
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" and "B"
I
)1
1
THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT GUARANTEC THAT ANY PARTICULAR USE MAY BE MADE OF THE
PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT. A BUYER SHOULD CHECK WITH TIIE APPROPRIATE
CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES.
To have and to hold the same unto the said grante@ and grantee's
heirs, successors and assigns forever.
The true and actual consideration paid for this transfer, stated
in terms of dollars, is $ Nil
In cot• truing this deed and where the context so requires, the
singular includes the plural and all grammatical Chang Wshall be
implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to corporations
and to individuals.
In Wit ass Whereof, the grantor has executed this instrument
this _ 510 day of F<-.6 , 19 86 if the
undersigned is a corporation, it has caused its corporate name to be
• signed by its officers duly authorized by order of its Board of
Directors. -
�RED•w. BURGOYNE BE S. BURGOYHg -
STATE OF _QHFS•oN _ )
COUNTY OF
i
i DATE: 1986
Personally app,ared the above named
7
i
Alfred W. Burgoyne and Phoebe S. Burgoyne
and ackoowlcdge the oregoing instrument to be the it voluntary
act and deed. /
...,:
BEFORE HE: "r
No"r ., c� ' r--b - Oregon --
Ml 5� tY,Ares: LI /J-8.7
NMI I
FM
86-03376 EXHIBIT "A"
Commencing at the Southwest corner of Donation Land Claim No. 38,
Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson
County, Oregon; thence West, 495.0 feet; thence South 165.0 feet,
to the true point of beginning; thence continue South 630.Q feet,
more or lees, to the North line of the Northeast quarter of the
Southwest quarter of Section S, said Township and Range; thence
North 89' 48' Weet, along said line, 350.0 feet, more or lees, to the
Northwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of
said Section.5; thence North 0' 27' West, along the West line of said
quarter-quarter, 629.93 feet; thence East 349.80 feet, to the true point
of beginning. -
ALSO, Commencing at a point 425.44 feet South and 40.56 feat West
of the Southwest corner of Donation Land Claim No. 386 Township 39
South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon;
thence South 3' 14' West , 202.80 feet, to the true point of beginning;
thence West 202.56 feet; thence North 202.48 feet; thence West,
330.41 feet; thence South 370.39 feet; thence South 89' 48' East, 523,38
feet; thence North 3' 14' East, 170.0 feet, to the true point of beginning.
ALSO. Beginning at a Point 40.0 feet West of the Southwest corner of
Donation Land Claim No. 38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette
Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence West 228.97 feet; thence South,
,385.44 feet; thence East, 228.97 feet; thence North 385.44 feet, to the
point of beginning.
ALSO, Beginning at a point 268.97 feet West of the Southwest corner of .
Donation Land Claim No. 38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette
Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence West 226.03 feet; thence South,
192.72 feet; thence East 226.03 feet; thence North', 192.72 feet to the
point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the followingi Commencing at the intersection
of the South aide line of Tucker Street with the West aide line
of Prim Street, in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon;
thence West, 254.0 feet, to the true point of beginning; thence
South 202.46 feet; thence West, 200.41 feet; thence North
202.46 feet, to the South aide line of Tucker Street; thence
East, 200.41 feet, to the true point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPTING therefrom all that portion lying Southerly and Easterly
of Thornton Wa; .
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following: Commencing at the
Intersection of the North line. of Tucker Street, with the Westerly
line of Prim Street, in the City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Grego,; thence West, along the North line of Tucker Street,
455 feet, to the Southwest corner of the property described in
Volume 471, Page 348, Jackson County, Oregon Deed Records,
the place of beginning; thence West, 40 feet; thence North,
192.72 feet, thence East 40 feet; thence South, along the Westerly
side line of the property described is Volume 471, Page 348, said
Deed Records, 192.72 feet, to the point of beginning.
`I
I
- 1
. EXHIBIT "Bu -
86-03376
ALSO EXCEPTING TBEREPROH the followings Beginning at a point
425 feet South, and 254.56 feet West of the Southwest corner of
Donation Land Claim No, 38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East,
I Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence South,
202.48 feat; thence West, 30 feet; thence North 202.48 fast. thence
East, 30 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the followings Commencing at a 2" iron
pipe situated at the accepted Southwest corner of Donation Land
Claim No. 38, said Township and Range; thence West, 40.00 feet to a -
5/8" iron pin for the true point of beginning; thence West, 455.00
feet to a 5/8" iron pin; thence South, 165.00 feet to a 5/8" iron
pin; thence West, 29.55 feet to a 5/8" iron pia; thence South, 27.72
feet to a 5/8" iron pin; thence East, 255.58 feet to a 5/8" iron pin;
thence South, 192.72 feet to a 5/8" iron pin situated on the Northerly
right of way of Tucker Street; thence East along said Northerly right
of way' 228.97 feet to a 5/8" iron pin situated on the Westerly right
of way of Prim Street; thence North along said right of way of Prim
Street, 385. 4 feet to the point of beginning.
This lnalrumoNfllcd for record tl an a:conodatbn onry.
it has not boon exnmined a,to Its aaeoutlon or a!to Its
ell<ct upon IM 14M.
Crllur Tlae tt17UOnca Co.
Jackass County,0»won
Recoiled
OFFICIAL RECOAM
/-�•o� FEB 2 71W 103L
KATHLEEN S.BECYBTT
CeR
. DEE Deamr
i
3 �
I
I
n i-f'' .,e:u rr sews CRATER TITLE INSUItAN�E CO. r.a awi at I"R.gtAttr ter. -
86-7-56 JOSEPHINE COUHTY TITLE CO. P.0.wx TL on 3L p ew.aiAm"PA#mk Ogsoolt e Y
IQIOr ALL Mf1�,Y THESE:RESENTS.1%0 "m t, Smith dba glskiyou
rooercias andd C ristina guith
i. broWbo law ties paaior,
for tonJdereaon MnlnaMr rote)q H paalw paid by
�lvar_ay ggyIIfs .......
i 6waschr a141 eM prase,
( ifts ImorebY Imo,heals, "11 4"logo" ands Ib sow W givossa's Mke sal soaps,tbeterii real
McMN,With tko tsar" krdltnesgs meal epporroaeea tbr..a M o
ys, loglag spprteW.a,sNeeM V 1M
Cam,01 Jaekson W Sate o1.Ctgea,broLl sal dooriel as Ie11On, t"11:
1:
k
t
gn A1TAOMD 11CAL MSCRIPTI011
This instrument will not allw use of the property described in this instrument in
violation of applicable land "a laws and regulations. Safon signing and accepting
+ this iastrument, the parson acquiring fee title to the property should check with the
appropriate city or county planning departrat to wrify approved us".
N
` To Hasa and to Hod ties a w"described and
gr enld
Iredw Wars 00 eand dtati«and
N loin ed aelynt 1
And"ad/'asntor
es"Arab,nx.antanee m and oven aid drerWe aid m hos'a Aehe.red rannew, "less
� gruwor•b laohntL,rlr.d m fe danaha d qr above beau/treeless,less hoe all eaaeweroe
tm .._.EEL$P.2..s�e�teou...sagas nu...aa -10"triatluoa_nL_nmrd........--.........................._.
_ .................................... .-........................__......
._..._.__.—.._...__..._-----.._..........._.
Z ...........-........ ......... ......._..._.................._...__..-.___.. ....._.._._..----.._..and&At tmmr oW we
N pantofe heirs,stea"m"s ad ada.lr.irranwa Mel oerrr and to Os Wiled do,a#. yeas./P-ftd-
and a•s.,part and oarcr Ow of s/airet the I."derive end dseaed,of d eesr.oa o/netes.ar.
C
so TM aw and ocrval cansidaratka paid for this trans{.., .tend is orra r/"lore. le$ 26.500.00.
CIE
D ahafia
F Z
K tl In conarvinY tMa deal and rfesne the awraaf a 'm ti eby.ds.ir.d,.da W pAvr.
rn WITHLSS yarrtd.hard ar.d a.al d._..................May.......:_.......... lv..B6....
1 e
t✓ (SEAL)
db kiyou ropertu SEAL)
(SEAL)
TI1(A SlQTB (SEAL)
STATE OF OREGON n T.e'
19..E
County of.._._Iacksoa......._...._......I
/.s�'`'g' to PERSONALLY appeared de above maned
.L�`.re9�,�.. .E;_lr...__...._._-._. Oua^a Lt�R�[h AtL-pia
god dti fvagoing InaavmeN to barhair wkwary ad e_a;i&.. L
of . ., �-.
Or.4'
( '' a •„t'D^J�FG..ti•: AWY Pubis Fur Oa –•---..._._ .
o)j¢ (SFJ� �E a •at..'�,! My Coeeiuha arybtan
MUM TO
_] Mail taz ■tote nt to I
{tl crantM at
l� � O •
JOSEPHINE COUNTY TITLE CO. y.a D=a err I.:a . .metre ran tntrww
CRATER T(TLf INSUZANCE C(1y* °t as a.tea or.•a�uaan aatoot '<;` `. --_---
g', 15
i
Description
A parcel of land situated in the Southeast qua;tar of the
Northwest quarter of section 5, Township 39 South, Range 1
East, Willamette Meridian, Jacksnn County, Oregon, more parti-
cularly described as followsn
1
Commencing at the Southwest corner of Donation Land Claim No.
38, Township 39 south, Range 1 Bast, Willamette Meridian,
Jackson County, Oregon; thence West 495.0 feat; thence South
385.44 feet to the true point of beginning, said point being
the Northwest corner of the existing right of way for Tucker
Street, City of Ashland; thence West 349.8 feet more of lees to
} the Westerly line of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest
quarter of section S of said Township and Range) thence South
' 00 27' West 408.34 feet, more or leis, along said line to the
Northwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the southwest
quarter of the said Section 5; thence South 890 480 37' Bast
288.0 feet, more or less, along the Southerly line of Southeast
quart.: of the northwest quarter of the said section S to a
point on the Westerly right of way of Thornton Way, said point
being on a 97 foot radius curve concave to the Bast, the radial
bearings 'in and out' are Worth 600 43' 27' East and Worth 130
18' 1B- west; thence, along the arc of said right of way curve '
j (central angle being.850 58' 15') 145.55 feet; thence, contin-
uing along said Thornton Street right of way, North 760 41' 42'
East 145.18 feet to a 23.34 foot radius curve concave to the
Northwest the radial bearings 'in and out' are North 130 18'
18' West and North 890 58' 57' Rast; thence 31.25. feet along
said curve (central angle being 760 42' 458) and continuing to
be the said right of way of Thornton May; thence, leaving said _
right of way for Thornton Street, south 890 58' 57' West
r 167.66 feet; thence Worth 243.17 feet more or less to the true
point of beginning.
SUBJECT Te, .
Easew"ta for road and utility purposes describeds
A strip of land 30 feet wide and such additional width as may
be necessary for the normal construction and maintenance of
slope& and with a centerline more particularly described as
follows:
Commencing at the Southwest corner of Donation Land Claim No.
38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian,
Jackson County, Oregon; thence West 495.0 feet] thence South
405.44 feet to the true point of beginning, said pc7nt being on
the Westerly end of the existing right of way for Tucker
Street, City of Ashland; thence West 26.0 feet; thence South
430 West 134.0 feet; thence South 580 West 225.0 fast) South
280 West 61.7 feet, more or leas, to a point 1S.0 fast from the
Westerly line of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter
of the said Section 51 thence South 00 77' Most 106.7 feet,
more or leas, parallel to said lino to a point on the 3ontherly
1 lino of the Southeast quarter of th Northwest quarter of the
said Section S, the paint of ending.
A tract of land described as follows;
Commencing at the South-jest cornew of Donation Land Claim No.
38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette :Iori'dian,
Jackson County, Oregon; thence West 495.0 feet; thence South
385.44 feet to the true point of beginning, said point being
• the Northwest corner of the existing right of way for Tucker
Street, City of Aehlamd; thence West 70.0 feet; thence South
450 .East 37.7 feet; thence Worth 430 Bast 15.9 feet; thence
Peat 32.5 Leat to the point of beginning.it 13MM n4 rM Win ��d 8pow /J.'g3 lACK408 CDJ ITY TITIf OIY OR M rwxdW tt a
(bAL-L—"°�_-mil aC�----`-"1" 1"r� �asaamau 4f mwd n as scm,",Uft ay r
bf 125mM CyAty and haf M moM,. II for rcvvlartry 1,d roilrl
t"
Mange-
3: 31 X5.00
89-13039
BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT
�q s
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this �L day of
1989 between LTM, INCORPORATED, an Oregon
'rporation,I hereinafter referred to as 'LTM', and GERALD STEIN
and riAY STEIN, hucband and wife, hereinafter referred to as
"Steins". _
RECITALS:
A. On July 15, 1985 Rogue River Paving, Inc., an
Oregon corporation, was merged into M. C. Lininger i Sons, Inc., [`
an nregon corporation, pursuant to Articles of Merger that were F.
filed with the Corporation Commissioner of the State of Oregon IIIIT
r
on July 15, 1985. .
B. On May 16, 1988 M. C. Lininger L Sons, Inc. was
merged into Tru-Mix Leasing Co., an Oregon corporation, and the
name of Tru-Mix Leasing Co. was changed to LTM, Incorporated
pursuant to Articles of Merger that were filed with the
Secretary of State of the State of Oregon. -
C. LTM and Steins each own an interest in certain
real property situated in the Northwest Quarter of Section 5, -
Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson -
County, Oregon. t
D. The parties desire to definitely fix and establish
the boundary line between their properties, '
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows:
1 - Boundary Line Agrecment
it
;T
59-13039
1. The parties hereto agree that the boundary line
and legal description of LTM's property is as described on
Exhibit "A' attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. The parties hereto agree that the boundary line
and legal description of Steins' property is as described on
Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. Steins hereby convey to LTM all of the right,
title and interest they have in the real property described on
Exhibit "A" hereto.
4. LTM hereby conveys to Steins all of the right,
title and interest has in the real property described on
Exhibit 'B" hereto.
S. The true coneidcraticn for th- conveyances herein
contained is other value given.
6. The parties agree that this agreement shall be
executed and acknowledged by them and placed of record in the
official rece-ds of Jackson County, Oregon.
DATED the day and year first hereinabove/ written.
LT*hard 4Di
By
re
Gerald in
xay b in
2 - Boundary Line Agreement
t _
,514 LL Y -
i
'Jy-13') 9
STATE OF OREGON ) '
ss.
County of Jackson )
On this day of 1989, personally
appeared . the above named Richard . Hensley, who, being duly
sworn did say that he is the Chairman of the Board of Directors
of LTM, INCORPORATED, an Oregon corporation, and that said
instrument was signed on behalf of said corporation by authority
o€ 4kj-.board of directors; and acknowledged said instrument to
vHe PdkSr ,0iuntary act and deed.
Vefore me:
„• �' Notary P lic or Oregon q
My comm ssion or 2�.3 '7oZ
6T.Z,T.E-OF "OREGON I
--k . ) ss.
County of Jackson ) _
,
On this Z day of 1989, personally
appeared the above named Ger d Stein and Kay Stein and
acknowledged the foregoing inst ent to be their voluntary act
and deed.
Before me:
me:
..,."• Notar ublic for or n
My commission expire 13
Eo : PUOI`=�•
3 - Boundary Line Agreement
Exhibit
page �`��
89-13039
EXHIBIT "A" _
Commencing at the Southwest corner ofDonation Land Claim go.
38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East,
County, Oregon; thence West 495.00 -feet; thence South 385.44 feet
to the Northeast corner of the tract described in Jackson County
Instrument No. 86-25612 for the POINT OF.BEGINNING;
along the Northerly line of said tact - and the westerly
prolongation of said Northerly line 358.00 feet to a 5/8 inch iron
pin;
rolongation South
oft 0 l the Southerly line of the feet
forementionede5 tract
described in Instrument No. 86-25612; thence South 89° 48' 37'
East 289.85 feet to a point on the Westerly riway along the
Thornton way; thence along said Westerly rig
arc of a 97.00 foot radius curve to the right (the long chord to
bears Nothence"North15760 East 41'1 421 4 feet)145.18 cfeet to thence
which along the arc of a .23.34 foot radius curve to the left (the long
chord . e which bears North hence, 201
leaving East
sa d Westerly fright-of-
distance of 31.25 feet;
way, South 89° 58' S7" west 167.62 feet (record 167.66 feet);
thence North 243.17 feet to the point of beginning. Containing
3. 38 acres, more or less.
