Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1995-0418 Council Mtg PACKET
Im n : 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 fill out the Speaker Request form looted near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The Chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to be heard, and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 18, 1995 I. PL GE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers III. ASPf20VAL OF MINUTES: Executive Session and Regular meeting of April 4, 1995. IV. JEEC�J[ALP ESENTATIONS & AWARDS: yogi's n*ocla_ ada .declaring the week of April 16-23 as "Earth Week '95." Proclamation supporting creation of an independent presidential commission to re-examine our nation's radioactive waste policy. /Vl---,�MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS: 1. Annual appointments and reappointments to City Boards, Commissions, and Committees. VI/ CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Departmental Reports for March, 1995. City Administrator's monthly report - March, 1995. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance amending Sections 18.76.050, 18.76.060, and 18.08390 e Ashland Municipal Code relating to flag partitions." �VIr�UBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker. Must conclude at 9:30 p.m.) 1. Request to amend the Procedures Chapter 18.108 of the Land Use Ordinance; reconciling other sections of the Land Use Ordinance and the Municipal Code to these amendments; amending the variance criteria and other sections in the Land Use Ordinance; and repealing Resolutions 73-38 and 88-20. � v y VJdI. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda (limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total). �J C b/#MA J IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: L Request by John Nicholson and others to reactivate the "Audit Committee". X. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: Request by Ashland Community Hospital Board to modify bidding procedures in connection with changes to emergency room facility. at}nAV-4, R� Request by Director of Public Works to waive bid ' renuirementc for sewer line serving Water Filtration Plant. jety 2 Memorandum from City Administrator regarding WWTP Coordinator position and related issues. f4�Z1 Letter from M/M Jean and M/M Rodriguez requesting reconsideration of denial of sewer service at 2855 East Main Street, outside the city limits.. Request by Councilor Hagen to hear oral presentation by Wetlands Coalition of phased plan for WWTP upgrade. 6. Letter from Ashland Chamber of Commerce concerning survey of Ashland businesses relative to camping on city streets. 7. Memorandum from City Administrator regarding guidelines for annual pay comparisons. XI. ANC RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS: Reading by title only of "A Resolution dedicating property for park purposes pursuant to Article XIX, Section 3, of the City Charter (City of Ashland property located on the corner of Garfield Street and East Main Street)." XII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS XIII. ADJOURNMENT MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 4, 1995 ' EXECUTIVE SESSION 6: 00 p.m. , Civic Center Conference Room, to deliberate real property transaction pursuant to O.R. S. 192 . 660 (1) (e) . CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7 : 03 p.m. , Civic Center Council Chambers. Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen and Thompson were present. Councilor Winthrop was absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the Regular meeting of March 21, 1995 were accepted as amended with the following: Page 5, section 3 , paragraph 3 : . . .particularly regarding the reliability and Page 6, section 3 , paragraph 11: The idea of the wetlands is to -(pa=late: settle out the solids] level out 1 peak flows. . . . ���d USiK t�I (&4AS SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 6 AWARDS `J 1. Mayor's proclamation declaring the week of April 2-8 as "Arbor Week in Ashland." 2 . Mayor's proclamation declaring the week of April 9-15 as "Telecommunicators Week in Ashland." 3 . Presentation of Police Department "Employee of the Year" awards. Police Chief Brown announced the following employees-.as Police Department "Employee of the Year" recipients: Paul Steel, Reserve Police Officer in Detectives; Kelly Haptonstall, Clerk I; Gail Rosenberg, Clerk-Dispatcher; and Randy Snow, Police Officer. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2 . Departmental Reports for March, 1995. 3 . Authorization for Mayor and Recorder to sign quitclaim for lo' public utility easement off of Logan Drive. Councillors Hauck/Reid m/s approval of the Consent Agenda. Voice vote: all ayes. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Continuation of public hearing on formation of an assessment district for the improvement of Clinton and Ann Streets and reading by title only of "A Resolution authorizing and ordering the improvement by constructing 1410 feet of street 22 feet in width, curbs and gutters, storm drains and sidewalk on Clinton and Ann Streets from Carol Street to (r.Alinutcs%44-95.min)P9. 1 Hersey Street in Ashland, Oregon and authorizing the assessment of the cost of the improvements against property to be benefited and providing that warrants issued for the costs of the improvement be general obligations of the City of Ashland." Public Works Director Steve Hall presented information on the previous hearing on this matter. Residents in this neighborhood had met and reached agreement on the formation of the assessment district. Paul Mace, 345 Clinton Street, asked Council to consider directing staff to meet with neighborhood groups prior to future LID's being prepared and presented to Council for approval to allow for more consensus in the future. Tax lot 500 is a non- issue. Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to proceed to form an LID as originally proposed and adopt the proposed Resolution 95-09 . Roll call: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES. Motion passed. Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to approve Resolution 95-09 . Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM Ra, 2253 Hwy 99 N, Ashland (Jackson Hot Springs) : explained recent sale of Jackson Hot Springs will necessitate relocation of RV residents currently living there. He asked for Council to consider helping residents of Jackson Hot Springs in their relocation efforts. Mayor Golden explained that Jackson Hot Springs was in the County. Suggested the residents contact Jackson County officials for assistance and State legislators. Theresa Lowrie, Women's Center, SOSC, presented Rogue Valley Clothesline Project and requested Council permission to hold the Clothesline Project at the Plaza on April 9 . Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s approval to allow display of Clothesline Project on Sunday, April 9 . All AYES. Motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Request by Youthworks for use of one-half acre of City land at the corner of East Main and Garfield for Ashland Youth and Family Resources Center. City Administrator Almquist read letter from Parks and Recreation Commission dated March 30, 1995 reversing their previous approval of this space to be used by Youthworks. The Commission now believes the best utilization of this parcel of land would be to dedicate it as part of the park system. (r.Alinutn\�-{AS.iniiil P6 2 Youthworks Director Steve -Gr'oveman reviewed his proposal and the process he has been following to secure property for the proposed Family and Youth Resource Center. Councilor Reid advised Council that CDBG guidelines were prepared to facilitate funds quickly to the low income members of the community. She understood when the funds were allocated last year that the Youthworks proposal was ready to go then. It concerns her that nothing has been done with it to this point. Councilor Reid is not prepared to invest staff or Council time on locating a piece of property for this project. Councilor Laws suggested Youthworks contact a realtor to locate available property. Councilor Hagen suggested Youthworks could appeal towthe- community for real estate available for the Center. Councilor Hagen volunteered his assistance to Youthworks. Councilor Hauck advised Council that the Parks Commission had volunteered 2 Commission members to assist Youthworks in their property search. Groveman stated it was obvious to him that the proposed site was meeting with opposition from the community and the Parks and Recreation Commission. He would withdraw his request at this time and hope to work in locating other property. Keith Moseley, 565 Taylor Street, spoke to Council regarding the proposed Center and asked Council to assist Youthworks with their efforts. Kathy Cooper, 1983 Crestview, urged Council to see this proposed Center as a necessity. Mary Lou Gross, 240 W. Hersey Street, urged Council to offer support and assistance and urged Council to look at a revised plan presented by Alan DeBoer. Alan DeBoer, 2260 Morada Lane, urged Council to support Youthworks project. Presented plans that would exchange proposed site for other corner site to build a 6500 square feet building. Linda Redding, 31 Garfield, spoke in favor of Youthworks proposal and suggested site at the current City storage yard near the railroad tracks. Eric Setterberg, 101 Garfield, spoke in opposition to use of space at Garfield Park for proposed Youthworks site. Bill Greenstein, 191 N. Wightman, spoke in opposition to using space at Garfield Park for any type of building. Dave Little, 91 N. Wightman, opposes use of Garfield Park (,:Min.I"W.4-95.min)pg. 3 property for building. He is in favor of the Youthworks proposal. He considers this Park to be the only open space for this high- density neighborhood. Betty Northcutt, 1340 E. Main Street, opposes use of Garfield Park property for proposed building. Pat Adams, Parks Commission, 580 Weller Lane, urged Council to act on Parks Commission recommendation to dedicate property as part of the park system. Commission believes Youthworks needs to work with other community agencies to develop their plan. John Sexton, 216 Alta Street, Teen Librarian at Ashland Public Library, urged support by Council to assist Youthworks. Councilor Reid stated that the Council has fought for over 12 years to fund the Ashland Teen Center. Councilor Laws supported Council providing assistance by establishing a working committee of Council and Parks Commission with other community groups. Councilor Thompson offered support of working committee and suggested looking at use a portion of the City storage yard as a possible site. Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to request City Attorney prepare a resolution to dedicate City property for Park property. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, and Thompson all YES. Motion passed. Councilors Hauck, Hagen, and Thompson volunteered to form the working committee from Council to meet with the Parks Commission members and Youthworks. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Memorandum from the Director of Public Works requesting Council authorization to sign 1996-98 STIP consensus letter on 116 Year Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Update." Public Works Director Hall presented memorandum. Councilor Thompson requested letter be sent to State Transportation Committee asking that they revise their thinking to include multi-modal transportation alternatives. Councilor Laws supported Thompson's theory and suggested a more regional approach to these \transportation problems was necessary. Councilor Hauck stated that the Constitution prohibits gas tax funds being spent on multi-modal issues. Councilor Hagen requested that we explore ways to increase multi-modal efforts. Councilor Reid suggested community efforts need to be expended locally to adopt less dependence on the road way. Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to authorize Director of Public Works to sign consensus letter. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck YES; (r.Minutes\44-95.min))+g.4 Hagen, Thompson NO. Motion passed. Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s to place on real property transaction _- discussed in Executive Session on agenda. Voice voter all AYES. Motion passed. Councilors Hagen/Hauck m/s to approve real property transaction discussed in Executive Session. Roll call vote: Laws, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES. Reid absent from room. Motion passed. ORDINANCES RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance providing for signmaker liability for sign violations." Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s approval of Ordinance 2754. Roll call: Laws, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES; Reid absent from room: Motion passed. 2 . Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance repealing section 15. 04. 096 of the Ashland Municipal Code to eliminate subdivider reimbursements for street improvements." Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s approval of Ordinance 2756. Roll call vote: Laws, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES; Reid absent from room. Motion passed. 3 . Second reading by title only of "An ordinance amending street dedication map of Comprehensive Plan- for Fordyce Street areas." Councilors Laws/Thompson m/s adoption of Ordinance 2753 . Roll call vote: Laws, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES; Reid absent from room. Motion passed. 4 . Second reading by title only of "An ordinance amending the Local Improvements and Special Assessments chapter of the Municipal Code to clarify petition requirements for initiation of process to form a district." Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s adoption of Ordinance 2755 . Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES. Motion passed. 5. First reading by title only of "An ordinance amending Sections 18.76. 050, 18.76. 070, , and 18. 08. 390 of the Ashland Municipal Code relating to 'flag partitions. City Attorney Paul Nolte advised Council of change in title from 18.76.060 to 18.76.050. Rest of the Ordinance title remains correct. Community Developm nt Director (r.Minuses\iJ-95.min1144. S �� John/JMcLaughlin reviewed this 1,1tsk QG o f 10r 76 . 6,O 7pQQ ChanCdt��U / Ordinance and requested that the proposed Ordinance amendment of Section L be studied further by Council and staff. McLaughlin recommended Council adopt Ordinance excluding Section L and allow a Public Hearing to be held by Planning Commission. Councilor Laws requested section L be referred to Planning Commission and urged their expedient review. Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to second reading, excluding Section L. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen YES; Thompson NO. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Regional Strategies Grant for Plaza Information Kiosk City Administrator Almquist advised Council of a Regional Strategies grant offer of $12 , 500 in matching funds for remodel of Plaza Information Kiosk in cooperation with Chamber of Commerce. Almquist requested Council action on the grant offer. Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to place item on agenda. Voice vote all AYES. Motion passed. Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to accept grant offer and have remodel plans reviewed by Historic Commission. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Thompson YES. Motion passed. Community Development Director John McLaughlin invited Council and citizens to attend Street Plan meeting being held on Thursday, April 6 from 6-10pm at SOSC Stevenson Union, Rogue River Room. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 9 : 20 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor (r:MinWCS\1J-NJ.nmrl p @.6 . ----- ------------ .......... ......V�7 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, according to documentation provided by the State of Nevada which indi..cates that radioactive waste may be transported through Ashland as early as 1998 should Senate Bill 167 or similar legislation be enacted by the U.S. Congress; and WHEREAS, this radioactive waste is to be transported to an "interim" site in Nevada, and thus does little or nothing to solve our nation's radioactive waste problem; and WHEREAS, commercial nuclear reactors have generated about 22,000 tons of highly irradiated waste in the United States, which will remain hazardous for 250,000 years. WHEREAS, the industry and the govemment have found no safe way of isolating the toxic substances from the environment for this period of time. Those trying to foster a crisis atmosphere have shown little inclination to curb the creation of the hazardous substances; and WHEREAS, the health hazards are beyond imagination and the proposed casks are untested tit for withstanding highway accidents; and x5l WHEREAS, the majority of high-level radioactive waste is the fuel from the hot core of commercial nuclear power plants. This irradiated fuel is the most intensely radioactive material on the planet; and WHEREAS, we generally oppose radioactive waste transportation through Ashland on Interstate 5; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland reiterates its declaration of being a nuclear-free zone; BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Ashland is on record as opposing Senate Bill 167 and all similar legislation which Would require radioactive waste transportation near or through the City of Ashland; and r-, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Ashland supports creation of an independent presidential commission to re-examine our nation's radioactive waste policy; and BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Ashland will carry this resolution to all of our elected local, st, ate, and federal officials and to the President of the United States. Dated this ISth day o[April, 1995. , tf 10' Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor ..... ... ........ ....... An jRf'u;'w ............ . . ...... PROCLAMATION IA WHEREAS, the City of Ashland is an environmentally conscious community; and f; uIS WHEREAS, people's actions toward nature and each other are the source of growing damage to the environment; and WHEREAS, there is a need to ensure that the earth will be a secure and hospitable i� place for future generations; NOW, THEREFORE, 1, Catherine M. Golden, Mayor of the City of Ashland, urge all citizens to support Earth Week, and do hereby proclaim April 16 to 23, 1995, as jfjv EARTH WEEK '95 in the City of Ashland, and call upon all citizens and civic organizations to support Earth Week '95 by participating in the Earth Fair on April 17-18, Eco-Products Exposition on April 22-23 and the Schneider Lecture on April 17 at Southern Oregon State College and the numerous other community activities. Dated this 18th day of April, 1995. I. III nP" Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor -55.f 11�Il�ll In .......... COUNTY OF DEL NORTE 563 'C:° Strect, Suilo #1 CRESCENT CITY, CALIFORNIA 95531 rHON'E: (707) 494-7200 FAX: 1705) W)AttD OF GLT VISOM Jtmuiry 27, 1995 466.1470 Josephine County Board of CommiusionNrs Cellrth011ae Rm 159 (;runts Pass OR 97526 Dclar CO1llmie1&10110rA: SUBJECT: PROPOSAL TO TRANSPORT NUCLEAR WASTE ON 111CHWAY 199 During its meeting (if JanuHCy 24, 1995, the Del Norte County Board of Supervisor& Y7A6 informed of thu Dopartment of Enorgy's request that a transportatitnl plats be developed Involving the use of llighway 199 for the purpose of transporting nuclear waste from tho Humboldt nay Nuclear Power Plant to A nuclear waste facility in ihn sluts of NAvadu. ThA board was extremely alarmad when thAy Warrl.:d Of this propusol and, after clue discussion, took action to adopt the enclosed resolution which requests the w;sistuncc Of the Governor and the affected federal and local legislators to RCA deliberately to prevent the use of Highway 199 for the purposo of transporting nuclear Waste. Thu Board of Super•visorr, also authorized and d)rcetad me to inform you of its position in opposition to this proposal. Your help in preventing; the utilization of llighway 199 for this purpose ig sollcited and would be greatly Appreciated. Highway 199 is H narrow and winding mountain reed that runs along tha Smith River for the majority of Its routs through Del Norte County. Accidents have occurred ulong this roast which have adulterated the river tvlth various substances. The 1aRkage of nuclear material Into thie river would constitute a catastrophe. Also enclosed Sr; A recent DeWEpapAl' article and acoompanying editorial cartoon which may help to clarify the Board of Suparvisoru eoltcorn. Again, your assistance ill tltis m,ltter would be. greatly appreciRted. Shlcevely, i _ _( i - 1. - t � au.� JACK D. REESE, ChAirman Del Nortu County Board of Supervisorlr Co.: MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SLIPF.11VISORS COMMUNITY DEVHLOPMENT DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVIC}:S AND HEALTH LT. LYI,F. RAD'1'HE, California llighway Patrol ,-RFMWOOD ALLIANCP. NEVADA AGENCY FOR NUCUAlt 11110JECTS DEPARTMENT OF 1:NERGY CHANNEL 49 DEL NORTE TRIPLICATE KCRE KPOD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DEL NORTE COUNTY STATE OF CAi1FORNiA RESOLUTION NO. 95-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE DEL 14ORTY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OPPOSING THE TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR WASTE MATERIAL ON U.S. HIGHWAY 199 W I14:ILEAS, the Del Norte County Bonrd of Suporvi sors tank-up the proposal Of transporting nuclear waste by truck uu Highway 199 us an urgency item during its meeting of January 24, 1995; and WHEREAS, the pu.0bility of transporting nuClear waste on Highway 799 is to be covered by a transportation plan requested by the U.S. Department of Energy; and WHEREAS, Highway lU9 c10s01y pOralle1H tlto p.nurae of Lli.c.Smith River while]-,is a"Wild and Scenic" rivor; and WHEREAS, the Smith River 1s essential to life and uuonomy of Del Norty. County; and WHEREAS, uunu.!roue accideutu and mishaps frequently Occur On Highway 199; WHEREAS, the Smith River has by such accldeuts been adulteruted by all manner of sub6tannes in recent months, iaL•ludn;g asphalt, puint, end beer; and WHEREAS, the spillage Of nucitar inaterial into 11:a Smith River would Constitute a mnnumeutul catastrophe affecting tite lire, hcallb, safety and security of the people of and in Del Norte County; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Del Norte County ROHrd of&upervir-.ura haroby adopts a position in total and Completo opposition to the possibility of using Hight-My 199 for tho purpose of transporting nucAoar wssto; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that 111a Del Norte County Board of SuPorvinors boseeehos Governor Fete Wilsurn, Senator Diane FeinstCin, Senator Burbara BOSer, Congreasman Frank Riggs, Senator Mike Thompson, Assemblyman Dan Hauser, and all permitting agendas to act with a deliberate intent to prevent tl'.c utili2ation of Highway 199 for the purpose of trutlsporting nuclear waste. PASSED AND ADQPTED at u regular maethtg of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Dal Norte held on January 24, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: BARK, CLAUSEN, I•a.I.ER, REBSE NOES: NONE _ ABSENT: 111ELLETT ' �JILCK REF.SF, Chairmau ll Board of Supervisors Del Norte County. ATTEST: K B. .. L. WALSH, L'lcrk Of 7t Board of Suporvisorn, County of Del Norte, Stuto of California ROOK PAGE TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR WASTE IN OREGON Civilian Spent Fuel Shipments, One Repository[Yucca Mountain] , No New Reactors, Current Reactor Operations Projected Through 2030, MPC Base Case, No Alternative Highway Routes Designated in Nevada 1. Highway Routes from Reactors Using GA 4/9 Truck Casks a. Highway Through Shipments from California Reactors (1) H1 - US 199 from Crescent City, CA to Grants Pass; I-5 from Grants Pass to Yreka, CA: 44 Truck Casks [Humboldt Bay] 2. Rail Routes from Reactors Using MPCs a. Rail Through Shipments from Washington Reactors ( 1) RT1 - UP from Wallula, WA to Hinkle to Pendleton to Nampa, ID:. 152 Rail Casks [Washington NP 2] b. Rail Exit Shipments from Oregon Reactors ( 1) RE1 - EN from Trojan NP to Portland; UP from Portland to Oregon Trunk Jct to Hinkle to Pendleton to Nampa, ID: 90 Rail Casks [Trojan] 3. Total Shipments Through Oregon a. Highway: 44 Truck Casks b. Rail: 242 Rail Casks b rOi� A w � r V, S O �Rp !D O I- � N � 1 � _ I � � o i Nuclear Guardianshi p Project For the Responsible Care of Radioactive Wastes 3051 Adeline Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 Phone: 415-843-5092 Fax: 415-548-2353 econet: ngp Given the extreme toxicity and longevity of nuclear waste, and our commitment to the health and well-being of today's and future generations, we assume our responsibility for keeping radioactive waste out of the biosphere. The Nuclear Guardianship Project is a growing worldwide network of citizens working to develop nuclear waste policies and practices that reflect our responsibility to present and future life. It reflects a growing body of scientific judgment and citizen views in calling for the retrievable, monitored, ground-level storage -- or guardianship -- of these wastes at their points of generation, using the best technologies presently available. And it develops educational programs to begin the training in technical knowledge and moral vigilance required to establish and maintain these Guardian Sites. The Project recognizes that radioactive wastes represent our most enduring legacy to future life on earth. • Millions of metric tons of radioactive waste have been generated by the production of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. The waste it generates annually in the U.S. alone is 240 times the amount released in the Chernobyl disaster. These wastes include irradiated fuel rods and intensely radioactive liquids as well as so-called "low-level" wastes which, though more diluted, have an equally long hazardous life. • Scientific evidence is revealing the devastating health effects of the radiation emitted by these wastes. These include cancers, diseases of the immune system, birth deformities, and infertility. These effects will become yet more crippling to future generations as they compound through time and affect genetic structures. „ • The radioactivity in the wastes which lasts up to 250,000 years and more requires that they be kept out of the biosphere for many times longer than recorded history. D391.6. • All wastes are presently in temporary storage -- some in leaking tanks, and unlined trenches, in pools, drums, and even cardboard boxes. Our radioactive legacy also includes voluminous uranium mill tailings, 438 reactors worldwide (110 in the U.S.), and other structures and equipment contaminated in the course of nuclear energy and weapons production. • Government and industry plans for "permanent disposal" of these wastes entail deep geologic burial, creating extensive and long-term dangers through water seepage and seismic activity. No containers last as long as the radioactivity they contain, and when sealed off deep underground, they will be inaccessible for repair and replacement. Proposed centralized burial sites also require dangerous transport of the wastes over long distances on public roads and through populated areas. We propose to develop the motivation and means necessary to involve citizens directly in decisions concerning the disposition of radioactive wastes, and in the monitoring and over-seeing of these wastes. This entails an educational campaign designed to: • Shift public attitudes from the short-term calculus of burying the nuclear wastes "out of sight, out of mind" to a Guardianship Ethic that embodies our concern for our own and future generations. • Envision and plan for long-term surveillance of the wastes at decommissioned reactors, present waste facilities, and other nuclear production plants as they are closed down. We propose that these become Guardian Sites which will serve public safety concerns and will also provide a locus for on-going training. This citizen training will include radiation protection, disciplines of mindfulness, and devotion to the well- being of future generations. To these ends the Nuclear Guardianship Project was initiated in mid-1988 in Northern California by Joanna Macy and colleagues and has spread to other parts of the U.S., and Germany, Austria, Britain, Japan, New Zealand and Australia. The Project's activities focus on 1) presenting the vision of nuclear guardianship and the reasons for its necessity, and 2) developing and disseminating the citizen training that guardianship requires with methods, materials and a model for local self-education and political action. Both immediate action and the on-going training have three simultaneous and interdependent dimensions: technical, political, and moral -- each integral to guardianship. Technical knowledge about radiation, its effects on living organisms, and methods for its containment, is essential now for responsible decision-making. This knowledge can be made accessible and understandable through written materials and interactive learning systems. D391.6. r Political responsibility as citizens requires that we become familiar with governmental and corporate processes determining the disposition of radioactive waste, and that we intervene to represent the interests of our own and future generations. It is not appropriate to leave this responsibility on the shoulders of bureaucrats, engineers, and business people who are pressured by short-term considerations. Moral vigilance motivated by and anchored in deep values is required to break through the wide-spread denial and avoidance that surround the issue of nuclear waste. To recognize our responsibility for its care and generate political will to assume this responsibility, we must reassess our most deeply held values and cultivate those values that are life-sustaining. This training includes: • An enactment of the Guardian Site concept including a slide show with music, which inspires an identification with future generations and with their perspective on our efforts today to guard the "poison fire' of nuclear waste. • Workshops and seminars presenting the technical and spiritual challenge of nuclear wastes, and tapping the wisdom traditions of our planetary heritage in responding to this challenge. • A training model for local citizen groups combining study and action and spiritual empowerment in understanding and dealing with nuclear wastes. Arrangements for booking and materials can be made through the Nuclear Guardianship Project office. The Nuclear Guardianship Project will be conducting public education on a wider scale through production and dissemination of information and training materials, training sessions, organization of conferences, and work with mass media. Tax deductible donations and volunteer time are welcome to support the Project and the following specific plans: distribution of a kit offering materials and methods to support groups seeking to provide Guardianship training in their localities; the preparation of a book on nuclear guardianship; the publication of a periodic newsletter for members of Guardian Groups and other interested parties; updated Fact Sheets on the need for on-site, monitored, retrievable storage, and on new technological means to support it; outreach to schools and educational associations, and the development of study-modules on nuclear waste guardianship in social studies and general science .courses; outreach to church organizations and other religious institutions to enlist their support for the Guardianship Ethic and guardianship training; outreach to artists and the entertainment industry, promoting works that portray the challenge of radioactive waste and the vision of guardianship. ©1991 Nuclear Guardianship Project 7be PmJWSL2tmer9andE*k3 may benProdwcedfore&Karbn21p psesu4bdxfidlhr"bnofaddrezhm. D391.6 The Guardianship Ethic 1. Given the extreme toxicity and longevity of nuclear wastes, their generation by nuclear energy and weapons production must cease.The development of safe,renewable energy sources and non-violent means of conflict resolution is essential to our health and survival. 