Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-1219 Council Mtg PACKET Important: Any citizen attending Council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located 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 December 19, 1995 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers II. ROLL CALL Y III. APPROVAL OF MINUTP.S: Regular meeting of December 5, 1995 and Special meeting of December 12, 1995. IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS: .mil! Proclamation of December, 1995 as "National Drunk and Drugged Driving Prevention Month." V. (`C)xsFNT AGENDA: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. -= 2. Monthly departmental reports - November, 1995. 3. Memorandum regarding stakeholders reception on Wednesday, January 24 for Clean Cities Coalition. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Karen Amarotico to Conservation Commission. I' Report by Audit Committee and Acceptance of Audit Report for FY 1994-95. I/ VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker. Hearing must conclude by 9:30 p.m. or be continued.) 1. (Continuation from 11/21/95) Request for an amendment to 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 of the Land Use Ordinance; and repealing Resolutions 78-33 and 88-20. (Applicant: City of Ashland) VII. PiTBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total.) VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 2bAdoption of goals and notes to staff for 199,6-97. Adoptions of Findings, Conclusions and Order for PA 95-101 (ICCA). i IX. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: 1. Adoption of drug and alcohol testing program as mandated by the Federal Highway Administration for employees holding a commercial driver's license. 2. Election of Budget Committee members (3). 3. Authorization for purchase of police vehicles. Authorization for Mayor and Recorder to sign bargain and sale agreement for City-owned property on Terrace Street. 5. Request by attorney for ICCA for refund of appeal fee. X. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS: 1. First reading by title only of "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 of the Land Use Ordinance; and repealing Resolutions 78-33 and 88-20. 2. Reading by title only of "A Resolution adopting a site-specific systems development charge for the Ashland Retirement Residence, 540 N. Main Street, pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 4.20.050(F)." XI. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS XII. ADJOURNMENT (Reminder: Council Study Session tomorrow, Wednesday, December 20 at 12:00 p.m. with County Commissioners.) MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 5, 1995 CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon, Laws, Thompson and Reid were present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular meeting of November 21, 1995 and Adjourned meeting of November 28, 1995 were approved with the following amendments to minutes of November 28, 1995 page 2 paragraph 3 motion should read as follows: Councilor Thompson moved approval of PA 95-101 with the aforestated 3 conditions and a 4th condition that 50% of the area of the existing house be a month-to-mouth residential unit with access from Second Street. Amendment to page 2, paragraph 5, third sentence should read Councilor Thompson thought the action would produce irrevocable changes within the one year period. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS 1. Proclamation declaring Saturday, January 6, 1996 as "Christmas Tree Recycle Day in Ashland." Mayor Golden read proclamation "9th Annual Christmas Tree Recycle Day". 2. Energy Smarts/Resource Conservation Manager Award from U.S. Department of Energy to the City of Ashland and the Ashland School District No. 5. Presentation by Mayor Golden, Russ Otte accepted for the Ashland School District No. 5 and Dick Wanderschied accepted for the City of Ashland. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. City Administrator's Monthly Report - November, 1995. 3. Monthly departmental reports - October, November, 1995. 4. Liquor license application from Daren Strahm, Wesley Strahm, and Sharon Strahm dba Caliente's Grill and Cantina. 5. Approval of Budget calendar. Councilor Thompson declared possible conflict of interest on item #4 stating that he is the landlord of this establishment. Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s to approve consent agenda. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. SPECIAL AGENDA ITEM 1. Presentation by Al Koski, SOREDI, regarding Rural Investment Fund rules and funding availability. Reported the new program would be Administered by the Regional Strategy board and would begin to accept applications by mid-February. The program is designed to provide a flexible source of funding for remote rural areas. Presentation is made to Council because the Regional Strategy Board has approved the work plan subject to Public Hearings set for December 15, 1995 in Grants Pass and Medford. 