LTM - T.L. 2000 39 lE 5BD
es--13039
EXHIBIT "B"
Commencing at the Southwest aStr corner illamette 1Meridian, Jackson
38, Township 39 South, Range 1 East,
County, Oregon; thence West 495.00 feet; thence South 385.4d feet
to the Northeast corner of the tract described in Jackson County
Instrument No. 86-25612; thence West, along the Northerly line of
sai 358.00 tract
eet and
to ah 5/8e inchlyironnlpin.foci Northerly
the POINT
BEGINNING•
thence continue West to the Westerly line of the Sou theaandq Range,
acti
of the Northwest quarter of Section said Townshiline to the
ti,ence North 000 27' West, 9 said
Northerly line of the south one-half (1/2) of the Southwest one-
quarter (1/4) of the Northwest one-quarter (1/4) of said SChence _
5; thence West, along said Northerly line 495.00 feet;
South 00° 27' East to a certain line per a boundary line agreement
as described -in Jackson County Instrument No. 81-12442; thence
Easterly, along said line, 495.00 feet more or less to a 5/8 inch
,
iron pin; thence North 00° 30' 24° East 411.30 feet to the point
of beginning.
stein - T.L. 1301 39 lE 5
3OOk9OL COULtY,OregrOL
neac=ded
Q.MCiAL RECORDS
3:39 JUN 201989 P.M
KATHLEEN S. BECKETT
CLgERK� amend}RJ�ECORDER
ia��J/�1Np( nliR '.Wvue
L �
_
JA aWM nurse TITLE DIVISION i�3b370-X(' copy
E3-2139a ,�I, 118 srna oor e+r
502 W. }fain Street (P. O. BOx 218) Medford, OR 47501 ( ij� �0�?
. .VVXRAMY /C°
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESUM that . -
L'M INOMPORATED, etmassor in: interest to Fbgne Rivas Paving CO., aka fbQue
River Paving, Inc.
hereinafter called the grantor, for the cvnaiderstim hereinafter stated, to Grantor
paid by
L17NAm J. JCHMCN
hereinafter called the Ora,tem, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and coney unto the
said Orentet and Orantes's hairs, nncoassors and assign, that certain real property
with the ta,eoentt, leseditaewnts and appurbensrrns thersnto belonging or appertain_ .
ing, situated in the County of JAC)C9CN state of Oregon, described as follows
to wit:
SEE EOiIBIT "A" ATTAQM }i ?ZM AND MADE A PART HP tMF
To HAVr Mm To HOLD the etas unto the said Grantee and Rmntm-a hairs, euo®saora
end assigns forever.
And Grantor her'sbY cumaats to and with Orsntees and the heirs of the s-avivcr and
their assign, that Ormtcr is lawfully naiad in fee slaplq of the above granted
pzvaiaes, free free all enasirmms, hnaaf
we exhibit 'A" attached hereto
and that Grantor will serrmt sad forever dsfed the avid premises and every part and
parcel thereof against the IDwAa claiam and demands of all parsers ut v , except
those claSmirg unZe • tan atrnn daaibed amarbra:c'as.
TtM 7MM Ater ACr<AL CCthiiDeRAT=w paid for this trwafer, stated in tt of doll�^-
is S 32,000.00
vmi7E THa comma 80 RCS, the singular includes the plural and all yiumetiasl
dianges shall be inplied to maka the provisions teranf apply egally'to indivi6L%als and
to w' ••aatirars. .
L'.' wrItOss fafEPsX, tin grantor has caused its name to be signed this 3rd day of
August 1989 by its officers duly auC�.thereto by order omits board
of direc:sv. 1
-'"rAIS Jjr. , {UU KM ALLOW 116E OF 'LM PfKX'aaY D!' IN THIS I SiR M?r IN
VIOLATICH OF Aperrneaez LARD tW JAM AM Td=Jj=CW. BEFUFM SIGHM CR AOCYPrDQ THIS
nmwj1mrf, TY.S PnSCH AJ_QIIRTIrJ M TITI3 TO = PiOMM GW= CNEOC wI•Ri TNZ APPRD-
MATE MY OR CCUM PLVd2L'A DCPAlSNEM TO VPI M APPFUM USM." .
L-MjIkCCFUCFA M-/
p�/m.:/Zn
/ TE OF OREGN
CCLMY OF Jackson
The f ore, 3s»,iz,mart wsa ed�!'d befcre ma this 3rd dsy of Auo e t 1449,
President and by n/a
.��.i,❑`{� L7f: IT� a
f of the o -pccation.
o
V\ ro
SPACE MR RECUMFR'S tSE
tart' x
MS' manirsim 92 \
Nail Tax Stdt%R6 to:
101 Ra-dy Stslxt
o',shlard. OR 9751_0
LA-36370
/
69-21943 IXH= a
Y— ramrrl� at the south,.est comer of ration Land Claim No. 38 in 7ts+nship 39 South,
// Rnr>ro 1 Fast of the Willamette Varidien in Jedtaon County, Oregon, ther=e Feat 495.0 foet.
chance South 385.44 foot to the true point of begiming, raid paint bairn the moth est
earner of the existing right of way for Tlriaer Street in the City of Ashland; thence Wet
358.00 fast to a 5/8' iron pin nrrenentirg the ncrthwat Corner of the trac of lad as
do ibed in Dd%UAt "A" of agree:mnt rworded as No. 89-13039 of the Official Records of
- Jadkon County, Oregon; thn as South 00'30124" East, along the Want boundary of said tract
described in Dchihit "A", 411.30 feet to a 5/8" iron pin sittated on tha westerly
prolongation of the southerly lira of the Southeast Quertar of the N o thoest Quarter of
Section 5 of mid Tmrmhip and Renga; therm South 89'48'37' Past 289.85 feet, alcrg the
southerly lira of Southeast Quarter of the Northwest puartar of the said Section 5 to e
point on the Wastarly right of way of Thornton Flay, said point being on a 97 foot radius
curve�a=mve to tin Pmt, tha radial baerilgs 'in and out' am North 80'43127" Fast and
North 13'18'18" Westi thsioe, along the arc of amid right of way curve (central angle
being 85.58'15") 145.55 feat; thanes runtir'ulnng along said Tt,,Omtrn Street right of way,
North 76'41'42" East 145.18 -feet to a 23.34 foot radius curve ooncave to the Nartiwest, _
the radial bearings "in and out" are Moth 13.18118" W t and North 89158'57" East; therr_o
31.25 feet aloe said Cove (central angle being 76'42'45") contiruirg to be said right of
way of Thornton Way to the sa;th lire of tract described Lon instrument reo=tW as
N76-00501 of the Official Rumrda of Jackson County, Oregon; ther=e, leaving said right of
wev for TT=mtcn Street, South 89'58'57" Wert (Reo.ud Wast), along said south line, 167.66 -
feet to the eoutlnast corner thereaf; thmoa North 243.17 feet along the west 1" of said
tract and Ste northerly extension mars er lees to the true point of bogimi-rg.
P (Cdo 5-1, ant 1-5475-1, Nbp 391ESEO, Tax lot 1900)
B (Code 5-11, Portion Tammt pl-1C040-0, N4sp $391E5FD, Portion Tax Lot 1900)
SUB= TO:
1. 1989/90 taome, a lien but not yet dus or payable.
2. Any pox-Jm lying Within puhlie roads or dedicated streets.
3. Existing rights of way for dud=es or coals.
4. Easement for laying and mnlntalning pipeline o: liras for the distribution of =mater
aM rights in �-cion ttaauith, granted to the City of Ashland, Oregon, by inq Ctnv_nt
ran.-ti[d in Fblma 154 page 145 of the Dew ;bxuds of Ja_+csr 0:--nty, Qrogc .
e
3
Jacbom C d.d0�9°r
OFn m._AL 4.ECORDS
&.'/>7 SEP 2 6 .ad
u 7 CPT s sE IMES
a
i
l
s
3
y
' 111-78-5 4111� RECORD OF DESCRIPTIONS OF REAL PROPERTIES 5-1 & 5-2
w couxr MREn OFFICE OF COUNTY ASSESSOR, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON cone NUMBER
ze - O0
5 39 lE 111=78 AERIAL PHOTO '
S,=0N TOWNSHIP_5 RANGE_M'.M. MAP NO.
5
R`°" THIS INFORMATION
'°T 9s aand
TAX LOT NUMBER NO.
NO. N Tr
DEED RECORD ACRES
n+P£xr EACx xEr LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND TAXATION r£AR VOLUME PAGE REMAINING
counsE ro rxls uxc
1928 173 630
Wiley, Thornton S. 1925 129 625
i
Commencing at a point 425.44 feet South and 40.56 feet 1939 221 492
West of the Southwest corner of DLC 38 in twp. 39 South
Range 1 East of'the W11 in 40, thence South 3G 14' West
i 202.80 feet to the true point of beginning; thence
West 202.56 feet; thence
North 202.48 feet; thence y
j West t237 .feet; thence
North 40 feet; thence
West 349.8 feet; thence
South 406.56 feet; thence = `
..Fast 783 feet; thence
North 30 14' East 170 feet to the point of
I beginning.
Also pot-noo when sT' /�In worr� TJ,o�nron wey
C Jas cvrr.0o✓T (PoF.3,Is I.E. :
��il/� 1949 315 231-
a^�,:/ 1949 319' 332- - .,.
1949 325 374..
Yo1. 315 ('
p� l CJa Luc -a7j 1950 329 45
1951 357 336 -
i (Written foriax lotting purposes only)
Wiley hornton S. A Francis & Evelyn Tamney (C) 1528 173 630
�'' 1925 129 625
1539 221 492
bei , par of
1954 C-27
l
Less tax lot 5-1 1959 1183 224
Part f
Tamney{ Francis & Evelyn P. 1963 547 422
(Inst. in 111-79-1) SV 64 3627
Part of R. 74-0 89 (note)
Less tax lot 391E5BD-1901 - 1965 586 61
• iv 6 -1791
i
391E2D-1900 � RECORD OF DESCRIf'�RP 1 10040-0
AC VNT "MBER OFFICE OF COUNTY ASSESSOR, { / -5u'7s-1 S—� pL&Vy'p
391EO58DO1900 OGJTB '
wealu nxoTO '
SECTION- S TOWNSNIn3 gANGE IF W.u. uwn NO. 391E5BD
LOT qwCX THIS INFORMATION
TAX LOT NW18ER NO. NO. AMTfflN A I CITY__
AND TAXATION DEED RECORD
INDC. LACH NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTION AcREs
WUREC TO THHI LINO YEAR YGLUNL ,Z- REMAINING
Part of
$Urgoyne, Alfred W & Phoebe S O.R. 75-02516
(Inst in 391E5CA-9oo) , 75 02360 J
I
Less tax lot 391E5BD-1902 Part f
O.R. 75-0 516
Bei parl of
O.R. 75-1 663
V ?(-02213
I
Less tax lot 391E5BD-1903 (split parent) Part of
O.R. 75-0 516
JV 7 -02213
Part f
Burgoyne, Alfred W & Phoebe S, % Smith, Duane F (C) .R. 75- 2516
Being Part of
R. 76-15862
V 76 1olo8
Smith, Duane F art f
(Inst in 391E5CA-800) (1-5503-4) ERROR O.R. 78-M783
cr .v. 8-o8- 25
Burgoyne, Alfred W & Phoebe S Part of
% Smith, Duane F (C) CORRECTION O.R. 75-0, 516
U , L TPLKC V 1 +M1TH( t- a-a ) Bein Pt o
z ."� � L+a fHll. 1/Y AE(-CILV IN�i flu•
O.R. 76-1' 862
TITL I� -
l <o. Coa L,y plrD ^IO ]2gCA\ulN fq Np>cr) J.V. 79-00,)62 I
Pape 24-3
e
391E5BD-1900 1-5475-1(5-1)ACCOUNT NO. 1-10040-0 5-1
OFFICIAL RECORD OF DESCRIPTIONS OF REAL PROPERTIES 5-11
DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENT, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
MAP 6 PARCEL PARENT
SECTION TOWNSHIPS RANGE_W.M.I AERIAL NO. CODE
LOT BLOCK IM IMMA11UN
NO. No. SUB. FOR ASSESSMENT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION PURPOSES ONLY. DEED RECORD ACRES
YEAR VOLUME PAGE REMAINING
Page 2
Smith, Duane F. Part of
D.R. 86-03376
J.V. 86-04z.463AB
Rogue River Paving, Inc O.R. 86-25612
JV 87-1037 AB
Part of
BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT O.R. 89'-13039 ( ote)
Johnson, Donald J. .R. 89-21943
JV 89-1218 AB
�y
_ 3d�
m F76, Cr
tv
° s u
ha
t
T
W I r-/
A GRO
a
-°r« t-
oo
m I 0 I
1 r �
d r
Pj u u N D A IL �/
ii1 IlE
g R
m -
� �.
l I 14317/
r ,
�4
O
N
N V +
5:
2204 f 2205d( '
AC.
RR•5 ,.: •6 « ys n
°
P w
m
99):.
v _
2200 { xsD.xD 1 • :o:
2100 22G.o3� n° 2203X
ox
P /p rols�p . r.
ri �
I°' A
M%42_9
e -349.Qf sr6xas 226.03l
)900
TUCKER
of
2000 _
I ! I 1901
P-4 ,eA/
/ I 10
)J
d 1906 Ir
II�� •4'
r4�.rf k5.j0,•se`
94.90
1904 ...,
1-!.. A1 `905 9C
/,- 1902 2
130/ 77 -� ,( � �
:I,« _ WI LEY >>,SIa3z�ST
SUAiMuJ.ar rw.00 roe.00
"� \ ce.8 5 5 9;o Exhi 0. 1
WHAT IS SOLAR ACCESS?
Solar access is best described as one' s right to a certain amount
of sunlight to fall upon the.ir .dwelling or property. L,49. protect•)
Ashland'.residegts' right to sunlight', the City_.has a S61 r -Access
O"rdinance in it, s_.Land Use Code The .Solar Access :Ordinance`not
only. protects residents" to Vst1linght.. ut also assures them
the.,option to uses>the Sun forsspace and�wa iieating: Addition-
. ally', the Oregon Department of' Energy recently determined that
structures receiving full sunlight use up to 20 % less energy than
those which receive only limited sunlight.
The purpose, of the Solar Access Ordinance 'is ..to-assure that no
...
structure casts a_ snagow across the-.northern property line greater
than..that -which:..would be cast by a 6 foot tall fence located at the
northerly .property l l -ne The time of year which is chosen to
determine the shadow length is during winter solstice, at 12 noon
on December 21st. The angle of the sun above the horizontal at that
time is about 25 degrees . The following is a step by step explan-
ation on how to compute each of the steps in the Solar Access,
Ordinance to assist you in determining your solar setback.
STEP 1- DETERMINE THE TALLEST SHADOW PRODUCING POINT FROM YOUR PLANS
Roof pitch and design have a direct effect on the length of the
shadow and ultimately, the solar setback. Figure 1 shows the
relationship of roof pitch and shadow length . A roof with a pitch
of 5 1/2 ' in 12 ' has an angle of approximately 25 degrees . If a .
roof has a pitch of less than 25 degrees then the longest shadow
producing point will be the north wall or eave . If the roof has a
pitch greater than 25 degrees then the longest shadow producing
point will be the roof crest or gable . Remember, the tallest shadow
producing point is the point which casts the longest shadow beyond
the northern property boundary.
Figure 1
Relationship of Roof Pitch and Shadow Length
w. ,.. . ...
._., .,.,
STEP 2- CALCULATION OF SLOPE
Slope and aspect play an important role in determining shadow
lengths because the steeper the slopes are in a northerly direction
the longer the shadow will be. Conversely, if the slopes to the
north are level or uphill then a shorter shadow will result provided
that the building height is the same in both cases .
Slope is simply defined as the vertical change in elevation divided
by the horizontal distance of the vertical change ( Note: the
Planning Department has 1" = 100' topographic maps with 5 ' contour
intervals available for use to make these calculations ) . Figure 4 ,
below, shows how slope is measured.
FIGURE 4
Measurement of Slope
t7O`
2140 H[,CiZONTAL PISTANCE
213 '
Di S7-A/vc = 2125 ---- - .. --
2120• — ----
2115'
profile view
The Solar Access Ordinance re4uires that the slope be measured along
lines extending 150 ' from the end points of a line drawn parallel to
the northern lot line through the mid-point of the north/south lot
line. Figure 5 , below shows two examples of where the slope
measurements are taken. It is important to note that slopes which
are uphill to the north are positive and slopes which Are downhill
to the north are negative.