2. We all share in the responsibility for the nuclear wastes produced in our lifetimes. In taking care of these wastes, we are concerned with the well-being of present and future generations. 3. Current plans for deep geologic disposal of nuclear wastes, which preclude dose monitoring, retrievability and containment repair, entail long-term risks of uncontrollable contamination of life support systems, and as such are not consonant with our responsibility to future life. 4. Transportation of nuclear wastes, with the inevitable daily risks of accidents and spills, should be minimized. 5. A large-scale research effort to develop technology for the least hazardous long-term treatment and disposition of nuclear wastes is of high priority. 6. In the interim, until responsible long-term measures are discovered and devised, it is our generation's responsibility to monitor all nuclear wastes and store them in ways that are retrievable, recognizing that "safe, permanent management of these wastes has as yet proved illusive, and that total safety may ultimately never be attainable with respect to nuclear waste. 7. MonitorAd storage designed for appropriate retrievability must entail both citizen participation and citizen education in the nature of nuclear waste and the requirements for its monitoring and storage. As a context we need a profound education about our relationship to the Earth and our relationship to time. 8. Policies pertaining to nuclear waste management must be arrived at with full participation of the public. Consideration of the interests of both present and future generations can only be served by lack of secrecy, free circulation of information, and open on-going communication. 9. With respect to-all parties, citizens, public interest groups, corporations, utilities, and governments, we choose strategies that are based on cooperation for the public good and the integrity of the biosphere. 10. The motivation and vigilance necessary for ongoing, interim storage of nuclear wastes requires a moral commitment on the pan of citizens.This commitment, comparable to a spiritual vocation to act on behalf of the biosphere and future generations, is within our human capacity and can be developed and sustained through tapping the religious and cultural resources of our planetary heritage. © 1990 Nuclear Guardianship Project The Protect Statement and Ethics may be reproduced for educational purposes udth the full inclusion of address line. 3051 Adeline Street, Berkeley, CA 94703 Phone: 415-843-5092 Fax: 415-548-2353 econet: ngp D12905.0 1�Of ASo ' Memorandum April 12, 1995 �11O: Council Members rum: Mayor Catherine M. Golden �$AjPd.' Annual Appointments/Reappointments Process After reviewing your recommendations, I am requesting your approval of the following appointments/reappointments to the various Boards, Committees, Commissions. The positions being filled expire April 30, 1995. Letters were received from two individuals that were not included in the previous packet to you. Thomas G. Sander is requesting appointment to the vacancy on the Forest Lands Commission expiring April 30, 1996. Lawrence C. Hill is requesting appointment to the vacancy on the Senior Program Board expiring April 30, 1995. Their letters and r6sum6s are attached for your review. AURPORT COMMISSION Members (3-year terms) '95 William Skillman '95 Linda Katzen BICYCLE COMMISSION Members (3 year terms) '95 Rees Jones '95 Larry Hobbs CABLE ACCESS COMMISSION Members (3 year terms) '95 Dr. Mark Chilcoat, SOSC '95 Hap Freund '95 Virginia Bird, ASD FOREST LANDS COMMISSION Members (3 year terms) '95 Will Brown, M.D. '95 C. Herschel King, M.D. '95 Lenny Niemark '96 Thomas G. Sander HISTORIC COMMISSION Members (3 year terms) 195 Keith Chambers '95 Fredricka Weishahn '95 Terry Skibby HOSPITAL BOARD Members (4 year terms) '95 Pat Acklin '95 Richard Nichols '95 Greg Williams PLANNING COMMISSION Members (4 year terms) '95 Jim Hibbert '95 Peter Finkle SENIOR PROGRAM BOARD Members (3 year terms) '95 Lawrence C. Hill '95 Jeanne Monroe TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION Members (3 year terms) '95 Christine Schumacher '95 Joanne Navickas TREE COMMISSION Members (3 year terms) '95 Shelly Simmons '95 David Mason '95 Nancy Kerr (r.Rc.ppU VA n1apM,11WO i� Thomas G. Sander 8580 Dead Indian Memorial Road Ashland, OR 97520 488-8181 March 31 , 1995 Dear Mayor Golden: The forest commission currently has a vacant seat and I would like you to consider my application for this seat. I have a strong background in Wildlife biology both professionally and as a layperson. I have lived here in Ashland for just several years and would like to become more involved in the community. I feel I would be an asset to the commission because of my ability to reason and find solutions to challenging issues. 1 have no political or economic agenda inspiring me to pursue this position. Currently the .bulk of my time is spent running my sound recording business. attending graduate level business courses at the college, and volunteering six to ten hours per week at the forensics laboratory. Enclosed is- resume. If you have any questions at all,'please don't hesitate to phone. Thank you. Sincerely. Thomas G. Sander c THOMAS G. SANDER 8580 Dead Indian Road Ashland, OR 97520 (503) 488-8181 HIGHLIGHTS OF QUALIFICATIONS • Extensive experience as field biologist. • Excellent ability to work with others cooperatively. • Skilled in planning, coordinating and supervising projects. • President and owner of an environmental sound recording company FIELD EXPERIENCE WILDERNESS RECORDINGS Ashland, CA President 1982 - Present Extensive experience in field identifying and recording avian vocalizations. OREGON COOPERATIVE WILDLIFE RESEARCH UNIT OR Field Biologist/Wildlife recordist 1992. Recorded and developed the authoritative field guide to Spotted Owl vocalizations. This production included virtually all Spotted Owl vocalizations encountered in the field. It was developed for educational purposes and to be used to census Spotted Owls in the Northwestern United States. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE Crook County, OR Field Biologist 1991 Censused an endangered disjunct population of Upland Sandpipers in Grant County. Field Biologist 1991 Located, mapped and described Prairie Falcon nest sites in Crook County. POINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY Stinson Beach, CA Field Biologist, Northwestern California 1987 Initiated research on Marbled Murreletes in Northern California studying inland activity patterns, e.g. frequency, timing and location of activity as well as vocalization behavior. Field Biologist, S.E. Farallon Island 1986 Researched and reported on the ecology and recolonization of Rhinoceros Auklets on S.E. Farallon Island. Field Biologist, S.E. Farallon Island 1985, 1986 Monitored and descri bed behavior of Northern Elephant Seal populations. Field Biologist, Palomarin Field Station 1983 Mistnetted, trapped, winged, weighed, and banded passerines, as well as daily censuring of a 22-acre grid monitoring and mapping behavior and location of 12 species of resident and nonresident breeding birds. ADMINISTRATIVE/MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE • Created and managed a successful environmental sound recording company. • Wrote business plan, defined goals and developed cash flow/break-even analysis. • Designed promotional materials and marketing strategies. • Authored and published four successful environmental educational albums. • Produced recordings for research organizations, museums, documentary films, television news agencies, and musicians. EDUCATION B.S., Environmental Studies, major- ornithology The Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA, 1987 Currently attending business classes part time at Southern Oregon State College ApR 0 1995 -------------- Lawrence C. Hill 420 Taylor Street Ashland, OR. 97520 Tel . 482-0946 April 3 , 1995 The Honorable Catherine Golden Mayor, City of Ashland City Hall 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR. , 97520 Dear Mayor Golden: It has come to my attention that an opening has developed for a position Ion the Ashland Senior Services Board. Mrs . Jeanne Monroe, a present member of the Board, has suggested that I apply for this vacancy. At the present time I am a member of the Ashland Chapter of AARP, serving also on its Board of Directors . I have been a member of the National AARP, participating in a number of insurance coverages including Health, Homeowners, and Auto. I served with the National Council on Aging of Santa Clara County, California for six years, rising to an executive position before retiring. I feel that I am well qualified for this position. I am looking forward to your response to this request . Sincerely, La e ce C. HY11 0 C I T Y O F A S H L A N D C I T Y H A L L ASHLAND,OREGON 87520 telephone(cade 503)482-3211 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Pete Lovrovich, Director of Electric Utilities \ SUBJECT: Electric Department Activities for MARCH 1995 THE FOLLOWING IS A CONDENSED REPORT OF THE ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT ACTIVITIES FOR MARCH 1995. INSTALLED 5 NEW UNDERGROUND SERVICES AND 3 ALTERED SERVICE. INSTALLED 2050 FEET OF CONDUIT AND 6265 FEET OF CONDUCTOR. 10 NEW TRANSFORMERS WERE INSTALLED FOR A TOTAL OF 550 KVA AND 4 WERE REMOVED FOR A NET GAIN OF 268 KVA ON THE SYSTEM. RESPONDED TO 111 REQUESTS FOR CABLE LOCATES. HAD 312 CONNECT ORDERS AND 204 DISCONNECTS FOR A TOTAL OF 516. THERE WERE 422 DELINQUENT ACCOUNT NOTICES WORKED AND 127 DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS WERE DISCONNECTED. TWO 40' POLES, TWO 45' POLES, AND ONE 55' POLE WERE INSTALLED UNDER THE POLE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. 2 NEW STREET LIGHTS WERE INSTALLED AND 35 STREET LIGHTS WERE REPAIRED THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM. EMPLOYEES ATTENDED MONTHLY SAFETY MEETING. MONTHLY EMF READINGS WERE TAKEN. Monthly Building Activity Report: 03/95 Page 1 # Units Value SINGLE/MULTI-FAMILY & TOURIST ACCOMODATIONS: Building: ADDITION 4 62, 220 CARPORT 1 10, 000 CONV GAR TO B&B UNIT 1 22, 566 DECK 1 2, 300 DECK EXTENSION 1 1, 300 DEMOLITION OF OUT BLDG 1 0 DEMOLITION OF SFR 1 0 DETACHED COTTAGE ADDITION 1 125, 000 FENCE 6 7, 981 OVERHANG 1 200 REMODEL 2 7, 500 REMODEL & ADDITION 1 30, 000 REMODEL OF BASEMENT 1 8, 000 SECOND SOLAR WATER HEATER 1 2 , 400 SFR 10 1, 987, 976 SPECIAL INSPECTION 2 0 Subtotal: $ 2 , 267 ,444 Electrical: 1 BR CIR FOR SPA 1 200 4 BRANCH CIRS FOR KITCHEN 1 500 ADD 3 BRANCH CIRCUITS 1 200 SERVICE CHANGE 1 375 Subtotal: $ 1, 275 Mechanical: GAS FURN/REWIRE HOUSE 1 3 , 000 GAS LINE/FURN/1 BR CIR 2 10, 942 GAS LINE/GAS FURNACE 2 3 , 000 GAS LINE/WATER HEATER 1 1,200 GAS WATER HEATER/GAS LINE 1 725 REPLACE GAS FURNACE 1 4, 000 Subtotal: $ 22 ,867 Plumbing: ADD BATHROOM SINK 1 250 Monthly Building Activity Report: .03/95 Page 2 # Units Value SINGLE/MULTI-FAMILY & TOURIST ACCOMODATIONS: Plumbing: AUTO SPRINKLER SYSTEM 1 5, 200 IRRIGATION SYS/1 BR CIR 1 10, 000 REPLACE KITCHEN SINK 1 450 REPLACE PLUMBING 1 2, 000 REROUTE SEWER LINE 1 300 SPRINKLER SYS/1 BR CIR 1 1, 000 WATER HEATER 1 450 Subtotal: $ 19, 650 ***Total: $ 2 , 311, 236 COMMERCIAL: Building: INTERIOR REMODEL 1 3 , 500 NEW COMMUNICATION TOWER 1 25, 000 REPAIR FIRE DAMAGE 1 5, 000 Subtotal: $ 33 , 500 Electrical: 2 BRANCH CIRCUITS 1 500 5 BR CIR FOR BRITT BALLRM 1 500 6 BRANCH CIRCUITS 1 1, 700 ADD 1 BR CIR FOR AWNING 1 300 ADD TO EXISTING CIRCUIT 1 325 ALARM SYSTEM 2 1, 550 INSTALL O/C PROTECTOR 1 0 SECURITY SYSTEM 1 438 SIGN LIGHTING 1 500 Subtotal: $ 5, 813 Plumbing: ADD 3 SINKS/WATER HEATER 1 500 Subtotal: $ 500 ***Total: $ 39, 813 Monthly Building Activity Report: 03/95 Page 3 Total this month: 69 $ 2, 351, 049 Total this month last year: 102 $ 2 , 909 504 Total year to date: 721 $17,454 , 289 Total last year: 831 $13 , 207 ,863 This month This month This year last year Total Fees: 23 , 577 28, 496 202,569 Total Inspections: 551 569 5078 NEW CONSTRUCTION: 3/95 RESIDENTIAL PAGE NO. 1 04/11/95 r ADDRESS #UNITS CONTRACTOR VALUATION ** CARPORT 561 MORTON ST SNAWHAM, KEVEN 10000. 00 ** Subtotal ** 10000. 00 ** FENCE 370 HARGADINE ST TRADEWINDS MARINE 800. 00 ** Subtotal ** 800. 00 ** SFR 193 EASTBROOK -WY COX, FRED--CONSTRUCTION 110000.00 243 EASTBROOK WY COX, FRED--CONSTRUCTION 152640. 00 501 PARKSIDE DR BONIN, DARYL - 101542 . 35 CONSTRUCTION 481 ASHLAND LOOP RD LEWIS CONSTRUCTION ' 287205.80 451 WATERLINE RD LEWIS CONSTRUCTION 248099. 60 500 WATERLINE RD LEWIS CONSTRUCTION 285581. 40 195 GRANDVIEW DR GRIGGS, PAUL 312209.90 100 AUBURN ST BRINK, RICHARD T. - 209294. 60 HOMEBUILDER 1399 MILL POND RD MEDINGER CONST. CO. INC. 104403 .24 1385 APPLE WY TURRELL, JON CONSTRUCTION 177000. 00 ** Subtotal ** 1987976.89 *** Total *** 1998776. 89 NEW CONSTRUCTION: 3/95 COMMERCIAL PAGE NO. 1 04/11/95 ADDRESS #UNITS CONTRACTOR VALUATION ** DETACHED COTTAGE ADDITION 668 NORTH MAIN ST NORTH PACIFIC 125000.00 CONSTRUCTION CO ** Subtotal ** 125000. 00 ** NEW COMMUNICATION TOWER 1155 EAST MAIN ST OWNER 25000. 00 ** Subtotal ** 25000. 00 *** Total *** 150000. 00 of ASAf, ErrtDranAUnt April 10, 1995 5� ss YS iy 'tw ,� Mayor and City,Council= rant- Steven M Hall, Director of Public Works '��'?P?,i��G.$ iz�` '� —i"i��,.+��,^,r•'xs�,g 'a' r-.s _ ', «.r,�.,,�e K; > LtD Etf.� Monthly Reports r Attached are monthly reports from the Public Works department for the month of March, 1995. Attachments (c:\pw\morpt.mem) ENGINEERING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT FOR: March, 1995 1. Issued 16 Street Excavation permits. 2. Issued 5 Miscellaneous Construction permits. 3. Issued 10 Address Change or Assignment forms. 4. Responded to 15 Certificate of Occupancy reviews. 5. Completed 13 Pre-applications for Planning Actions. 6. Completed 13 "One-Stop" permit forms. 7. Performed field and office checks on 4 partition plats. 8. Performed the following work on the Water Treatment Plant Improvement Project: a. Attended pre-bid conferences. b. Reviewed plans and specifications provided by engineer. C. Fielded questions from prospective contractors. 9. Performed the following work on the Clearwell Modification Project: a. Awarded contract for work. b. Prepared change order regarding pipe specifications. C. Issued notice to proceed. 10. Approved 5 contractors pre-qualification applications. 11. Performed the following work on the Family Circle Subdivision: a. Approved constructions plans. b. Assigned address to all lots in the Subdivision. C. Prepared subdivision agreements. d. Completed utility and other City fees. 12. Operated traffic counters at several locations. PAGE 1-ce:eggine 6mmtMy.xp0 13. Responded to citizen regarding the location of Ditch Road. 14. Prepared memo regarding the responsibilities establishing and completing L.I.D. projects. 15. Met with property owners regarding the proposed improvement of North Mountain Avenue. 16. Performed the following work on the Applewood Subdivision: a. Discussed with citizen the requirements for creating a public street. b. Prepared memo to City Attorney concerning the requirements for creating a public Street. C. Prepared description of proposed right-of-way. 17. Performed the following work on the Oak Street Meadows Subdivision, Phase II: a. Prepared Subdivision agreements. b. Computed service and connection fees. C. Assigned addresses to Subdivision. d. Held pre-construction conference. 18. ' Prepared a sketch and estimate for construction of a canal along the railroad right-of- way. 19. Researched right-of-way on Scenic Drive. 20. Two staff members attended emergency management training. 21. Notified Public Utilities Commission of completion of remedial work on railroad crossings. 22. Prepared letter requesting the purchase of property near "A" Street and 8th Street. 23. Performed the following work on the Strawberry Lane/Westwood Street Sewer & Water Project: a. Awarded contract to low bidder. b. Held pre-construction conference. C. Staked and computed grades for water line. d. Sent notices to property owners regarding construction. e. Inspected work performed by Contractor. 24. Assisted in mailing information packets regarding the Wastewater Treatment options. PAGE 2-(c:mgi. r,\. amly.RVQ 25. Performed the following work on Clear Creek Subdivision: a. Field checked post monumentation. b. Made final inspection. C. Prepared letter of approval and acceptance. d. Released all remaining money held on deposit for construction. 26. Notified O.D.O.T. of requested change in crossing configuration for the proposed Siskiyou Boulevard/Walker Avenue signal project. 27. Prepared memo regarding the termination of a public utility easement in Logan Drive Subdivision. 28. Performed the following work pertaining to the Oak Knoll Meadows Subdivision, Phase IV: a. Reviewed project plans. b. Computed City service and connection fees. C. Prepared subdivision agreements. 29. Performed the following work pertaining to the 1994 Miscellaneous Concrete Project: a. Sent letter requesting Contractor complete walks on Walker during spring break. b. Met with School District personnel regarding work along School property. C. Inspected work performed by Contractor 30. Prepared a request for quotations for an expansion to the Calle Guanajuato recycling center. 31. Attended emergency management table-top exercise. 32. Prepared a site plan of a proposed addition to the information Kiosk on the Plaza. 33. Referenced survey monumentation on several streets prior to overlaying. 34. Arranged for water well testing to be done on the Monte George well near the airport. 35. Prepared a description of the easement to be quitclaimed to the City at the Airport. 36. Performed the following work on the Degroodt Subdivision on Tolman Creek Road: a. Prepared a list of service and connection fees to be charged. b. Prepared subdivision agreements. C. Discussed development requirements with the owner and engineer. PAGE 3-cc:enSinmr\m thly.RFv 37. Completed summary of all City annexations from 1964 to present including area computations. 38. Completed design of monument bases at Reeder Reservoir. 39. Responded to numerous vision clearance complaints. 40. Inspected on-going construction at the following subdivisions: a. Whistle Subdivision b. Audubon Subdivision C. Oak Street Meadows Subdivision PAGE 4-(c:.gi..0..1Wy.RpU WATER QUALITY MONTHLY REPORT FOR MARCH, 1995., WATER: Repaired 1 leak in City owned water mains in which contractor tore out main line. -- - - _- _-- Repaired 2 leaks in customer service and or meter. Repaired 1 Lithia leak at East Main. Changed out 6 water meters. Changed out 2 broken curb stops on customer service. Installed 8 new water meters with hand valves. Installed 2 customer hand valves. Repaired 2 fire hydrants Installed one new hydrant and relocated one hydrant. Installed 4 new 3/4" water services and four 1", two 2" and one 3" water service. Repaired drinking fountain at 4th and C Streets, and Triangle Park. Replaced the last of the Lithia fountains on the Plaza. Installed 500' of 8" water main, chlorinated and put into service new water main at East Nevada and changed over two water services and installed two new services. Made two main line taps one 4" and one 6". Made first tie-in of 12" North Main water line, tied into 8" Sheridan line. Replaced 30' of 4" TID line on Chestnut, and repaired section of TID line in the same area. Removed 4" valve at the Water Street bridge after street work. Repaired trestle in canyon and removed slides from road there. SEWER: Installed 5 new 4" sewer laterals.' Responded to 2 main line plugs Repaired two main line problems. Replaced two sewer laterals. Repaired one sewer lateral and responded to three service calls. ' Rodded 58,244; using jet rudder with 128,000 gallons of water. Rodded 2,697' using the mechanical rodder and TV'd 5,155' of City sewer mains. MISCELLANEOUS: There were 102 requests for Utility locate calls. There was 65.452 million gallons of water treated at the Water Treatment Plant and 64.15 million gallons of water treated at the Waste Water Treatment Plant. Citv of Ashland Street Division March 1995 Report SWEEPER: Swept 379 miles of streets. ' Collected 137. 5 yards of debris. Y Responded to 129 utility location requests. Graded several streets and alleys. Patched pot-holes and sunken services. Continued pro-filing. streets (grinding ) for resurfacing : Completed Clay ^ St. from Siskiyou to end of pavement, Harmony Ln . from Siskiyou to Lit Way and started 'on Lit Way; . Joy to Ray Ln . . .._-'. Picked up 50 gallons of tack-coat from LTM in Medford. Checked out paving machine. Began stripping storm drain ditch on Wimer between No. Main and Scenic Dr. for patching . '` Completed Dauenhauer Rd. : Rolled (compacted ) it. Repaired the alley off Morton below Siskiyou using 20 yards of rack. .; Water Street Bridge_ Project; Hauled 7 loads of concrete (old curb .& gutter) from our pit. Built a retaining wall and filled with 4 yards of 5 sack concrete. Back-filled entire new wall with 20 yards of drain rock, 30 yards of 4 inch minus shale rock and 50 yards of 3/4 minus rock . For compaction, we rented a back-hoe compactor from Southern - Oregon Underground with operator. Swept and flushed , removed the barri- , .,, cades and opened the street for thru traffic . Completed preparing Wimer Street for patching . Patched new Wimer Street storm drain from No. Main to Scenic Dr. in- cluding 3 cross-over drains. Total tons: 104.30 Remove 600 sq . ft. of sunken asphalt approach from alley behind the Stratford Motel on Siskiyou at Sherman for replacement. Also prepped for patching : Around re-constructed catch basins on 2nd and A, 3rd and A, new cross-over storm drain on A at 4th, 6th street alley approach above S, and new catch basin on Walnut at Wiley. Raised a sewer clean-out on 6th at E. Main due to re-surfacing . Prepped for patching . Repaired the alley between Hersey and Van Ness. Patched the following: Sunken alley approach on Sherman , storm drain repair on Glendower, storm drain crossing on A at 4th, catch basin on Walnut at Wiley. abandoned manhole on Grant above No. Main , and the new parking lot approach on Water St, at B. . .Total tons: 31 .35. Hauled from "B" Street yard : Sweeper pile to dump, boulders to granite pit, old asphalt to re-cycle yard and concrete to concrete pit. STORM DRAINS: Flushed and/or rodded several storm drain systems. Cleaned off catch basins. Cleaned out catch basins. Completed storm drain repair at 898 Glendower: Project included replacin 52 ft. of 24 in. pipe, installing 2 maintenance manholes, using 28. 5 yards of slurry back-fill and 5 yards concrete. 249 Wimer St. flooding problem: Installed a new catch basin , 40 ft. of 12 in'. P.V.C. pipeand tied the new line into existing basin . Used 1 yard of concrete for catch basins and 6 yards of slurry for back-fill . So. Mountain above Ivy Ln . flooding problem: Installed a new catch basin , 8 ft. of 12 in . P.V.C. pipe, a 90 degree bend to tie into an existing catch basin. Used 1 . 5 yards of concrete for catch basin and 1 .-:.yard of slurry for .back-fill . _. Locate and expose the storm drain on No. Pioneer at "A" St. for the Engineering Division . . Heavy rains on March 9 caused considerable flooding of the R/R ditch ,...; west of Walker Ave. and north of the tracks. We filled in' the T. I .D. ditch that went under the tracks (20 yards 3/4 minus) and. cleaned the , ,,.regular ditch of blackberries. _._.. ..._ Took water samples at our granite pit for testing . . _- Cleaned the ditch on Glenview above Hillcrest. Y .Repair wash-out on. Glenview at Terrace. I _ ;_Abandoned the manhole on Grant St. above No. Main due to storm drain . project: Removed the ring and lid and prepared it for patching: . ., ' SIGNS and PAINT: Continued painting: Stop bars and cross-walks around the schools and all along "B" St. . -_r Re-set stop sign post on Sheridan at No. Main . Replaced faded bicycle stop sign on Wightman at R/R tracks. : .Straightened street. sign post-on Hush at No. Main . w Replaced street sign on Mary Jane at Siskiyou. Replaced Re-Cycle Center directional sign on Water St. at Van Ness. Removed all but one 30 minute parking signs and painted the curb gray on the east side. of 8th below E. Main . Install "NO OUTLET" sign and post on Washington off "66" . Replace street sign on Nevada at Cambridge. Replace street sign on Nyla at Westwood . Straightened sign post on Manzanita at No. Main . Install 3 "NO PARKING THIS SIDE OF STREET" on Wimer between No. Main and High Sts. . Extended all sign posts on the north side of E. Main from R/R tracks .-to Walker Ave. . Installed 2 "NO PARKING" signs on the gate at Hitt Rd . and Strawberry. Replaced street sign on Terrace at Loop Rd . . Installed "STOP SIGNS" on "B" Street on both sides of No. Pioneer making this intersection a "4 WAY" stop. Below all 4 stop signs, we installed 6"x.1211 114-WAY" signs. Also painted all 4 cross-walks and all 4 stop bars. Painted a "ONE WAY" arrow on Will Dodge Way exiting Harrison' s parking lot. Painted new curb on Water St. from B St. to new wall at the bridge. Painted curb yellow on both sides of Wimer from No. Main to High Sts. . Painted 30 ft. of new curb yellow on the east side of Walker at R/R. . Repaired the stop sign on Coolidge at No. Main . MISC. : Sand-blasted , oiled , stacked and covered our concrete forms. Re-located the fence at our pipe yard on Glenview Dr. cleared more blackberries to enlarge the open area next to the pipe yard, and . .hauled in 90 more yards . of granite. Removed graffiti from the R/R bridge on Water St. . Entire crew attended CPR classes. .Cleaned up open shed at ."B" St. yard. Removed a tree stump from Glenview Dr. above Granite St. . Cleared Westwood of a fallen tree. Removed the driveway approach to the lower parking lot on Water St. , on the creek side, opposite B St. , to straighten out the curb line. Re- poured the_ approach; .and poured, 67„ ft.. of-, new curb and gutter with a . section driveway. lay down. to the new wall on the Water St. bridge. This project created a small parking. area (2.•or 3, cars) which we covered with 3/4 minus rock' with_ a_smal l berm__ along ,tl e creek . Placed 3 temporary. stop; signs at '!99” andt, "'66", due to traffic-' signal , • problems. Picked them;up after- problem was -resolved . !` Held 'a "Asphalt; Grind ng" dembnstration_`- by_ Hessei Tractor at our re- cyle. yard . . We furnished_ the loa_de_r, _operator- a_ nd,>asphalt and came out . with about 50 yards of ground-up asphalt in ,3 hours._ A ; big plus for us. Helped,; Mike Biondi and crewAo move furniture • Hel ed in s h o ... ,-1 } z Cleaned., up equip ment°and facilities n w o :a, eelely basis: Held monthl safet City of Ashland Fleet Maintenance March 1995 Report 3 mechanics completed<work on 120 work orders on -various types of City equipment and vehicles. ' wit he new numbering, system ,in. effect, work" orders will no longer be-;' reporE ed. on -an indiLidual.';department or division" basis. The emergency generators at City Hall and the Civic Center were" manualI Y. tested. on a week ly.