1 The program is designed to help rural areas finance locally determined economic and community ' development programs and projects that might otherwise be ineligible for other kinds of State and Federal funding. Stated that there are eligible applicants available in all areas of Jackson and Josephine County with the exception of those areas that are within the urban growth boundary of the City of Medford. These funds are available only to non-profit organizations. Council was provided with a draft copy of the 1995-97 Rural Action Plan, Rural Investment Fund (RIF). Stated that the Board will consider the following in determining and prioritizing which programs and projects to fund: 1) Preference to remote, rural areas that have greatest economic challenges; 2)priorities of rural communities; 3) Whether monies from the Rural Investment Fund will fill a gap in financing for programs and projects that are not eligible for state and federal sources; 4) The extent to which funding will leverage other resources by bringing in public and private partnerships; and 5) The degree to which applicants for funding have established measurable economic outcomes that can demonstrate, through specific Performance Measurements, progress towards achievement of the goals and objectives of the RIF. Explained eligible and ineligible activities. It was clarified for City Administrator Almquist that on the application there are points given for local matched monies to the RIF. Almquist stated that there may be a project through the Senior Center that may qualify for funding. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Citizen input on 1995-96 Council Goals not previously submitted in writing. PUBLIC HEARING OPEN 7:23 p.m. Rick Vezie/446 Walker/Spoke regarding resolving office space needs, Council Goal N4 for 1995. Stated that he didn't feel there had been enough progress on this issue. Cited the resolution passed in 1993 forming a Space Need Study Committee which would either adopt the recommendations from the committee or put an initiative measure on the ballot. He questioned the Council as to whether they had adopted the recommendation of the Space Needs Committee or if there would be an initiative on the next ballot. Almquist informed Mr. Vezie that there is progress in the matter of possibly acquiring the Hillah Temple. Mayor Golden requested that City Administrator Almquist keep Mr. Vezie up to date on this issue. Vezie requested that the Council act in good faith on the resolution passed in 1993. Jim Moore/1217 Park St/Submitted petition before the Council stating concerns on environmental, social, and economic reasons. Proposed that the Council direct staff to develop a Non Point Source pollution plan to address water quality concerns; including chemical and biological pollution, sedimentation, elevated stream temperatures and riparian habitat at risk. Requested that a committee of technically trained citizens be formed to coordinate and implement this plan. Richard Hart/308 Avery/Spoke in favor of forming a NPS pollution plan. Would like to see a plan within a year and would be willing to submit information to the Council to help facilitate. It was suggested that Conservation Manager Dick Wanderschied would be available to be a part of this. Bill Robertson/2175 Tolman Rd/Spoke as the chairman of Forest Commission. Requested $140,000 for additional proposed fire reduction projects. Hershel King/791 Faith/Spoke on the existing problems of the threat of wildfire in our watershed area. Larry Medinger/695 Mistletoe Rd/Spoke regarding Affordable Housing. Stated that the main key in making a program work is having adequate staff. Urges Council to hire new staff or look at how to utilize the current Housing Officer as the "Housing Officer". 2 Susan Hunt/220 Nutley/Spoke regarding Hillside Development Standards. Danial White/945 N. Mountain/Reminded Council of the N. Mountain Avenue neighborhood plan. Evan Archerd/120 N. Second/Reported on the status of the N.Mountain Avenue neighborhood plan. Debbie Miller/160 Normal/Submitted in writing the following: I encourage the Council to take specific actions to work with other jurisdictions in the County and Valley to carefully plan future land uses for the area with the emphasis on sustainability (not overuse of finite resources) and retention of agriculture as a major factor of the economy. I believe the Rogue Valley can be a leader in the state to perhaps revise some state land use goals to reflect the needs of communities who want to maintain their small town/semi- rural character, as opposed urbanization. This Council