FIGURE 5
Zi 10' --
2iI �'
1
2j45'
Al
�0 8s
Now that you have measured the north/south lot dimensions , average
them together. To do this , add the north/south dimensions and divide
by the number of measurements. Use the average north/south lot
dimension, along with the average slope you calculated earlier , and
use Table 1, below to find which Setback Standard applies to you.
Table 1
Lot Classification Standards
Slope -.30 -.25 -. 20 -.15 -.10 -. 05 0. 0 . 05 .10 .15 . 20
STD A 207 1 154 122 1 102 87 76 1 67 1 61 1 55 1 50 46
STD B 69 51 41 34 29 25 22 20 18 17 15
If your north/south lot dimension is greater than that shown as .
Standard A, then use Setback Table A to find your Solar Setback.
If your north/south lot dimension is less than Standard A but greater
than that shown as Standard B then use Setback Table B to find your
Solar Setback.
If your north/south lot dimension is less than Standard B, then use
Setback Table C to find your Solar Setback.
STEP 4- USING THE SOLAR SETBACK
The Solar Setback is measured along a line parallel to the northern
lot line(s ) and is the minimum distance that the tallest shade
producing point casting the longest shadow to the north is
to be set back from the northern property line(s ) . The Solar Setback
is measured using the same slope and along the same lines used
to determine the north/south lot dimension . Figure 7 , below, shows
two examples of how the Solar Setback is measured. If you can-
not reasonably meet the Solar Setback then contact the Planning
Department for further instructions.
FIGURE 7
Measuring the Solar Setback
40,
4a`
"
S�o.4CK LiNE-5 %O� T'Dih'T lrliliU�
' CiFSTS j!-1EJ LOh'�ES% .SiJ�f�%Yr' TO 77-1c NOON
Ashland Setback Table
Setback Standard "A"
Slope
-0 . 30 -0 .25 -0 .20 -0 .15 -0.10 -0 .05 .00 0 .05 0 .10 0.15
---------------------------------------------------------------
Height in feet
8 14 10 8 7 6 5 4 4 4 3
10 28 20 16 14 12 10 9 8 .7 7
12 41 31 24 20 17 15 13 12 11 10
14 55 41 33 27 23 20 18 16 15 13
16 69 51 41 34 29 25 22 20 18 17
18 83 61 49 . 41 35 30 27 24 22 20
20 96 72 57 47 41 35 31 28 26 24
22. 110 82 65 54 46 40 36 32 29 27
24 124 92 73 61 52 46 40 36 33 30
26 138 102 82 68 58 51 45 40 37 34
28 151 113 90 75 64 56 49 44 40 37
30 165 123 98 81 70 61 54 48 44 40
32 179 133 106 88 75 66 58 53 48 44
34 193 143 114 95 81 71 63 57 51 47
36 207 154 122 102 87 76 67 61 55 50
38 220 164 130 108 93 81 72 65 59 54
40 234 174 139 115 98 86 76 69 62 57
Ashland Setback Table
Setback Standard "B"
Slope
.-0 . 30 -0 .25 -0 .20 -0 .15 -0 .10 -0..05 .00 0 .05 0 .10 0 .15
---------------------------------------------------------------
Height in feet
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0 0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
18 14 10 8 7 6 5 4 4 4 3
20 28 20 16 14 12 10 9 8 7 7
22 41 31 24 20 17 15 13 12 11 10
24 55 41 33 27 23 20 18 16 15 13
26 69 51 41 34 29 25 22 20 18 17
28 83 61 49 41 35 30 27 24 22 20
30 96 72 57 47 41 35 31 28 26 24
32 110 82 65 54 46 40 36 32 29 27
34 124 92 73 61 52 46 40 36 33 30
36 138 102 82 68 58 51 45 40 37 34
38 151 113 90 75 64 56 49 44 40 37
40 165 123 98 81 70 61 54 48 44 40
`70 Exi�iSi±
Shadow Height Tables ( in feet)
Solar Altitude 24 .0 Solar Fence/Object 6 .0
-0 .30 -0 .25 -0 .20 -0 .15 -0 .10 -0 .05 0.00 0 .05 0.10 0 .15
Dist. ---------------------------------------------------------------
2 5 . 7 5 . 6 5 .5 5 .4 5.3 5 .2 5.1 5 .0 4 .9 4 .8
4 5 .4 5 .2 5 .0 4 .8 4 .6 4 .4 4 .2 4 .0 3 .8 3 .6
6 5 .1 4 .8 4 . 5 4 .2 3 .9 3 .6 3 .3 3 .0 2 . 7 2 .4
8 4 .8 4 .4 4 .0 3 .6 3.2 2 .8 2 .4 2 .0 1.6 1.2
10 4 .5 4 .0 3 .5 3 .0 2.5 2 .0 1.5 1.0 0 .5 .0
12 413 1.7 3 .1 2 . 5 1.9 1.3 0 .7 0 .1
14 4 .0 3 .3 2 . 6 1.9 1.2 0 .5
16 3 . 7 2 .9 2 .1 1.3 0 .5
18 3 . 4 2 . 5 1 .6 0 . 7
20 3 .1 2 .1 1 .1 0 .1
22 2 .8 1 . 7 0 . 6
24 2 . 5 1. 3 0 .1
26 2 .2 0 .9
28 1 .9 0 . 5
30 1 .6 0 .1
32 1 .4
34 1 .1
36 0 .8
38 0 . 5
40 0 .2
Shadow Height Tables ( in feet)
Solar Fence/object 16 .0
-0 . 30 -0 .25 -0 . 20 -0 . 15 -0 .10 -0 .05 0 .00 0 .05 0 .10 0 .15
Dist. ---------------------------------------------------------------
2 15 .7 15 .6 15 . 5 15 .4 15 .3 15 .2 15 .1 15 .0 14 . 9 14 .8
4 15 .4 15 .2 15 .0 14 .8 14 .6 14 .4 14 .2 14 .0 13 .8 13 . 6
6 15 .1 14 .8 14 . 5 14 . 2 13 .9 13 . 6 13 .3 .13 .0 12 . 7 12 .4
8 14 .8 14 .4 14 .0 13 . 6 13 .2 12 .8 12 .4 12 .0 11 .6, 11 .2
10 14 . 5 14 .0 13 . 5 13 .0 12 .5 12 .0 11 .5 11 .0 10 .5 10 .0
12 14 .3 13 .7 13 .1 12 . 5 11 .9 11. 3 10 . 7 10 .1 9 .5 8 .9
14 14 .0 13 . 3 12 . 6 11 .9 11 .2 10 . 5 9 .8 9 .1 8 .4 7 . 7
. 16 13 . 7 12 .9 12 .1 11 . 3 10 .5 9 .7 8 .9 8 .1 7 . 3 6 .5
18 13 . 4 12 .5 11 . 6 10 . 7 9 .8 8 . 9 8 .0 7.1 6 .2 5 .3
20 13 . 1 12 .1 11 .1 10 . 1 9 .1 8 .1 7:1 6 .1 5 .1 4 .1 ,
22 12 .8 11 . 7 10 .6 9 . 5 8 .4 7 .3 6 .2 5 .1 ' 4 .0 2 .9
24 12 , 5 11 . 3 10 .1 8 . 9 7. 7 6 . 5 5 . 3 4 .1 2 . 9 1 . 7
26 12 . 2 10 . 9 9 . 6 8 . 3 7 .0 5 .7 4 .4 3 . 1 1 .8 0 . 5
28 11 .9 10 . 5 9 .1 7 . 7 6 .3 4 . 9 3 .5. 2 .1 0 . 7
30 11 . 6 10 . 1 8 .6 7 .1 5 .6 - 4 .1 2 . 6 1 .1
32 11 .4 9 .8 8 . 2 6 .6 5 .0 3 .4 1.8 0 .2
34 11 .1 9 .4 7 . 7 6 .0 4 .3 2 . 6 0 .9
36 10 .8 9 .0 7 . 2 5 .4 3 . 6 1 .8
38 10.. 5 8 . 6 6 . 7 4 .8 2 .9 1.0
40 1 10 .2 8 . 2 6 . 2 4 . 2 2 . 2 0 . 2
42 9 . 9 7.8 5 . 7 3 . 6 1 . 5
44 I 9 . 6 7 . 4 5 .2 3 .0 0 .8
46 9 .3 7 .0 4 . 7 2 . 4 0 .1
48 9 . 0 6 . 6 4 . 2 1 .8
o4`ASH�` Pmorandum
z
OREGON
9 September 1993
II: Mike Broomfield, Paul Nolte, John McLaughlin, Steve Hall, Jerry Glossop
{ rIIItI. James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer
VVV City of Ashland
LI�IjPLf: Residential Construction at 635 Thornton Way Planning Exhibit
E%H16IT
PA# rya-t2K
DATE H7 STAfFIVL
On Wednesday 1 September, I met with Jon Turrell to discuss the construction of the
retaining wall at 635 Thornton Way. Jon provided me with an engineer stamped copy of the
wall design at that time. In reviewing the wall design and.location as shown on the plans, it
appears that our original concerns have been satisfied.
The only additional information required is a specification for the engineered fill to
support the grade beam and upper retaining wall which the engineer will be providing.
We are satisfied that all other design considerations have been met. You may instruct
the contractor to resume work immediately.
JHO:17s\635d,m ..
7�
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION -
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
GLENN H. MUNSELL
607 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD POST OFFICE BOX 640 —
JUDITH H. UHERBELAU'
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520
. � •AL60 ADMITTED
15031 482-1511 (5031462-2621 . IN CALIFORNIA
FAX (5031 773-5325 OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
September 2 , 1993
Chairperson City of Ashland
City of Ashland Planning Commission Planning Exhibit
20 E . Main Street ExNI°" 3
Ashland, Oregon 97520 rAx 3 /d8
Dare y-y�3sTA11
RE: Appeal of Staff Decision
Our Client : 'Maralee Sullivan
Our File No . 9357
Dear Chairperson:
Our firm represents Maralee Sullivan, who owns Tax Lot 2000,
in the City of Ashland, more commonly known as 550 Tucker Street .
Ms. Sullivan' s property lies adjacent to Tax Lot 1900, which is
owned by Don Johnson. The City has issued Dr. Johnson a building
permit . In issuing the building permit , it appears that the
Planning staff was in violation of the applicable zoning and
planning regulations .
It is important to note that Don Johnson' s property lies
both within the City and within the County. All of it is within
the Urban Growth Boundary. ' Dr . Johnson is building only in the
City portion. In the beginning of the permit process, it appears
the City was considering the entire lot for some purposes and
only that portion in the City for other purposes . After this was
brought to the Planning staff ' s attention in a letter from me
dated August 20 , 1993 , it appears they then decided to use the
entire lot for all purposes . One effect this had was requiring
the building permit applicant to use Solar Standard "A" , instead
of Solar Standard "B " . This change would, in the usual course of
events , have resulted in a denial of the permit considering how
close the Johnson 2-story home will come to my client ' s property
line . However , based upon the unusual configuration of the
Johnson .lot , the staff used a north line that , in effect , totally,
disregards the effect on the Sullivan property and its solar
access .
73
SEP i85;
1
Chairperson
September 2 , 1993
Page Two
The staff also has taken the position it may disregard the
lot depth and lot 'width requirements set forth in Municipal Code
18 . 20.040 . The issues involved here , i . e . if the entire lot or
only that portion in the City should be considered in determining
whether the improvement complies with the zoning laws ; if solar
access should be determined from the north line used by the
staff ; and if the lot depth and width requirements can be dis-
regarded; all involve interpretation, or the exercise of . policy
or legal judgment . Thus , land use decisions were made.
By this letter , the Sullivans are asking for a Type 2 proce-
dure in a hearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning
staff did not treat this as a land use decision, and so no notice
was ever given to the parties . Accordingly, the time for re-
questing a review after notice has never begun to run. In any
case, it is our understanding that the building permit was issued
on August 16 , 1993 , amended August 24 , 1993 , and this request is
certainly timely.
Thank you for your attention to this matter .
Sincerely,
HOWSER & MUNSELL ,
Professional Corporation
Judith H . Uherbelau
JHU: kn
CC : Maralee Sullivan
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION J�
607 SISKIYOU BLVD., P.O. BOX 640 7
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 _
15031 482-2621
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
GLENN H. MUNSELL
607 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD POST OFFICE BOX 640 _
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 JUDITH H. UHERBELAU-
'ALSO ADMITTED
15031 482-1511 15031 462-2621 IN CALIFORNIA
FAX 15031 ]]3.5325 OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
August 30, 1993
HAND DELIVERED
City of Ashland
John McLaughlin Planning Exhibit
Planning Director EXHIBIT 0 - 2
City of Ashland Planning Division PAU 93-1;Zb
20 E. Main Street DATE_0:/ JSTAFF
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE: Johnson Building Permit If Thornton Way
Our Client : Maralee Sullivan
Our File No . 9357
Dear Mr . McLaughlin:
This is a follow-up to my letter of August 20, 1993 , con-
cerning the City issuing Don Johnson a permit to build on Tax Lot
1.900, which runs along Thornton Way. As you may recall , we 're-
present Maralee Sullivan, who owns Tax Lot 2000, adjacent to Dr .
Johnson' s property.
We have had a surveyor review_ information that was obtained
from the Planning Division file as to dimensions and measure-
ments , and information from other sources . The review. indicates
that the building permit was issued in violation of the appli-
cable zoning and planning regulations as follows :
1 . It is my understanding from the Planning Department
that the property in question is zoned R-1-7 . 5 . The
minimum lot width for R-1-7 . 5 lots is 65 feet .
Municipal Code 18 . 20 .040(B ) . Lot width is defined in
18 . 08 . 470 as the average horizontal distance between
the side lot lines . The average of this lot is closer
to 50 feet than 65 feet lot width, assuming you measure
in a north-south direction. If you took an east-west
measurement , then the width would be wider than 150
feet , the maximum width allowed under 18 . 20 . 040 (C) .
2 . If the entire part of the property fronting on
Thornton Way is considered the front yard, then the
back yard must be on the north side and the required
length of 80 feet ( front to back) does not exist .
Municipal Code 18 . 20. 040(C) . Our review indicates
75
John McLaughlin
August 30 , 1993
Page Two
that you would not be able to satisfy the minimum depth
of 80 feet if the front yard is all Thornton Way.
3 . In apparent contradiction of "front and back" , we
are informed by Planning staff that the "back" yard was
the west line of the City even though the "front" is on
the south side . If that is so, the drawing indicates
that the house is going to be built right up to the
line and, therefore , is in violation of 18 . 20 . 040(D)
which requires a rear yard setback of 10 feet , PLUS 10
feet for each story in excess of 1 story. Since this
is going to be a 2-story building , there must be a 20-
foot setback. If you are looking at just the City
portion of the lot , then there is no setback at all .
In fact , the deck hangs into the County.
4 . The proposed building is in violation of Chapter
18 . 70, Solar Access . It is my understanding from the
Planning staff that Solar Standard "B" was allowed.
The only way that Solar Standard "B" would apply is if
measurements were taken only of that portion of the
Johnson property which lies south of the south line of
the Sullivan property. If one includes the long,
north-south portion, which lies in the City, the
average "north-south dimension" of the Johnson property
exceeds the criteria in Standard "B" . There is no-
where in the ordinance that says you can ignore part of
the property in order to come up with measurements to
permit a Standard "B" .
Some of the actions of the Planning staff in allowing the
building permit are based upon "clear and objective standards" ,
while other actions appear to have required an " interpretation or
the exercise of factual , policy or legal judgment. " Thus , it . is
our position that the violation of the objective standards is
amenable to a mandamus action in the Circuit Court and that the
policy decisions or interpretations involve a land use decision
subject to the LUBA review process .
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIYOU BLVD.. P.O. BOX 640
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 "74 15031 482'2621
15031 4821511
FAX 15031 7735325
John McLaughlin
August 30, 1993
Page Three
By this letter, we are asking the Planning Department to
withdraw the building permit issued to Don Johnson. If it does
not do so, and notice given to our office that it has been with-
drawn by 5:00 o'clock P .M. , Wednesday, September 1 , 1993 , we will
file a mandamus and an injunction action in the Circuit Court on
Thursday. September 2 , 1993 . At -the same time, we will ask the
Planning Commission for a hearing on those parts of the Planning
staff ' s action that included a land use decision.
Sincerely,
HOW$ R & MU ELL,
Pfe sional Corporation
J dith H . Uherbelau
JHU: kn
CC : Maralee Sullivan
Donald J . Johnson, O . D .