-basis.r• £.M certific - ° ates issuedz,for the month I and t , ' Cityrof Ashland: 1 , x.;. y April 13 , 1995 M E M O R A N D U M y TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator SUBJECT: Monthly Report - March 1995 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 1995-96. I . PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES: 1. Participated in Anniversary Show at RVTV. 2 . Met with Tim Bewley, Pete Belecastro and Steve Hall regarding proposed 30-minute video of WWTP options. 3 . Met with Jill Turner, Peggy C. , and Keith Woodley to review proposed budget for wildfire fuels reduction. 4 . Met with Chuck Root, manager of BCVSA, and Steve Hall to discuss methodology for SDC's in connection with the "Medford option" . 5. Met with Ron Bolstad of SOSC to discuss options for City acquisition of 40 acre "Perrozi Tract" . 6. Attended quarterly board meetings of OMECA and OMEU in Salem. 7 . Attended Governor' s Worker Safety award banquet at Portland Convention Center along with Bob Nelson, to receive award for the City of Ashland (We were the only municipality to receive an award) . 1 8. While in Salem for OMEU meeting, met with Senator Hannon and Rep. Uherbelau to discuss N.Main/Maple signal light and other legislative issues. 9. Met with Sharon Laws, Peggy C. and Gary Afseth regarding schematic of proposed expansion of Senior Center. 10. Met with Councilor Winthrop and Peggy C. on salary study issues. 11. Spoke at Saturday seminar sponsored by the League of Oregon Cities for newly-elected officials on their duties as councilors. 12 . Met with County Administrator Burke Raymond regarding their participation in cable access. 13 . Attended monthly Board of Directors meeting of the Chamber of Commerce. 14 . Met with Ron Roth concerning WWTP issues. 15. Attended luncheon with School District board members, Superintendent, and Park Board members, to discuss feasibility of joint acquisition of school/park sites. 16. Participated in conference call arranged with Rep. Uherbelau, State Highway officials, Councilor Hagen and Hospital Admin. Watson to discuss N.Main/Maple project and traffic light. 17. Attended monthly meeting of SOREDI at Grants Pass city hall. 18. Met with Jill Hamilton of the Oregon Restaurant Assn. regarding member concerns about the administration of the prepared food and beverage tax and related issues. 19 . Delivered budget message at first meeting of Citizens Budget Committee. 20. Met with Councilor Hagen on a variety of issues. 21. Attended meeting at Police Department conference room along with Councilor Winthrop to discuss camping on city streets and continuing problems with transients. 22 . Attended bid opening for Water Filter Plant upgrade project. 23 . Completed Jill Turner' s annual evaluation. 2 a 24 . Met with Chuck Wiley regarding vacation of utility easement on his property. .a. 25. Met with Parks and Street personnel to finalize plan for landscaping in island in front of Fire Sta. l. 26. Met with Tim Bewley and Steve Hall to finalize script for WWTP options video. 27 . Met with Councilor d park officialseregardingmjointg the Hauck to previous week with school and school/park acquisitions. 28 . Met with Gene Morris of Hillah Temple regarding upcoming - appraisal of the property. 29 . Met with Councilors Laws and Hauck on various issues. 30. Attended Capt. Daymon Barnard's retirement party and presented retirement certificate on behalf of Mayor and Council. 31. Was in Washington D.C. for a week of appointments with 28 members of Congress on Public rower issues. Mainctopicss debt included t BPAIS interest rest rates, salmon recovery, the Clinton at current interest rates, and Administration's proposal to sell BPA and the other PMA's, government corporation status for BPA. STATUS OF VARIOUS CITY PROJECTS: m 1. Electric Substation. BPA Administrator Hardy other officials joined the Mayor, a dedication ceremony on April 13 . 2 . Open Space Proaram. We have made an offer to the owner of the granite pit above Lithia Park but because ance State f other had the commitments have decided to hold thisbut they realize the Perrozi Tract appraised at $600, 000, difficulty of locating 25 potential homesites in the interface. Since this is not a high priority of the Parks Commission we will probably also delay pursuing this until decisions on other properties are resolved. Ken Mickelson and I are having a Beagle property on N.Mountain Avenue appraised as a p possible school/park acquisition. The costs are being shared with the District. 3 . Capital Im rovement Plan. We are still planning to make a public presentation on the overall plan some time this Spring. 3 I III. STATUS OF 1995-96 COUNCIL GOALS: 1. Resolve the funding issue for wildfire fuels reduction. Included in 1995-96 Proposed Budget. 2 . Commit to an ongoing matching grant program for LID sidewalk construction in existing neighborhoods, not to exceed $30, 000 per year. This is included in the 1995-96 Budget. A committee including the Mayor, Councilor Hauck and Hagen met on April 12 to develop a process to publicize the availability of this matching program. They have recommended a city match of 25%. This match would also apply to the TPAC sidewalk priority list, which has an additional $20, 000 appropriated. 3 . Prepare plan of options for reduction of dependence on electric utility revenues. Staff has programmed a retreat on April 26 to begin to develop options for Council consideration. 4 . Resolve office building/space needs issue. Planning Director MacLaughlin presented a cost analysis at the March 21 Council meeting. M.A. Z. appraiser Evan Archerd is preparing appraisal report on the Hillah Temple, which should take about 30 days. 5 . Develop and implement a citizen/government communication program which includes citizen input. Staff will begin working on this after July 1. NOTES TO STAFF: 1. Research the costs and feasibility of building a physical model of the City for demonstration purposes. 2 . Following TPAC adoption of the transportation plan, Staff is to cost out the various "traffic calming" recommendations and to report to the Council . 3 . Complete Management Compensation Study and present to Council prior to 1995-96 salary recommendations. 4 . Place on future Council agenda , Councilor Thompson's proposal of declaring Ashland a "Multi-modal City" and installing appropriate signage. 5. The Council concurred with Councilor Law's proposal to hold quarterly meetings with the Planning Commission to review one or more Comprehensive Plan elements. 6. The Council agreed to bring up Councilor Thompson's idea of showing off Ashland/Talent products or services using economic 4 development grant monies to the Chamber, during the Budget Subcommittee presentation by the Chamber. 7 . Investigate the cost and feasibility of setting up a store front for "green products", e.g. energy efficient lighting items, phosphate-free dishwasher detergent, etc. s� rian L. Almquist City Administrato BA:ba 5 Contents of Record for Ashland Planning Action 94-095 REQUEST TO AMEND THE PROCEDURES CHAPTER 18.108 OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE; RECONCILING OTHER SECTIONS OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE AND THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO THESE AMENDMENTS; AMENDING THE VARIANCE CRITERIA AND OTHER SECTIONS IN THE LAND USE ORDINANCE; AND REPEALING RESOLUTIONS 78-38 AND 88-20. APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND Proposed Ordinance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 Planning Commission minutes 6/26/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 [ r ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROCEDURES CHAPTER OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE; RECONCILING OTHER SECTIONS OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE AND THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO THESE AMENDMENTS; AMENDING THE VARIANCE CRITERIA AND OTHER SECTIONS IN THE LAND USE ORDINANCE; AND REPEALING RESOLUTIONS 78-38 AND 88-20 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 18.108 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended in its entirety to read: Chapter 18.108 PROCEDURES Sections: 18.108.010 Purpose 18.108.015 Pre-application Conference 18.108.017 Applications 18.108.020 Types of Procedures 18.108.022 Ministerial Actions 18.108.030 Staff Permit Procedure 18.108.040 Type I Procedure 18.108.050 Type II Procedure 18.108.060 Type III Procedure 18.108.070 Effective Date of Decision 18.108.080. Public Notice 18.108.100 Public Hearings 18.108.110 Appeal to Council 18.108.140 Fees 18.108.150 Council or Commission May Initiate Actions 18.108.160 Ordinance Interpretations 18.108.170 Legislative Amendments 18.108.180 Resubmittal of Applications 18.108.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures to initiate and make final decisions regarding planning actions. 18.108.015 Pre-Application Conference. An applicant shall request a pre-application conference prior to submitting an application for a Type I, II or III planning action. The purpose of the conference shall be to acquaint the applicant with the substantive and procedural requirements of the Land Use Ordinance, provide for an exchange of information regarding applicable elements of the comprehensive plan and development PAGE 1-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:plenning\code\rev-108e.ano)[Aupust 8, 19941 1 requirements and to identify policies and regulations that create opportunities or pose significant constraints for the proposed development. 18.108.017 Applications. A. In order to initiate a planning action, five-thraCcopies of ..:............. a complete application shall be submitted to the Planning Department. 1. Complete applications shall include: All of the required information for the specific action requested, Q Written findings of fact, G-' Complete and signed application form;N "I"h..#i cepprj rttUSt„b signed by one or more property owners, , of the property for which the planning action is requested; cr their,`aUtt001,�d g rttS, a , TiIt2 aplailG�tEcr} shall_nqt bt?ct�nsldered cQrnpfeit unless tt is accornpn d lay the appropriate application fee. 2. Incomplete applications are subject to delay in accordance with ORS 227.178. The City will inform the applicant of deficiencies within 30 days of application. The applicant then has 31 days in which to provide a complete application When the application is deemed complete, or at the end of the 31 day period, the City will begin the appropriate application procedure. B. All applicants for Types I, II and III planning actions shall have completed a pre- application conference for the project within a 6-month time period preceding the filing of the application. This requirement may be waived by the Staff Advisor if in the Staff Advisor's opinion the information to be gathered in a pre-application conference already exists in the final application. 18.108.020 Types of Procedures. A. , fnis :i Acttc The Staff Advisor shall have the authority to review and approve or deny the following matters which shall be ministerial actions: 1. Final subdivision plat approval. (18.80.050) 2. Final partition map approval. (18.76.120) 4. Minor amendments to subdivisions and partitions. 5. Boundary line adjustments. (18.76.140) 6. Zoning permits. (18.112.010) 7. Sign permits. (18.96.050) 8. Home occupation permits. (18.94.130) B. P1rirlirjtia3is3 All planning actions shall be subject to processing by one of the four following procedures: 1. Staff Permit Procedure 2. Type I Procedure 3. Type II Procedure 4. Type III Procedure C. a islafwe rfei t3 ... Legislative amendments shall be subject to the procedures established in section 18.108.170. PAGE 2-TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1P:pla nning\ooda\rav-108a.ano1[A000ac B. 19941 Z. 18.108.022 Ministerial Actions,T L.....t_ A. Within 21 days after accepting an application for a ministerial action nthe Staff Advisor shall deny or approve the application unless such time limitation is extended with the consent of the applicant. The Staff Advisor shall not accept applications which cannot be acted upon initially in a rational manner within seven days of receipt unless the applicant consents to a longer period for action. B. Within such 21 day period the Staff Advisor shall issue the permit or approval or advise the applicant that the application has been denied. 18.108.030 Staff Permit Procedure. A. X&[i rs f tcCtJt aC! , The following planning actions shall be subject to the Staff Permit Procedure: 1. Site Review for two or three residential units on a single lot. 2. Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permits as allowed in Chapter 18.62. 3. Variances described in Section 18.70.060. 4. Site Reviews in C-1, E-1, HC and M zones for expansions of an existing use that do not require new building area in excess of 2,500 square feet, or modification of more than 10% of the area of the site. 5. Extension of time limits for approved planning actions. Two extensions of up to 12 months each may be approved under the following conditions: a. A change of conditions, for which the applicant was not responsible, prevented the applicant from completing the development within the original time limitation, and b. Land Use Ordinance requirements applicable to the development have not changed since the original approval. An extension may be granted, however, if requirements have changed and the applicant agrees to comply with any such changes. 6. The.following developments subject to the Site Design and Use Standards in section 18.72.040.A: a. Any change of occupancy from a less intensive to a more intensive occupancy, as defined in the City building code, or any change in use which requires a greater number of parking spaces. b. Any addition less than 2,500 square feet or ten percent of the building's square footage, whichever is less, to a building. c. All installations of mechanical equipment in any zone. d. Installation of disc antennas subject to the requirements of Section 18.72.160. Any disc antenna for commercial use in a residential zone shall also be subject to a Conditional Use Permit (18.104). e. Any exterior change to a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 7. Any other planning action designated as subject to the Staff Permit Procedure. 8. Other planning actions not otherwise listed or designated as a Type I, II or III procedure. PAGE 3-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (o:ote nninekcodelrev-108e.ano)[Auoust 9. 1994] 3 B. Staff PeFMi} PFeee ' L Ets; Not d ica an Tune Hearir�c� R�q€�irerr�ents. Applications subject to the Staff Permit Procedure shall be processed as follows: 1. Within 14 days after receipt of a complete application the Staff Advisor shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the application unless such time limitation is extended with the consent of the applicant. The Staff Advisor shall enter findings and conclusions to justify the decision. 2. Notice of the decision shall be mailed within seven days of the decision. The notice shall contain the following information: a. The decision of the Staff Advisor and the date of the decision. b. That no public hearing will be held unless specifically requested. c. That a request for a public hearing must be made by the date indicated on the notice in order for a public hearing to be scheduled. d. That a request for a public hearing shall include the name and address of the person requesting the public hearing, the file number of the planning action and the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 3. Notice shall be mailed to the following persons: a. The applicant, or authorized agent. b. The subject property owner. c. All owners of record of property on the most recent property tax assessment roll within the notice area defined as that area within 100 feet of the subject property. 4. Persons to whom the notice is mailed shall have 10 days from the date of mailing in which to request a public hearing. Requests for a public hearing shall meet the following requirements: a. The request shall be filed by the date specified in the notice of decision. b. The request shall be in writing and include the appellant's name, address, the file number of the planning action and the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable criteria or procedural irregularity.. 5. If a request for a public hearing is timely received, a public hearing shall be scheduled for the next regular Commission or Hearings Board meeting allowing adequate time to meet the notice requirements of section 18.108.080. The public hearing shall be in accord with the requirements of section 18.108.100. 18.108.040 Type I Procedure. A. #etict lrcltt The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type I Procedure: 1. Final Plan Approval for Performance Standards Subdivisions. 2. Site Reviews other than those subject to a Staff Permit Procedure or Type II Procedure. 3. Partitions which require no variances or only variances subject to Type 1 procedures." 4. Amendments to conditions of approval. 5. Creation of a private way, as allowed in section 18.80.030.B. 6. Conditional Use Permits involving existing structures or additions to existing structures, and not involving more than 3 residential dwelling units, or temporary uses. PAGE 4-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:planninp\eode%rev-108a.ano)[Auouet 8, 19941 x I 7. Variances for: a. Sign placement. b. Non-conforming signs, when bringing them into conformance as described in section 18.96.130.D. c. Up to 50% reduction of standard yard requirements. d. Parking in setback areas. e. Up to 10% reduction in the number of required parking spaces. f. Up to 10% reduction in the required minimum lot area. g. Up to 10% increase in the maximum lot coverage percentage. h. Up to 20% reduction in lot width or lot depth requirements. L Up to 50% reduction for parking requirements in Ashland's Historic District as described in section 18.92.055. j. Up to 10% variance on height, width, depth, length or other dimension not otherwise listed in this section. k. Site Design and Use Standards as provided in section 18.72.090. 8. The following developments subject to the Site Design and Use Standards in section 18.72.040.8: a. Any change in use of a lot from one general use category to another general use category, e.g., from residential to commercial, as defined by the zoning regulations of this Code. b. Any residential use which results in four dwelling units or more on a lot. c. All new structures or additions greater than 2,500 square feet, except for developments included in section 18.108.030.A.6. 9. Any other planning action designated as subject to the Type I Procedure. pl Applications B. �e RFesedure TlTie Lttfti Nt 1 subject to the Type I Procedure shall be processed as follows: 1. Complete applications shall be reviewed at the first regularly scheduled Commission meeting which is held at least 30 days after the submission of the complete application. 2. Within 14 days after receipt of a complete application, the Staff Advisor shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the application unless such time limitation is extended with the consent of the applicant. The Staff Advisor shall enter findings and conclusions to justify the decision. 3. Notice of the decision shall be mailed within seven days of the decision to the persons described in section 18.108.030.B.3. The notice shall contain the information required in section 18.108.030.B.2 plus a statement that unless a public hearing is requested, the action will be reviewed by the Commission. Persons to whom the notice is mailed shall have 10 days from the date of mailing in which to request a public hearing before the Commission. Requests for a public hearing shall conform to the requirements of section 18.108.030.B.4. 4. If a request for a public hearing is timely received, a public hearing shall be scheduled for the next regular Commission or Hearings Board meeting allowing adequate time to comply with the notice requirements of section 18.108.080. The public hearing shall be in accord with the requirements of section 18.108.100. PAGE 5-TITLE 18.108 REVISION Ip:pl annin01eode1rev-198a.anei[Aupust S. 19941 5. If no request for a public hearing is timely received, the decision shall be reviewed by the Commission or Hearings Board at its first regularly scheduled meeting 30 days after submission of the application. The Commission or Board may: a. Amend the decision; in such case, the action shall be re-noticed as a Type I decision, with a 7-day period within which to request a public hearing, except that the Commission shall not review the decision again should there be no such request filed. b. Initiate a public hearing of the decision, through a majority vote of those in attendance, to be heard at the following month's regularly scheduled Commission or Board meeting. c. Take no action at the meeting when the decision is scheduled on the agenda. In such case the decision is final the next day. 6. Prior to the Staff Advisor making a decision, applicants or the 5fafi#Adv€sor may request, , planning actions subject to a Type I procedure be heard by the Commission or Board. In such case, the Staff Advisor shall not make a decision and shall schedule a hearing before the Commissiofl_ or Board to be heard as provided in section 18.108.040.8.4. 18.108.050 Type II Procedure A fo I.hdtu�ded< The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type II Procedure: 1. All Conditional Use Permits not subject to a Type I procedure. 2. All variances not subject to the Type I procedure. 3. Outline Plan for subdivisions under the Performance Standard Options (AMC Chapter 18.88). 4. Preliminary Plat for subdivisions under the standard subdivision code (AMC Chapter 18.80). 5. Final Plan approval for all subdivision requests under the Performance Standard Options not requiring Outline Plan approval. 6. Any public hearing of a Staff decision resulting from the Staff Permit Procedure. 7. Any other-planning action designated as subject to the Type II Procedure. B. e H-Rfeeedt+rejiQ#rerc } ear_rr .)3e` .: Applications M1 0 subject to the Type II Procedure shall be processed as follows: 1. Complete applications shall be heard at the first regularly scheduled Commission meeting which is held at least 30 days after the submission of the complete application. 2. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed as provided in section 18.108.080. 3. Public hearing shall be held before the Commission in accord with the requirements of section 18.108.100. 18.108.060 Type III Procedure. A. The following planning actions shall subject to the Type III Procedure: 1. Zone Changes or Amendments to the Zoning M g 9 apA��rthet' pt��in�ps }3LIK,S.:ettw <tFie�; n��,3SE3aC;� aYt�e. , < xrxxuc�? 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Changes . PAGE 6-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:of anningloode%rev-108a.mo)[Auoust e. 19941 6 3. Annexations. 4. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments. B. Standards for Type III Planning Actions. 1. Zone changes, amendments to the zoning map or comprehensive plan map changes may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and one of the following conditions exist: a. A public need, supported by the Comprehensive Plan. b. The need to correct mistakes. c. The need to adjust to new conditions. d. Where circumstances relating to the general public welfare require such an action. 2. Annexations shall be subject to the criteria of chapter 18.106. 3. Urban growth boundary amendments shall be subject to the criteria contained in the Urban Growth Boundary Agreement between the.City of Ashland and Jackson County. C. Type III Procedure. 1. Applications subject to the Type III Procedure shall be processed as follows: a. Complete applications shall be heard at the first regularly scheduled Commission meeting which is held at least 45 days after the submission of the application. b. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed as provided in section 18.108.080. c. A public hearing shall be held before the Commission as provided in section 18.108.100. 2. For planning actions described in section 18.108.060.B.1, the Commission shall have the authority to take such action as is necessary to make the amendments to maps and zones as a result of the decision without further action from the Council unless the decision is appealed. The decision of the Commission may be appealed to the Council as provided in section 18.108.110. 3. For planning actions described in section 18.108.060.B.2 and 3, the Commission, within 45 days after the public hearing, shall make a report of its findings and recommendations on the proposed action. Such report shall be forwarded to the City Council within 45 days of the public hearing. a. Upon receipt of the report, or within 60 days of the Commission hearing, the Council shall hold a public hearing as provided in section 18.108.100. Public notice of such hearing shall be sent as provided in section 18.108.080. b. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. 18.108.070 Effective Date of Decision. A. Ministerial actions are effective on the date of the decision of the Staff Advisor and are not subject to appeal. B. Actions subject to appeal: 1. Staff Permit Decisions. Unless a request for a public hearing is made, the final decision of the City for planning actions resulting from the Staff Permit procedure PAGE 7-TITLE 18.108 REVISION Ip:plenninp\code\rev-108e.enol[Auoust 8, 19941 7 shall be the Staff Advisor decision, which shall be effective ten days after the date of decision. If heard by the Commission or Board, the Commission or Board decision shall be the final decision of the City on such matters, effective 15 days after the findings adopted by the Commission are signed by the Chair of the Commission and mailed to the parties. 2. Type I Planning Procedure. Unless a request for a public hearing is made, the final decision of the City for planning actions resulting from the Type I Planning Procedure shall be the Staff Advisor decision, effective on the day after the decision is scheduled to be reviewed by the Commission or Board. If a public hearing is held by the Commission or Board, the decision of the Commission or Board shall be the final decision of the City, effective when the findings adopted by the Commission or Board are signed by the Chair of the Commission or Board and mailed to the parties. 3. Type II Planning Actions. The decision of the Commission is the final decision of the City resulting from the Type II Planning Procedure, effective when the findings adopted by the Commission are signed by the Chair of the Commission and mailed to the parties. ALTERNATIVE SECTION (Note - This alternative also requires an amendment to 18.108.110.): ' [3. Type 11 Planning Actions. The decision of the Commission is the final decision of the City resulting from the Type ll Planning Procedure, effective when the findings adopted by the Commission are signed by the Chair of the Commission and mailed to the parties, unless appealed to the Council as provided in section 18.108.1 10A. The final decision shall be effective 15 days after the findings adopted by the Commission are signed by the Chair of the Commission and mailed to the parties. The decision of the Council shall be the final decision of the City on appeals heard by the Council, effective the day the findings adopted by the Council are signed by the Mayor and mailed to the parties.] 4. Type III Planning Actions. For planning actions described in section 18.108:060.8.1, the decision of the Commission shall be the final decision of the City resulting from the Type III Planning Procedure, unless appealed to the Council as provided in section 18.108.110.A. The final decision shall be effective 15 days after the findings adopted by the Commission are signed by the Chair of the Commission and mailed to the parties. The decision of the Council shall be the final decision of the City on appeals heard by the Council, effective the day the findings adopted by the Council are signed by the Mayor and mailed to the parties. For planning actions described in section 18.108.060.8.2 and 3, the decision of the Council shall be the final decision of the City, effective the day the findings adopted by the Council are signed by the Mayor and mailed to the parties. C. No building or zoning permit shall be issued for any action under this Title until the decision is final, as defined in this section. PAGE 8-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:Pig,ninQXcoaekrev-108e.ano)[Auouat 8. 19941 5 18.108.080 Public Notice. Public notice for hearings before the Hearings Board or Commission for planning actions shall be given as follows: A. Notices shall be mailed at least 20 days prior to the hearing to: 1. The applicant or authorized agent, 2. The subject property owner, and 3. All owners of record of property on the most recent property tax assessment roll within 200 feet of the subject property unless the hearing has been requested under the Staff Permit procedure. In such case the notice shall be mailed only to owners within 100 feet of the subject property. B: Mailed notices shall contain the following information, provided, however, that notices for hearings before the Council shall not contain the statements specified in paragraphs 8 and 9: 1. Explanation of the nature of the application and the proposed use or uses which could be authorized. 2. List of the applicable criteria from the ordinance and the plan that apply to the application at issue. 3. The street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property. 4. The name of a local government representative to contact and the telephone number where additional information may be obtained. 5. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost. 6. The date, time and location of the hearing or of the meeting, if no hearing is involved. 7. A statement that failure of an issue to be raised in a hearing, in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) based on that issue. 8. A statement that if additional documents or evidence is provided in support of the application, any party shall be entitled to a continuance of the hearing. 9. A statement that unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. C. Posted Notice. Except for Staff Permit Procedure planning actions, a notice, as described in this subsection, shall be posted on the subject property by the applicant in such a manner as to be clearly visible from a public right-of-way at least 20 days prior to the date of the Commission meeting. Failure by the applicant to post a notice, or post in clear view from a public right-of-way shall be considered an incomplete application. The applicant shall certify, for the record of the hearing, that the posting was accomplished. The failure of the posted notice to remain on the property shall not invalidate the proceedings. The posted notice shall only contain the following information: planning action number, brief description of the proposal, phone number and address for contact at Ashland Planning Department. PAGE 9-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:plennino\eodekev-10ee.wo)[Aucust e. 19941 9 D. Additional Requirements for Type II and III Public Notice. In addition to the notice specified in section 18.108.080.A, B and C, notice for Type II and III procedures shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing before the Commission. E. The failure of a property owner to receive notice as provided in this section shall not invalidate such proceedings if the City can demonstrate by affidavit that such notice was mailed. The failure to receive notice shall not invalidate the decision after the action is final if a good faith attempt was made to notify all persons entitled to receive notice. 18.108.100 Public Hearings Procedure. A. At the commencement of a public hearing before the Board or Commission to consider a planning action or before the Council to consider planning actions described in section 18.108.060.6, a statement shall be made to those in attendance that: 1. Lists the applicable substantive criteria. 2. States that testimony and evidence must be directed toward the listed applicable substantive criteria, or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or Land Use Ordinance which the person believes to apply to the decision. 3. States that failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to LUBA based on that issue. 4. States that failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally.or in writing, precludes appeal to LUBA. 5. States the presentation and rebuttal time limits for the applicant, proponents, and opponents. 6. Other general rules of conduct for the public hearing as deemed necessary by the Board or Commission. B. After the statement required by section 18.108.100.A is made, the Commission members shall declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest and any ex parte contacts including the substance of those contacts and any conclusions the member reached because of those contacts. 1. No member shall serve on any proceeding in which such member has an actual conflict of interest; in which the member, or those persons or businesses described in ORS 227.035, has a direct or substantial financial interest; or in which the member is biased. If a member refuses to disqualify him or herself, the Board, for hearings before the Board or the Commission, for hearings before the Commission, shall have the power to remove such member for that proceeding. 2. All parties shall be advised that they have the right to rebut the substance of any ex parte communications. C. At such public hearing, after receipt of public testimony, the Board or Commission may approve, approve with conditions or deny the request. The Board or Commission may also continue the public hearing to the next meeting to allow for the submittal of additional information for consideration in the decision. At the public PAGE 10-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:aiannine�cod<kr<v-109e.mo)[Auemc 9. 19941 /0 hearing, the date, time, and location for the continuance of the public hearing shall be stated. After such statement, no additional public notice shall be required. D. A majority of those members present at the public hearing must vote affirmatively in order to adopt findings. 18.108.110 Appeal to Council A. Appeals of Type III decisions described in section 18.108.060.13.1 shall be initiated by a notice of appeal filed with the City Administrator. The standard Appeal Fee shall be required as part of the notice. Failure to pay the Appeal Fee at the time the appeal is filed is a jurisdictional defect. ALTERNATIVE SECTION (Note - This alternative is to be used only if the alternative to 18.108.070.B.3 is adopted.): [A. Appeals of Type II decisions or Type Ill decisions described in section 18.108.060.B.1 shall be initiated by a notice of appeal filed with the City Administrator. The standard Appeal Fee shall be required as part of the notice. Failure to pay the Appeal Fee at the time the appeal is filed is a Jurisdictional defect.] 1. The appeal shall be filed prior to the effective date of the decision of the Commission. 2. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 3. Any party not filing a notice of appeal, may file a notice of cross- appeal within ten days after the notice of the appeal is mailed as provided in section . 18.108.110.A.4. The notice of cross-appeal shall contain those matters required in a notice of appeal. The party filing a notice of appeal shall mail a copy of such notice to all other parties. 4. The notice of appeal, together with notice of the date, time and place of the hearing on the appeal by the Council shall be mailed to the parties at least 20 days prior to the hearing. 5. The appeal shall be a de novo review of the record made before the Commission limited to the grounds stated in the notice, if the appeal was initiated by such notice, and in the notice of cross-appeal, if any. 6. The Council may affirm, reverse or modify the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. The Council may remand the matter if it is satisfied that testimony or other evidence could not have been presented at the hearing below. In deciding such remand, the Council shall consider and make findings and conclusions respecting: PAGE 11-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (a:c[annfnpkodelrev-10ee.wo[[Augu:t 8, 19941 a. Prejudice to parties; b. Convenience or availability of evidence at the time of the initial hearing; c. Surprise to opposing parties; d. Date notice was given to other parties as to an attempt to admit; and e. The competency, relevancy and materiality of the proposed testimony or other evidence. D. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the planning action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following: 1. The applicant. 2. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing. Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council 3. The Council, by majority vote. 4. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to error. 18.108.140 Fees. Fees for applications under this Title shall be set by resolution of the Council. 18.108.150 Council or Commission May Initiate Procedures. The Commission or Council may initiate any Staff Permit, Type I, Type II, or Type III planning action by motion duly adopted by the respective body designating the appropriate city department to complete and file the application. 18.108.160 Ordinance Interpretations. A. When in the administration of the Land Use Ordinance there is doubt regarding its intent, the suitability of uses not specified or the meaning of a word or phrase, the Staff Advisor may interpret the provision in writing or refer the provision to the Commission for interpretation. The Commission shall issue an interpretation in writing to resolve the doubt. Neither the Staff Advisor's interpretation nor the Commission's shall have the effect of amending the provisions of the Land Use Ordinance. Any interpretation of the Land Use Ordinance shall be based on the following considerations: 1. The comprehensive plan; 2. The purpose and intent of the Land Use Ordinance as applied to the particular section in question; and 3. The opinion of the City Attorney. B. The interpretation of the Staff Advisor shall be forwarded to the Commission who shall have the authority to modify the interpretation. The interpretation of the Commission shall be forwarded to the Council. Whenever such an interpretation is of general public interest, copies of such interpretation shall be made available for public distribution. PAGE 12-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:planninelcod<trev-108e.ano)[August a, 19941 / L 18.108.170 Legislative amendments. A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance in order to conform with the comprehensive plan that Fnay be adopted 8F amended-, or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions. An amendment to the text of the Land Use Ordinance is, as is original zoning, a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. An amendment to the text of the Land Use Ordinance may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, and within thirty days after the hearing, recommend to the Council, approval, disapproval, or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee. D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment, the Commission shall hold a public hearing. After receipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment. Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for an amendment to the text of the Land Use Ordinance shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of.such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if, in the opinion of the Commission, new evidence or a change.of circumstances warrant it: 18.108.180 Resubmittal of Applications. In case an application is denied by the Commission, or denied by the Council on appeal, unless that denial is specifically stated to be without prejudice, it shall not be eligible for resubmittal for one year from the date of the denial, unless evidence is submitted that conditions, the application, or the project design have changed to an extent that further consideration is warranted. SECTION 2. Section 18.08.345 is added to the Ashland Municipal Code: 18.08.345. Legislative amendment. An amendment to the text of the land use ordinance or the comprehensive plan or an amendment of the zoning map or comprehensive plan map for land involving numerous parcels under diverse ownerships. SECTION 3. Section 18.08.487 is added to the Ashland Municipal Code: 18.108.487 Minor amendment. An amendment to a subdivision or partition PAGE 13-TITLE 18.108 REVISION tv:pl ennin6\codelrev-10$e.e„euA„o„et s, 19941 /3 plat that: A. Does not increase the number of lots or parcels created by the subdivision or partition; B. Does not enlarge the boundaries of subdivided or partitioned area; C. Does not change the general location or amount of land devoted to a specific land use; or D. Makes only minor shifting of the established lines, location or size of buildings or building envelopes, proposed public or private streets, pedestrian ways, utility easements, parks or other public open spaces. SECTION 4. Section 18.08.595 is added to the Ashland Municipal Code: 18.08.595. Planning action. A proceeding pursuant to this ordinance in which the legal rights, duties or privileges of specific parties are determined, and any appeal or review of such proceeding, pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance. A planning action does not include a ministerial action or a legislative amendment. SECTION 5. Section 18.08.870 is added to the Ashland Municipal Code: 18.08.870. Zoningl2ermit. An acknowledgement made to the Building Official by the Staff Advisor that the application for a building permit meets the requirements of the Land Use Ordinance. Where applicable a zoning permit may also set forth any special conditions to be met by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or any other planning and zoning related conditions to be enforced by the Building Official. SECTION 6. Chapter 18.106 is added to the Ashland Municipal Code as follows: Chapter 18.106 ANNEXATIONS Sections: 18.106.010 Procedure 18.106.020 Application 18.106.030 Approval Standards 18.106.040 Boundaries 18.106.050 Statutory Procedure 18.106.060 Procedure 18.106.010 Procedure. All annexations shall be processed under the PAGE 14-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:al.nninglcodolrov-108a.mo)[Auoust e, 19941 14 Type III procedure. 18.106.020 Application. Application for annexation shall include the following information: A. Consent to annexation which is non-revokable for a period of one year from its date. B. Agreement to pay system development annexation charges as required by AMC 4.16.010. C. Agreement to deposit an amount sufficient to retire any outstanding indebtedness of Public Service Districts defined in ORS 222.510. D. Boundary description and map prepared in accordancg with ORS 308.225. Such description and map be prepared by a registered land surveyor. The boundaries shall be surveyed and monumented as required by ORS subsequent to Council approval of the proposed annexation. 18.108.065 E. Written findings addressing the criteria in 18.108.0650. 18.106.030 Approval standards. The following findings shall be required for approval of an annexation to the City of Ashland: A. That the land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary. B. That the proposed zoning and project are in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. C. That the land is contiguous with the City Limits. D. That adequate City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. E. That a public need for additional land, as defined in the City's Comprehensive Plan, can be demonstrated; or 1. That the proposed lot or lots shall be residentially zoned under the City's Comprehensive Plan and that the applicant has agreed to provide 25% of the proposed residential units at affordable levels, in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council. Such agreement to be filed as part of the initial application and completed and accepted by all parties prior to the final adoption of the ordinance annexing the property; or 2. That the proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 under the City's Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request or within one year of the PAGE 15-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:of.ninekcaaek,ev-ioee.mo)(Auaust e, 19941 /S annexation hearing and prior to the final adoption of the ordinance annexing the property: Failure to obtain subsequent site review approval shall invalidate any previous annexation approval; or 3. That a current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services; or 4. That the existing development in the County has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or 5. That the area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or 6. That the lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. 18.106.040 Boundaries. When an annexation is initiated by S pOvate individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City of Ashland. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Commission and Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Planning Commission and Council to make annexations extending the City's boundaries more logical and orderly. 18.106.050 Statutory procedure. The applicant for the annexation shall also declare which procedure under ORS 222 the applicant proposes that the Council use, and supply evidence that the approval through this procedure is likely. NOTE: THE ABOVE SECTIONS ARE EITHER ENTIRELY REVISED OR HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE EXISTING CODE. THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS ARE ANNOTATED TO SHOW DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING CODE. DELETIONS ARE "N€94HROUGK AND ADDITIONS ARE SF#AD1 p. SECTION 5. Section 2.14.050 of the Ashland Municipal Code is deleted. SECTION 6. Section 18.08.130 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 18.08.130 Commission. The Planning Commission eF HeaFiAgS Bee f the City. PAGE 16-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:planning%codeXrav108a.ano)[August 8. 19941 SECTION 7. Section 18.100.020.B of the Ashland Municipal Code is deleted and the remaining sections shall be renumbered accordingly. 18.100.020 Application. The owner or his agent may make application with the Staff Advisor. Such application shall be accompanied by a legal description of the property and plans and elevations necessary to show the proposed development. Also to be included with such application shall be a statement and evidence showing that all of the following circumstances exist: A. That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. G$. That the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. D . That the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. SECTION 8. Section 18.04.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 18.04.020 Purpose. The purpose of this Title is to encourage the most appropriate use of land; to promote orderly growth; to provide adequate open space for light and air; to conserve and stabilize the value of property; to protect and improve the aesthetic and visual qualities of the living environment; to aid in securing safety from fire and other dangers; to facilitate adequate provisions for maintaining sanitary conditions; to provide for adequate access to property; and in general to promote the public health, safety and the general welfare, all of which is in accordance with and in implementation of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Ashland. Race; ecaY , rsitglrxE,„sexr. 8xal ar�antat�an; �t�at�ar arG=��r��ryc�isttb�ly sh�IC x�at��F��a�d+r�rse caris��eratiarr +iti making art}f riectstci�Ai�rt'der a iand t)se f3rdinanee� SECTION 9. The first sentence in section 18.62.040.E of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: E. Criteria for approval. A Physical Constraints Review Permit shall be issued by the Hears Offieer;;fit fE Ctit E701 when the Applicant demonstrates the following: SECTION 10. Section 15.04.090 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 15.04.090 Building Permits Generally. Permits shall be obtained as required by the specialty codes. General contractors shall obtain all permits for a given PAGE 17-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:pl ennino\cudekrav-108e.mol[Aucun e. 19941 17 job at one time. No building permit that would result in the construction of new structures, or the enlargement or change in use of existing structures shall be issued prior to the presentation of an approved plaaair�g ast�ea zt3itinc permit t0 the Building Official by the applicant. Such z£thg rtttxhall be issued by the Planning Director, or a designee, and shall verify that the contemplated project is in accord with all applicable zoning and planning regulations. It shall also set forth any special conditions to be met by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or any other planning and zoning related conditions to be enforced by the Building Official. The issuance and continued validity of any building permit issued by the City of Ashland shall be contingent on compliance by the applicant with all applicable city, county, state, or other regulations. On properties or in areas designated to be of significant historical value or interest applications for building permits, not requiring review by the Planning Commission pursuant to Title 18 of the Municipal Code, shall be referred to the Ashland Historic Commission for review and recommendations, who shall have a period of time not to exceed seven days to complete such review and recommendations. SECTION 11. Section 18.70.080.0 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 18.70.080 Hearing Procedure. A. The Staff Advisor shall send notice of the hearing on the permit application to the applicant and to all persons originally notified of the Solar Access Permit application, and shall otherwise follow the procedures for a Type I hearing. B. The Staff Advisor shall consider the matters required for applications set forth in Section 18.70.070(B) on which the applicant shall bear the burden of proof, and the following factor on which the objector shall bear the burden of proof: A showing by the objector that the proposed collector would unreasonably restrict the planting of vegetation on presently under-developed property. 1. If the objector is unable to prove these circumstances and the applicant makes the showings required by Section 18.70.060(B), the Staff Advisor shall approve the permit. 2. If the applicant has failed to show all structures or vegetation shading of the proposed collector location in his application, the Staff Advisor may approve the permit while adding the omitted shading structures or vegetation as exemptions from this Chapter. 3. If the objector shows that an unconditional approval of the application would unreasonably restrict development of the objector's presently under-developed property, the Staff Advisor may approve the permit, adding such exemptions as are necessary to allow for reasonable development of the objector's property. 4. If the Staff Advisor finds that the application contains inaccurate information which substantially affects the enforcement of the Solar Access Permit, the application shall be denied. PAGE 18-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (a:cianninokccdabav-108a.mo)(Auoust 8, 19941 18 C. Any decision by the Staff Advisor FRay be appealed te s sU U. , [to f [dvfthe Planning Commission and the Gity Geuneil as a Type II planning action according to the usual procedures contained in this Title. SECTION 12. Section 18.104.070 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 18.104.070 Revocation: Abandonment. Unless a longer period is specifically allowed by the approval authority, any conditional use permit approved under this section, including any declared phase, shall be deemed revoked if the proposed use or phase is not developed id within one year of the date of approval WW`- fiC phgse Sheli niit 1P8 Ct�rt9lC ft d :-Q 110 nceti iir ti the; perrriittes� has at..... y t2lned a bi dtlirtg permit and Gorrtmer#ced s±anstrt�trticrn oi',# as artuati corsnencsd t#te cbttctljiortat fuse ort the prt3iiiis If the permit requires site design approval under Chapter 18.72, the'permit shall be deem revoked if the use or phase is not developed within one year of the date of site design approval. A conditional use is deemed void if discontinued or abandoned for a period of six consecutive months. SECTION 13. Section 18.70.060.13 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: B. a-A variance may be granted with the following findings being the sole facts considered by the Staff Advisor: 1. That the owner or owners of all property to be shaded, sign and record with the County Clerk on the affected properties' deed, a release form supplied by the City, which contains the following information: a. The signatures of all owners or registered leaseholders who hold an interest in the property in question. b. A statement that the waiver applies only to the specific building or buildings to which the waiver is granted. c. A statement that the solar access guaranteed by this Section is waived for that particular structure and the City is held harmless for any damages resulting from the waiver. d. A description and drawing of the shading which would occur, and 2. The Staff Advisor finds that: a. The variance does not preclude the reasonable use of solar energy on the site by future buildings; and b. The variance does not diminish any substantial solar access which benefits a habitable structure on an adjacent lot. T er are c nlgiJe str P-s., wh dit. P. pfy to tl its «> . str�> ir c�a asst�pgy��p�1y�scv+w�er�� PAGE 19-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:P1 enning%cede%rev-108e.eno)[Auausc s, 19941 �9 SECTION 14. Section 18.68.090.A of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: A. A non-conforming use or structure may not be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, substituted, or structurally altered, except as follows: 1. When authorized in accordance with the same procedure as provided in Conditional Use Chapter 18.104, a nonconforming use may be changed to one of the same or a more restricted nature. 2. When authorized in accordance with the same procedure as provided in Conditional Use Chapter 18.104, an existing building, structure land may be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or structurally altered, except that a Conditional Use Permit need not be obtained to enlarge or extend a single-family home in the residential district, provided that the addition or extension meets all requirements of this Title. � �1 �pi1 G`cirtft?l'�tf'tg SttC.ft,ll'�33'ts"ij+� � �@4f, �`,&GO�'1StctJ.Gf��O�' str�ctu�a��r altered tftts fou�rirtt rs nof-c�tao�ed�r�.sl2e�c�rsttape SECTION 15. Resolution 78-38 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ADOPTING LAND USE HEARING RULES FOR CONDUCT OF QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION' and resolution 88-20 entitled "A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE LAND-USE HEARING RULES ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION 78-38" are repealed. PAGE 20-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (v:plenninglcodekrev-108e.eoo)[Auoust s, 19941 20 Bingham asked if any discussion ever came up about a road in 1978. Dion responded that there was discussion. She believes it would be in everyone's best interest to get a street dedication. Staff will provide Robertson with a list of items he should submit. Robertson said he would waive his 120 time limitation and agreed to continue the hearing to July 12, 1994. Carr moved to continue PA94-092 for completion of the file for the July 12, 1994 hearing. In the event the applicant cannot meet the deadline of July 1, 1994 for submission of materials, the hearing will be continued to the regular August meeting. Powell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Powell left the meeting. Thompson returned to the meeting. PLANNING ACTION 94-050 REQUEST FOR A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND. SECTION 18.08.300 AND ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER TO THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO HOME OCCUPATIONS. APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF REPORT Everything that has been discussed prior to this hearing has been included in the packet. A draft application is in the packet. Cloer moved to approve PA94-050. Carr seconded the motion and it was approved with Hibbert abstaining. PLANNING ACTION 94-095 REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT OF PROCEDURES CHAPTER (18.108); MODIFICATIONS TO OTHER SECTIONS OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE; AND AMENDMENT OF VARIANCE CRITERIA (18.100). APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND The shaded areas in the ordinance are the changes for which the Commission has asked. Please note the alternative sections (Page 8 and 11). Carr moved not to use the alternative sections. Hibbert seconded the motion and all favored. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 6 REGULAR MEETING JUNE 2%1994 MINUTES CARR MOVED TO CONTINUE THE MEETING UNTIL 10:15 P.M. ARMITAGE SECONDED AND ALL FAVORED. Carr moved and the motion was seconded to recommend approve of the ordinance changes to the City Council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. /ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 7 REGULAR MEETING JUNE?B,1994 MINUTES � �'•`.�:. C � � YYCIIr {A 1'i � 44 YYI of ASAf °4fcoa ' April 18, 1995 �11D� Brian Almquist, City Administrator r ram Steven Hall, Public Works Director ,�$1ThjEtl11: Public Hearing - Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant ACTION REQUESTED None, information only. DISCUSSION Attached is information on a public hearing to be held on Tuesday, May 16, 1995, at the Jackson County Auditorium, 100 South Oakdale in Medford. Hearing is in reference to Ashland's ability to meet the requirements of the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and Department of Environmental Quality. The hearing is on the issue of allowing Ashland to discharge into Ashland and Bear Creeks in accordance with the Mutual Agreement and Order approved by the City Council. Another item at the hearing is the non-point source management plan developed through RVCOG. I plan on attending the hearing. Unfortunately, the hearing is on a regular City Council meeting date. The hearing before the EQC in Portland is tentatively scheduled for July 7, 1995 which I plan to attend. cc: Gary Schrodt, Ashland Wetlands Coalition Nancy Abelle, Ashland Clean Air Coalition Klaas Van de Pol, League of Women Voters Ron Roth (0pwlmaohwg.m=) n� i . APR 14 1995 �U I O(°cJCR O!