can begin the discussion by making regional planning for sustainability a major focus of the 1996 agenda. Cate Hartzel/881 E. Main/Submitted in writing the following: 1) develop hillside development guidelines and regulations; 2) address, in an open and inclusive process, the issue of adequate future water supply for the City; 3) address what both the FOA Vision Planning process and that your survey gives evidence to, that is citizen's concern about the impact and rate of growth on Ashland as a community; 4) support the creation of a committee to review city projects for environmental impact and opportunity for education; and 5) continue support for the goal of increased communication between the City government and citizens. Stated that though she had a lot of criticism of the survey and the process by which it was designed, after reading it thoroughly found some information which she hoped the Council will use in deciding priorities. Felt it pointed out the fact that there is a lack of adequate information on a number of topics in town. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:57 p.m. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. (Continuation) Request for Conditional Use Permit for a professional office (counseling) at 144 North Second Street. The office will provide a variety of services for disadvantaged families and individuals in the Ashland area [Applicant: Interfaith Care Community of Ashland (ICCA)]. Councilor Reid questioned the year review on the conditional use permit, and because these are Federal monies, what would happen if the funds were expended on a piece of property and then a year later the property lost its conditional use permit. Housing Officer Kelly Madding clarified for Councilor Reid that if the local jurisdiction granted a conditional use permit, even if it is for only one year, that is acceptable to HUD to purchase the property. In the event after one year it is determined that the agency can no longer operate out of this property, the contract normally runs for about 20 years and every year 1/20 of the grant can be forgiven. The City has the ability to structure the contract to meet its needs. If the use of the building did not work out, the City would own the building and it would be up to the Council to decide what to do with the building. The money that was used initially would have to come back to the Block Grant as program income and would be used again to benefit low and moderate income people. Madding clarified for Council that another piece of property being questioned as a possible site for ICCA had been found to have environmental problems. Exparte contacts reported: Councilor Reid had a site visit, telephone calls from owners, general conversation with citizens; Mayor Golden reported a telephone call from Barbara Jarvis requesting that council consider setting percentage limits block by block within the RailRoad district. This would give the RailRoad neighborhood an opportunity to determine in the future how much commercial mix they want 3 with the understanding that some blocks might have no commercial buildings while some may have greater" mix of commercial than residential but to make it a component of the plan so that the people within the RailRoad district have the opportunity to make block by block assessment of how they want their neighborhood to look like. Discussion by Council regarding criteria involving impact of area and change of use. Councilors Wheeldon/Hagen m/s to approve PA 95-101 with the aforestated 3 conditions and create a review process to review use within one year. The review committee should be made up of neighbors, staff and council. Discussion: Councilor Thompson voiced concern that the proposed use will have a greater impact than a duplex as to traffic and noise. Believe that the neighbors representative would show that by using statistics as to how many people would be visiting or served, it will show that the traffic exceeds the zoned use of the neighborhood which would be a duplex. A mixed use application could be shown that the traffic would not exceed for what the property is zoned or that the impact would be adverse to the neighborhood. Roll Call Vote: Thompson, Laws NO; Wheeldon, Hagen, Reid YES; Councilor Hauck abstained declaring conflict of interest. Motion Passed 3-2. Applicant granted an extension until December 15, 1995 for the approval of Findings and Conclusions. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSWFSS ' 1. Presentation of results of Community Survey conducted by Barbara Tull of Advanced Marketing Research. , Presented brief overview of Community Survey. It was reported that there was 74% response rate on the study. Executive summary stated that Ashland's size tops the list of positive aspects of living in the city; rapid growth is what people would like to change most in order to make it a better place to live; people are generally "somewhat" or "very" satisfied with the overall level of services; highest marks was for "maintaining city park ground and equipment" and for "fire and medical emergency response times". People feel that the City should accommodate population growth through "a combination of additional housing within city limits and annexing more land"; economic growth was "just right"; recycling opportunities were better; quality of life rated high; moderate amount of ethnic and cultural diversity; moderate amount of trust in local government; moderately positive attitude toward tourists; felt safe in neighborhood; "somewhat satisfied" with opportunity to provide input on city decisions; Lithia Park most widely used; The Ashland Daily Tidings most widely used source of information. Discussion by Council regarding economic growth vs. population growth.- Councilors Hagen/Hauck m/s to place on agenda for Council approval, assignment of Ambulance Purchase Agreement. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Assignment of Ambulance Purchase Agreement 1 Fire Chief Keith Woodley reported that following the last Council Meeting and Public testimony regarding the Ambulance Service Area, there were a number of questions raised which required additional clarification. Mercy Flights was contacted and asked if they would be open to discuss these issues. A productive meeting was held and it was proposed that there could be a possible partnership formed. The Board from Mercy Flights did want not to form a partnership but would prefer to reassign the purchase agreement rights that Mercy Flights maintained with Ashland Life Support to the City of Ashland. Woodley requests from council authorization to accept assignment of Ambulance Purchase Agreement. 4 u Cquncilors Reid/Hauck m/s to approve staff and city attorney to negotiate with Mercy Fights for assignment of agreement and bring back to Council for approval. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM None. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS None ADJOURNMENT Meeting as adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Barbara Christensen, Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor 5 MINUTES FOR THE SPECIAL MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 12, 1995 CALLED TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:50 p.m. by Mayor Golden in the Hospital Board Conference Room. ROLL CALL Councilors Hauck, Hagen, Laws and Thompson were present. Councilor Reid and Wheeldon were absent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Authorize the Mayor to sign an "Assignment of Buyer's Interest in Asset Purchase Agreement" with Mercy Flights, Inc., for the acquisition for Ashland Life Support, Ltd. (ALS), all of the assets of the ground ambulance service previously operated by ALS in and about the city limits of Ashland. . Fire Chief Woodley explained to the Council that the City of Ashland would take Mercy Flights position in the agreement with ALS. It was noted that Gordon Brown requested an additional segment in the contract stating his signing under duress and protest. Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s to authorize. Voice vote: all YES. Motion passed. 2. Authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to execute an ORS 190 Intergovernmental Service Agreement with the City of Springfield for assisting the City of Ashland in the preparation of its application to Jackson County for ASA No. 6. City Administrator Almquist explained for Council that Dennis Murphy, Fire Chief of Springfield has past experience with ASA and would agree to assist in preparation of application for assignment of ASA //6 for Jackson County to the City of Ashland; assist in preparation of a business plan and assist Ashland in implementing its ambulance service plan. The cost of the service would be $5,000.00. Council requested that the agreement be dated to reflect deadlines. Under Agreement section one, number 1.1; deadline of January 1, 1996 would be added; number 1.2 deadline of June 30, 1996 would be added. Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to authorize. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Barbara Christensen, Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor it t / 1 -.;w r• 'V m I t �aln 1 -y,i vo f. - vii ul�. 1 ylwi '' r .��\ 4 / F i ! w° �/�C N,t y{.,j'� .� r ° / / `r ° ', .� Y ° " `✓ '\ �/ /ter"��.� r .6.:,� rFS'> , / J ! / < \c o/ a. lr r .\s l,n_l��\I _•.•1• l rz (f.<1`i< , dl l •1 _ >.����_ .