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
t
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIYOU BLVD.. P.O. BOX 640
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
15031 4822621 777
'
15031 48 2 1511
FAX 15031 773-5325 '
{0FN�'� Pma ran dnm
�REGGa.`
30 August 1993
Mike Broomfield, Paul Nolte,.John McLaughlin, Steve Hall, Jerry Glossop
CIO:
1{(rIIm: James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer u
City of Ashland
r- Planning Exhibit
12IIjEtf: Residential Construction at 635 Thornton Way EA # S ---Z—
PA# 93-J28
DATE(O'U'9J SWTWAt
On Thursday 26 August 1993, Jerry.Glossop and I visited the construction site at 635.
Thornton Way and observed the excavation being conducted for footings and retaining walls
for the residence being built by Jon Turrell. The excavation is > eing made parallel to
Thornton Way and approximately 6-8 north of the curb face. The cut appears to be over 12
feet deep; however, it was not measured at that time.. The building plans show a maximum
wall height of 8'8" with a 12" deep footing which leaves the top of the retaining wall 2 to 3
feet lower than the top of curb. No handrails were shown on the plans. It is felt that to
provide a safe retaining wall that will adequately protect the street structure and those using
the street, the wall must be constructed to the approximate top of curb height and a standard
pedestrian handrail be include at the top of the wall. The wall design should be checked and
recalculated, if necessary, to provide for this additional height. The Engineering Division
would appreciate the opportunity to review the redesign before it is implemented.
We request that you'stop work on this wall construction until this matter can be
resolved. If you have any questions, please feel free to call at 488-5347.
JHO:rs\635�h.w...
-�a
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
_ GLENN H. MUNSELL
607 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD POST OFFICE BOX 640
JUDITH H. UHERBELAU'
ASHLAND. OREGON 87520
-ALSO AOMI"EO
(5031482-1511 45031482-2621 IN CALIFORNIA
FAX 15031 773.5325 OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
August 20,. 1993
John McLaughlin
Planning Director
City of Ashland Planning Division City of Ashland
20 E. Main Street Planning Exhibit
Ashland, Oregon 97520 EXMI8JTQ- _
PAN 93-tab
RE : Maralee Sullivan D•rey-7p.gJ Sr.rr
Our File No. 9357
Dear Mr . McLaughlin:
We represent Maralee Sullivan, who owns Tax Lot 2000 , more
commonly known as 550 Tucker Street , Ashland, which property also
lies along Thornton Way and is adjacent to Don Johnson' s pro-
perty, which is Tax Lot 1900 . It is my understanding that the
City has signed off on a building permit to Dr. Johnson for a 2-
story home, to be located on that small triangular portion of Tax.
Lot 1900 which is within the City limits .
This is to notify you that Ms . Sullivan believes that the
building permit is not in compliance with Municipal Code
15 . 04 . 090. As .you know, Planning Division approval must verify
that the contemplated project is in accord with all applicable
zoning and planning regulations . We do not feel that the contem-
plated project is in compliance . Specifically, we think there
are problems in the following areas :
1 . Compliance with Chapter 18 . 70, Solar Access , of the
Municipal Code; and
2 . Municipal Code 18 . 20.040 , General Regulations ,
dealing with minimum lot area , minimum lot width , lot
depth, standard yard requirements and maximum coverage .
As you know, Tax Lot 1900 falls both within the county and
the city. It appears as if the Planning staff permitted the
applicant to use measurements of only that portion of the lot
falling within the city in some situations (solar access measure-
John McLaughlin
August 20, 1993
Page Two
ments) , and allowed the applicant to look at the entire lot in
other situations (rear .yard requirement) . You can' t have it both
ways . The. Planning staff's decision as to whether the entire lot
or only a portion of the lot should be used in determining
whether this project met certain requirements is a land use
decision because it requires "interpretation or the exercise of
factual , policy or legal judgment . " See . ORS 197 .015( 10) (b) (C) ;
Campbell v . Board of County Commissioners , 107 Or App 611 ( 1991) .
Ms . Sullivan -is in the process of having a surveyor review
the information that we have from the Planning Division file as
to dimensions and measurements , and from other public records .
Once that review is done, she expects to ask for a hearing before
the Planning Commission as to those decisions that were land use
decisions and may seek judicial review of any decisions that were
in violation of the objective standards found in the applicable
municipal ordinances . If Ms . Sullivan does file a lawsuit , she
will name the City, the Planning Director, and Dr . Johnson.
Although the Planning Division did not treat this as a land
use decision and give notice to the appropriate parties , it is
our position that the staff decision and interpretation is made
as of the date the building permit is issued and that , under
Municipal Code 18 . 108 .078 ; we have 15 days to appeal that staff
decision. According to information I received yesterday, while
the planning staff has signed off on the permit , it has not yet
been issued.
Sincerely,
HOWSE-� & MUNSELL,
Prof e sional Corporation
Jydith H . Uherbelau
JHU : kn
CC: Maralee Sullivan
Donald J . Johnson, O . D.
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIYOU BLVD.. PO. BOX 640
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 O
15031 482-2621
(503) 482-1511
FAX 15031 7735325
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
607 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD POST OFFICE BOX 640 GLENN H. MUNSELL
JUDITH H. UHERBELAU'
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520
'ALSO ADMITTED
15031 482-1511 15031 462-2621 IN CALIFORNIA
FAX 15031 773.5325 OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
September S, 1993
Donald J Johnson, O.D.
101 R dy -
As and, Oregon 97520
Re: Maralee Sullivan
Our File No. 9357
Dear Dr. Johnson:
On September 2 , 1993 , I mailed a letter to the City of Ashland
Planning Commission requesting a hearing. It appears that you may
not have received a copy of the letter. My secretary is out of the
office this week due to a death in the family and I am unable to
reach her to ascertain whether she mailed you a copy of the letter.
In the event you did not receive the letter. I have enclosed
a copy for your reference .
Sincerely,
H ER & MUNSELL
r0 essiona1 Corporation
// lel'"LCwol"
J dith H. Uherbelau
JHU: see:09
CC: /Chairperson, -City of Ashland Planning Commission
Maralee Sullivan
Enclosure
t D 9:?:
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS C. HOWSER
607 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD POST OFFICE BOX 640 GLENN H. MUNSELL
JUDITH H. UHERBELAU'
ASHLAND.OREGON 97520
'ALSO ADMITTED
15031 482-1511 15031 482-2621 IM CALIFORNIA
FAX 15031 773-5325 OF COUNSEL
RICHARD C. COTTLE
September 2 , 1993
Chairperson--
City of Ashland Planning Commission
20 E . Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE : Appeal of Staff Decision
Our Client: Maralee Sullivan
Our File No . 9357
Dear Chairperson:
Our firm represents Maralee Sullivan, who owns Tax Lot 2000 ,
in the City of Ashland, more commonly known as 550 Tucker Street .
Ms . Sullivan' s property lies adjacent to Tax Lot 1900 , which is
owned by Don Johnson. The City has issued Dr. Johnson a building
permit . In issuing the building permit , it appears that the
Planning staff was in violation of the applicable zoning and
planning regulations .
It is important to note that Don Johnson' s property lies
both within the City and within the County. All of it is within
the. Urban Growth Boundary. Dr . Johnson is building only in the
City portion . In the beginning of the permit process , it appears
the City was considering the entire lot for some purposes and
only that portion in the City for other purposes . After this was
brought to the Planning staff ' s attention in a letter from me
dated August 20 , 1993 , it appears they then decided to use the
entire lot for all purposes . One effect this had was requiring
the building permit applicant to use Solar Standard "A" , instead
of Solar Standard "B" . This change would, in the usual course of
events , have resulted in a denial of the permit considering how
close the Johnson 2-story home will come to my client ' s property
line . However , based upon the unusual configuration of the
Johnson lot , the staff used a north line that , in effect , totally
disregards the effect on the Sullivan property and its solar
access .
V
Chairperson
September .2 . 1993
Page Two
The staff also has taken the position it may disregard the
lot depth and lot width requirements set forth in Municipal Code
18. 20 .040 . The issues involved here , i .e : if the entire lot or
only that portion in the City should be considered in determining
whether the improvement complies with the coning laws ; if solar
access should be determined from the north line used by the
staff ; and if the lot depth and width requirements can be dis-
regarded; all involve interpretation, or the exercise of policy
or legal ;judgment . Thus , land use decisions were made .
By this letter , the Sullivans are asking for a Type 2 proce-
dure- in a hearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning
staff did not treat this as a land use decision, and so no notice
was ever given to the parties . Accordingly, the time for re-
questing a review after .notice has never begun to run. In any
case , it is our understanding that the building permit was issued
on August 16 , 1993 , amended August 24 , 1993 , and this request- is
certainly timely .
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
wS R & MUNSELL,
; Prof ssional Corporation
udith H . Uherbelau
JHU : kn
CC: Maralee Sullivan
HOWSER & MUNSELL
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
607 SISKIVOU BLVD.. P.O. BOX 640 ` I�
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
15031 482-2621
15031 482-1511
FAX 15031 773-5325 _
i
IA of AS&
Apmorandum
�4EGO
December 16, 1993
1u D- Brian Almquist, City Administrator
rum: Steven Hall, Public Works Director
0 Ithint: Odor Control Project-Wastewater Treatment Plant
ACTION REQUESTED
None, information only.
BACKGROUND
See attached memorandum dated 9/16/93.
The pmject design Js' y 70%complete and the costs have increased ed from the original est mate of
$200,000 to$266,290. The Criy Cotutal has authorized the atpei iture of$110,000 from the instnartce find and
$90,000 from the"Equipment Fund to cover the $200,000 project.
The attached letter from John Hohoyd ottlines the reasons for the increased costs. Most of the increases are
requests of staff which John outlines in his letter. Danis Bam Marshall
ts, Dick and I all concurred in the design
changes noted in John's letter as the end product will be a more versatile and useable permanent addition to the
. WWTP.
Jill Turner has recommended the following financing plan. ,
Equipment Fund $ 90,000
Insurance Services Fund 110,000
Sewer Fund 70,000
Total $270,000
The Equipment Fund equipment advance will be paid back over the neat few years. The ins ante services fund
tuansffa is a gift. The sews fund will require either the postponement of the Bear Creek Interceptor-Phase BI-A
project as found on page 5'of the current Capital Improvements Plan or-an interfund loan
cc: 'Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent
Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
Nancy Abelle, Ashland Clean Air.Coalition
:,.^ rl �-..i x , ,.
Gary Schrodt, AshlandfWetlaitds Coahtron'c c
Johh Holroyd; Brown*and.Caldwell Consultor En ' eers
86W Y, ,Ua� 1�,; .. : . .g, g"'.
�,c•t
encl Holro d Letter
o s p4�,v i`tti 1Y,:•.III( , Uf vnfi�� n�r3{ -',"� �:I�"� f. �,. .. •i.
Memorandum, 9/.16/93 _
n! at-nggn it 2.5 C;Y !)e8 �rl� 'vf� i :'l it',C•- /.l i -
Brown and Caldwell �. '
Consultants
1025 Willamette Street -
Suite app
Euge ne REUCEIVED
Eugene
Oregon 97401-3199
(503)686-9915
FAX(503)686-1417 f)ATE DEC o.4- 10
December 9, 1993 DEC 1 0 1993
Mr. Steve Hall
Director of Public Works
City of Ashland
City Hall
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520 013-7927
Subject: Odor Control Project Cost Estimate
Dear Mr. Hall:
We are approximately 80 percent complete with the design of the wastewater
treatment,plant odor control project. Our detailed cost estimate is enclosed for .
your-review: The project cost is estimated.to be approximately $,180,000. A .
number of feature's have been added which-raised the estimated cost in excess of
our original estimate of approximately $120,000.
First, it is anticipated that the thickener and associated equipment costs will be -
higher than previously estimated. Our initial contacts with two Oregon
municipalities indicated that a trailer-mounted thickener could'be acquired for
about $30,000. Our initial design was based upon providing a temporary
structure and making the necessary piping.and electrical connections to the .
package thickener equipment. We learned subsequently that almost $25,000 in
additional electrical, instrumentation, and control costs were required to provide a
complete and operational thickener system.
Secondly, our original design included a wood frame structural enclosure for the
thickener facility: During the design review process, city staff requested a block
building be designed. This would be compatible with other site structures and
minimize operations and maintenance.costs. Washdown inside of a block building
Would be much simpler than in a Wooden structure. In addition, noise
transmission from equipment would be lower from a block building. We estimate
the selection of a block building added approximately $10,000 to the project
cost. '
_;. . gin. .
Finally, our original design concept assumed-that the.new equipment_would.serve
to thicken the digester contents to about 4-td-5 percent, increasing the sludge
treatment capacity. During the'plan''treview:phase,.it was decided to make'
provisions to also dewater sludge to about 18 percent for loading into trucks.
This feature will allow the staff to haul much less water to agricultural sites and
result in significant reductions.in hauling costs. The city`est(mates it'spends in
I
j .
Mr. Steve Hall
December 9, 1993
Page 2
excess of $20,000 annually to haul sludge. At least $10,000 per year could be
saved by hauling dewatered sludge. Addition of the dewatering provisions added
approximately $12,000 to the project cost estimate.
It should be noted that only municipal.grade equipment has been specified for this
project. These components will have a long service life and can be relocated,
reused, or salvaged depending upon the future of the wastewater treatment
plant.
We have been mindful through this design process that this may be a temporary
facility and that cost control is an important issue. At the same time, we are
aware that the facility could operate for a number of years as the decision is
made regarding plant expansion or abandonment. The present design attempts to
balance_operations costs, operator convenience and flexibility with construction
cost. We will continue.to refine this-design at your•direction.
A project schedule is included for your.review. At present, the project will be
advertised"just before Christmas. Bid opening is planned for mid-January. The
major schedule constraint is`the approximately 10 week delivery time for the
thickener and sludge pump. We anticipate the system will be fully operational by
early June of next year.
We look forward to your input regarding final design features, cost, and schedule.
As always, working with your staff has been a pleasure.
Very truly yours,
BROWN AND CALDWELL
,
Jy�o'['n Holroyd
FFoject Manager
JEH:jdc f
Brown and Caldwell
d 4 Of AS/o,`
emorandum
OREGO, o :
" September 16, 1993
�ItJ: Brian Almquist, City Administrator
rum: Steven Hall, Public Works Director
pttbjPtt: Odor Treatment-Wastewater Treatment Plant
ACTION REQUESTED
None, 'information only.-
GOOD NEWS
The initial repoit on odor contiol from John Holroyd of Brown and Caldwell indicated several options to help
minimize odors from the'WWTP under normal operating conditions.
After discussion with the City Council, staff was authorii7ed to pursue improvements to the aerobic digester(open
tank)and to purchase a sludge thi&ner: The total estimated costs of that project was$190,000 with design and
construction times of about 3 months after a contract was signed.
John Holroyd and I each had concerns that the$110,000 improvements to the aerobic digester would be of no
value when the new plant or a connection to Medford is completed.
As a result,John worked with several of the specialists at Brown and Caldwell and carne up with a solution that is
a win-win. This seems to be a rare occurrence lately.
The proposal is to install a sludge thickener and polymer feeder at the anaerobic digester(closed tank)which will
reduce the amount of liquid in the anaerobic digester to the point when;there is enough opacity to process the
normal primary sludge plus the sludge now processed in the aerobic digester.
In effect, the aerobic digester would not be needed unless an emergency arose. The aerobic digester is one of the
prime "odor culprits" at the WWTP.
There are several benefits to the proposal. The first, and largest benefit is the removal of the aerobic digester
from the normal operation of the W WTP. The second benefit is that all of the equipment is useable in the
upgraded pl ant,if that option is chosen by the Council. The third benefit is a reduction in power costs of about
$20,000 per year by not using the aerobic digester.
The estimated cost of the project is$200,000. This figure will be refined after the design is reasonably complete.
WWlP Odor
Pge2
I have given John Holroyd the go-ahead on the project. Their approximate schedule is as follows.
TASK TIME/DATE
Sign Professional Services Contract . 10/4/93
Design of Project 7 weeks
Bidding Project/Project Award 4 weeks
Start Construction End of 1/94
Build Sludge Thickener 7 weeks,
Project Completed/Operational 4/94
I will keep you informed of the project as it moves towards completion. I realize that the time for this project is
more than the two smaller projects, but I know the end results will be far more acceptable to all,, particularly the
residents of Quiet Village.
cc: Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent
Dick Marshall, WWTP Supervisor
John Holroyd, Brown and Caldwell
A"of A5N4ti
F.
, � �., . o , � ezrcarttncE �tm
December 10, 1993
1!1 D• Brian Almquist, City Administrator
ram: Steven Hall, Public Works Director
�1t�IjPtt: Wetlands Facility Plan
ACTION REQUESTED
Council review and accept additional information requested at public hearing on October 5, 1993.