` >�>i: H R ,® ., ,_:,. CJXY.QFASHLAND I Proposed Commission Authorization for Continued Discharges into Water of ! the Bear Creek Subbasin (Rogue River Basin) with Specified Conditions Notice Issued: April 13, 1995 Public Hearings: May 16, 1995 Written Comment Due: May 19, 1995 WHO IS AFFECTED: The City of Ashland, Boise Cascade Corporation, the cities of Talent, Phoenix, Central Point, Medford and Jacksonville, Jackson County, persons engaged in agricultural activity and citizens interested in the quality of Bear Creek and its tributaries. WHAT IS PROPOSED: This is not a proposal to adopt.or amend a rule, but rather a proposal related to the implementation of an existing rule. The proposal includes: 1. To revise the 1993 Bear Creek Nonpoint Source Management Implementation and Compliance Schedule; 2. To authorize the City of Ashland Sewage Treatment Plant (Ashland STP) to continue the discharge of wastewaters into Ashland Creek, a tributary to Bear Creek, with conditions; and 3. To authorize the Boise Cascade Corporation North Medford Plywood Mill (Boise) to continue logpond discharges into Elk Creek, a tributary to Bear Creek, with conditions. WHAT ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS: The proposals allow the parties affected by the Bear Creek Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDLs) requirements to continue their activities and discharges without being in violation of OAR 340-41-385, which states that no activities or discharges may occur after December 31, 1994 that cause the O IFOR FURTHER INFORMATION: 811 S.W.6th Avenue Portland,OR 97204 Contact the person or division identified in the public notice by calling 229-5696 in the Portland area.To avoid long distance charges from other parts of the state,call 1-800-452-4011. it/t/a6 TMDLs to be exceeded. The proposals allow additional time for the permitted sources and the ' Designated Management Agencies (DMAs) for nonpoint sources to comply with the TMDL requirements. In addition, the proposal adopts a revised Implementation and Compliance Schedule for the DMAs and directs the point source requirements to be implemented via permits and Mutual Agreement and Orders issues by the Department. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: DEQ will hold a public hearing: When:May 16, 1995 Where: Jackson County Auditorium 100 S. Oakdale, Medford Time: 7:00 pm Anyone wishing to be heard, or listen to the discussion, should arrive at the beginning of the hearing. Written comments must be received by 5 p.m. on May 19, 1995 at the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Western Region, 201 W. Mail Street, Suite 2-D, Medford, Oregon 97501 to be included in the official record. HOW TO GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you would like additional information, you may contact Gary Arnold or Jon Gasik at (503) 776-6010 in DEQ's Western Region Office in Medford, or Debra Sturdevant at (503) 229-6691 in the Water Quality Division in Portland. You may also call toll free in Oregon 1-800-452- 4011. Persons with a hearing impairment can receive help by calling DEQ's TTY number at (503) 229-6993. The attached documents are also available for inspection between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday at the DEQ office in Portland and also at the DEQ regional office in Medford. Those needing to view or copy the documents in the DEQ offices should call one of the staff people listed in the paragraph above to make arrangements. SW\WC13\WC13391 . 5 - 2 - WHAT HAPPENS NEXT: After the conclusion of the public participation period, the permit will be issued as proposed, issued with modifications, or denied, depending on comments received during the public participation process. Interested parties can request to be notified of the final determination by writing or calling the Department at the above address. ACCOMMODATION OF DISABILITIES: (Only needed if there is a meeting or a hearing) In order to accommodate persons with physical disabilities, please notify the Department of any special physical or language accommodations you may need as far in advance of the meeting date as possible. To make these arrangements, contact Ed Sale by calling toll free within Oregon 1-800-452-4011 or (503) 229-5696. For the hearing impaired, the Department's TTY number is (503) 229-6993. ACCESSIBILITY INFORMATION: This publication is available in alternate format (e.g. large print, braille) upon request. Please contact Ed Sale in DEQ Public Affairs at (503) 229-5766.to request an alternate format. SW\WC13\WC13391 .'5 - 3 - EN\ HWNMENTAL Memorandumt Date: April 13, 1995 To: Interested and Affected Public Subject: Proposed Commission Authorization for Continued Discharges into waters of the Bear Creek subbasin (Rogue River Basin) with Specified Conditions This memorandum contains information on a proposal by the Department of Environmental Quality to adopt Commission Orders regarding the discharge of wastewaters by the City of Ashland Sewage Treatment Plant (Ashland STP) and the Boise Cascade Corporation North Medford Plywood Mill (Boise). The proposed Commission authorization is necessary to comply with OAR 340-41-385(1). This rule states that no discharges may occur after December 31, 1994 which will cause the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) to be dxceeded unless the program plan is modified or unless authorized by the Commission. December 31, 1994 has passed and the TMDLs continue to be exceeded. In addition, the City of Ashland submitted a draft program plan to the Department in 1989. The program plan was approved by the Environmental Quality Commission (Commission) as a component of the TMDL program for Bear Creek. The Ashland STP has not met the schedule of tasks outlined in their approved program plan. The MAO establishes a new schedule to replace that in the approved program plan. The Department, therefore, proposes that the Commission authorize continued discharge by the Ashland STP under the following conditions: 1. the Ashland STP complies with all permit conditions and limits, AND A4 •- : qN ?Accommodations for disabilities are available upon request by contacting the Public Affairs Office at (503)229-5317(voice)/ ,. (503)229-6993(TDD). sl l ,1N s xth .\ion e Portland. OR 97204-1.390 (;03) 2'_11-;606 TDD (303) 229-6993 Memo To: Interested and Affected Public April 13, 1995 Page 2 2. the Ashland STP complies with all provisions and schedules contained in their Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO) with the Department. The purpose of the MAO is to achieve compliance with the Total Maximum Daily Loads specified in OAR 340-41-385(1) in a reasonably expedient timeframe. Boise submitted a proposed program plan on May 22, 1991 for their North Medford Plywood Mill logpond discharge. In this plan, Boise proposed a modification of their assigned wasteload allocations (WLAs) and a discharge management plan which would meet the modified WLAs. The Department never formally responded to Boise's submittal and the program plan was never approved or rejected by the Commission. Boise is currently operating in compliance with the proposed discharge management plan and with their current permit. The Department, therefore, proposes that the Commission authorize continued discharge by Boise under the following conditions: 1. Boise complies with all limits and conditions in their existing permit or their renewed permit when that permit becomes effective; OR, if necessary, 2. Boise enters into a Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO) with the Department, complies with all the limits and conditions of their renewed permit as modified by the MOA, and complies with all provisions and schedules within.the MAO. The MAO will set out a schedule for obtaining compliance with the WLAs. What's in this Package? Attachments to this memorandum provide details on the proposal as follows: Attachment A Proposed Commission Order Regarding the City of Ashland STP Attachment B Proposed Commission Order Regarding the Boise Cascade Corporation North Medford Plywood Mill Attachment C The Mutual Agreement and Order for the Ashland STP. Attachment D Questions on Potential Justification for Differing from Federal Requirements Attachment IS Oregon Administrative Rule 340-441-385 Memo To: Interested and Affected Public April 13, 1995 Page 3 Hearing Process Details You are invited to review these materials and present written or oral comment in accordance with the following: Date: May 16, 1995 Time: 7:00 pm Place: Jackson County Auditorium, 100 S. Oakdale, Medford, OR Deadline for submittal of Written Comments: May 19, 1995, 5:00 pm Jonathan Gasik will be the Presiding Officer at this hearing. Following close of the public comment period, the Presiding Officer will prepare a report which summarizes the oral testimony presented and identifies written comments submitted. The Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) will receive a copy of the Presiding Officer's report and all written comments submitted. The public hearing will be tape recorded, but the tape will not be transcribed. If you wish to be kept advised of this proceeding and receive a copy of the recommendation that is presented to the EQC for adoption, you should request that your.name be placed on the mailing list for this rulemaking proposal. What Happens After the Public Comment Period Closes The Department will review and evaluate comments received, and prepare responses. Final recommendations will then be prepared, and scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC). The EQC will consider the Department's recommendation for rule adoption during one of their regularly scheduled public meetings. The targeted meeting date for consideration of this rulemaking proposal is July 7, 1995. This date may be delayed if needed to provide additional time for evaluation and response to testimony received in the hearing process. You will be notified of the time and place for final EQC action if you present oral testimony at the hearing or submit written comment during the comment period or ask to be notified of the proposed final action on this rulemaking proposal. The EQC expects testimony and comment on proposed rules to be presented during the hearing.process so that full consideration by the Department may occur before a final recommendation is made. The EQC may elect to receive comment during the meeting where the rule is considered for adoption; however, such comment will be limited to the effect of Memo To: Interested and Affected Public April 13, 1995 Page 4 changes made by the Department after the public comment period in response to testimony received. The EQC strongly encourages-people with concerns regarding the proposed rule to communicate those concerns to the Department at the earliest possible date so that an effort may be made to understand the issues and develop options for resolution where possible. Background on Development of the Proposed Implementation and Compliance Schedule What is the problem The purpose of the Bear Creek TMDLs, program plans and the MAO is to reduce pollution . loads to Bear Creek and its tributaries in order to achieve water quality standards and protect the beneficial uses of the stream. Water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, pH, ammonia and fecal bacteria have been exceeded. In addition, temperature and soil erosion are water quality concerns. The beneficial uses of the stream include fish and aquatic life, water contact recreation, irrigation and others. The problem is that the TMDL rule for the Bear Creek Basin (OAR 340-41-385) prohibits activities or discharges after December 31, 1994 that cause the TMDLs to be exceeded unless the program plan is modified or unless so authorized by the Commission. This proposal requests that Commission authorization. How does this proposal help solve the problem The proposed authorization solves the immediate problem by allowing wastewater discharge to continue after December 31, 1994 without violating OAR 340-41-385. Although the TMDLs are not yet being achieved, the rule allows activities to continue if so authorized by the Commission. In addition, this proposal provides additional time for completing tasks identified in the approved program plan. The proposed authorization to continue discharging is conditional. In the case of Ashland STP, the schedule in the MAO replaces the program plan schedule. In the case of Boise, the Department will review the program plan and Boise's request to modify their WLA. Then the Department will renew Boise's permit and, if necessary, issue an MAO. How are MAOs developed MAOs are developed by cooperation between DEQ regional staff and the permitted facilities. I Memo To: Interested and Affected Public April 13, 1995 Page 5 How does it affect the public regulated community, other agencies The proposed authorization and the revised schedules contained in the MAO will provide the Ashland STP and Boise additional time to comply with the tasks outline in their program plans and with their WLAs. This will make it easier for the regulated community to comply with the requirements and avoid enforcement actions. The action may delay compliance with the TMDL and water quality standards, prolonging the time during which beneficial uses may be at risk due to poor water quality. How does the proposal relate to federal requirements or adiacent state requirements Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and water quality standards are requirements of the federal Clean Water Act. The DEQ administers the Clean Water Act in Oregon on behalf of and in cooperation with the US Environmental Protection Agency. MAOs are a mechanism for implementing the TMDLs and obtaining compliance with permit limits and conditions and with water quality standards. How will the proposal be implemented The proposal is for authorization, with conditions, to continue discharges of wastewater after December 31, 1994 that cause the TMDLs to be exceeded. The conditions will be implemented through permits and MAOs. The permits and MAOs are implementation tool to ensure compliance with assigned wasteload allocations (WI-As). The MAO contains tasks and a schedule for implementation by the permitted facilities. DEQ staff in our Western Region will work with the permitted facilities to ensure that acceptable progress is being made and to provide technical assistance. In addition, the region staff will recommend when enforcement action is warranted. Are there time constraints There are no time constraints specified in federal law or state statute. The only time constraints are the December 31, 1994 deadline in the rule (OAR 340-41-385) and the schedule in the approved program plan, all of which have passed. Contact for more information If you would like more information on this rulemaking proposal, or would like to be added to the mailing list, please contact: Memo To: Interested and Affected Public April 13, 1995 Page 6 Debra Sturdevant or Jon Gasik ODEQ ODEQ, Western Region 811 SW 6th Ave. 201 W Main Street, Suite 2-13 Portland, OR 97204 Medford, OR 97501 (503) 229-6691 (503) 776-6010 Before the Environmental Quality Commission of the State of Oregon In the Matter of National Pollutant ) Discharge Elimination System Waste ) ORDER ALLOWING Discharge Permit No. 100862 issued ) CONTINUED DISCHARGE to the City of Ashland on ) INTO BEAR CREEK March 6, 1992 ) The Department of Environmental Quality has requested that the City of Ashland be allowed to continue discharges of wastewater from its sewage treatment facility into Ashland Creek which exceed their Waste Load Allocations (WLAs) and the standards specified in OAR 340-41-385 (1), provided that: 1. the discharge meets all permit limitations and conditions as modified by the Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO), AND that 2. the City complies with all provisions and schedules in the MAO. FINDINGS 1. City of Ashland owns and operates a municipal wastewater treatment plant in Jackson County. The treatment plant discharges into Ashland Creek about 1/4 mile upstream from the confluence with Bear Creek. 2. In 1989 the Environmental Quality Commission promulgated OAR 340-41-385 which set water quality standards within the Bear Creek subbasin and set a deadline of December 31, 1994 to meet these standards. The standards included Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) waste load allocations and required the City of Ashland to submit a program plan describing how and when they will modify their plant and/or operations to comply with these rules. 3. On September 21, 1990, the Environmental Quality Commission conditionally approved the proposed program plan submitted by the City of Ashland. This plan outlined a plan that would bring the City of Ashland into compliance by December 1996. Part of the approval was a requirement that a final facilities plan report be due on September 1, 1991. 4. On February 7, 1992, Stipulation and Final Order (SFO) number WQ-SWR-91-202 was issued to the City of Ashland because they could not meet the permit limitation for chlorine residual discharge. This Attachment A, Page 1 SFO also included the requirement that by September 1, 1992, the Permittee shall submit a complete facilities plan report for providing upgraded and expanded wastewater control as needed to: (a) meet the TMDL for Bear Creek (b) assure that any toxic impact of the Permittee's discharge of chlorine residual or any other toxic substance complies with OAR 340-41-965(2)(p) for toxic substances and OAR 340-41- 965(4) for mixing zones; and, (c) comply with state and federal sewage sludge management requirements. 5. Several extensions were granted through addenda to the SFO. 6. On February 6, 1995, because the City of Ashland could not meet the requirements of OAR 340-41-385 and the permit limitations on chlorine residual discharge, Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO) No. WQMW-WR-94-325 was issued to the City of Ashland. This MAO requires that the City of Ashland submit a final facilities plan by October 1, 1995 and commence with a Department approved schedule to upgrade the facilities. ORDER The request by the Department of Environmental Quality to allow the City of Ashland to continue discharges of wastewater from its sewage treatment facility into Ashland Creek which exceed the Waste Load Allocations (WLAs) and standards specified in OAR 340-41-385 (1), provided that: 1. the discharge meets all permit limitations and conditions as modified by the Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO), AND that 2. the City complies with all provisions and schedules in the MAO, is hereby granted. Dated this day of On behalf of the Commission --------------------------- Lydia Taylor, Director Department of Environmental Quality Attachment A, Page 2 BEFORE TIM E`+-1v'IRONM NTAL QUALITY COMMISSION 2 OF THE STATE OF OREGON 3 LN THE MATTER OF: ) MUTUAL AGREEMENT City of Ashland, ) AND ORDER 4 ) No. WQMW-WR-94-325 Permittee, ) JACKSON COUNTY 5 ' ) i 6 WIEREAS i 7 ; 1. On March 6, 1992.tbe Department of Environmental Quality (Department or 8 DEQ) issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number 9 100862 (Permit) to City of Ashland (Permittee). The Permit authorizes the Permittee to 10 construct, install, modify or operate a wastewater collection, treatment, control and disposal 11 system and discharge to public waters adequately treated wastewaters only from the 12 authorized discharge poir-t or points established in Schedule A and only in conformance with 13 the requirements, limitations and conditions set forth in the Permit. The expiration date on T4 the permit is December 31, 1994. The Permittee has trade a timely application for renewal 15 of the Permit. Pursuant to OAR '-240-45-040, the Permit shall not be deemed to expire until 16 final action has been taken on the renewal application to issue or deny the permit. 17 2. Prior to the issuance of the Permit, the Environmental Quality Commission 18 j (Commission) promulgated OAR 340-41-385 which set water quality standards within the 19 Bear Creek subbasin and set a deadline of December 31, 1994 to meet these standards. 20 I These standards included Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) waste load allocations. By 21 letter dated October 11, 1991, Permittee requested the extension of this date to December 31, 22 1995. DEQ did not grant this extension. 23 3. Paragraph 2.a of Schedule C of the Permit requires that by no later than 24 September 1, 1992, the Permittee shall submit to the Department a final facilities plan report 25 (FPR) for providing upgraded and expanded wastewater treatment facilities as needed to=et TMDL allocations, to comply with Oregon's water quality standard for chlorine residual and 27 PAGE 1 - MUMAL AGRE-DAENT AND ORDER (CASE N0. WQMW-WR-94325) 28 (FNF-PEiZ:rIAO 8-29-94) Attachment C 1 ; ammonia-nitrogen, and to comply with state and federal sewage sludge management I 21 requirements. 3 4. Stipulation and Final Order No. WQ-SWR-91-202 (SFO) was issued by the i 4 Commission to Permirtee on February 7, 1992. 5 5. Paragraph 10A of the SFO requires that by September 1, 1992, the Perminee 6 shall submit a complete facilities plan report for providing upgraded and expanded 7 j wastewater control as needed to: 8 (a) meet the TMDL for Bear Creek 9 (b) assure that any toxic impact of the Permirtee's discharge of chlorine residuai 10 or any other toxic substance complies with OAR 340-41-965(2)(p) for toxic substances and 11 OAR 340-41-965(4) for [nixing zones; and, 12 ! (c) comply with state and federal sewage sludge management requiremenu. 13 ; 6. On September 10, 1992, at the request of the Permittee, the Department issued 14 SFO addendum 1 which extended the compliance date to January 1, 1993. This extension 15 was granted to allow the Perminee time to completely evaluate the alternative of abandoning 16 the present treatment plant and connecting to the Medford wastewater treatment plant through 17 Bear Creek Sanitary Authority transmission facilities. 18 7. On December 29, 1992, again at the request of the Permirtee, the Deparmtent 19 ! issued SFO addendum 2 which extended the compliance date to July 1. 1993. This extension i 20 was granted to allow the Permute- time to completely evaluate the alternative of using a i 21 constructed wetland to produce an effluent that could be delivered to the Talent Irrigation 22 District (TID) in exchange for leaving flows in Bear Creek which during summer months 23 would otherwise be diverted to the TED canal. 24 8. On June 11, 1993, again at the request of the Permittee, Fred Hansen, the 25 Director of the Department of Environmental Quality (Director) at that time, issued a letter 26 i which extended the compliance date to July 30, 1993. i 271 - PAGE 2 - M=AL AGREMAF-NT AND ORDER (CASE NO. wQMW-WR-94-325) 78 (ENF-PER.MAO 8-29-94) 1 9. On August 31, 1993, the Director sent Perminee a letter which stated "I do not 2 intend to enforce the July 31, 1993 date for submittal of a facilities plan. I do expect to 3 j renegotiate the compliance schedule in the SFO at some time in the future, however." 4 10. Because of Permirtee's lack of a facilities plan and a constructed facility, i 5 Perminee is currently unable to comply with the Permit limitation for chlorine residual. i 6 j 11. Also because of Permittee's lack of a facilities plan and a constructed facility, 7 Permittee will be unable to comply with the TIvIDL discharge limitations referred to in 8 ! Paragraph 2 by the December 31, 1994 deadline. 9 i 12. The Department and Permittee recognize that until Permittee completes the 101 actions required by this ,l-futual Agreement and Order (NIAO), Permittee will violate the 11 Permit and Oregon law. Therefore, pursuant to ORS 183.415(5), the Department and 12 ! Permuittze wish to sersz t cse past vielaaors referred to in Paragraphs 3 through 10 and to i 13 ' limit and resolve the future violation. referred to in Paragraph 11 in advance by this '.LAO. 14 13. This MAO is not intended to limit, in any way, the Department's right to . 15 proceed against Permittee in any forum for any past or future violations not expressly sealed 16 herein. 17 NOW THEREFORE, it is stipulated and agreed that: 18 � 14. Time Environmental Quality Commission shall issue a final order which will 19 replace SFO WQ-S7,TR-91-202 and all addendum 20 A. Requiring Permiaee to comply with the following schedule: 21 (1) By August 1, 1995, the Permittee shall select a preferred option 22 for modifying the wastewater treatment facilities. 23 (2) By October 1, 1995, based on the selected option, the Permittee 24 shall submit for Department approval a complete facilities plan which will: (a) meet the TMI)L for Bear Creek: 26 (b) assure that any toxic impact of the Permittee's discharge of chlorine 27 PAGE 3 - MUTUAL AGREEMENT' AND ORDER (CASE NO. WQMW-WR-94-325) 28 (ENF-PER.I*tAO 8-29-94) p 1 i residual or any ocher toxic stbstances complies with OAR 340=41-965(2)(p) for toxic 2 ! substances and OAR 340-41-965(4) for mixing zones and; 3 (c) contain a proposed schedule for completing facilities modifications 4 and/or upgrades. 5 j B. Requiring Permirtee to, upon Department approval, commence with the 6 ; agreed upon plan referred to in Paragraph 14(.0(2) above apd complete construction of the 7 facilities in compliance with the agreed upon schedule referred to in Paragraph 14(A)(2)(c) 8 above. 9 ' C. Requiring Perminee to meet the following interim waste disc.arge 10 limitations for daily median chlorine residual concentration until Permirtee completes 11 construction of the facilities required by this MAO: 1^_ The chlorine residual concentration shall not exceed a daily median of 0.5 mg/l. 13 D. Requiring PerIn tree, upon receipt of a written notice from the Depar.:r..ent 14 for any violations of this MAO, to pay a civil penalty of 8100 for each day of each violation 15 of Paragraph 14.C. and $250 for each day of each violation of the schedule of compliance set 16 forth in Paragraph 14.A. and 14.B. 17 15. If any event occurs that is beyond Perminee's reasonable control and that causes 18 or may cause a delay or deviation in performance of the requirements of this MAO, 19 Perminee shall immediateiy notify the Department verbally of the cause of delay or deviation 20 and its anticipated duration, the measures that have been or will be taken to prevent or 21 minimise the delay or deviation, and the timetable by which Permittee proposes to carry out 2 such measures. Permittee shall confirm in writing this information within.five (5) working 23 days of the onset of the event. It is Perminee's responsibility in the written notification to 24 demonstrate to the Department's satisfaction that the delay or deviation has been or will be 25 caused by circumstances beyond the control and despite due diligence of Permittee. If 25 Permittee so demonstrates, the Department shall extend times of performance of related . 27 PAGE 4 - !vft71ZJAI- AGREEME*rI' AND ORDER (CASE N0. WQMW-wR-94-325) . 2g (ENF-PER ..MAO 8-29-94) activities under this MAO as appropriate. Circumstances or events beyond Permiree's 2 control include, but are not limited to acts.of nature, strikes, work stoppages or other labor 3 I difficulties experienced by the contractor, shortage or failure of supply of materials, labor, suppiies or transportation-to the conE-actor-,-fires or other casualty, 4 fuel, power, equipment, 5 explosion, riot, sabotage, or war.' Increased cost of performance or,consultant's failure to 6 provide timely reports may not be considered circumstances beyond Permittee's control. 7 16. Regarding the violations set forth in Paragraphs 3 through. 11 above, which are 8 expressly settled herein without penalty, Permittee and the Department hereby waive any and 9 all of their rights to any and all notices, hearing, judicial review, and to service of a copy of 10 the final MAO herein. The Department reserves the right to enforce this MAO through 11 appropriate administrative and judicial proceedings. 12 17. The terms of :his MAO may be amended by the mutual agreement of the 3 Department and Permince. ti 18. This MAO shall be binding on the parties and their respective successors, 0 agents, and assigns. The undersigned representative of each parry certifies that he or she is 16 fully authorized to execute and bind such parry to this MAO. No change in ownership or 17I corporate or partnership status relating to the facility shall in any way alter Permittee's 18 obligations under this MAO, unless otherwise approved in writing by DEQ. 19 19. All reports, notices and other communications required under or relating to this 20 MAO should be directed to Mr. Jonathan Gasik, DEQ Medford Office, 201 W. Main Street, 21 Medford, Oregon 97501; phone number (503) 776-6010 x230. The contact person for 22 Permitter shall be Mr. Steven M. Hall, Public Works Director, City Hall, Ashland, Oregon 23 97520. 24 20. Permittee acknowledges that it has actual notice of the contents and requirements 25 of the MAO and that failure to fulfill any of the requiremetirs hereof would constitute a violation of this MAO and subject Permittee to payment of civil penalties pursuant to 27 PAGE 5 - MUIVAL AGREEMENT AND ORDER (CASE NO. WQMw-WR-94-325) '. 28 (ENF-PEP.MAO 8-19-94) 1 Paragraph 14.D. above. 2 21. Any stipulated civil penalty imposed pursuant to Paragraph 14.D. shall be due I 3 upon written demand. Stipulated civil penalties shall be paid by check or money order made 4 j payable to the "Oregon State Treasurer" and sent to: Business Office, Department of 5 Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204. Within 21 days 6 of re`._ipt of a "Demand for Payment of Stipulated Civil Penalty" Notice from the 7 I Department, Permittee may request a hearing to contest the Demand Notice. If Permittee 8 contests the Demand Notice, the stipulated civil penalties shall not be due until a Final Order 9 j is issued. At any such hearing, the issue shall be limited to Permittee's compliance or non- 10 compliance with this 1L-�0. '?"he amount of each stipulated civil penalty for each violation 11 I and/or day of violation is established in advance by this MAO and shall not be a contestable 12 issue. 