�Illu 13!11 i at atnat n ul ' �� flu �-• WHEREAS, in 1994, approximately 40,000 Americans were killed in motor vehicle z'r' �~ crashes, and of these deaths, almost 16,600 or less than 41 percent of these fatalities a ,{ involved alcohols ' WHEREAS, the number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities has declined significantly over the last decade, there remains a critical need for continued public education, `j=r increased enforcement and tougher laws and penalties for offenders. WHEREAS studies have shown that the country's try s most at-risk group for driving impaired are young adult male drivers aged 21-34, particular attention must be paid to )![ reaching this age group. WHEREAS, all across this nation, Americans are coming together to "Take a Stand = VP4 `°( Against Impaired Driving," federal, state, and local government agencies are working " fis pl alongside private businesses and local communities to spread the word about the •','- dangers of impaired driving. WHEREAS, throughout December, I ask each citizen to make a conscious effort to _ 1 ensure a safe and healthy holiday season for everyone by not driving impaired, by ` being a responsible party host, and by intervening when someone you know attempts to "l ' . get behind the wheel after drinking or taking drugs. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Catherine M. Golden, do hereby proclaim December 1995 as t "National Drunk and Drugged Driving Prevention Month". I call upon all citizens, s 1 y „Ir g overnment agencies, P ublic and private institutions, businesses hospitals and schools {I, P \l I ` I in Ashland to observe this month with appropriate ceremonies. fin I Dated this 19th day of December, 1995. IN MI Ilt` Catherine M. Golden, Mayor �rl as �, I t��l i III Barbara Christensen, Recorder Hit :i_r i is iij-1 1'' rr I r/ s I iav �.. _ , � u K say \ 1 r i1 \ • 1 l,a i../ S A ,axt i - si{k r � � �°+�.r1.'✓�51 M�� i E 1�- ^ .1 1 1 7�- \ � .�+i—I 11 �4 1 !/ �,?�y�C' \\\l�//. �� , .� -'�{ ` Vrn�u/'n" 4 A"l• \Im1 /m�! '�! n'1.. A +./<1\ui�4� Amt n C A—1 l%a1.. ap� i 1, ._ uW��.-.. =c . .. .."1��:N X14' _ ,:-:••• ...dr.>Q^ <�e. ...'a, �/��e�,.. .... ...,�Y ./`b�; L. -:V3i t•N kWv}-� .�V, .:!k' ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1995 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Barbara Jarvis. Other Commissioners present were Cloer, Howe, Bass, Finkle, Armitage, Giordano, and Bingham. Carr was absent. Staff present were McLaughlin, Molnar, and Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS Finkle noted a change on Page 8 of the October 10, 1995 Regular Meeting Minutes where he commented. Instead of'...ff it would cause a shift from commercial to residential' it should read '...ff it would cause a shift from residential to commercial'. Finkle moved to approve the Minutes of October 10, 1995 Regular Meeting and the October 24, 1995 meeting as corrected above. Howe seconded the motion and it was approved. Howe moved to approve the Findings of the October 10, 1995 Regular Meeting (PA95-100 - Craig Black). Finkle seconded the motion and everyone approved. Howe noticed that there is no indication in the Findings of who voted which way. When she has voted against a proposal how does she vote to the approve the Findings. McLaughlin explained the Findings are a documentation of the decision and the evidence used to reach that decision. The minutes reflect the voting on a proposal. All Commissioners voted in favor of the Findings for Craig Black, Planning Action 95-100. PUBLIC FORUM Brent Thompson, P.O. Box 201, discussed how the suggested state guideline of 300 feet for a linear block length (1200 foot perimeter) is a parameter to use for pedestrian trip lengths people will take. If blocks are more than 1200 feet, the Commission needs to look for other means of pedestrian access. Even though the Commission may approve paths to nowhere, there may be future redevelopment to create areas with pedestrian travel. Adequate transportation to and through the development includes pedestrian traffic too. There is always an opportunity at Final Plan to add pedestrian paths. TYPE 11 PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 95-075 REQUEST FOR OUTLINE PLAN AND SITE REVIEW APPROVAL OF A 17-LOT, 17-UNIT (15 TOWNHOUSES & 2 RESIDENCES) MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 963 B STREET. APPLICANT: WILLIAM D BARCHET Site Visits and Ex Pane Contacts Giordano had a site visit and was called by the applicant to see if Giordano might assist him. He did not feel it would be proper to assist the applicant and so Giordano referred the applicant to Staff and Staff concurred. Bingham, Howe, Finkle, Armitage, Bass and Jarvis had site visits. Cloer abstained because he was not at the previous meeting. STAFF REPORT I ' This proposal is a request for Outline Plan and Site Review approval that was reviewed a couple of months ago. Testimony was given at which time several issues were raised by the Commissioners and relayed to the applicant so he