UPDATE ON DISCUSSIONS WITH STATE AGENCIES
Rob Winthrop, Marc Prevost and I drafted a discussion document as requested by the Anne Squier and Fred .
Hansen at the recent meeting in Ashland. That document has been reviewed by and accepted by the 2050
Instream Committee and the overall 2050 Committee.
A meeting has been set at Brown and Caldwell's office in Eugene on December 16th. At present, confirmed
attendance is at 18. The Rogue Valley will be represented by Rob, Marc,Tim 10 (City of Medford), Ed Olson
(Medford Water Commission), 3 appointees from the 2050 Committee and myself.
I am attaching a copy of the working paper for your reference.
cc: Nancy Abelle, Ashland Clear Air Coalition
Jim Hill, Wastewater Reclamation Administrator, City of Medford
Ed Olson, Manager, Medford Water Commission & Chairman, 2050 Committee
Marc Prevost, Water Quality Coordinator, RVCOG
Gary Schrodt, Ashland Wetlands Coalition
Encl: Woodward-Clyde Supplemental Information
Discussion Paper
y of ftj
Woodward-Clyde
Consultants
F_�EIVED
Engineering a sciences applied to the earth 6 its environment
.4TC DEC 1 IM
November 29, 1993
Mr Steve Hall
Public Works Director
City of Ashland
20 Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520.
Subject: Wastewater management alternatives for Ashland
Dear Steve:
This letter addresses the topics brought up by the city council at their;meeting on October 5,
1993. John .Holroyd of Brown and Caldwell provided information on the costs of the
modifications necessary to allow each alternative wastewater management system to provide
water suitable for.golf course irrigation.
1. Temperature requirements. The temperature requirements specify.that the wastewater
discharge must not cause stream waters to increase in temperature by more than 025 degrees
F in summer-and 2 degrees F in winter. The allowable temperature of discharged effluent
depends on the temperature and volume of flow of both stream and effluent.
Under Alternative 3A-2 and Wetland Alternative A-1 there would be no discharge to the
stream in.the summer, so compliance with the summertime standard would not be an issue.
Compliance with the wintertime standard would be obtained by passing treated effluent
through a constructed wetland. The temperature of wastewater effluent in the winter may be
elevated several degrees above stream temperatures. After several days detention in the
wetland, effluent temperature would be expected to, cool and approach stream water
temperature.
Wetland Alternatives B-IA and B-3 and Alternative 3A-4 all involve year-round discharge
to Bear Creek. They would all be expected to comply with wintertime temperature standards
in much the same way as Alternative 3A-2 and Welland Alternative A-1. Effluent emerging
from the treatment plant, at a temperature higher than stream temperature, would be cooled
in a wetland or a soil treatment system. The temperature of effluent discharged to the stream
would be about the same as that of stream"waters.
During the summer, when stream flow is low, the temperature of water in Bear Creek at
Ashland is likely to be close to ambient temperature. -TVs is because flow is shallow and
slow,providing ample opportunity for solar,heating.. Treated wastewater,emerging from the
treatment plant in the.'summer,wil.Falso be close to ambient tempati tie`.'For the'altbtnatives `
that include large wetlands„siored;wastewatec woiild remain close-to ambient temperature
because the wetland"would be designed to maintain a continuous cover of marsh vegetation.
. p' 111S.W.CdumWSW19990 4. Ptatlartdomoon97201 (503)222-7200 Fa::(503)222x292
Woodward-Clyde
Consultants
The vegetative cover would limit solar heating. If some open water is desired, then it may
be necessary to release effluent to the stream from the bottom, rather than the surface, of the
wetland.
2. Wetland costs More detailed information on the estimated cost of constructed wetlands
is shown in Attachment A.
3. Odor problems. The existing odor problems'at the treatment plant are largely attributable
to inadequacies in the wastewater solids handling facilities. All alternatives considered by
WCC and by Brown and Caldwell included improvements to the solids handling facilities.
Once made, these improvements would control the primary source of odors. However, it is
difficult to operate a wastewater treatment in a way that is entirely odor-free at al l times.
The effluent applied to the wetlands or the soil treatment system would be of high quality--
better than secondary effluent. Because of this it is very unlikely that either the wetlands or
the soil treatment system would be a source of unpleasant odors.
4. Background,information on soil treatment systems. Some additional materials on soil
treatment systems is included in Attachment B. I have requested that Dr. Gearheart send
additional information to you directly.
5. Golf course irrigation alternative. Effluent used for golf course irrigation would have to
be bevel IV effluent as defined by DEQ. All of the alternatives discussed in our letter dated
September 23, 1993 could be adapted to supply water to a golf.course. The adaptations
necessary are noted in the following paragraphs.
Alternatives 3A-2 and 3A-4 and Wetland Alternatives A-1 and B-IA all include effluent
filters to meet wintertime stream discharge requirements for biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD). If a portion of the effluent is needed in the summer for golf course irrigation, the
same filters would be used to produce a Level IV effluent. However, a pump station and a
force main would be needed to deliver effluent to the golf course. The estimated capital cost
of the pump station and the force main is $200,000.
Wetland Alternative B-3 involves year-round stream discharge via a very large wetland. It
does not include filters. Filters would need to, be added to produce an effluent suitable for
golf course irrigation. In addition, a pump station and a force main would be needed to
deliver filtered water to the golf course. The estimated capital cost of the filters and
associated equipment, the pump station and the force main is $600,000, assuming that these
facilities are built at the same time as the major plant upgrade.
6.�bisinfection. Under Alternative 3A-2, effluent would be used to.irrigate pasture during the
summer. .It would be disinfected once before use. In the winter it would be discharged to
Bear Creek via a 3-acre constructed wetland. In order to allow public access to the wetland
41%
Woodward-Clyde
Consultants
it will be necessary to disinfect the effluent before it enters the wetland. Passage through the
wetland would probably result in an increase in bacteria content due to use of the wetland
by wildlife. DEQ may allow Ashland to comply with most applicable effluent limits,
including the bacteria limit, upstream of the wetland, while complying with the temperature
limits downstream of the wetland. If DEQ insists that Ashland must meet all effluent limits
downstream of the wetland, then the effluent may have to be disinfected a second time to
meet the effluent limit for bacteria. -The same reasoning applies to all the other alternatives
because they.all involve passage of effluent through a large or small wetland at some time
of the year. We do not expect to obtain a definitive answer on this issue until DEQ reviews
the facility.plan.
It is worth not that in developing the alternatives that include a wetland or soil treatment
system at some considerable distance from the treatment plant, we assumed that the effluent
would have to be.returned to the vicinity of the treatment plant before discharge. This would
avoid the need for sampling at a remote location and would facilitate a second disinfection
episode, if one was needed.
I believe this letter provides you with the information the city council requested. If you need
anything•else.please let me know.
Sincerely,
John A. Davis, P.E.
Project Manager
Woodward-Clyde
Consultants
ATTACHMENT A
Estimated Cost of Wetlands
Alternative B4A Alternative B-3
" Item (25 Acres) (75 Acres)
Influent pump station 400;000°, 400,000'
Force main to Hanby Springs 443,000' 443,000'
Wetland 1,303,500 3,910,500
Return line to treatment plant 332,250 332,250`
Outlet works 215,000 215,000
Electrical/instrumentation 236;300 354,450'
Fencing/gates 40,000 120,000
Hydroseeding 20,000 60,000
Access roadways 35,000 105.000
Contractor indirects (10%) 302,505 594,020
3,327,555 6,534,220
'Pump station cost increased to account for extra head -
'7,000-footline to Hamby Springs
`75% of cost influent force main, assumes larger pipe in same trench
'150% of cost of 25-acre marsh
-s'!�. -.. ;g� .:T,1"tl .p7•:- : . '. .;C" .. n.. 1.^2Lt11:- -.
NROJECMWCOMAU TACH-A
v�
U J A S-h:-e- 1)es
Chapter 24
LAND APPLICATION
24. 1 Methods
The two basic methods of land application for effluent disposal are
irrigation and infiltration-percolation. Each method can produce
renovated water of different quality, can be adapted to different
site conditions, and can satisfy different overall objectives.
24.11 Irrigation
Irrigation involves . the application of effluent to the land
for 'treatment and disposal and for meeting the growth needs
of plants._ The—applied effluent—is treated by physical, chemi-
cal, and biological means as it seeps into the soil. Effluent
can be applied to crops or vegetation (including forest land)
either by sprinkling or other techniques such as flood irriga-
tion.
Irrigation can be of two types, evapotranspiration or high rate,
depending on the. amount of water applied.
Evapotranspiration ;irrigation consists of applying water to
crops in quantities sufficient to. meet or slightly exceed
the plant's evapotranspiration requirements (generally up to
30 inches per year). This requirement depends on the length of
growing season, climatic condition, plant species, and avail-
Ability and quality of irrigation water. The evapotranspiration
rate is determined by the amount of effluent needed to maximize
' crop production.
High-rate irrigation consists of applying as much water as
possible without exceeding the hydraulic capabilities of the
soil and still maintaining crop growth (application rates
generally of 30 to 125 inches per year). Water applied in
excess of evapotranspiration requirements of the crop will pass
through the soil to the ground water. The application rate is
determined by crop tolerance to watering, by soil permeability,
and by nutrient removal capability of the crop and soil. High-
rate irrigation minimizes land requirements by applying the
maximum amount of water possible.
Washington State University's Station Circular 512 can assist
in estimating the irrigation water requirements for crops at
different locations in the state. The reference information
is:
Washington State University, College of Agriculture,
Agricultural Experiment Station. Irrigation Water Require-
ments Estimates for Washington. Station Circular 512.
November 1969.
�. -212-
i
Woodward-Clyde
Consultants
ATTACHMENT A
Estimated Cost of Wetlands
Alternative 13-IA Alternative 13-3
Item (25 Acres) (75 Acres)
Influent pump station 400,000°. 400,000°
Force main to Hariby Springs 443,0006 443,0006
Wetland 1,303,500 3,910,500
Return line to treatment plant 332,250 332,250`
Outlet works, 215,000 215,000
Electrical/instrumentation 236,300 354,450°
Fencing/gates 40,000 120,000
Hydroseeding 20,000 60,000
Access roadways 35,000 105,000
Contractor indirects (10%) 302,505 594,020
3,327,555 6,534,220
'Pump station cost increased to account for extra head'
°7,000-footline to Hamby Springs
`75% of cost influent force main, assumes larger pipe in same trench
"150% of cost of 25-acre marsh
•
WR01ECT5\9:C0886A\ATTACH-A
Ar S+c-L Lu-Jr c _ - 1�ev�ud Idl
Chapter 24
LAND APPLICATION
24.1 Methods
The two basic methods of land application for effluent disposal are
irrigation and infiltration-percolation. Each method can produce
renovated water of different quality, can be adapted to different
site conditions, and. can satisfy different overall objectives.
24.11 Irrigation
Irrigation involves the application of effluent to the land
for`_treatment and disposal and, for meeting the growth needs
of plants.._ The .applied effluent is treated by physical, chemi-
cal, and biological means as it seeps into the soil. Effluent
can be applied to crops or vegetation (including forest land)
either by sprinkling or other techniques such as flood irriga-
tion.
Irrigation can be of .two types, evapotranspiration or high rate,
depending on the amount of water applied.
Evapotranspiration irrigation consists of applying -water to
crops in quantities sufficient to meet or slightly .exceed
the plant's evapotranspiration requirements (generally up to
.30 inches per year) . This requirement depends on the length of
growing season, climatic condition, plant species, and avail-
ability and quality of irrigation water. The evapotranspiration
rate is determined by the amount of effluent needed to maximize
crop production.
High-rate irrigation consists of applying as much water as
possible. without exceeding the hydraulic capabilities of the
soil and still maintaining crop growth (application rates
generally of 30 to 125 inches per year). Water applied in
excess of evapotranspiration requirements of the crop will pass
through the soil to the ground water. The application rate is
determined by crop tolerance .to watering, by soil permeability,
and by nutrient removal capability of the crop and soil. High-
rate irrigation minimizes land requirements by applying the
maximum amount of water possible.
Washington State University's Station Circular 512 can assist
in estimating the irrigation water requirements for crops at
different locations in the state. The reference information
I s:
Washington State University, College of Agriculture,
Agricultural Experiment Station. Irrigation Water Require-
ments Estimates for Washington. _ Station Circular 512.
November 1969.
i
-212- .
24.12 Infiltration-Percolation
This method involves infiltrating or percolating the maximum
amount of water through the soil (generally 20 to 100 inches per
week) by surface or subsurface application.
24.2 General Considerations
24.21 Site Evaluation
24.211 General
The factors discussed below should be evaluated to determine
the suitability of- the site.
24.212 Topography
The topography of•;,the.: area, .either .natural or graded,
should allow the'-prevention of .erosion and runoff to state
waters. Run on of extraneous snowmen and rain should be
minimized. The' selection of. theoapplication system shall
be compatible with the site topography. Areas with a high
degree of relief are generally :better suited to fixed
irrigation rather than center pivot systems. Overland
flow can also be' used where the-topography is appropriate.
24.213 Soils
Soils should be well drained and suitable for proposed
application methods. A detailed soil profile •and statement
of soil percolation capacity shall be submitted :by a soil
scientist. ' A minimum of 5 feet of suitable soil-is-required
above less permeable soils or groundwater.
Background soil samples sufficient to characterize the
field area shall be tested prior to land application.
Additional soil samples shall be collected and retained
permanently to allow the original soil to be physically
compared with the soil after application begins.
24.214 Subsurface Geology
Detailed information on the geologic conditions at the
site shall be provided by• a geologist. Lithologic descrip-
tions shall be provided for the bedrock, the depth to con-
solidated rock (or depth of unconsolidated equivalent),
and the structural characteristics.
24.215 Ground Water
i
The depth to the permanent ground water table shall be
determined. ' The location, depth, and extent of perched
water tables shall be established and the effects of
-213-
these water tables shall be evaluated for the particular
land .application method. A minimum depth to ground water
of 5 feet should be maintained.
The potential effects of the land disposal system on the
aquifer hydraulics and quality shall be determined. The
present, planned, and potential use of the aquifer shall
also be indicated.
Discharge to the ground water shall not cause the quality
of the ground water to be less than standards for drinking
water, supplies without specific approval of DSHS and the
department.
24.22 Land Acquisition or Control
The method of .land acquisition or control shall be stated and
submitted. . Thes:following -methods are acceptable:
= a.- ..Ownership,of'land with direct control
�b. a Lease of.-land with-direct control
Control,:of the.•eftluent,,application shall be retained by the
owner of the sewage treatment works.
24.3 Department and DSHS Guidelines
The Department of . Ecology and Department .,of Social and Health
Sciences have jointly issued guidelines for land application systems.
The most recent edition .shall be obtained from either agency and the
requirements of the.guidelines be fulfilled by the design engineer.
c
—214—
br. Z - slope length,m;
it (' q - application rate,m3/m•h;and
P - period of application,hours.
If wastewater storage is required,the field area can be expressed as
' A - (365Q+ V,)Z (13)
qP(10 000)D
i
Where
V,, - net loss or gain from evaporation,seepage,or precipitation on
- the storage pond,m 3/a;and
D operating time,d/a. • .
VEGETATION SELECTION. Water-tolerant grasses are used in overland
f 7 flow systems to provide a support medium for microorganisms,minimize
t erosion,and remove nitrogen.The crop is cut periodically and either re-
moved as hay or green chop or left on the slope.Sod-forming grasses such as
reed canary grass are usually selected.Other cool-season grasses include tall
fescue,perennial ryegrass,and mdtop.Warm-season grasses include com-
mon and coastal bermuda grass and bahia grass.
DISTRIBU77ON SYSTEM. Municipal wastewater can be surface applied to
overland flow systems using gated pipe;however,industrial wastewater
should be sprinkler applied.Sprinkler systems for municipal wastewater
should be located 30%of the distance down the slope.Typical distances
from the edge of the sprinkler wetted diameter to the runoff collection ditch
range from 15 to 20 in(50 to 65 ft).Top-of-the-slope distribution methods,in
addition to gated pipe,include low-pressure sprays,bubbling orifices,and
perforated pipe.'
RAPID INFILTRATION SYSTEMS.Rapid infiltration systems require
U deep,permeable soils for wastewater treatment.This section describes
expected treatment performance,design procedures,hydraulic loading rates,
organic loading rates,and land requirements.
Treatment Performance.Rapid infiltration systems effectively remove
BOD and suspended'solids through filtration,adsorption,and bacterial
decomposition.Table 13.15 presents BOD loadings and removals for rapid
infiltration.Suspended solids are usually removed to very low levels,ap-
proaching l mg/L.