13 22. Providing Permirtee has paid in full all stipulated civil penalties pursuant to 14 Paragraph 21 above, this MAO shall terminate 60 days after Permittee demonstrates full 15 compliance with the requirements of the schedule set forth in Paragraph 14.A and 14.B. 161 above. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PAGE 6 - MUMAL AGRE`z"ff ' AND ORDER (CASE NO- WQMW-WR-94-325) (ENF-PER.MAO 5-29-94) 28 1 CITY OF ASHLAND 2 ' 1 i Steven M. Hall, P.E. 41 Date Public Works Director, City of Ashlznd i 5j 61 7 j DEPARn, 1E-NT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 8 9 -LydiA Taylor, Actini r—r 10 Date 11 12 FINAL. ORDER :3 14 IT IS SO ORDERED: 15 ENVLRONMENTAL QUALITY CONMSSION 16j I ' 17 ..-- 18 Date Lydia ayior, Actin; Director Department of Environmental Quality 19 I Pursuant to OAR 340-11-136(1) 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 PAGE 7 - MUTUAL AGREE. ff-N AND ORDER (CASE NO. WQMW-WR-94-325) (ENF-PER MAO 8-]9-94) 28 Questions to be Answered to Reveal Potential Justification for Differing from Federal Requirements. NOTE: The proposed Commission authorization is necessary due to a state rule and does not have a comparable federal regulation for comparison of stringency. Rather, it is a tool for implementing and achieving specific state rules adopted under federal requirements within the Clean Water Act. The questions are answered to the best of our ability given that they are not directly applicable to the proposal. !. Are there federal requirements that are applicable to this situation? If so, exactly what are they? The current proposal related to implementing a state TMDL and pertains to tools for ensuring that water quality standards and Total Maximum Daily Loads established for the basin are achieved. Water quality standards and total maximum daily loads are required under the federal Clean Water Act section 303 and EPA's Water Quality Planning and Management Regulation in 40 CFR Part 130. ?. Are the applicable federal requirements performance based, technology based, or both with the most stringent controlling? The total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) requirements are performance. based. In fact, TMDLs are used when the technology based standards alone are found to be insufficient to meet water quality standards in stream. 3. Do the applicable federal requirements specifically address the issues that are of concern in Oregon? Was data or information that would reasonably reflect Oregon's concern and situation considered in the federal process that established the federal requirements? The federal rules are procedural rules. They require the states to establish water quality standards and TMDLs, but leave it up to the State to establish the standards and TMDLs appropriate for our state and for specific basins or waterbodies within the state. TMDLs are always established for a particular waterbody, river segment or basin. 1. Will the proposed requirement improve the ability of the regulated community to comply in a more cost effective way by clarifying confusing or potentially conflicting requirements (within or cross- media), increasing certainty, or preventing or reducing the need for costly retrofit to meet more stringent requirements later? Attachment D, Page 1 The proposal will provide additional time for the regulated parties to meet their obligations under the TMDL rule. It should also reaffirm what is required of them. 5. Is there a timing issue which might justify changing the time frame for implementation of federal requirements? There is no federal timeline in rule for TMDL implementation. 5. Will the proposed requirement assist in establishing and maintaining a reasonable margin for accommodation of uncertainty and future growth? Most TMDLs include a reserve allocation for future growth and development. The specific proposal for authorization to continue wastewater discharges with conditions addresses only current point sources contributing to current violations of water quality standards. 7. Does the proposed requirement establish or maintain reasonable equity in the requirements for various sources? (level the playing field) The responsibilities vary according to the estimated level of contribution and the jurisdictional responsibilities -of the various sources. The proposal maintains reasonable equity in the sense that all contributors are asked to do their part to reduce pollutant loads, including permitted point sources and nonpoint sources, rather than requiring all the clean up by a few permitted sources. 4. Would others face increased costs if a more stringent rule is not enacted? If any particular source is not required to reduce their loads to Bear Creek, the other sources in the basin may be subject to further load reduction requirements and increased costs in order to ensure that the TMDLs and water quality standards are achieved. 9. Does the proposed requirement include procedural requirements, reporting or monitoring requirements that are different from applicable federal requirements? If so, Why? What is the "compelling reason"for different procedural, reporting or monitoring requirements? The proposed schedule amendments do not require procedures that are different from federal regulations. They require more specific procedures necessary to implement and achieve federal requirements. Attachment D, Page 2 10. Is demonstrated technology available to comply with the proposed requirement? Yes. 11. Will the proposed requirement contribute to the prevention ofpollution or address a potential problem and represent a more cost effective environmental gain? The TMDL requirements address a current existing problem, not a "potential" problem. They will, however, also contribute to the prevention of pollution. Attachment D, Page 3 OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES CHAPTER 340,DIVISION 41 —DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (d) Industrial cooling waters containing (3) Before October 21, 1989, the Ciirrty ofpAshlana ' t and siggnificant heat loads shall be subjected to shat schedule l describPinarthowtandrwhen the will offstream cooling or heat recovery prior discharge to public waters;' modify their sewerage facility to comply with this (e) Positive protection shall be provided to, rule and all other applicable rules regulating waste prevent bypassing of raw-or inadequately treated discharge efore Ma Y 25 1991, the industries Industrial wastes to any public waters; ( ) (f) Facilities shall be provided to prevent and ppermitted for log pond lsn, Cvm Cascade contain spills of potentially toxic or hazardous Co oration, Kogap g P y, materials and a positive program for containment Medford Corporation shall submit program laps to and cleanup of such spills should they occur shall the Department describing g how and w th thisyru e be developed and maintained. and all other applicable rules regulating waste Stat.Auth.:ORS Ch.468 discharge; Hist.:DEQ 128,f. &ef. 1-21.77 (5) Before June 1, 1992, Jackson County and the incorporated cities within the Bear Creek Special Policies and Guidelines subbasin shall submit to the Department a 34041.385 In order to improve water quality program plan for controlling urban runoff within within the Bear Creek subbasin to meet ex ing their respective jurisdictions to comply with these water quality standards for dissolved oxygen dd ppH the following special rules for total maximum (6) Before June 1, 1992, the Departments of y loads, waste load allocations, load allocations, Forestry and Agriculture shall submit to the pprogram plans are established. Department program plans for achieving spec ified and (1) After the completion of wastewater control load allocations of state and private forest lands facilities and program plans approved by the and agricultural lands respectively; Commission under this rule and no later than (7) Program plans shall be reviewed and December 31, 1994, unless otherwise modified by approved by the Commission. All proposed final program plans no activities shall be allowed and no program plans shall be subject to public comment wastewater shall be discharged to Bear Creek or its and hearing prior to consideration for approval by tributaries without the authorization of the the Commission. Commission that cause the following parameters to Star.Auth.:ORS 468.710&468.735 be exceeded in Bear Creek: Hist.: DEQ 17.1989, L & art. e(. 7-31-89; DEQ 40.19 00, f. Low-Flow Season &cert.et 11.15-90 �} Approximately -' May I through November 30' Willamette Basin In a mi Five-Day Ammonia Nitrogen Biochemical prmea Total Phosphorus Beneficial Water ITsa>9 to be Protected Nitrogen as N(mg/1) (Demand(mg(1)r as P.(mg/1) 340-41.442 Water quality in the Willamette River Basin (see Figures 1 and 7) shall be 0.25 3.0 0.08 managed to protect the recognized beneficial uses as indicated in Table S. High Flow Season Approximately Stat.A ORS Ch. 468 December I through April 30' Hist.: DEQ EQ 128,f.&ef. 1.21-77 Instream Five-Day Ammonia Nitrogen Biochemical Oxygen Water Quality Standards Not to be Exceeded 468.735 and Nitrogen as N(mg11) Demand(mg/1) Enforceable ble Pursuant to ORS 468.720, 468.90, 1.0 2.5 and 468.992) 340-41-445 (1) Notwithstanding the water 'As measured at the Valley view Road Sampling Site. For the quality standards contained below, the highest and purposes of waste load allocations, the biochemical oxygen best practicable treatment and/or control of wastes, demand is calculated m the ammonia concentration multiplied activities, and flows shall in every case be provided by 4.35 and added to the measured effluent biochemical oxygen so as to maintain dissolved oxygen and overall demand. water quality at the highest possible levels and 2Median value ae measured at the Kirtland Road sampling site. water temperatures, coliform bacteria concen- 'Precise dates for complying with this rule may be conditioned trations, dissolved chemical substances, toxic on physical conditions, such as flow and temperature, of the materials, radioactivity, turbidities' color, odor, and receiving stream and shall be specified in individual permits or other deleterious factors at the lowest possible . avmorandums of understanding issued by the Department levels. (2) No wastes shall be discharged and no (2) The Department shall before September 30 activities shall be conducted which either alone or 1990 distribute initial waste load and loan in combination with other wastes or activities will allocations to pois nt and nonpoint sources in the cause violation of the following standards in the j redistributed upon conclusion of the approved wat(a) Dissolved oiZr(DO): Basin program plans; (A) Multnomah Channel and main stem 1994) 28 - Div. 41 QKgY. ATTACHMENT E r I JOHN W. NICHOLSON 1515 GHEENMEAUOWS WAY March 7 , 1995 - ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 To the Mayor and City Council of Ashland , Oregon Re: AUDIT COMMITTEE The Council is urged to amend the "Audit Committee" resolution in accordance with the attached petition and to reactivate the audit committee. Why reactivate the audit committee? Reasons follow: 1 . The Council needs technical advice on audit management . The out- side auditor cannot be that advisor without jeopardizing his or her independence; if an auditor is not independent , his or her report is worthless . A committee that is independent of staff being audited is the Council ' s best source of advice . 2 . The Council should reassert control over audit management either directly or indirectly through an audit committee . If staff dominates audit management processes , there are risks that financial controls may be overridden by staff . 3 . Present audits for Ashland meet minimum legal requirements but do not provide adequate safeguards . All audits are not the same . An audit committee can evaluate the scope of present and pros- pective audit services . Determining audit scope is not a job for the staff being audited . 4. Independent economy and efficiency audits (performance audits ) should be routine procedures . Immunity from performance over- sight is not a sacrosanct right of the staff . 5 . An effectual audit committee can enhance public confidence in the City ' s government . The John and Jane Does of Ashland need a financial watchdog that has the support of the Council . 6. Present financial reporting by the City is not timely and does not meet citizen needs . An audit committee can help the Council set sound criteria for financial reporting to the public . 7. Any municipality can get into financial trouble. Financial mismanagement and abuses can arise in many ways . After a problem erupts , corrective action is hard and costly . An effective audit committee can be of constructive assistance in avoiding problems stemming from mismanagement or abuse. 8 . A strong audit committee should be viewed as a co-producer of solutions to accounting, auditing, and financial problems . (continued ) a "Audit Committee" Petition (continued ) If the Council does not reactivate the audit committee, the Council becomes, ipso facto, the equivalent of an audit committee. Can the Council take on those chores from a practical standpoint? The Council is urged to act soon on the petition . Plans for the fiscal 1995 audit should be made in the near future. , j Notes : (a ) Nothing in the foregoing should be interpreted as a criticism of Coopers S Lybrand ( the present outside auditor for the City) . They are doing the type of audit that they have been engaged to do. However , the scope of their audit services should be expanded . (b) Some City officials have pointed to a 1993 "cost" study and Government Finance Officers Association certificates as justifications for sticking with the "status quo" . The cost study had an objective of increasing taxes and user fees; it was not to strengthen financial controls . The GFOA certificates are a plus , but they are certificates as to the form of financial and budget reports . The GFOA does not delve into the substance behind the figures and does not provide audit assurances . Coo' Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P. 400 Country Club Read fe(ephona'(50.9) 4a5-1600 Suite 300 .facsimile Post Office Box 1600 general-.(5013) 334-4385 & Lybrand Eugene,Oregon 97440-1600 tax ' i+(503)'93Ty98s, a professional services firm April 11, 1995 Mr. Brian Almquist City Administrator City of Ashland 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Dear Mr. Almquist: As you requested, we have provided some information regarding audit committees, their organization, roles, responsibilities, structure and potential benefits. We have also provided some perspective on audit committees with which we have worked. ORGANIZATION As noted in Governmental Accounting Auditing and Financial Reportine, written by the Government Finance Officers Association, in recent years audit committees have become increasingly common in the public sector. The audit committee is a group of individuals appointed by the legislative body and is generally given responsibility for overseeing all aspects of - audit procurement and monitoring. The committee should have a written charter that clearly defines the committee's membership and terms of office, roles and responsibilities; relationship with management and external auditors; and frequency and timing of meetings. Although the committee's charter should set some boundries, the committee's duties and responsibilities need to be flexible enough to allow it to operate effectively. The committee should be large enough to represent a balance of viewpoints and experience, yet small enough to operate efficiently. Most committees are composed of three to five members. In most committees a majority of the members, if not all, are members of the governing board. To be effective, the committee must have access to the resources necessary for them to fulfill their duties. The resource most often needed is administrative support. Occasionally the committee may use additional resources such as outside specialists or consultants. 3 Normally, audit committees report their activities to the legislative body. Written reports generally provide a summary of committee activities and are often supplemented by the minutes of committee meetings. Ccopors A Lybrand Ll P.,a registered limited liability partnership,is a member firm of Coopers 8 Lybrand(International) 0 Mr. Brian Almquist April 11, 1995 Page Two An audit committee does not necessarily have to meet frequently to be effective. The number of meetings is influenced by the objectives established and the scope of committee activities. Normally, three or four meetings annually, corresponding to the major phases of the independent audit, will suffice. Committee meetings usually involve the Director of Finance and the external auditors, and other management as appropriate. In addition to the general meetings, the committee may also meet privately with management, and with the external auditors at least once during the year. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES As previously noted, audit committees are generally given responsibility for overseeing all aspects of audit procurement and monitoring. Additionally, audit committees may also play an important role in providing direction and guidance to management on issues involving all aspects of the internal control structure. A most important role of the audit committee is that of a communication link -- between the auditor and the legislative body and between the auditor and management. Effective committees generally perform the following duties: • Recommend the appointment of an independent auditor and review fee arrangements. • Review the proposed scope of the independent audit, e.g., the auditor's approach to evaluating the internal control structure and how that evaluation will affect the scope of the audit; the areas that will be emphasized in the audit and the approach the auditor plans to take; how information technology will be used, and whether computer security reviews will be performed; how any new professional or regulatory pronouncements will affect the audit; and the organization's financial reporting requirements and the auditor's timetable for meeting the organization's reporting deadlines. • Oversee financial reporting policies and practices. • Review the effectiveness of internal controls and provide recommendations for improvement as to the effectiveness and efficiency of operations, reliability of financial reporting, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. • Review financial statements and the results of the independent audit. • Review the selection of appropriate accounting policies and implementation of new pronouncements, and make recommendations. Mr. Brian Almquist April 11, 1995 Page Three • Review the communications from the independent auditor regarding deficiencies in controls or irregularities noted in the course of the audit. • Review the legal environment, including the status of any pending lawsuits and their potential effect on the organization's financial statements. • Review the organization's exposure to environmental liability and-;compliance with environmental laws. 1' • Review the extent of programs funded by federal and private sources and assess the organization's compliance with the related contractual terms. • Review controls over cash management and investment in new or unusual financial instruments. • Review contemplated changes in management information systems, as well as the adequacy of security for new systems. THE SUCCESSFUL COMMITTEE Members of the audit committee should generally have a background in business and familiarity with accounting practices and principles. A diverse outlook among members is also desirable, since a uniform point of view could lead to overemphasis in one direction. The number of years that members serve on the committee varies, depending on the nature of the community. Most committee members have terms of one year, with possible reappointment. If members are to serve longer terms, a program that evaluates their performance is especially important. Such evaluations should provide a mechanism for replacing members whose performance is not satisfactory. Independence is a key characteristic of an effective audit committee member. Members must be completely independent of management to insure that they act in the best interests of the legislative body and the citizenry. To maximize effectiveness, committee meeting attendees should be limited to those participants who are familiar with, or responsible for, the topics on the agenda. However, management, external auditors, and the legislative body should have direct and unrestricted access to the committee. I a Mr. Brian Almquist April 11, 1995 Page Four To be effective, audit committee members should be kept up to date on the basic issues facing the City. Management should provide the committee with periodic financial reviews and developments affecting financial reporting as promulgated by the standard setting bodies. POTENTIAL BENEFITS The primary benefit of an audit committee is that it is thought to enhance the independence of the external auditors. Additionally, the existence of the committee demonstrates that all parties with responsibility for reliable financial reporting -- management, the independent auditors, and the legislative body, are diligently carrying out their duties to the citizens. SOME PERSPECTIVES Coopers & Lybrand has had the experience of working with various "audit" committees associated with many of our governmental clients. These audit committees are often called by different names, and they may not all cover the full scope of roles and responsibilities as described earlier. Some seem to be more effective than others. However, generally they provide a useful communication link to the full legislative body, and provide an informal forum to discuss audit related matters in more depth. Inspite of their structural and organizational differences, the "successful" audit committees are comprised of individuals who are willing to actively participate in the process -- individuals who are truly committed to the purpose of the committee, and who are willing to invest a tremendous amount of self-study time to gain an understanding of the serious topics at hand so as to be knowledgeable, positive and proactive participants in the meetings themselves. We would be happy to provide you more material on audit committees if you feel it would be helpful. Very truly yours, G f)-11 Don R. Doe vg Enclosure RESOLUTION N0. 91- �G A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT, OBJECTIVES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MUNICIPAL AUDIT COMMITTEE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland, as follows: SECTION 1. municipal Audit Committee -- Established. There is hereby established a Municipal Audit Committee which shall consist of seven (7) voting members. The Committee may request the presence of any appointive City official (s) at its meetings. SECTION 2 . Term -- Vacancies. The voting members shall be appointed annually by the Mayor with confirmation by the City Council . The voting members shall include one member of the City Council, one member of the Parks & Recreation Commission, one member of the Hospital Board, one lay member of the Citizens Budget Committee, and three citizens at large positions. SECTION 3 . Quorum - Rules and Regulations. Four (4) voting members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum. At its first meeting each calendar year, the Committee shall elect a chair, a vice chair, . and a secretary, who shall hold office at the pleasure oP the Committee. The Committee shall establish rules for its meetings, and shall meet once during the planning stages of the audit, and at such other times as the Committee deems necessary. SECTION 4 . Mission. The mission of the Municipal Audit Committee is to advise and assist the uncil in meeting its ublic responsibilities for the accountability and- stewardship of p assets. The Committee should also advise and assist the Council in audit management processes, in ensuring that audit processes are independent in fact as well as in appearance, and in facilitating communications on financial matters between the Council, the external auditor, and the staff whose operations are being audited. SECTION 5. Responsibilities -- Generally. The responsibilities of the Committee are to establish and maintain continuing communications with the independent auditors, Finance Department and elected officials, with respect to: 1. Annual financial reports prepared by management. 2 . Scope and results of the .annual audit and related fees. 3 . The City' s accounting and financial reporting policies and practices. 4 . Adequacy and effectiveness of the system of internal accounting controls. 5 . Scope of other services per by the independent auditors. 6 . Evaluating the services provided by the independent auditors and recommending their retention, or when necessary, their termination and replacement. 7 . Approval of the request for proposals (RFP) for audit services, and assistance in soliciting participation by potential proposers. 8 . Evaluating the technical qualifications of proposing audit firms and making recommendations on auditor selection to the City Council . 9 . Any other matters relative to the audit or the government' s accounts and its financial affairs that the Committee, at its own discretion, deems necessary. SECTION 6 . Significant Accounting Policies -- Notification . City management s:a11 notify the Audit Committee of any of the following: 1 . The initial adoption of an accounting principle . 2 . Changes in accounting principles or their application. 3 . Accounting for unusual transactions. 4 . Accounting policies in matters where there is a lack of consensus on the appropriate accounting treatment. SECTION 7 . Reports. The Committee shall submit copies of its minutes to the City Council . Reports or recommendations of the Committee shall be considered advisory in nature and shall not be binding on the Mayor or City Council . SECTION 8 . Compensation. The voting members of the Committee shall receive no compensation for services rendered. SECTION 9 . Resolution No. 84-14 is hereby repealed . The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the day of 1991 . 0 Nan E. Franklin City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of zr- 1991. �- Catherine M. Golden Mayor VIRGINIA L. VOGEL Certified Public Accountant 550 Siskiyou Blvd. Ashland, OR 97520 (503) 482-2211 December 17, 1992 Cathy Golden, Mayor City of Ashland 20 E Main St Ashland OR 97520 Dear Cathy: My apologies for not attending the audit committee meeting. I didn' t wish to spread the flu germs and didn't know in advance that was enough of a nuisance to make that decision. I understand that there wasn't a quorum, that the audit report was satisfactory and accepted. I do agree that the audit committee hasn't been useful and that it would probably be expedient to abolish the committee. Sineerely, Virgi Certified Public Accountant VLV/djw B4 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL FRIDAY, APRIL 7, 1995 � o'On crp w'OONCm �Qd� � ammBc.� `D wC %opmnnn �C HoyPpr°oew 'm rn�HCC� moo wQw_ay n -r con nm < 'n cm w � � u �. omwrNp > > m _ � o o'3 .w-. o.�-.^ 0 '3 p _ 'm n ^•� lTio won n°' �°' n P°' � W 6j ^.��9� 9oco;�ac ywao� c < 2 m33'w9ww 6 °:g O- w O -1 O- 'J' .J w•"� C E. :� O c° ao � � �- .w�.. y ° 3a'3_ Nmw3 . > c o o awnp9 ° =:y a�w •°'v.�n^� cn �'9 nn.w, � � 3 ,'- A ` J `m = 34roo °_c,o •� T.cN C. ocm m-wo ?,wmm rao q £ Boa n ^ wm y i O ,ry �� n 7c aH HAC ° ao.=A-mi 9m wwOGO .+� �.� ^ ❑ K�°.� ma9w � o.is � o r� Fm3 � oo,_ � m � wwo cw � w°•�'-wc p' Om _3m ° w � °n nacv °c r"i� �+ 3 .^ 3 =.c Ewc 3yayo v°, . . -° 3w w � no'ww worm m� yc � a = i ^ �.a • .°, w 7'=rho -°r ^m o.y ° v;�.? yO •_N .fl vin9 O-,-m, nn 'r rr' ° m N -OOmm aww �_an -.1 ^c ynno n �o �w w ^n3c c-.c.o mn3`<. o w90^ off " mm �,o _� imp-, yacwOn 3 m wok ?aa ^.o m. H w = o "' �c,wNC noa> > o �Dn �� na`O�ca, � 3 � 9c_ o� y m Oc° m _9 m = ca mo•-:wn Nna ° mac. -• " " C° �. w9 °a.iono � o3 �' -. o•w -- �ww ,mn fan aFm3N E3 w ° wn -.c.o.'9 � I , o �moA mw �mN m ....9 N _._. 0 E' °' °'� ^ w w^c -r N'_'a io C n � 3 w n N'< ^-.o m c � '� m m -' r. C n c . p O Cl) cm ° nw � Mn Pom `-'. °ow`'�'.n aw c w a' < °c m m n w c° .°'c � o.ca °-' � n� E,^ t'_o� � �w we c°'� °:ww� � myy '-' ac. 3 'aacyC £ o c O ° °c Tlo m nomw.wy w^te.-. r. 3d �mmcr;�❑ �.� E.w COQ" -Cra w _ m � � eeey 3 �d �+ rem " w ° c° owa°c o.E'^ -°� 3 'o'cm ao �° � a^ov w°:... gmro o -"�ccOC'� ^ � H a w m 3, 5 O'^ na °moor'o °o ° m'° n _. E3y -°^rc3 anwo°_: � cm = OQ -r m m m o -r 6 O a 'J' m 0 m m -, VO O N m O m 9 E3 ["X 2 V n ig S n w ITS ` ncn > oc � ^ Orcc °' �(m 3 °c m :7?c � o C) ^ c m o y n y, o r C]vmiT= £ a wnowmnc wyoww -.3wwmZ8Sn� O >`<m mAa�irt n �'O EOnwm N .m., mwmv❑� yN3amioo='�' m o =a n N o '. m p 07 -'� w w xo g _ oom m -ow mao 3 El woa cmo �,3 '�mc c ��n° ^.�.>c 0 3 ... 0 ^� 3.y �yn � N. VJ m3 - � w3 wc . �, ffia �+� m" Wp� p � S e n in _ ° 'm Q w -� p ❑ N '. R.. ' X ' m m n m,< -' m i a . m" A`< o m�q� rmo ?-mi °e r:o < n n wn n C m ^^C^'o ^ ^' wymc ay » mc ..m nm � ^ win^g' w _m wemF=°-� x<. r°<Dwn = � o /�^`� ICJ 9 q N m a n m y ',�^ ^' y a 'moray .N- "' 0 7 l ) 1� �. <;o a '. '' 3a-�m° n�N �C ° n� N ° a `-'.ca 9... wn c .w, - a mw ' . wo C^n op_ -. m -- ... owN ommc moo. mw o.c awei " �y Ccw �e° mnmca�.o � A-ro o .- ^.om >> O�,?'m a39 ter`.'.,s-'.'m 3.3g ?:,o (p �\ Cam m 'r = - 3 -tO,H ? �.w wnNCC,oc °n - n °t p-' c3." �.� I"'1• � � c --om .fl3c., w w_ ww?'.a C, � w o ?' o ' m n _ 'w � 3mg.9 ioWo mw ;w , m mw � _?Nym^ r:� an o•5^°c° �� -� _� w'O 'w o.y.°� > > y mo3.-o x� = n fDOmmnmy ❑ n'r^ yo.w w3 wf0�m : n3 � mwo '' _ m 4° ^'JOmro N ,-xwwn w-'wo m , mao a-. o 0 m ? a < -,' n an..❑ �'<� _, (° '. CC N fOn .-.•e - c e n m N F:y _r7, ° ?'.- ^.n m: 3 w m mm 0 > > 3.ccyyow ,Mrwzw-- ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL April 12, 1995 TO: Mayor, Catherine Golden Ken Hagen Brent Thompson Susan Reid Rob Withrop Don Laws Steve Hauck FROM: James R Watson, Administrator RE: Request for Modified Bidding Pro cedure Ashland Community Hospital is preparing to begin a project that will expand and renovate the hospital's Emergency Department. It will be constructed of materials similar to the exisiting facility construction type. The addition consists of roughly 3,300 square feet and 4,300 square feet of renovation are anticipated. The construction costs are estimated to be in the range of$680,000. This project expands and renovates Ashland Community Hospital's Emergdircy Department, Ashland's primary trauma facility. Maintaining 24 hour operation of this critical community resource requires phased construction. To uphold life-safety requirements during the construction will require the selection of a General Contractor/Construction Manager(GC/CM)experienced in hospital construction. To ensure conformance to scheduling and project budgets the selection should occur prior to completion of construction documents. A.1. The modified bid approach does not substantially diminish competition. The hospital advertises the project openly and rates (GC/CM) bidders on their hospital construction qualifications and fixed percentage bid for Overhead and Profit as defined in the American Institute of Architects contract for construction(AIA201). The selected GC/CM subsequently solicits competitive bids by subcontractors and suppliers by advertising the project openly. A.2. The modified bid approach results in significant cost benefits to the Hospital. The GC/CM provides early input on cost-savings, constructability review, scheduling techniques to be included in the bid documents. These methods in turn reduce the construction timetable, disruption of Hospital operations (with associated loss of revenues and clients), and construction change orders by earlier planning of cost saving options and better decision making by Hospital, consultant and contractor representatives. 6.1 Selection methods for the GC/CM shall include: Definitive Ranking Of • Extent Of Experience With Hospital • Qualifications Of Key Project Personnel • References • Bonding Capacity • Project Management Approach • Scheduling And Value Engineering Methodologies Firm Bids For: • Percentage of the Total Project Construction Cost for Overhead and Profit • Monthly Cost of Field General Conditions • Labor Rate For Project Field Superintendent • Labor Rate For Trade Foremen And Labor The selection of subcontractors shall be based on public solicitation of bidders for each trade. 280 Maple Street • P.O. Box 98 • Ashland, OR 97520 • 503-482-2441 RESOLUTION NO. 95- BEFORE THE CITY OF ASHLAND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION ALLOWING MODIFIED BIDDING PROCEDURES FOR THE EXPANSION AND LCRB RESOLUTION RENOVATION OF THE ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT Recitals: A. AMC § 2.50.030.6 permits the Ashland City Council sitting as the Local Contract Review Board to exempt contracts from competitive bidding if it finds: 1. The lack of bids will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract; and 2. The exemption will result in substantial cost savings. B. This ordinance provides that in making such findings, the Board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid, and such other factors as the Board may deem appropriate. Where appropriate, the Board shall direct the use of alternate contracting and purchasing practices that take account of market realities and modern or innovative contracting and purchasing methods, which are also consistent with the public policy of encouraging competition. C. In order to exempt a project from competitive bidding, the Board shall adopt written findings that support the awarding of a particular public contract or a class of public contracts using the exemption. The findings must show that the exemption of a contract or class of contracts complies with the requirements of AMC § 2.50.030.B. D. This modified bidding procedure has been approved and is used successfully by the State of Oregon Department of General Services, the Department of Corrections and the Oregon State System of Higher Education. The Board adopts the information contained in the letter to the Mayor and City Council dated April 12, 1995 as findings justifying the modified bidding procedures. The Board finds that the modified procedure will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract and the modified procedures will result in substantial cost savings. The Board resolves that an exemption be granted as follows: Ashland Community Hospital Emergency Room Project for 1995. The Ashland Community Hospital may use a modified bidding procedure for the 1995 emergency room expansion project provided that request-for-proposal procedures for the selection of construction manager/general contractor firms (CM/GC) are used and the PAGE 1-LCRB RESOLUTION IP:ord\Icrbcmc9.6-1) CM/GC will be required to establish guaranteed maximum prices for construction subject to the following conditions: Contractual requirements are stated clearly in the solicitation document. The contract shall describe the methods by which the CM/GC shall competitively select other contractors and subcontractors to perform the work of the improvement. Further, the contract shall describe completely the methods by which the CM/GC and its affiliated or subsidiary entities, if any, may compete to perform the work of the improvement; such methods shall include, at a minimum, public opening of sealed bids at a pre-announced time and place. Evaluation criteria to be applied in selecting the CM/GC firm are stated clearly in the solicitation document. Criteria used to identify the CM/GC firm which best meets the public contracting needs may include but are not limited to cost, quality, experience relevant to the improvement to be constructed, and time required to commence and complete the improvement. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1995. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1995. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Zed as to orm: aul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 2-LCRB RESOLUTION Ip:ordUcrbcmcp.8-1) ? ..... April 12, 1995 Steve Hall, Brian Almquist ram: James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer '1IDjPtt. Granite Street to Water Treatment Plant Sanitary Sewer Project BACKGROUND: As you are aware, the contact for the Water Treatment Plant Improvement has been awarded to James W Fowler Company with the notice to proceed scheduled to be made on April 12, 1995. Actual conmuction start- ups is anticipated for the first week of May. A very critical element of this project is the limited working and storage space around the construction site. The space limitation is experienced especially in the access to the Plant. The reservoir access road is the only access to the plant and is a long, very narrow way. Blockage of this access would cause delays to the Treatment Plant project which would give rise to delay and damage charges. Because of unanticipated delays in the preparation of project plans and specifications for the above referenced sewer project we are now faced with conflicting work schedules in the very narrow Treatment Plant access road. While we had previously planned to have the access road section of the sewer project completed prior to issuar>ce of the notice to proceed on the Treatment Plant project we now realize that it is not possible. It is equally impossible to administer two ongoing contracts in the access road without causing undue harm or delays to one,or both, of the contractors. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: To avoid costly delays, expensive weekend work schedules and additional arbitration, the following course of action is recommended: 1. The sewer project be divided into two sections. One section being the 8-inch mainline in Granite Street and approximately 400 feet of 6-inch service line to the beginning of the access road. The second section to include the 6-inch service line in the access road to the Treatment Plant. 2. The Granite Street portion of the project be advertised, bid, and constructed, in the usual fashion. 3. The reservoir access road section of the project be exempted from normal bidding procedures and this work appended to the Fowler contract by negotiated change order. Representatives from the Fowler Company have expressed an acceptance of this proposal. _ PAGE 1-(c:en n"r%cmu,c%\jr=chm.h,rn,) APR 1 3 :-'7 / i It is felt that this is the best plan for the City and will result in a total cost savings. Some very positive benefits of this proposal are as follows: 1. The City could not be held responsible for the delays to either the Fowler contract or the sewer contract. 2. The coordination of traffic and movement of materials on the access road would be the responsibility of the Fowler Company and could be considered an extension of the traffic control portion of their contract. 3. To construct the access road sewer by a second contractor would require that the construction be completed when the road is not in use. This would require a weekend and holiday work schedule. Labor costs for these days would be at least time and one half and perhaps as high as triple time depending on the union contract which the contractor might have in effect. 4. The schedule of construction on the access road could be controlled solely by Fowler so that the sewer work could be arranged when demands on the road are low. REQUEST: To exempt this phase of the sewer construction from competitive bidding requirements would take Council authorization in its role as Contract Review Board. It is felt that, for the reason stated above, this would best serve the citizens of Ashland. Could this request be placed on the agenda for the April 18th Council meeting? It is assumed that a resolution would be required for the exemption. cc: Paul Nolte Dennis Barnts Phil Beverly, Lee Engineering 0 PAGE 2-(c:cnsinccr%cmvsctk&=chm.h1Cm) 4.. i RESOLUTION NO. 95- BEFORE THE CITY OF ASHLAND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION EXEMPTING FROM COMPETITIVE BIDDING THE GRANITE STREET TO WATER LCRB RESOLUTION TREATMENT PLANT SANITARY SEWER PROJECT Recitals: A. AMC § 2.50.030.6 permits the Ashland City Council sitting as the Local Contract Review Board to exempt contracts from competitive bidding if it finds: 1. The lack of bids will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract; and 2. The exemption will result in substantial cost savings. B. This ordinance provides that in making such findings, the Board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid, and such other factors as the Board may deem appropriate. Where appropriate, the Board shall direct the use of alternate contracting and purchasing practices that take account of market realities and modern or innovative contracting and purchasing methods, which are also consistent with the public policy of encouraging competition. C. In order to exempt a public contract from competitive bidding, the Board shall adopt written findings that support the awarding of a particular public contract or a class of public contracts without competitive bidding. The findings must show that the exemption of a contract or class of contracts complies with the requirements of AMC § 2.50.030.B. The Board adopts the information contained in the memorandum from James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer to Steve Hall and Brian Almquist dated April 12, 1995 as findings justifying the exemption. The Board finds that this exemption will not result in favoritism or substantially diminish competition in awarding the contract and the exemption will result in substantial cost savings. The Board resolves that an exemption be granted as follows: Granite Street To Water Treatment Plant Sanitary Sewer Project. The reservoir access road section of the Granite Street to Water Treatment Plant Sanitary Sewer Project consisting of the installation of a 6-inch service line from the beginning of the access road to the water treatment plant is exempted from competitive bidding. The PAGE 1-LCBR EXEMPTION 1p:ordk1crbpwww.8-2) work may be accomplished by a change order to be negotiated with the contractor constructing the Water Treatment Plant Improvement Project. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1995. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 1995. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor R�e s _to form: Paul Nolte,/VCity Attorney PAGE 2-LCBRa EXEMPTION Ip:0rd\lubpwww.8-21 I .: � of `�a. " emoranti tm °4roo� . April 5, 1995 �11II Brian Almquist, City Administrator rom Steven Hall, Public Works Director p1IbjEtt: Appeal of Council Decision - Sewer Service on East Main Street ACTION REQUESTED City Council consider the appeal of Mr. and Mrs. Jean and Mr. and Mrs. Rodriguez for sewer SWAM The Jean. home is located at 2855 East Main Street[39-lE-12,Tax Lot 501]and vacant Rodriguez property[39-1E-12,Tax Lot 400]. BACKGROUND See attached information: Olson Memorandum of 5/3/95 Jean Letter of 3/28/95 Rodriguez Letter of 3/28/95 Hall Memorandum of 10/18/94 Olson Memorandum of 10/11/94 Jean Letter of 9/23/94 Rodriguez Letter of 9/23/94 Jackson County Lot Line Adjustment Report of 1994 AMC Title 14.08.030, Sewer Service Outside City Limits, Inside Urban Growth Boundary. PAGE 1-(c:.uu=mdr.m—) STAFF DISCUSSION My previous`reeommendation was to deny.the request. As I noted in my memorandum of October 8,.1994, "I am finding it diffidult to recommend either of the properties a_sewer connection because either the problem is self . imposed"oi;does not exist .. On the other, hand, there is always the potential of pollution of Neil Creek just above Bear Creek. That situation,has not changed. The'need to eliminate' septid tanks in our Urban Growth Boundary to eliminate current or future health and water pollution.has been on-my mind-... particularly with the Bear Creek issues and declining ground water quality in._ Jackson County ;,Although the condition is self-imposed for the Jeans, I believe that allowing connection to the City sewer system is in the best interests of our,."future" City of Ashland. AMC 14.08.030.F-wi11 not allow future par tions'or connections to the City sewer system until after annexation. . Such future partitions; if allowed, would be controlled by Ashland's comprehensive plan and zoning regulations.- As with my 10/18/94 memorandum; if the Council agrees with the applicants appeal, Council should stipulate that the property owners pay the additional cost of boring a line under East Main Street. This is a requirement of Jackson County Public Works and Parks Department and is a cost not included in our normal connection fees. In accordance with AMC 14.08.030, I certify that the sewer lines have adequate capacity and the additional unit and future unit will not have a detrimental affect on the treatment plant. cc: James and Wink Jean, Appellant Joseph and Mary Rodriguez, Appellant Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent Enc: Various (see previous page) AMC 14.08.030 PAGE 2-to:.ea<n mrod .Mem> 14 08 030 Connection - Outside City, Inside Urban Growth Boundary. Premises located outside the City of Ashland and inside the urban growth boundary may be connected to the sewer system when such connection is determined by the Ashland City Council to be in the best interest of the City of Ashland and to not be detrimental,to the City's sewage facilities. Such connection shall be made only upon the following conditions: A ,. The applicant for sewer service pay the sewer connection fee and the systems development charges established by the City Council. (Ord. 1954 S3, 1978; Ord. 2019 S3, 1979; Ord. 2092 S3, 1980; Ord. 2147 S1, S2, 1981; Ord. = 2263 S3, 1983; Ord. 2316 S3, 1984; Ord. 2322 S1, 1984; Ord. 2449 S3, 1988) In the event dwellings or buildings connected to the sewer system are subsequently replaced for any reason, then the replacement building or dwelling continue to be connected to the sewer system of the City as long as the ` `use of the sewer system will not be increased as determined by the Director of Public Works. C. . There is an existing Ashland sewer main or line to which the premises can tie connected. D. The applicant furnish to the City a consent to the annexation of the land, signed by the owners of record and notarized so that it may be recorded by the City and binding on future owners of the land. E. The applicant shall provide for the payment to the City by the owners, at the time of annexation, an amount equal to the current assessment for liabilities and indebtedness previously contracted by a public service district, such as Jackson County Fire District No. 5, multiplied by the number of years remaining on such indebtedness, so that the land may be withdrawn from such public service districts in accord with ORS 222.520 and at no present or future expense to the City. (Ord. 1820, 1974; Ord. 2147 S2, 1981; Ord. 2314 S2, 1984; Ord. 2322 S1, 1984) F. The owner shall execute a deed restriction preventing the partitioning or subdivision of the land prior to annexation to the City. G. That the land is within the Urban Growth Boundary. (Ord. 2322 S2, 1984; Ord. 2704, 1993) Title 14 Page 3 •J Of ANN;w,,'• : � ..- � ; � emazttxt �Eixm April 3, 1995 �T �1 D: Steve Hall - eX rom James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer ubjtd: -Appeal of Council's Decision to Deny Sewer Service 4 Attached are two letters from Joseph&:Mary Rodriguez and James&Wink Jean requesting that their earlier request for sanitary sewer service be reconsidered. -' The original request was heard by the Council and denied on November 4, 1994. Since then the Jeans and Rodriguers' have pettioned the county for septic approval for their properties at 2855 East Main St (39 1 E 12-TI-501)and at the vacant lot at 391E 12-TI-400. Both applications were denied by the County due to the geographical setting of the parcels with respect to the creek. Would you please consider these two requests at your earliest opportunity. Attachments: Letters of March 28, 1995 County requirements for minimum separation distances Your memo of October 18, 1994 My memo of October 11, 1994, maps, etc. March 28, 1995 Mayor Golden and City Courivl Ivfembers Re: Denial on_request.for sewer connection at 2855 East Main St. Ashland Or. . We respectfiilly ask that our_request for sewer connection be reconsidered for approval for - the following reasons = 1: Due to the lot line adjustment invoking lots 400 and 501 we find that part of our drain field extends into the lot of 400. We need to correct this encumbrance is orderto satisfy our mortgage lenders: Also to avoid any problems in the event that,we decide to sell our property. 2. As with lot 400 the geographical setting of the parcel makes it impossible to find a suitable location to install a drain field within the county specifications, leaving us with the only option of connecting to the sewer line. We respectfully ask your approval on this request so all the necessary corrections can be properly made. T hAnk you. Sincerely yours -- V/ J James E. and Wink R. Jean ow MAR 1995 , Engppg. � i^H Div. �3 r v March 28, 1995 i Mayor Golden and City Council Members:. RE; Denial on_request for sewer connection at Tax Lot 400 on East Main St Ashland, OR _ We respectfully ask that our request for sewer connection be reconsidered for approval for ' the following reasons: 1:-The geographical setting of the parcel doesn't satisfy.the minimum separation distances required by the county for septic systems. 2. We were advised by a septic system installer, Mr. Deen Yates, that there is no suitable site to place a drain field and still meet the county requirements. We have owned the parcel for many years and would like to build our home on it and the only delay is not being able to obtain sewer service. Your favorable decision on this request would be sincerely appreciated Thank you. Respectfully yours, ^i��CC �• ILA it � i - X .G `�_ _ . II �\ Joseph M. acrd Mary K. Rodriguez ✓ 1 4419.95 ri • � EnP� Dry TABLE 1 Mini—, Separation Distances From ram Septic Ts= Sewage Disposal. Other Treatment Brits, Area Irv.luding. _ Effluent Sewer End Items Requiring Setback Replacement Area ' "Distribution Units : 1. Groundwater Supplies 100' 50' 2. Temporarily Abandoned Wells 100' 50' 3 . . Springs: — upgradient 50' 50 - doangradient 1001, r , _ SO'., _ .. *4. -Surface Public Waters: — year round 100' 501 — seasonal 50' 1 5. Intermittent Stres=s. r ' — Piped (watertight not less than 25' from' 20' 20' - any part of the on-site system) - - - - - Unpiped 501 . 50' 6. Groundwater Interceptors: On a slope of 31 of less 20' _ 20' On a slope greater than 3b — Upgradient 10' 10' — Downgradient 50' 25' 7. Irrigation Canals: Lined (watertight cs✓al) 25' 25' Unlined — Upgradient 251 251 — Downgradient 50' S01 8. Cuts Manmade in Excess of 30 Inche; (Top of Dwnslope Cur): — Which Intersect 1.4ers that Limit Effective Soil Depth Within 48 Incbea of Surface 50' 25' — Which Do Not Intersect Layers That Limit Effective Soil Depth 25' 10' 9. Escarpments: — Which Intersect Lsyess that Limit Effective Soil Depth 501 101 — Which Do Not Intersect Layers That Limit Effective Soil Depth 25' 10' 10. Property Lines 10' 10' 11. Water Lines 10' 10' 12. Foundation Lines of any Building. Including Garages and Cut Buildings 10' S' * This does not prevent stream crossings of pressure effluent sewers. SOO:h 12/31/85 Table - 1 0 AS REGO . October 18, 1994 "MI j- !Ii 15 A .51 ._!M "-'j" 1 M4,- Brian Almquist-, City Administrator r7 am: Steven Hail Public Works JDirector A IIIIjPtf Request for Sewer Connection ACTION REQUESTED My Council deny request to allow the conneclion of exL<fn home at 2855 Fast Main Street(39-IE-12,TL 501) and vacant lot (39-IE-12, TL 400) to City sanitary sewer. BACKGROUND As noted in the Jackson County Planning Department staff report, Tax Lot 400 was a land-locked parcel Of property until the boundary line adjustment was granted by Jackson County. Tax Lot 400 is vacant but can be used for a home since it now has legal access to East Main Street meeting Jackson County requirements. Tax Lot 501 has an existing sep6c tank which is functioning properly as there is no mention of a failing system. The lot line adjustment skill place a portion of the septic system on Tax Lot 400. One option for the.property owners would be to see=an eastment from Tax Lot 400 for the portion of the septic system that is INmted on Tax Lot 400. (See Jim Olson's memo for additional information.) From staff's standpoint, I am fording it difficult to recommend either of fl-p-properties a sewer connection bemuse 0 'MC)had a either the problem is---If impoS,�or does not exist. Also, the previous Ashland Municipal Code(A, stipulation that the building be in existence prior to 1973 which has been eliminated from the existing AMC- Each of the lots are approximately 2 acres in size and provide adequate land for a septic system. on the other hand, there is always the potential of pollution of Neil Creek just above Bear Creek. The sanitary sewer exists on the south side of East Main Street and would require crossing the county road- Jackson County has required the City of Ashland to bore rather than open cut any paved county streets, If the Council approves either request, Council should stipulate that the property Owner(s) pay the additional cost Of PAGE l-(c;scwcr\jcea!fMm) OIF Ulf •,,OREG0�,•'' October 11, 1994 - - - 3 �u `.Steve Hall, Public Works Directbr. r) -r,. r *f 's 7 . • r,.,u+7 , rDm:` s James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer_ ;.": L_""3 .Y v.•'ftT" rtQZ e n.1 �. a�.+.! Y `s S4T•t! �a ra+jplL'Ir Lt�IjEtf�` SEWER'CONNECTION TO PROPERTIES OUTSIDE CITY LMUTS _ •L�SV f tY&.-• - - . Atclied are two letters requesting connection to City sewer facilities on East Main Street: The properties are outside the City limits and are currently undergoing a boundary adjustment along their common boundary. The easterly parcel(39-1E-12 Tax Lot 501, Jean property) 2855 East Main Street will lose a major portion of its - septic drainfield in' boundary change and the iequest for sewer connection would compensate for its loss..The existing house on that lot was constructed five-or six:years ago. Attached is a copy of the applicants map showing the locations of the house, drainfield, etc. • - The second lot is noith and west(39-IE-12 Tax Lot 400)of the Jean property and is currently vacant. Both lots meet the criteria for connection to City sewers except the existing building requirements..Neither lot has a Home that was constructed prior to 1973. Although this requirement is not specifically listed in the ordinance I understand that it is to be considered. - Would you please let me know if either of their requests can be considered at this time? Attachments: Tax Lot Map Applicants Map Applicants Letters (c: Mgin=rNSCW$ v..=) t A, September 23 1994 IS 1 j1 c c Mayor ,Golden�and City ouncil Members ` '` e RE E Main, Streets, Ashland; Oregon We are requesting 'approval for a sewer connection outside the city. limits We meet thee requirements of ordinance 2704 a"s R follows 1; Th @property is ,iwith fn; theµ UGB, 2 :x There is: a�=sewer din place... across -East . Mai'n from our Property: 3 . We'will execute a'Consent`to=`Aiinex . our tax lot is 39 lE 11400 . The property is•_in. th&. process of :being surveyed due to the lof-line adjustment •- approved by Jackson County on July 1,4; 1994;-• •_ 4 . We' are willing to execute a deed restriction preventing partitioning prior to annexation;. 5 . We are willing to pay the sewer connection fees and system development charges . We will have approximately 1600 square feet and . 10 fixture units; 6 . Our property is divided ' by Neil Creek and any drain field located on our property would be directly adjacent to . Neil Creek. A failure of the septic system may result in pollution of the creek or nearby wells . Thank you for your consideration. 1 S 'ncerely, �� M seph and Mary Karen Rodriguez :-f3"t'HYTY ' :isi}y :•:.} :: :•:::::•:::ti:•>'•: ............... . •:::::::•:: i}:•:::•i:•}'•}:•i:•ii::v•:�:.}•:.�:: :•.:ti::::{•i::•i:•}:•}::;.}•::.�{:ii::::rr: ..... .. :'v.�:.:. N J r 0 Z O u, Z J E w do h' h 4 �:t.. Ad, / i© Li _ z m p o •. w _ o a File #94;43-LLA Page -2- F) Irrigation District None r G) Land Use: Residential „ . H) x Zoning:; - - 1) Subject property RR-5 u , - ,Property to the north City of Ashland 3) Propert}s-to the south:-...RR-5.3.: .v 701zrs'4' Ms. - ;Property.to the.east --City. Ashland, L.. _.. ..._. . - _ . , .-...__ . _. ...., 5)- Property to the west:. RR-S IL APPLICABLE CRITLRL-k To approve this. application, the County must determine that the application is in conformance vrith Section 40.030 of the Jackson County. Land Development Ordinance. IIL FINDINGS OF COMPL][ANCE. .WITH THE JACKSON COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE Chapter 40.030 of the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance establishes the folloNving criteria for approval of a lot line adjustment. A) The proposed adjustment will not result in the. creation of any more developable parcels or lots than previously existed or provide access required by this ordinance. FINDING: The proposed adjustment will not create any additional developable parcels. Tax lot 400 was created prior to County access requirements and therefore is not required to have County recognized access for development purposes however, this proposal will give tax lot 400 physical frontage onto East Main Street. B) The proposal will not render any lot or parcels unusable nor shall the usefulness, utility or viability of the lots or parcels for the stated purpose of the zoning district be decreased as a result of the proposal. FL`7DLNG: This proposal will not render these parcels unusable. By approving the lot line adjustment, parcel 400 will be more accessible because of the physical frontage to East Main Street. File•994-43rLLA Page -4- Y- Q 10"f'400 with the proposed adjustment. The Ashland_Municipal,Airport to the east 'z,was'not included in this finding:i H)d"The proposal will not-result in.violations of setbacks and building standards required for• fire protection under.the Uniform Building.Code ecti ua,FINDINQq These' parcels are-zoned.RR-5- and, at.this- time require a 100 foot �rtfl elbTeak _ New structures.or.additions., to.existing structures which are closer to propertyc lines than,thd:existing building;, may. obtain a fuelbreak easement onto ?;�adj6hirigLpropei-ty..oi apply-'-for fuelbreak.reduction.