Nitrogen removal for rapid infiltration systems varies from 40 to 90%as a
result of biological denitriftoation.The important design criteria are the
_ �BOD_N ratio hydraulic loading rate,and ratio of flooding period to drying
y,period jhe,design objective is to manage these factor to obtain nitrification-
t
Natural Systems 855
Table 13.15 BOD loadings and removal in rapid infiltration systems.
Applied wastewater BOD -
Location kg/ha-d mg(L. Percolate,mg/L Removal, %
Brookings,SD 13 23 1.3 94
Port Devens,MA 87 112 12 89
Hollister,CA 177 220 8 96
Lake George,NY 53 38 1.2 97
Phoenix,AZ 45 15-30 0-1 93-100
denitrification,allowing escape of nitrogen as a gas.The BOD:N ratio should
be greater than 3:1 for effective denitrification.The loading rate,if kept
within the range of 15 to 30 m/a(50 to 100 ft/yr),should provide adequate
detention time within the soil profile for effective nitrogen removal. The
soil profile should be 3 in(10 ft)or deeper to ensure adequate detention time
at a 30-m/a(100-ft/yr)'loading.The wetting and drying pattern is also critical
for nitrogen removal.20,21 Table 13.16 presents nitrogen removal experience
in rapid infiltration.
Table 13.16 Total nitrogen removal at rapid infiltration systems.17
Total nitrogen applied Percolate Applied
:nitrogen, BOMN
Location kg/ha-a mg/L mg/L ratio Removal, %
Brookings,SD 1 330 10.9 6.2 2:1 43
Calumet,MI 4 170 24.4 7:1 3.4:1 71
Fort Devens,MA 15250 50.0 10-20 2.4:1 60-80
Hollister,CA 6 110 40.2 2.8 5.5:1 93
Lake George,NY 6 960 12.0 - 7.5 2:1 38
Phoenix,AZ 16710" 27.4• 9.6 1:1 65
Phosphorus removal is accomplished by adsorption and chemical
precipitation.The detention time,critical for chemical precipitation,is a func-
tion of the percolation rate through the soil and the aquifer and the flow dis-
tance to the point of monitoring.Table 13.17 presents phosphorus removal in
rapid infiltration systems.Although phosphorus removal declines with time,
the removal rate might nonetheless remain high for many years.For example,
at Calumet,MI,the phosphorus removal rate is 99%after 88 years.22
V,,,
856 _ Design ojMumcipal Wastewater Treatment Plants
Table 13.17 Phosphorus removal in rapid infiltration systems.
Applied Percolate
Years concen- Distance concen-
of tration, to sample tretion, Removal, %
Location operation mg/L point,m mg/L
5 3.0 0.8 0.45 85
Brookings,SD 99
Calume4'MI 88 35 1700 0.03
2.1 150 0.03 99
Dan Region,Israel 7 45 O.IO 99
FL Devew,MA 31 9.0
Lake George,NY 38 2.1 `600 0.014 99
Phoenix,AZ 15 5.5 30 0.37 93
Vineland,NJ,
50 4.8 530. 0.27 94
Rapid infiltration systems are also effective in removing metals,
pathogens,and trace organics?At Phoenix,AZ,90 to 99%of the applied
viruses were removed within 0.1 in(0.3 ft)of travel through soil,and 99.99%
removal was achieved after travel through 9 in(30 ft)of soil.23
Design Objectives.Design objectives for rapid infiltration systems include
. Treatment and avoidance of direct discharge to surface water by dis-
eharging to groundwater,
. Treatment and groundwater recharge,
. Treatment and recharge of streams by interception of groundwater,.
. Treatment and recovery of treated water by wells or underdrains for
reuse,or
Treatment and temporary storage of water in the aquifer.
Design Procedures.An outline of the basic procedure for design is given
below:
1. Determine the field-measured infiltration rate.
2. Predict the hydraulic pathway of treated water.
3—Determine overall treatment requirements.
4. Select the appropriate level of pmapplication treatment.
5. Calculate the annual hydraulic loading rate.
6. Calculate the needed field area.
7, check the potential for groundwater mounding.
8. Select the final hydraulic loading cycle.
9. Calculate the application rate.
10. Determine the number of individual basins needed.
11. Locate the monitoring wells.
857
Natural Systems.
H.
IE � '
If nitrogen removal is required,add the following six steps:
L Calculate the mass of ammonium nitrogen that can be adsorbed on the
cation exchange sites in the soil.24
,.2. On the basis of the ammonium concentration and the daily application
rate,calculate the loading period that can be.used without exceeding
the mass loading from step 1.
3. Compare the ammonium and organic nitrogen loading rate to the
maximum nitrification rate of 67 kg/ha-d(60 Ib/d/ac)to check the
reasonableness of the expectation that nitrification will be complete.2
4. Select the loading cycle based on step 2 and the guidance in
Table 13.18.
5. Check the BOD:N ratio in the applied wastewater.
6. Consider limiting the infiltration rate[generally-to about 30 to 45 m/a
(100 to 150 ft/yr)].Moderate infiltration rates are conducive to higher
nitrogen removal rates.25
Table 13.18 Loading cycles for rapid infiltration?
Applied Application Drying
Objective wastewater Season period,d period,d
1. Maximize infiltration Primary effl. Summer I-2 6-7
rate Winter 1 7-12
Secondary effl. Summer 1-3 4-5
Winter 1-3 5-10
2. Maximize nitrification Primary effl. Summer 1-2 6-7
Winter 1 7-12
-Secondary effl. Summer 1-3 4-5
Winter 1-2 7-10
3. Maximize nitrogen Primary effl. Summer 1-2 10-14
removal Winter 1-2 12-16
Secondary effl. Summer 7-9 10-15
Winter 9-12 12-16
If the requirement for nitrogen removal is stringent(to nitrate values of
5 mg(L or less or more than 80% removal),pilot studies are needed to op-
timize the nitrogen removal process.
HYDRAULIC LOADING RATE. The design hydraulic loading rate is based
on the soil infiltration rate,the subsurface flow rate,of the loading of BOD or
nitrogen.Each of these loading rates must be calculated and the lowest value
selected for design.
858- .. _ Design'ofMunicipal Wastewater Treatment Plants
The procedure for calculating the hydraulic loading based on infiltration
rate includes converting the hourly infiltration rate into an annual rate(multi-
ply by 8760 h/a)and multiplying the result by a factor to account for the wet-
ting and drying cycle,the variability of the soils,and the type of infiltration
rate field test.The field-measured infiltration rate used in design is the
steady-state rate measured during 1 hour or more at the end of a test.The
equation for the annual design loading rate is
Lw °al
' (14)
Where .
Lw - annual design loading rate,m/a; ,
a - design factor ranging from 0.02 to 0.15;and
/ - measured steady-stale infiltration rate,m/a.
The design factor should be 0.02 to 0.04 for small-scale tests(cylinder in-
filtrometers or air entry permeameters).For largerscale basin flooding tests,
the design factor can be increased to 0.07 io 0.15,depending on the
variability of the soils,number of test results,and degree of conservatism
used.-The design factor must not exceed the fraction of the loading cycle
'during which the basins are Flooded.For example,if the application period is
1 day and the drying period is 9 days(a total cycle period of 10 days),the
design factofmust be less than 0.10.
ORGANIC LOADING RATE.For municipal rapid infiltration systems,
the BOD loading rate will generally range from 10 to 200 kg/ha•d(9 to
178 lb/d/ac),(see Table 13.14).The suggested maximum rate is 670 kg/ha-d
(598 Ib/d/ac).7 The BOD loadings in Table 13.14 are typical of those for suc-
cessfully performing systems.
LAND REQUIREMENTS. Use equation 15 to calculate the basin bottom
area.In addition provide for basin berms,roads,buffer area,or expansion.
365Q
A 1000OL,,, (15)
Where
A - net field area;ha;
Q - wastewater design average flow,m3/d;and
Lw - limiting loading'rate,m/a.
Natural Systems 859
Uar- /�IoSTYK-.Xw�.L�nV'd
30. . LAND APPLICATION l
" OF' WASTEWATER - BY
INFILTRATION PERCOLATION
31.1 DESCRIPTION
In the infiltration-percolation process,sometimes referred to as rapid infil-
tration,most of the applied wastewater percolates through the soil and the
treated effluent eventually reaches the groundwater.Thus the process is the i
most applicable land treatment technology for indirect water reuse. The
wastewater is,apphed to;highly,permeable soils;such-as sandy and loamy
atrols in the soils'spreading in basins or-by sprinkling,and is treated as it travels through
�e following the soil'matrix.Vegetation may not be_psed but
H frequency suspended ino (�cover helps to remove
rganic and oBarec solids..-
our loading Atypical cross section for this process is shown in the schematic view in i
ie plant-sod f figure 30.1 (23).A much or
portion of the applied wastewater perco- li
reuse of the later to the groundwater than with the irrigation approach and definitely
more than with overland flow.There is little or no consumptive use ofwater
e storage of or waste constituents by vegetation,and there is less evaporation than with
rs and other the other land treatment options.Renovated water recovery is accomplished
by Ong underdrains or wells as shown in F
rgure 30.2 (75). The principal
design parameters for infiltration—percolation are shown in Table 30.1_
Spreading basins may be used rather than the trench approach shown in
Figure 30.1. These are constructed by removing the fine textured top soil
.oxic metals i from which shallow banks are constructed.The underlying sandy soil serves
renovation as the filtration/treatment medium.Underdrainage is provided by using f
.nt must be plastic or clay tile pipes.The distribution system applies wastewater at a rate
difficult to which constantly floods the basin throughout the application period of sev-
ganic com- eral hours to two weeks.The spreading basin water drains uniformly away
periods. allowing air movement downward through the soil to fill the voids.A
con-
trolled treatment cycle of flooding and drying maintains the infiltration
capacity of the soil material. ! I
'large land " 30.2 LIMITATIONS
design and The process is limitedb soil hcussion in Y type,active soil depth,tlhehydraulic capacity of
the soil,the underlying geology,the transmissivity of the superficial aquifer,
and the slope of the land.Adverse values for these parameters may result in 4
201
' 11
..202 PART I .
.. Spreading Basin Surface ApPkaaon .
I
Infiltration uns Percolation rs Waugh
- U,patawled Zone
Zone or Aeration .
and Treatment
New Water Table
Recharge Mound
Old Water Table
Fgure 30.1. Schematic,view of land application of wastewater by infiltration-
percolation method(source.refemnce 23).
unacceptable treatment results. Nitrate and nitrite removals are generally
low but nitrification may occur.
Pretreatment of certain wastes,especially those containing very high TSS,
metals,and refractory organic compounds may be necessary tomaintainsoil
treatment capability. See the discussions in Chapters 28 and 29.
30.3 COSTS
The capital and operating costs for infiltration and percolation processes are
given in Table 30.2.
Spreading Basins
${1 wells Unsaturated Zone
IL. '-• -•- Saturated Zone
!' Figure 30.2. Recovery of renovated water by wells(sourcr reference 4).
i
� i
LAND APPLICATION OF WASTEWATER BY INFILTRATION—PERCOLATION 203
Table 30.1. Typical Design Parameter for Land Application
of Wastewater by Infiltration—Percolation Method
PARAMETER RANGE VALUES
Feld Area 3 to 56 acres/Mgal/day 1 e'
Application rate 20 to 400 ft/yr
4 to 92 in./week
BOD,loading rate 20 to 100 lb/ace/d -
Soil depth 10 to 15 ft or more
Soil permeability 0.61n./hr or more i
hydraulic loading cycle 9 hr to 2 weeks application period
IS hr to 2 weeks testing period ;I
Soil Texture Sams,sandy loans 9
Basle Size - I to 10 aces,at kart 2 basns/mte -
Hdghtofdikes 4 f .��.
Underdralns 6 or more ft dap well or drain spacing site specific
.. Application techniques Flooding or sprinkling
Pmapplication treatment Primary or secondary
Note.aae/MGD X I X 10-'–Ha/ml/day
?... �-
1 I,iR.-254em . -
Id-0.3048m i-
{:,o
Sarore:Adapted from adlrcam 75 and 76. •. :j
30.4 AVAILABWTY
This process has been used for decades, before an understanding of the w.
operative processes evolved. It has been widely used for municipal and
certain induitrial wastewaters throughout the world. } g
30.5 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE "I
Wastewater spreading basins must be prevented from clogging due to sus-
pended solids in the wastewater,therefore,occasional tillage of the surface .
layer is necessary.See the discussions in Chapters 28 and 29-
30.6 CONTROL Id.p
Preapphcation.treatment of wastewater is essential in the case of highly.
contaminated sources. Removal of solids will improve distribution system
reliability, reduce nuisance conditions, and may reduce clogging rates.' i
I
Common preapplication treatment practices include the following:settling ;,I
for isolated locations with restricted public access;biological and or chemical
treatment ftir urban locations where odors may become a nuisance. ;;s
204 PART I
Table 30.2. Capital and Operating Costs for 1-MGD
Infiltration-Percolation Systems
.li COST REM INFILTRATION-PERCOLATION
li
i Liquid'loading rate,in./wk 60.0
ii Land used,acres _
. d Land required,acres. 5 i
Total Capital Costs f 314,000
CaPital cost.2/1,000 gal 9.3
Total Operating Costs(/yr) 522,400
Operating Cost,2/1,000 gal 6.1
Total Cost,2/1,000 gal 15.4
! Natc I gal—3.785 L
25 a=—1 beet=(ha)
So-m*Adapred fmm Refmam 1.
30.7 SPECIFIC FACTORS
This treatment process has potential for contamination of groundwater by
Ail ' nitrates and heavy metals.The heavy metals may be eliminated b
ment as n es type-
I; necessary.Monitoring for metals and toxic organics is needed pe-
I ! cially where not removed by pretreatment.
Application of the technology,as with all land treatment options,requires
I., long term commitment of relatively large land areas (although small by
comparison to other land treatment types). Surface water resources are di-
vented to oundwater.Crops ps grown and harvested from the system require
!s! monitoring for heavy metal content. '
I,.. 30.8 RECOMMENDATIONS
With the continuous usage of spreading basins, the infiltration rate dimin-
ishes slowly with time due to clogging.Infiltration capacity of the soil may be
partially or wholly restored by occasional tillage of the surface layer and
when appropriate, removal (and replacement) of several inches from the
surface of the basin.
See the discussion in Chapter 28 related to application options for land
treatment.
City of Ashland
Bear Creek
List of Alternatives
November 10, 1993
Acknowledged by 2050 Committee
November 8, 1993
it
BACKGROUND
The discussions between the Governor's Office, Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ), Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW); Oregon Water Resources
Department (OWR) and Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) in Ashland on the evening
of September 29, 1993 resulted in the state agencies requesting the City of Ashland to devise
a list of options to deal with water quality and quantity issues in Bear Creek. These options
are intended to be a starting point for discussions with the state agencies, City of Ashland
and the Bear Creek 2050 Committee.
Fred Hansen, Director of DEQ, stated that the list of options should be completed within 6 .
weeks of the September 29th meeting. The state agencies would then consider the proposal.
Steve Hall suggested that each agency select representatives and that an initial meeting be set
in the Eugene area to begin discussions based on the proposal of the .City of Ashland and the
Bear. Creek 2050 Committee.
Rob Winthrop, Ashland City Councilor; Marc Prevost, Rogue Valley Council of
Governments Water Quality Coordinator; and Steve Hall, Ashland Public Works Director,
met on October 4, 1993, and are proposing the following options for consideration.
The state agencies are proposing a "Basinwide Approach" to dealing with Bear Creek water
quality and quantity needs.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Fred Hansen stated that the water quality standards for Ashland's Wastewater Treatment
Plant (AWWTP) are a given, not subject to change.
The state agencies agreed that the 2050 Committee is a valuable asset to the Bear Creek
endeavors and an excellent start in meeting the intent of HB 2215 that provides for the
creation of pilot watershed management programs.
Bear Creek minimum instream flows for the support of salmonid fish habitat has been
established at 10 cubic feet per second (cfs) by ODFW.
ThIDL
Pate 2
Anne Squier suggested a "subset" study be done over the next few months for the AWWTP
because the 2050 Committee projects extend at least 18 months into the future. State
agencies are looking for a 6 month maximum study time for the basinwide study effort.
Because of the "subset" issue, Ashland is mentioned separate from the 2050 Committee, but
is an active participant in the 2050 Committee.
Three major issues are under consideration including point source, non-point source and
water quantity.
POM SOURCE CONTROL
ASHLAND WWTP
The City of Ashland will complete their facility plan selection after conclusions are reached
between the state agencies, City of Ashland and the 2050 Committee. The Ashland Facilities
Plan has 6 options still under consideration by the Ashland City Council.
DESCRIPTION CAPITAL O&M •PRESENT
COST COST WORTH
1A Construct pipeline to Medford, $16,300,000 $ 564,000 $22,695,000
dismantle Ashland WWTP
342 Major upgrade to WWTP,3 acre $17,230,000 •• $ 820,000- $28,500,000
wetland,spray Irrigation or TID ,
exchange for summer,winter .
discharge to Bear Creek
A-1 Same as 3A-2 with 25 acre $21,640,000•` $ 930,000 - $33,300,000
wetland
B-1-A Major upgrade to WWTP,25 $16,900,000 $ 620,000 to $27,900,00010
acre wetland,6 acre soil $ 1,020,000 $30,600,000
treatment system
B-3 Upgrade to WN7P, 75 acre $20,090,000 $ 840,000 $31,300,000
wetland,would not meet full
summer discharge standards
3A-4 Same as 3A-2 less irrigation $14,270,000 $ 860,000 to $25,800,000 to
system with the addition of a 6 $ 1,060,000 $28,400,000
acre soil treatment system,
discharge to Bear Creek year-
round
• Assume;all capital costs to depreciate of a 20-year life with no salvage value except for land which is assumed to
retain its value. A discount rate of 4%was assumed. The discoum rate is an estimate of the•teal•interest rate,that
is the acted coat of money minus the inflation rate.
•• Include;$4,980,000cosa of effluent irrigation system and land acquisition for irrigation.
TI.mL
ti )
NON-POINT SOURCES
rrrro r.r /r rii rr q � /y,, r sr ./ yr //rr°' r / ry:•r rY/"G � rri�
i...,..,.,✓., r,,,,,....' ,u�„aay., �`./,.c�,w,ow�$/�.r .w Hw „w.,ac, .w,..,. /,kr,.. ..w
A further discussion needs to be followed in relation to Dick Nichols (DEQ) comment about
the potential of changing standards which could effect the winter discharge standards for the
AWWTP TMDL's and the non-point sources.
The City of Ashland and the 2050 Committee believe that the non-point source TMDL
process should parallel the AWWTP point source process because they are intertwined and
Ashland's decision will have an overall effect on non-point source TMDL's and remedies.
WATER QUANTITY
At this point in time, this is the most critical issue which should demand the time and focus
of all state agencies, the City of Ashland and the 2050 Committee.
To meet the Bear Creek in-stream flow minimum of 10 cfs will require the cooperation of all
involved parties. In addition, the overall Water Resources Committee is exploring the longer
term needs and demands for water source, quality and supply for the Rogue Valley in
cooperation with Klamath, Josephine and Curry Counties and agencies.
An understanding of Bear Creek is essential and critical to the final decisions in relation to
minimum flows within Bear Creek. During the irrigation season, Bear Creek is primarily a
conduit for irrigation water. The only consistent source of "natural flow” is Ashland Creek
and, occasionally Neil Creek. The primary source of water is Emmigrant Reservoir which
transports the water through Emmigrant Creek to the headwaters of Bear Creek, near the
southwesterly edge of the Ashland Municipal Airport. The Talent Irrigation District
withdraws approximately two-thirds of the flow at the TID diversion structure near,Oak
Street in Ashland. The next diversion point is for the Medford Irrigation District near
Suncrest Road in Talent. Between the TID and MID diversions, the AWWTP flow enters
Bear Creek via Ashland Creek.
The last major diversion is the Rogue Valley Irrigation District which diverts. water near
Jackson Street at the Jackson Street Dam in Medford. These withdrawals provide for a flow
diagram from the headwaters to the mouth at the Rogue River of that resembling a three-
toothed saw.
Bear Creek is currently over-appropriated and "new" water will mean the altering of sources,
delivery systems and other potential solutions as outlined in Exhibit "A".
F
' I
I
i
7TrIDL
PKe4
The City of Ashland has indicated a willingness to supplement water flows in the Bear Creek
reach from the TM to MID diversion structures. The other reaches downstream of the MID
diversion should not be Ashland's sole responsibility..
OTHER OPTIONS
The City of Ashland has reduced phosphorous load into the AWWTP by about 20% by
instituting a limited phosphate ban in residential clothes washing use. An investigation is
being made into the use of a limited or total ban for commercial laundry facilities and all
dishwashing facilities.
Encl'. Exhibit "A"
EXHIBIT "A"
POTENTIAL WATER RESOURCES
(Two Pages)
NARRATIVE: These potential sources of water for Bear Creek are presented as "ideas
only" fully realizing that each may have difficulties practically, politically or legally
and may contain a fatal flaw. The options are intended as a starting point to discuss
methods of providing for a minimum flow of 10 cubic feet per second in Bear Creek.
SOURCE FLOW OAP?AL ANNUAL TIME ISSUES
GAIN COST COSTS
Lost Creek Water vla Rogue 30 cis $27,240,000 $ 575,000 Unknown
River to Agate Lake/Bradshaw 50 cis $30,180,000 $ 989,000
Dmp' 90 cis $50,076,000 $ 1,360,000
770 Exchange with Ashland for 0 cis Unknown Unknown 2.3 years
reclaimed water .
New city golf course 1 cis S?44704 $72,000 2-3 years
exchange for reclaimed.water ..n...0,..,..
PflQf .
W
Medford reclamation project 30 cis $35,000,000 $500,000 Year 2000 IF grants are
water from WW7P to to not available to
Bradshaw Drop/Agate Lake $40,000,000 offset costs,
advanced
treahnent will
` be pursued as
the most cost
effective option
Using Medlord Water -Unknown 2-5 years Would be
Commission lacirrdes to interim project
hansmit Big Butte Springs until MFR
water to Bradshaw .reclamation
. Drop/Agate Lake project
completed to
Agate Reservoir(Double hum $6,000,000- year 2000
4,000 acR to 8,000 ac M ••• $8,000,000
Pipeline(Assume 2 miles) •• 15 cis $2,000,000
Water conservation for 20% Unknown Unknown
agricuhwe and domestic of
water supplies/users total
lbws
Talent Imgation District _
Medford hdgation District
Rogue River Valley lydgabon
Dlshict
CltyofAsbland
City of Talent
i
t
Conversion of agricultural ?777 Unknown Unknown Need to
land to urban land and establish bust
disposition of agricultural fund and
water rights-should be source of
converted to Instream water money to
rights acquire rights
Irrigation districts reduce Unknown Unknown
return flows maintaining
higher flows in Bear Creek
Talent lydgation District ?777
Meftid Irrigation District ?777
Rogue Ricer Valley Irrigation ????
District
City of Ashland-water In 1600 Unknown Unknown
Howard Prairie Reservoir for ac-ft
domestic and Instream flow *22 -
u.:%M
supplement
State Regulations on ??77 Unknown Unknown
agriculture conservation,
minimum of 25%of total
conservation will be converted
to instream water rights.
Amount can be increased.
based on proportion of private
funds involved.
Conversion of City of Talent 600
water system to Medford ac-ft
supply. Will make,Howard
Prairie Municipaoridustrial
water available
Marketing.ofwater,e.g. Unknown Unknown .
proposal by OWR to 'lease'
Ashland M&I water ham
Howard Prairie for insbeam
flow supplement -
• Based on CH'M-Hill study March 1992
•* Based on CH'M-Hill study March 1992,costs for Rogue River Alternative,33 inch diameter pipe.
••• Information from US Bureau of Reclamation
t!:"� • 7nf ae!tiat6�,nxtdk�asihatalfvt� �ar,*ter�ay�aeunder�itA�'Eis'G7ttasvfTalesE,uld.RshldndWNit!(w
.:,,, aRCepbon or3f £fa alacassaasare tiAtr f}fYRD�7J(T G3t3R Asbtantl;
NOTE., Annual costs for agricultural wafer thmugh the Talent Irrigation District costs are$30/ac-ft for,water and
$6 1acre for debt reduction.
Memorandum
December 20, 1993
D: Honorable Mayor and City Council
ram: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator
p�"II�IjBCt: Budget Committee Vacancies
There are currently two terms expiring on the Citizen's Budget Committee on December 31, 1993. An
advertisement announcing the openings was placid in the Daily Tidings naming four different days with the
deadline for applying set for December.15, 1993.
Both incumbents, Lois Wenker and Anne Haworth Root, n8e Meredith,have requested reappointment. Their
letters are attached.
The following is a summary of the applications received:
Lois Wenker Business owner/manager
Anne Haworth Root, nee Meredith Business person
Robert J. Malone Attorney
John W. Nicholson Retiree
Joan J. Dean Business person
Dick Trout Retiree
Martin H. Levine CPA
Russell Silbiger Business owner/manager
Letters of application and resum8s are also included for your review.
(r:Budgdt Appt93.m=)
Enclosures - 8
Russell Silbiger 562 Ray Lane Ashland, Oregon 97520
TF
12-01-93
DEC 0 3 1993
14
City of Ashland Budget Committee �» 4` L L
Ashland City Hall
20 East Main
Ashland, Or. 97520
I am interested in serving on the citizens budget committee. I believe I have a
wide range of experience that should qualify me for one of the available
positions. I.appreciate your considering me for the committee.
Some of my experiences include:
Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Management,Minor in Economics
Sonoma State University,Rohnert Park Ca.
Local business owner and manager (Cafe 24) . Part of responsibilities include
bookkeeping and reviewing financial data.
Over 8 years of practical business management experience.
Familiar with general accounting procedures and practices.
Familiar with the current years Ashland City budget.
Currently serving on the Oregon Restaurant Association's Board of Directors
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me either at home (482-6907)
or at work (488-0111). I appreciate your consideration of my serving of the
budget committee.
Thank you,
ussell W. Silbiger
70 -PMrT
rr 73
DEC 10 1993
J ,
December 8, 1993
Brian Almquist, Administrator
City of Ashland
20 E. Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Brian:
I would appreciate the opportunity to serve for an additional term on the City of
Ashland citizen's budget committee.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
7ds,,,
Anne Haworth Root
CITY OF ASHLAND �'(a CITY HALL
ASHLAND,OREGON 87520
telephone(code 503)482-3211
December 1, 1993
Ms. Anne Meredith
1506 Pinecrest
Ashland OR 97520
Dear Ms. Meredith:
Your term of appointment to the Citizen's Budget Committee expires on December 31, 1993.
I have tried unsuccessfully to reach you by phone several times to determine if you would
like to be reappointed to the committee.
Please contact me whether you would like to be reappointed or not. A letter or short note
requesting your reappointment will be�necessary, too. I have advertised for other applicants
for the committee with the deadline for their requests being December 15,:1993. If you
would contact me by that date, I would be able to add your request to the package.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Rhonda E. Moore'
Executive Secretary
(r.CammlBudgGUSrdlh.llt)
I
f
I
Ashland Sanitary Service
and Recycling
170 Oak St.
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Sanitary Service: 482-1471 Landfill.• 482-3680 Recycling: 482-0759 Fax: 488-1938
ROBERT WENKER and GARY RIGOTTI
LOIS WENKER
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I would like to be reappointed to the city budget committee. I believe my experience in
business and accounting for the past 40 years qualifies me to serve on the committee,
and I also enjoy being part of the budget process.
Sincerely,
Lois Wenker
0 0
DEC 15 1993
4
199 3
ty Recc--der
t y
of Ashland
a I n St .
OR . 97520
-' rizens ' Budget Committee
-ear Ms . Franklin:
Pease accept this letter as an expression of interest in
serving on the Citizens ' Budget Committee . In support , enclosed
lease find a copy of my resume.
As I have learned since moving to Ashland, I am like many
1 1 C r,; citizens�zens who chose Ashland as a home after an exhaustive
After deciding to leave the big city to raise our
niJCren my wife , Joan, and I traveled across the West looking
o.;,ns that seemed right on paper . With excitement and high
e::Pectat-�nns , we chose Ashland. it has yet to dissappoint us .
R v.e y factor in our decision was the opportunity for in-
that Ashland affords its citizens , and the extent to
:n- .-.1. �ney take advantage of that opportunity . Since seeing the
;1CJ, ice i". the newspaper, I have wrestled with whether it would be
for a recent arrival to apply . ultimately, the
re
E!3 Contribute prevailed.
,recognizing that the desire to contribute is not by itself
zl I l permit me to highlight the factors in my background that
I'01,19-ri
.;_ng somer.ning to the budget process . I served on the two mem-
aE,: executive committee at Crain , Caton & James for two years .
i.,_ C=Mitz.ee ran a twenty-five lawyer, fifty 'employee, law firm.
responsibilities included formulating' an annual budget , and
.in and implementing the ongoing decisions necessary to insure
' Ele generation of sufficient income to operate the law firm and
rt
F ners happy with profit levels , without exceeding the
Ten a- ,
wge' . I served on the executive committee while maintaining a
law practice .
addition to my executive committee duties , I - served on
�_- -hitectual committee while the firm built out a 28 ,000
square foot floor in a downtown highrise. In that capacity I
qaiae� valuable insight into the issues involved in deciding that
�iew space is needed, and providing that space in the face of com-
-e.tinq demands on limited resources . In light of the recent
controversy surrounding additional - space for city government , it
would seem that those issues will be a part of the budget
process .
have tried to keep both this letter and the enclosed
fir;. U�le ;-,r4 ef . If that effort has resulted i.^. 'too little
p_ ease let me l:now.
i rouir_ welcome the opportunity to serve.
y truly yo rs
Robert .Malone
I
I-
RESUME
Robert J . Malone
47 Granite St .
Ashland, Or . 97520
(503) 482-6191
Education
Irvin High School (1967 )
El Paso, Texas
The University of Texas at E1 Paso
(B.A. 1971 with highest honors)
Harvard Law School ( J .D. 1974)
Professional
Baker & Botts
Houston, Texas
Associate 1974-1979
Fisher , Gallagher , Perrin & Lewis
Houston, Texas
Associate 1979-1980
=-rtner 1980-1985
Steirburg , Malone & Bryant
ouston, Texas
Partner 1985-1987
Crain, Caton & James
Houston, Texas
Partner 1987-1993
E-ecutive Committee 1989-1991
archir.ectual Committee 1990-1993
Sa-no aticaI
Ashland, Oregon
July 1993 until admittance to the Oregon Bar
Personal
Born October 29, 1949
Married to Joan H. Malone
Children: Michael age 4, Carlie age 2
wrpco� JOHN W. NICHOLSON
1575 GREENMEADOWS WAY -
ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 December 12 , 1993
To Members of the Council
City of Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: CITIZENS BUDGET COMMITTEE
Dear Council Members :
In response to advertisements in the news media, I am indicating
my interest in an appointment to the Citizens Budget Committee for a
three-year period beginning January 1 , 1994. My working background
is summarized below:
1980-1984 Southern Oregon State College - School. of Business
Teaching accounting and financial statement analysis
on a part-time basis
1978-1982 Public Oversight Board of American Institute of CPAs
Monitoring (on a part-time basis) peer reviews of CPA
firms under a national audit-quality program
1969-1978 Arthur Young & Company (subsequently merged into Ernst &
Young) - Director of SEC Practice in National Office
in New York City; partner from 1971 - 1978
1950-1969 Alexander Grant & Company (subsequently merged into the
Grant Thornton firm) - National Director of SEC
Review (based in Chicago) ; partner from 1958 - 1969
1946-1950 Scovell, Wellington & Company (subsequently merged into
Coopers & Lybrands) - Staff accountant in Chicago
1941-1946 U. S. Navy - Deck officer with rank of Lieutenant
Commander at time of discharge from military service
Comments - As a staff accountant at Scovell , Wellington & Company,
I was assigned as the auditor of several hospitals affiliated
with the University of Chicago Medical School . In addition, I
did the audit of a private hospital on Chicago ' s Southside.
My first experience with governmental accounting came when
Alexander Grant & Company 'loaned me to the State of Illinois
for six months to assist State officials in clearing up problems
stemming from a large fraud. For several years thereafter, I
was , the partner-in-charge of many State audits which the State
contracted with the Grant firm to perform. I was also the
partner-in-charge of the audits of a suburban municipality and
a school district (both in the Chicago area) for several years.
(continued)
I
Education
University of Chicago ( 1938-1941 )
Bachelor of Arts in Economics
Northwestern University - Chicago Campus (part time 1946-47)
Preparation for CPA exam which was passed in 1947
Date of Birth September 16, 1918 in Chicago, Illinois
Though I am retired, I keep myself updated through subscriptions
to pronouncements of the Financial Accounting Standards Board , the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board, and the American Institute
of CPAs . I also subscribe to publications of the Government Finance
Officers Association, the National Civic League, the Budget Manual
of Oregon ' s Department of Revenue, and others.