-to. reduce that requirement. v... _. - '_•Tax lot 400 is vacant and must comply with current regulations: :Tax lot 501: has a '.house and shop which do not appear to get.closer to.the new.proposed property line- -;`t}ian`tl ey"di&to the existing line: _. ban I) ' -Proposed parcel or boundary line adjustments which have the net result of physically - relocating a parcel to a new location beyond an existing common boundary line will not be approved and must be reviewed as a partition. FINDING: This proposal will not physically relocate either parcel. IV.: CONCLUSION Based oa the above findings, staff found the lot line adjustment proposal, with adherence to conditions of approval stated below, to be consistent with the regulations contained within Chapter 40 of the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance. V. DECISION File 94-43-LLA, an application for a lot line adjustment for property described as Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Section 11, Tax Lots 400 and 501,is approved subject to the following conditions: A) No structures may be located within 20 feet of the new property line. B) All new structures must comply with Chapter 280.100, fire safety standards and maintain a 100 foot fuelbreak. C) The adjusted property line shall be surveyed and marked with monuments of either galvanized iron pipe (not less than one-half inch inside diameter) or iron or steel rods (not less than five-eighths inch in diameter and not less than 24 inches long). The survey map/mylar must be submitted to the Planning Division for review and signature within 180 days from the date of this approval. Failure to meet these deadlines will cause the approval to be void. No further requests for extensions can be approved. ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE Title 14 14 08 030 Connection Outside City. Inside Urban Growth Boundary. Premises located outside the City of Ashland and inside the urban growth boundary may be connected to the sewer system when such connection is determined by the Ashland City Council to be in the best interest of the City of Ashland and to not be detrimental to the City's sewage facilities. Such connection shall be made only upon the following conditions: A. The applicant for sewer service pay the sewer connection fee and the systems development charges established by the City B.-' t In the event dwellings or buildings connected to the sewer system are =.. subsequently replaced for any reason; then the:replacement building or dwelling may continue to be connected to the sewer system of the City as long as the use of the sewer system will not be increased as determined by the Director of Public Works. C. There is an existing Ashland sewer main or line to which the premises can be connected. D. The applicant furnish to the City a consent to the annexation of the land, signed by the owners of record and notarized so that it may be recorded by the City and binding on future owners of the land. E. The applicant shall provide for the payment to the City by the owners, at the time of annexation, an amount equal to the current assessment for liabilities and indebtedness previously contracted by a public service district, such as Jackson County Fire District No. 5, multiplied by the number o years remaining on such indebtedness, so that the land may be withdrawn from such public service districts in accord with ORS 222.520 and at no present or future expense to the City. (Ord. 1820, 1974; Ord. 2147 S2, 1981; Ord. 2314 S2, 1984; Ord. 2322 S1, 1984) F. The owner shall execute a deed restriction preventing the partitioning or subdivision of the land prior to annexation to the City. G. That the land is within the Urban Growth Boundary. (Ord. 2322 S2, 1984; Ord. 2704, 1993) c Title 14 Page 3 to GF AsN `'I• Pma ran dum �REGO�, April 14, 1995 Q. Honorable Mayor and City Council r- POM: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator 6$UbjUt: WWTP Project Coordinator Position In response to concerns expressed by the Mayor and Council two weeks ago at the Executive Session, I would like to recommend that the City create the position of Wastewater Treatment Plant Coordinator. It has become clear over the past several months that the workload on Public Works Director Steve Hall has become overwhelming. This is due primarily to the complexity of the W WTP project which requires his full attention, but which is not possible due to a myriad of other demands on this time. These demands include ongoing street and storm drain projects; upgrade of the Water Filter Plant; Reservoir Sluicing Committee; several large L.I.D. projects; the Airport Project; remaining an active player in the 2050 Committee, TRADCO, Medford/MID Exchange;pursuing the perfecting of our expiring T.I.D. water rights,and seeking new T.I.D. wafer rights. These projects are in addition to the day-to-day management and supervision of four divisions with over 50 employees. The W V TP upgrade decision is now entering a critical phase and require the full attention of one individual. We need to seek out a person who (1) already has a basic knowledge of the options before the Cowrcil, (2) a person with strong interpersonal skills to continue working with citizen groups and government agencies, and (3)an individual with analytical and writing ability to work with our consultants in preparing the finall written plan for DEQ. Secondly, I propose that a management team composed of myself,City Attorney Paul Nolte, Regional AffairVConservation Manager Dick Wan derscheid, and Public Works Director Steve Hall be designated to work with this newly-created position to provide the necessary support. This will insure that the project is organized and presorted to the Council and DEQ in a timely manner. It is critical that such a management support team be a part of the creation of the position, due to the technical, legal and administrative nature of the various alternatives. We must 3dso be prepared to clearly communicate the ultimate decision to our residents. Administratively, it is recommended that the position report to the City Administrator, with a salary range commensurate with other middle management positions(Superintendent level). I also recommend that the individual be offered a three year employment agreement with the same benefits as other supervisory employees. It is suggested that in the interest of time, we waive advertising requirements for the position, and that I be given the authority to negotiate with candidates who I feel have the necessary qualifications; time being of the essence. There are at least four individuals in the Valley, all of whom are currently employed, whom I believe meet these qualifications. Finally, I would request that Councilor Winthrop be authorized to work closely with me in the selection process and that we jointly bring back a candidate to you for your approval, prior to any offer of employment. t 3 DEVELOPMENT PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SYSTEM ASHLAND, OREGON This development plan will be designed to meet the following goals: 1. Satisfy the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) standards for effluent discharge from the Ashland Waste Water Treatment Plant and System (WWTPS). 2. Provide replacement water in equal volume for all treated/untreated effluent removed from Bear Creek. 3. Support the natural ecology of Bear Creek. 4. Minimize capital and operating costs of the WWTPS. 5. Eliminate odors created by the WWTPS. In carrying out this development plan, the following agencies of government will be consulted: OREGON: Department of Environmental Quality Department of Fish and Wildlife Division of State Lands Department of Water Resources Rogue Valley Council of Governments FEDERAL AGENCIES: Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Corps of Engineers National Marine Fisheries Soil Conservation Service DEVELOPMENT PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SYSTEM PHASE I • BENCH TEST OF SOIL FILTRATION. COMPLETED 1993 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SYSTEM PHASE H • HIRE FULL TIME PROJECT COORDINATOR • CONSTRUCT WETLANDS AND SOIL FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION PILOT • CONVERT WWTP FROM CHLORINE TREATMENT TO UV TREATMENT AS SOON AS PRACTICAL • REPAIR AND USE EXISTING AERATION TANK FOR REMOVAL OF AMMONIA • BEGIN SOURCE REDUCTION PROGRAM 3 DEVELOPMENT PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SYSTEM PHASE III CONTINGENT ON OUTCOME OF PHASE II, MAY INCLUDE: • EXPANDED WETLAND PARK AND SOIL FILTRATION SYSTEM • REPAIR AND UPGRADE WWTP AS NEEDED • SOLIDS REMOVAL TO COMPOST CENTER • WETLANDS AND/OR RESERVOIR VOLUME STORAGE AND TIMED RELEASE • WATER EXCHANGE WITH TID AND/OR MID • WATER CONSERVATION/REUSE • PURCHASED WATER RIGHTS TO INCREASE STREAM FLOW • REDUCE NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION FROM ASHLAND RUNOFF • FURTHER REDUCTIONS IN NUTRIENT LOADING AT THE SOURCE • CONSERVATION LANDSCAPING • INSTREAM HABITAT IMPROVEMENTS 4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SYSTEM PROJECT COORDINATOR The project coordinator position will be a full time position for a period of one year with a contract renewable for a second year. The coordinator will be appointed by the City Council and report to the Council, conducting liaison with involved departments of the City. • be the primary contact within City government for all activities related to the implementation of Phase II of this plan • coordinate interagency technical meetings to develop strategies for addressing all-waste water regulations and requirements • be present at all meetings with DEQ, RVCOG or other goverment agencies specific to implementation of this plan • coordinate planning process with the Wetland Coalition advisory group, local citizens and other watershed groups to develop integrated approach for improving the Bear Creek ecology • initiate a source control and source reduction program for waste stream pollutants • conduct aggressive grant searches for money to reduce the expense of completing PHASE II and for anticipating costs of PHASE III • present and follow the budget for PHASE II • make monthly progress reports to the Council and others • be the public relations representative for this phase • assess deferred maintenance costs of existing WWTP 5 PROPOSED WORK PLAN FOR PHASE II DEMONSTRATION WETLAND AND SOIL TREATMENT SYSTEM Task 1 Project Management This includes administration of project budget, communication with city, staff, and regulators, public relations, and coordinating the project team. Task 2 Design and Construct Wetland Demonstration System The goal of this task is a functional wetland treatment cell near the WWTP established by summer 1996. It should take advantage of one of the existing man-made wetlands in the area, be scaled to meet project goals, and be designed to convert into a nonpoint source treatment wetland after project completion. Task 3 Design and Construct Soil Treatment Demonstration System The goal of this task is a model soil infiltration system designed to accept influent of varying qualities and be able to analyze removal efficiencies, and system responses. Task 4 Monitor Demonstration Systems and Creeks This task includes monitoring and evaluating the demonstration systems, and gathering background creek and watershed water quality information. Goals include: documenting wetland and soil system effectiveness, • estimating full scale nutrient removal and temperature reduction ability, • observing and predicting system responses to climate and influent quality, • inspection and maintenance of demonstration systems, • identifying potential nuisances, predators and pests, and • measuring background phosphorus and temperature levels in the watershed, Task 5 Investigate Specific Sites This task includes site-specific soil and groundwater investigations if needed. Task 6 Facilities Plan Recommendation Report The report should: • present data gathered during Phase II, • estimate Phase III total size, removal efficiency and life span, • propose final permit modifications, • project final construction and operating costs, and • recommend Phase III as facilities plan design. 6 PROPOSED WORK PLAN FOR PHASE II DEMONSTRATION WETLAND AND SOIL TREATMENT SYSTEM Task 1 Project Management Task 2 Design and Construct Wetland Demonstration System Task 3 Design and Construct Soil Treatment Demonstration System Task 4 Monitor Demonstration Systems and Creeks Task 5 Investigate Specific Sites Task 6 Facilities Plan Recommendation Report F\� -aste farm 100 ZrVe At& cgld,., dA4hla J,," 97520 /r_lha COq II�rOh p IR �l S q DG'SS/ 6 !� 5-04 l.�/ W% P ra 6 S -� N ✓� Q 1r1 ay v ��H P SJUyCI ell, j lam_/ �rsf / te a O��/Oh5 �y/ ✓� l�lUf��S / "7G1h © �d O [bLs �loh5 Iv✓ D � ✓ah, fVlsz . JO�H �NSIr� vlgS a55N � v verbel� fG,k� w , Il gtis ter- �/ flu � u�e-s rah 5 i�, W���•'�,� - S ti.<<� s�ula �1,� g h S wc-�-s yG14 �bs � ✓kCf � p�� Lrih&✓nlhN v�P�NI°U�li` OCGul�1'hpl �k01P �0�"KS vi Iv- © flp w (��i�R �1,AV� ��N� l h �� !� x2S �hGt� 90'7a O7c W-711'et- /-S do wh S A-e-4 kh t l.rj � fov T�¢ S19hI � GAhC� -/ S v� h 5 a(,t v9 � Q o ��1 I � h �✓�/,-�/� 1`0,/ter v ti r �E I� G+�i by o h a hIL S le Rill Fare �.m loo '%Le, Ma ate,., 97-,2o Pq'q Q '), (f _ �g .-q5 1 Coti cA_,rh I tih t 1'� r�� e��- Cap/e'l) h a 1v,r rA CriunLl�� ��� rs ya/T wt'll l7a'1A4 PW NGw tf�Aal�S 4rp /4 dfWh �Ar O✓ r✓L(91 City of Ashland NEWSLETTER Volume 20 February 1995 No 2 G� �h�" DG�1`—� L,1NSOh 1 �ANrtti p w a - 1995-96 COUNCIL GOALS The following is the list of Goals which the T Iva1 4 IS (/ s Mayor and Council adopted at the goal-setting _ session held in January: Goal 1. Resolve the funding issue for ' o \ to �/1 �p� - wildfire-fuels-reduction. 4✓��/ �ry +^Vi�h� �j �udjs, Goal 2. Commit to an ongoing Y matching grant program for LID (gyp r /► h sidewalk construction in existing /tbl !n �lr 6ti5 yy� °hf neighborhoods, not to exceed $30,000 p 1 Y per year. t by vb r�Ati11�V q 5�j iit, �-v I2 Goal 3. Prepar.G plan of options for reduction of dependence on electric utility revenues. Goal 4. Resolve office building/space needs issue. Goal 5. Develop and implement a citizen/government communication program which includes citizen input. I � ' April 10, 1995 ill farm Lydia Wricnht v Michael Downs 00 1 JL, �`� � ' �d�1 a 5O 973zO Steve Greenwood Dennis Belsky John Gazik Gary Arnold et. al. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Dear DEG, Thank you for scheduling a meeting on April 12, 1995 with concerned environmentalists from Ashland in regard to our WWTP upgrade. I have heard this meeting advertised as a; "get-the-facts-straight" session. That 's very good, as I still have many unanswered questions on the table. I need a written response from DEG to the follow questions. 1. Is dilution of effluent a factor? yes no 2. If answer to 711 is yes, what is the summer dilution ratio of Bear Creek flow to treated effluent? 3. If a water trade is made with TID or MID, what happens at the end of the ditch? 4. Would t.ht- same utrient limits be placed on irrigation return water as on JTP effluent? 5. If the Rogue River were to be subjected to a TMDL in the future, how would phosphate level of effluent discharge be determined by DEQ? 6. Current phosphate level of Medford effluent is 2. 5 Mg/1, which Is 31 times the proposed level for the Ashland .wastewater plant. Would this need to be reduced before going into Agate Lake? yes no 7. a. If answer to #6 is yes, what would phosphate level be and how would it be determined? b. If answer to 776 is no, would adding 50 pounds of phosphates per day to low elevation, high temperature lake, cause algal bloom and excessive weed growth in lake and ditches? 8. In Medford WWTP/MID trade off, what happens at end of ditch? 9. Is background natural phosphate level in Bear Creek the measurement during irrigation season, when majority of water is imported from Klamath Basin or during low flow times when no imported water is in the creek? 10. In determining background phosphate level, did DEG measure natural phosphates in soils and ground water? Thank you for your consideration of these questions. cc : Senator Lenn Hannon Ashland City Council Ronald E. Roth NATURALLY OCCURING PHOSPHOROUS IN TILE TUALATIN VALLEY, OREGON Dnvle C Wilson and Scott F H urnc Dept. of Geology, Portland State University, Portland, Or. 97207; Wr`lCy M Iarrell, Envir. Science, Oregon Graduate Inst., Portland, Or. 97291 The Tualatin River has historically experienced algal blooms and low dissolved oxygen levels during the late summer due to a combination of low river (low and a relatively high phosphate content in the water. The phosphate levels were assumed to be the result of agricultural runoff and sewerage effluent. The Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County was directed by the ODEQ in the 1980's to reduce phosphate levels of effluent to a TMDL of 0.05 mg/I; however, efforts failed to produce the desired results. Over three hundred subsurface samples of the Willamette Sill and underlying Neogene sediments in the Tualatin Valley were analyzed for phosphorous concentrations. The measured phosphorous concentrations in the sediment package range from zero to 3.17 mg/I, averaging 0.238 ing/1. Phosphorous concentrations appear most elevated in the top ISOM (500)of Ilse sediment package. Phosphorous seems to be concentrated below this depth at various localities in small accumulations of the iron phosphate mineral, vivianite. Sediment in this lower interval contains lower recorded phosphorous levels. High levels of phosphate in the shallow groundwater discovered by USGS researchers may well correspond to increased mobility of phosphoroul,at shallower sediment depths where almost no vivianite has been noted. The initial hypothesis of the cause of the elevated river phosphate content.did not include natural background phosphorous levels and as a result,excessive amounts of money and time were spent to try to solve a problem that could not possibly meet the ODEQ standards. The results of the phosphorous survey exhibit a case in which the geology plays a critical role in the decision to set and maintain appropriate minimum standards. Many environmental situations that concern groundwater and soil contamination should consider the geologic implications before expeniive remediation is implemented. Proceedings Of The Oregon Academy Of Science VOLUME XXXI Published by Oregon Slate University 1995 0 1995 Oregon Academy of Science w V ffi 8 R 8 n $ $ i ° 8 w A 8 7 R n n 'm $ 6 ! N Oi O ' 17 (7 m m m Y O O qq n1Q r1� yp 1� 1N� �p �ryQ m N N O 14 Y t {� pa1 p 1� 1(1O1j p fp u p p Ni Yi 1!1 zz `df$, o ai a of of n cl o o v o v ri Y CLa m N J{ O I� m f0 (O 0 w w f� n 6' f0 10 01 l7 m EG m ^ ' f`j O O 6 d N ffi S ffi N 9 1 8� q s ffi 8 U P 8 6 a OO fG 0 p� W pN pN 0 pN �N V p � p4 m a m lV Q O a O 1� 1� 10 Q O O Q O N m '° 8 Si n ffi � °n. ffi 19i, (Rp{ a s 1$� g 180 yip aC '� Oi l7 N 10 (J 17 IV N r 1�f O u) 1n S a 8 S 0 p$ O 0 A p O S O °RR m y� p 1 8 Alma n 8 s V a R a 4 g g 4 9 A 8ffi ffi $ g $ Al 8 S 8 M $ S I 1 3 oGG i a s a - rc r 3 3 z 1 �` g E E Of AS& Pmor and nm °acc°�•' April 12, 1995 U: Steve Hall, Brian Almquist exrom: James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer ` 1I�IjPtf: Granite Street to Water Treatment Plant Sanitary Sewer Project BACKGROUND: As you are aware,the contract for the Water Treatment Plant Improvement has been awarded to James W. Fowler Company with the notice to proceed scheduled to be made on April 12, 1995. Actual construction start- ups is anticipated for the first week of May. A very critical element of this project is the limited working and storage space around the construction site. The space limitation is experienced especially in the access to the Plank The reservoir access road is the only access to the plant and is a long, very narrow way. Blockage of this access would cause delays to the Treatment Plant project which would give rise to delay and damage charges. Because of unanticipated delays in the preparation of project plans and specifications for the above referenced sewer project we are now faced with conflicting work schedules in the very narrow Treatment Plant aazss road. While we had previously planned to have the access road section of the sewer project completed prior to issuance of the notice to proceed on the Treatment Plant project we now realize that it is not possible. It is equally impossible to administer two ongoing contracts in the access road without causing undue harm or delays to one, or both, of the contractors. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: To avoid costly delays, expensive weekend work schedules and additional arbitration, the following course of action is recommended: 1. The sewer project be divided into two sections. One section being the 8-inch mainline in Granite Street and approximately 400 feet of 6-inch service line to the beginning of the access road. The second section to include the 6-inch service line in the access road to the Treatment Plant. 2. The Granite Street portion of the project be advertised, bid, and constructed, in the usual fashion. 3 The reservoir access road section of the project be exempted from normal bidding procedures and this work appended to the Fowler contract by negotiated change order. Representatives from the Fowler Company have expressed an acceptance of this proposal. i APR 3 PAGE 1'(<:enyincer\conlncl\ennchan.Tlcm) - It is felt that this is the best plan for the City and will result in a total cost savings. Some very positive benefits of this proposal are as follows: 1. The City could not be held responsible for the delays to either the Fowler contract or the sewer contract. 2. The coordination of traffic and movement of materials on the access road would be the responsibility of the Fowler Company and could be considered an extension of the traffic control portion of their contract. 3. To construct the access road sewer by a second contractor would require that the construction be completed when the road is not in use. This would require a weekend and holiday work schedule. Labor costs for these days would be at least time and one half and perhaps as high as triple time depending on the union contract which the contractor might have in effect. 4. The schedule of construction on the access road could be controlled solely by Fowler so that the sewer work could be arranged when demands on the road are low. REQUEST: To exempt this phase of the sewer construction from competitive bidding requirements would take Council authorization in its role as Contract Review Board. It is felt that, for the reason stated above, this would best serve the citizens of Ashland. Could this request be placed on the agenda for the April 18th Council meeting? It is assumed that a resolution would be required for the exemption. cc: Paul Nolte Dennis Barnts Phil Beverly, Lee Engineering e PAGE 2—(c:tag inccr\cmV&cftg cW.Mcm) Staff Permit Procedure Type I Procedure (Minor Variances, Solar Waivers, (Larger Site Reviews -commercial & Small Site Reviews, Application multi-family, partitions, CUf"s- Extensions) existing buildings, B$B's, most variances) Application Application Adminstrative Hearing Adminstrative Hearing Approval/Denial by Approval/Denial by Planning Staff Fanning Staff Notice to Parties Notice to Parties If NO Request for If Request for If NO Request for If Request for Hearing Received; Hearing Received... Hearing Received... Hearing Received... CHON,COMPUTE Public Hearing Review by Public Hearing before Planning before Fanning Commission Fanning Commission Commission ■ Approval/Denial Approve Request Approval/Dental by Planning Staff Public byf'lanning Commission Decisl pn Hearing : Commission FINAL DECISION ACTION FINAL DECISION OF MY, COMPLETED ; ■ OF CITY Further Appeals to Further Appeals to LUBA LUBA Type II Procedure Type III Procedure (Actions not subject to Type 1 (Zone Changes and Comprehensive procedure, subdivision, CUP's flan Map changes involving only involving totally new construction, one parcel/owner, annexations -- Large Scale Development) quasi-judicial action) Application Application Notice to Parties Notice to Parties Public Hearing Before Public Hearing Before Planning Commission Planning Commission Approval/Denial Approval/Denial by by Planning Commission Planning Commission FINAL DECISION OF CITY I Further Appeals to If NO Appeal is If Appeal LUBA is filed... ACTION COMPLETE Public Hearing before City Council A .Appro .. . 1 e.ni.. by City Council FINAL DECISION OF CITY ':._.._' Further Appeals to LUBA Legislative Amendments (Ordinance changes, zone changes &comp plan map changes involving numerous owners) Application Notice to Paper Public Hearing Before Planning Commission Approval/Denial Recommendation by Planning Commission Public Hearing before City Council Approval/Denial by City Council Adoption by Ordinance FINAL DECISION OE CITY .; ..........:. I Further Appeals to LUBA 04/14/95 13:97 $503 482 2350 ASHLAND CHAMBER Q001 PostX Fax Note 7671 Deto 0;.b To( From COJDePI Co. Phone N Phone A .. .. .. Fu a Fax K d1k d2 Ashland Chamber of Commerce . .. - 110 East/&lain St. P.O. Box 1360 Ashland,Oregon 97520.0046 . - (503)482-3486 DATE:' April 14, 199S TO: City Council FROM: Michael Gibbs President RE: No Camping Ordinance The Ashland Chamber of Commerce is requesting the City Council enact a No Camping Ordinance within Ashland... The problem of transients has greatly increased over the past two years, especially so this last year. While the panhandling;has been a problem mostly confined to summer,,this year many stayed through the winter sleeping all over town. The Chamber appointed a committee.to look at the aggressive panhandling issue and requested information on how other cities have handled it. We rely upon our Police Department to gather information and our City Attorney to create any possible ordinances. We have received many complaints from citizens, visitors and businesses regarding this issue and decided to survey our members to determine how they,felt about a No Camping Ordinance. The results were overwhelming in support of the City Council preparing a No Camping Ordinance- 139 For, 9 Against In addition to our members,many non-members and citizens'found out we were doing a survey and:asked to give their input, which was also in support of a No Camping Ordinance. I will be present at the City Council meeting Tuesday, April 18, to provide more detailed information and answer any questions you may have. poi of Af/f a PmoranAum �4F60�,. April 13, 1995 Mayor and City Council r (29 ro+_m: Peggy Christianse , Assistant City Administrator p�l bOd: Management Compensation Survey RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staff on the management compensation survey requested by the City Council. The Council may wish to choose one, two or three of the following approaches for comparison, or select a different approach altogether. 1. ICMA Annual Compensation Survey- Pacific Region: This is the annual salary data compiled and published by the International City Management Association upon which the city has based its management compensation adjustments in the recent past. The average of cities in the 10,000 to 25,000 population range within the Pacific Region (California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska)are generally used (a few positions have been compared to cities up to 50,000 in population based on the scope of duties of the position). The city has sought to maintain its top management compensation within 5% of the averages within this region. 2. ICMA Annual Compensation Survey- Pacific Sub-Region: The ICMA salary data is now available on CD Rom.This makes it possible to isolate the data within specific sub-regions.For example, data could be gleaned for cities in the 10,000 to 25,000 range for Northern California, Oregon and Washington, or any combination of states or sub-regions the City Council might wish to compare. 3. Comparable City Survey:This approach would attempt to identify and survey cities within the Northwest region deemed comparable to Ashland on a variety of indicators beyond population such as local economy, tourism, cost of living (particularly housing costs which can vary significantly), complexity and/or sophistication of public issues,quality of life within the community, total budget, type/extent of services provided, number of employees, collective bargaining history, etc. This is a fairly complex undertaking. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Last July, in approving a Cost of Living Adjustment for management employees, the Council asked that a salary survey be prepared prior to considering management compensation for FY 95-96. This request was reinforced again during the City Council goal setting session in January. One or more of the above approaches are suggested, however, the City Council may have others. In reporting compensation, total compensation will be used including salary/wages, health and retirement benefits and paid leaves. Positions to be included: City Administrator, City Attorney, Assistant City Administrator, Community Development Director, Chief of Police, Fire Chief, Finance Director, Public Works Director, City Attorney and Electric Utility Director. RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION DEDICATING PROPERTY FOR PARK PURPOSES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIX, SECTION 3, OF THE CITY CHARTER (CITY OF ASHLAND PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF GARFIELD STREET AND EAST MAIN STREET). THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The land described on the attached Exhibit A is dedicated for park purposes pursuant to Article XIX, Section 3, of the Ashland City Charter. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code § 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of 11995. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of 11995. Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Reviewed as to form: fty� Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 1-RESOLUTION DESIGNATING PROPERTY FOR PARK PURPOSES (City of Ashland Property on Corner of Garfield and East Main) (P:ParWgariield raa) EXHIBIT A Commencing at the intersection of the East right-of-way line of Garfield Street with the Southerly right-of-way line of East Main Street; thence South, along said line of Garfield Street, 150.00 feet; thence East 150.00 feet; thence North, 180.52 feet to the said Southerly line of East Main Street; thence along said line South 780 30' West, 153.07 feet to the point of beginning. Wkgk rlidd.d.)