Sincerely your, q
I
1
JOAN J. DEAN
220 HARRISON STREET
ASHLAND, OR 97520
DECEMBER 6, 1993
Nan Franklin
City Recorder
City Hall
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Dear Ms . Franklin:
I am submitting my name for consideration as a Volunteer on the
Citizens ' Budget Committee. Attached is a brief resume of my
experience. Although I have owned my home here for close to
five years, I just moved here in January after my retirement . I
have become actively involved in my parish, Our Lady of the
Mountain and I 'm sure Fr . David would be glad to provide .you with
a personal reference. If you need any other information, please
call me.
I will be leaving December 17th to spend the holidays . with my
children and will not return until January 16th. I hope that
my absence will not create a problem.
I thoroughly enjoy Ashland and would like to contribute my time
and talents as a volunteer on the Budget Committee. Thank you
for your consideration.
Sincerely,
oan J. Dean
k '
JOAN J. DEAN
220 HARRISON STREET
ASHLAND, OR 97520
482-7350
Qualifications :
Twenty years of experience in the public and private
non-profit sector. Areas of responsibility included
Budget, Purchasing, Redevelopment, Grants , Legislation,
Public Information, Volunteers and Community Events.
Education:
Master of Public Administration, California State
University, Fullerton
B.A. History and Political Science, C.S .U.F.
Employment History:
1989-92 Administrative Projects Coordinator, City of Culver City, CA
Prepared Capital Projects Budget, published City ' s
Annual Report and Newsletters, served as Legislative
Liaison, prepared Lease Purchase agreements', coordinated
Wastewater Bond Issue process and formation of a Benefit
Assessment District.
1981-89 Administrative Assistant , City of Fountain Valley, CA
Administered the HCD Block Grant Program, prepared budgets,
and reports to City Council, Boards and Citizen groups,
coordinated City-wide special events, trained and supervised
Housing and Code Enforcement personnel and developed and
supervised a Volunteer program.
1972-81 Administrative Intern for City of Santa Ana, Religious
Education Director for St . Boniface Parish in Anaheim,
Community Services Coordinator for the City of Cerritos .
DEC o RECro
December 3 , 1993.
City Recorder Nan Franklin
City Hall , 20 East .Main
Ashland , Oregon• 97520
Dear Ms Franklin:
I am applying for a position on the Citizens ' 'Budget Committee.
This is a position in which my skills could be of benefit to the
City and one that I would enjoy.
Sincerely,
Dick Trout
RESUME
Richard L. Trout 830 Garden Way
503/482-9747 Ashland , Oregon
Resident of Ashland for 10 years.
—Watershed Patrol volunteer past six years.
- Retired.
Education:
- B.S. in Economics , Santa Clara University, 1953. ,
Post-graduation courses in mathematics, political science ,
accounting , law enforcement, general education.
- Management Related : Numerous IBM, in-house and university
courses.
- Technical: Many IBM, Univac and university computer courses.
Business Experience: Thirty years with United Airlines.
- Mgr . of Apollo Business Systems : installing and supporting
mini-computer-based accounting systems for travel agencies.
- Mgr . Information Center : Installation/support of personal comp-
uters in western U.S. Support of users accessing mainframe data.
Programming Mgr . on United 's realtime reservations system.
Project manager for several large-scale applications.
Sideline business : designed, programmed and marketed a data
input-screen generator program .for personal computers.
Other : Married; good health. Outdoor sports , gardening , reading.
:' Military: Army military intelligence, 7/53-9/56.
- vice-chairman Education Accountability Committee , Cherry Creek
Schools, Colorado. Two years.
- Good typing skill; have IBM PC.
f .
- DEC 01 1993
MARTIN H. LEVINE
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT
November 29, 1993
Ms. Nan Franklin, City Recorder
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
j
Dear Ms. Franklin:
I am writing to you to offer my application for service on the Ashland Citizen's Budget
Committee, as noted in Revels. As a responsible citizen, I appreciate the opportunity to
serve my community in a capacity for which I believe I am especially well qualified.
I am a registered voter and resident of Ashland. I am licensed in Oregon and California as
a,Certified Public Accountant and hold memberships in both the Oregon and California
Societies of CPAs. Our son is now a senior at SOSC. Both my accounting office and my
wife's business, Udderly's Fresh Yogurts&Ice Creams, are located in downtown Ashland,
and my wife and I lease our home at 1276 Munson Drive, here in Ashland.
.:I am a member of the Rotary Club of Ashland, the Board of Directors of the Cygnet
Theatre Group, and'the foundingladvisory Board of Directors of The Camelot Theatre
Company. In addition, I offer the following local references:
Timothy E. Cate Eunice Rosenfield Stephanie Pollard . Jim Fiore
Teacher, Ashland H.S. Retired- Ashland Homes Fiore Construction
Real Estate
1131 Oak St. 237 Talent Ave. 150 East Main St. 10000 Mt Ashland Rd.
Ashland, OR 97520 Talent, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520
482-9432 535-4429 482-0044 482-6574
1 I believe my education, training, and experience as a Certified Public Accountant, along
with my experience as a former Treasurer and Board Member of various youth sports
fprograms, Finance Committee and Board Member of the Golden West Family YMCA; as
i well as accountant for several non-profit organizations, particularly qualify me to serve on
the Ashland Citizen's Budget Committee. • When combined with my economic
I commitment to Ashland and my sincere desire to be of service to the community, I know I
will be a valuable member of the Committee.
Sincerely,.
�i SR➢ i ti v f j Y,'•'!c�;` i Dui , r 4 J r0(J
f
ashbudgt ltr' # �� '"�
w °MembarAmerican h smote California Saletiy and Oregon Soddy or Certlfied Public Accountants
167 Ea Main Street :Past fxflce Baot 465*,Ashland Oregon 97520•Tdap"(503)482-78010 Fax(503)482-slot
r,,._,.,.._.,.....u.. ...,. ..:i...uw.,.-..i..sii..w.r ii.u.acsuuinu ._......,1. .......c,v.,.,��......M. ....._. _._. ,{.�,.
Soda Mountain
Wilderness Council
P.O. Box 512 • Ashland, Oregon 97520
Date : December 12 , 1993
To : Community Group Leaders, Newsletter Editors, and
Individuals Interested in Protecting Pilot Rock
From: Dave Willis (482-0526) and Marc Prevost (773-6780)
Soda Mountain Wilderness Council
Subject : Support needed for 160 acre BLM/Boise Land Swap
--Immediately North and East of Pilot Rock
--Smack dab on the Pacific Crest Trail
--Boise is willing, BLM needs encouragement
LETTERS NEEDED NOW
PILOT ROCK is located southeast of Ashland on the Siskiyou crest .
Jutting well above the ridgeline just a few miles east of
Interstate 5 , it ' s a classic Oregon landmark. Its striking
presence for early pioneers, visible from miles around as a
reference point , earned it its present name .
Maybe you 've seen it yourself , not just from I-5 , but from the
Pacific Crest Trail which traverses Pilot Rock's northern
shoulder . Popping out of the woods on the PCT into the headwaters
of Scotch Creek is breathtaking. The massive east face of Pilot
Rock dominates the scene , its eastern and northern flanks wrapped
by a forest of dark fir into which the trail disappears.
To the south is the long view to Klamath Canyon, Shasta Valley,
and Mount Shasta. And the open foreground between the trail and
lower Pilot Rock's conifer wrap of forest is a menagerie of large
and fascinating basalt formations in a juniper and sage-studded
western outpost of Oregon' s High Desert .
The BLM has acknowledged the ecological , historic, and aesthetic
values of Pilot Rock and the surrounding area by considering it
for two separate but overlapping Areas of Critical Environmental
Concern in their Regional Management Plan. Many citizens support
the inclusion of this largely undeveloped area into the National
Wilderness Preservation System as part of the citizen-proposed
Soda Mountain Wilderness -- the most popular wilderness proposal
on BLM land in the state .
But the north and east sides of Pilot Rock just described are not
BLM land. They are 160 acres of private timberland owned by
Boise Cascade. And Boise plans to road and log them in 1994 .
HOWEVER -- BLM-s Ashland Area Resource Manager, Rich Drehobl , has
asked Boise if they ' d be willing to trade their Pilot Rock land
for BLM land of equal economic value elsewhere . Boise is willing
-- if BLM can really come through on a trade in a timely manner .
(continued on other side)
Page 2 , ALERT: Letters Needed for BLM/Boise Land Trade
Even though this is a simple win-win deal , the BLM needs a strong
and broad show of public support for such a trade to become an
authorized BLM project priority. The more groups and individuals
writing BLM in favor of doing a trade, the better the odds that
it will happen. And supporting groups outside the usual
environmental suspects are especially important .
BLM acquisition of this Pilot Rock/Boise land will not guarantee
its designation as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern
or as Wilderness. It will guarantee that Boise won' t log and
road the north and east flanks of Pilot Rock when the snow melts
next spring.
Please write Area Manager Drehbbl today:
Mr. Richard Drehobl , Ashland Area Resource Manager
BLM - Medford District
3040 Biddle Road Medford, OR 97504
As an individual -- or better yet -- on behalf of your group on
your group' s letterhead, ask the BLM to proceed with all due
haste to trade public domain -- not 0 & C -- BLM land elsewhere
for the 160 acres of Boise Cascade land immediately north and
east of Pilot Rock (T41S, R2E, Sec 2 : NW, NE, & SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4
AND NE 1/4 OF SW 1/4) .
If you 've been there , say so and mention your feelings for the
area. If you've not been there, it doesn' t matter . Either way,
stress that this is a made-to-order situation for amiable
cooperation between citizens, government , and industry. Stress
the need for BLM to quickly grasp the lead in this win-win
opportunity. And thank them for the leadership they' ll be
assuming in making the land swap work ASAP.
Your letters will have more impact if you send copies to :
Mr . Dean Bibles , State Director Soda Mtn Wilderness Council
BLM - Oregon State Office P.O. Box 512
P. O. Box 2965 Ashland, OR 97520
Portland, OR 97208-2965
This is a non-controversial , housekeeping project that the BLM
can do easily. But they need to do it soon and they must be
backed and impelled by a strong show of public support .
Thanks for writing. And please do send us a copy of your letter .
Appreciatively,
Dave Willis
For a beautiful place that can stay that way and still keep
everybody happy -- if you write now!
',City of Ashland letterhead]
January 5 , 1994
Mr . Richard Drehobl , Ashland Area Resource Manager
BLM - Medford District
3040 Biddle Road
Medford, OR 97504 ** SAMPLE LETTER **
Dear Mr . Drehobl ,
The Ashland City Council , at its regular meeting on January 4 ,
1994 , voted unanimously to endorse and encourage the BLM to
acquire by land trade the approximately 160 acres of Boise
Cascade land immediately north and east of Pilot Rock (T41S, R2E,
Sec . 2 : NW, NE, & SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 AND NE 1/4 OF SW 1/4 ) .
The City Council enthusiastically endorses this trade based on:
1 . The City Council ' s continuing support for the Soda Mountain
Wilderness Council proposal which includes and calls for
eventual acquisition of this land by BLM.
2 . The City Council ' s concern for the historic, ecological ,
aesthetic , and recreational integrity of Pilot Rock itself
which it hopes will be preserved by BLM acquisition of this
piece of land.
3 . The City Council ' s recognition that , especially since Boise
Cascade has indicated a willingness to trade with BLM here,
such a trade offers a fine opportunity for BLM to take
leadership in a cooperative endeavor leading to the
satisfaction of all parties concerned.
Please proceed with all due haste to trade BLM public domain land
for this Pilot Rock/Boise Cascade piece in a timely manner .
Sincerely,
(Whatever city official is appropriate)
cc : Mr . Dean Bibles, Director - BLM/Oregon State Office
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2. 04.040 OF THE ASHLAND
MUNICIPAL CODE BY CHANGING THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AT
COUNCIL MEETINGS.
ANNOTATED TO SHOW DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS. DELETIONS ARE LINED THROUGH
AND ADDITIONS ARE 'gob
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 2. 04.040.A of the Ashland Municipal Code is
amended to read:
2 .04. 040 Order of business. A. Except as provided in
subsection B hereof, the order of business of the Council
shall be:
1. Roll call;
2. Approval of minutes of the previous meeting;
3 . Special presentations, proclamations and awards;
4 . Consent agenda, . subject to the limitations of
subsection C;
5. Public hearings, subject to the limitations of
subsection D; y
#z
3nl � 6n tie anaa {lzmted to a totals arinutis}
. . . :. :,:. _....._ a:. .
6 ;'. tTn�inistiecl"'I�usiness;
�8.' New and miscellaneous business;
9. Ordinances, resolutions and contracts;
10. Other business from Council members.
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 1994 .
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Approved as to form:
.Paul Nolte, City Attorney
PAGE 1 of 1-ORDINANCE (p:oraknorder.ma>
RESOLUTION NO. 94-
A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS
WITHIN 1993-94 BUDGET
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Due to the circumstances stated below, the Mayor and City Council
.of the City of Ashland hereby determine that it is necessary to
transfer appropriations as follows:
GENERAL FUND
FROM: Contingency $ 57 , 000
TO: Fire Payroll 57, 000
Additional amount needed per union settlement.
INSURANCE SERVICES
FROM: Contingency 110, 000
TO: Transfer to Sewer Fund 110, 000
SEWER FUND
FROM: Transfer from Insurance services 110, 000
TO: Capital Outlay - Odor Contol Project 110, 000
EQUIPMENT FUND
FROM: Contingency 60, 000
Equipment 30, 000
Total 90, 000
TO: Buildings $ 90, 000
These last three appropriations deal with the odor control
project. The Equipment Fund equipment advance will be paid back
over the next few years. The insurance services fund transfer is
a gift. The sewer fund will require either the postponement of
the Bear Creek Interceptor - Phase III-A project as found on page
five of the current Capital Improvements Plan or an interfund
loan.
The foregoing resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a
regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the
day of 1994 . ,
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1994 .
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
RevieW� as �or
Paul, Nolte, City Attorney H:\;imwPmudgm�s
SOUTHERN
OREGON 9+ 4/- —�i/� tln 6u� i�•
STATE
COLLEGE
December 21 , 1993
Chief Keith Woodley,
Ashland Fire Department
455 Siskiyou Blvd,
Ashland , OR 97520
Dear Chief Woodley:
A Christmas card is just not sufficient to express the gratitude
for the courtesy and support we have received from your
department ' s office and field personnel.
Assistant Chief Don Paul has been of tremendous assistance in
maintaining a watchful eye on our buildings ' safety. In fact , he
has been quite an inspiration to Wes Brain of our Safety
Department . Indeed, even I am accustomed to think in terms of:
" . . .now what would I do if I were Don Paul ! "
The rest of the nameless heroes: the Rescue and fire-fighters who
day after day and night after night provide us with their
emergency services and support. Please know that throughout the
year innumerable compliments have been expressed by our
department ' s personnel , and now at year's end they deserve to be
praised and know of the gratitude that we feel . Please be so kind
as to express this on our behalf.
And lastly and certainly not the least , I want you to know that I
have tremendous respect for you: not only for your expertise and
skills , but your guidance and friendship. With the many little
projects that we will be slating ourselves for the next year, I
hope to be relying on your support. I hope that you can tell us
how we can reciprocate a little.
In closing, I thank you again and wishing that both our
departments will have a great new. year.
Sinc` y yours ,
oey Ngan
Director of Security
DEPARTMENT OF SECURITY AND SAFETY
1250 Sisklyou Boulevard
AsNand.Oregon 975205091
TC1 /SIl'l\GFO.AOSO [ev icnv\ggo.Rnn>
�. .r
♦Gf A811
�410TI
December 16, 1993
Q- Honorable Mayor and City Council
ram: Brian L. Almquist, City Administra
1t�IjEtt: January 13 Budget Committee Meeting
At the final meeting of the Citizens Budget CommWee last year,it was rheTxsted that a meeting of the Cornmatee
be scheduled prior to the preparation of the draft budget for 1994-95.The purpose of the meeting was to allow
members of the Budget Commitme to provide input into the budget process, after receiving a brief update on the
status of the current budget.
In addition, we have several items that could be handled, including the following:
1. Election of Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary.
2. Finalize assignment to budget subcommittees.
3. Receive draft of Cost of Service study by Moore and Briethaupt.
Please mark January 13 at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, on your calendars. .
c�eaeu+m.�+w
0 oG
0
t:-