could provide additional information. Those items are outlined in the Staff Report Addendum. Conditions 9, 10, and 11 have been added. Howe wondered what Fred Cox's letter was talking about in terms of setbacks for new construction. Molnar explained that Cox wanted a ten foot minimum setback be met on units six through 14. A similar condition was placed on Cox's development to Insure an adequate private rear yard. Since the original proposal by Barchet, the units have been pushed to the east and the rear yard setbacks have been increased. The average setback is from eight and one-half to 12 feet (Condition 3). A comfortable private space needs to be a minimum of ten feet. Since some of the units will be two-story, Bass wondered why the rear yard setbacks did not have to be greater than ten feet. McLaughlin explained that the entire property functions with each "real" side yard functioning as a 'rear yard. The street frontage is the front yard. The ordinance requires that the units have a "private" yard. Molnar continued with Cox's letter (Rem 2) and said the garage is single covered story . Item 3 of Cox's letter discuss the existing structures (16 and 15) which have nonconforming setbacks. It appears from the proposal that the applicant does not plan to expand the structure to Increase the non-conformity of the building. The applicant would require a Conditional Use Permit to expand the building. With regard to Rem 4, the solar panel or structure must meet the setback If R Is over 18 Inches above ground. If solar panels were used on top of the building, the building could not be built. Jarvis is concerned about whether the applicant has considered screening the pool from noise. McLaughlin said the Commission could require full fencing and planting. Molnar said Staff still has concerns about the level of detail presented for this project by the applicant. The applicant submitted some typical elevations that indicate siding, but sometimes the computer rendition does not give the Commission what the ultimate product will look like. Last month, the Commission requested additional elevations on the west side. This type of unit is being repeated over and over so the applicant has given one elevation of a particular rear yard and has chosen not to show the entire eight units and R is difficult without the entire elevation to get an Idea of how it will relate to the rear yards of the adjacent development. The applicant has met the letter of the ordinances because all the information is available, but as the project gets larger, the Commission can ask for the necessary detail to feel comfortable with what the end product will look like. Howe noted that on unit 17 there is an indication there is a basement, first story and second story. At the last review the Commission was concerned about the ultimate height and wanted to see measurements. There are no measurements this month. Molnar said he talked to the applicant and has gone over the provision of a daylight basement. Half the floor has to be underneath finished grade. There is no indication of where finished grade is with no additional information submitted. Staff added a Condition that at final plan, final grades have to be shown to be sure R complies. The height requirement is 35 feet. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14,1995 i PUBLIC HEARING BILL BARCHET, 734 Elkader Street, responded to Cox's letter. When he began the process, he was under the assumption the minimum setback was six feet. Barchet thought the average setbacks on his project are ten feet. The garages on units 16 and 17 are single story with a deck on each. Barchet has no plans to expand units 16 and 15. He plans to add a deck on the north side and a deck will not encroach Into the six foot setback. Barchet was hoping to mount the solar panel (Cox's item 4) in a privacy fence so it would supply shade underneath. McLaughlin said fences have a specific setback along a property line and anything over 18 Inches Is a structure. Barchet said there will be a fence next to the pool(between five and six feet). The distance from the pool to the bike path is about four and one-half feet. The typical west elevation was submitted for the record. Finkle said Barchet wrote a letter on October 23, 1995 suggesting the possibility of using entirely different building materials (horizontal siding and asphalt roofing) which would make a major difference in the overall appearance of the development from all directions. Barchet said his Initial preference was for stucco and tile and he would still like that but he is concerned about the cost involved. 'He would be open to approval by the Commission for the alternative materials. Jarvis read letters of support from Barbara Allen, Coldwell Banker, and Bob Hall. C. D. MCKEREGHAN, 77 Sixth Street, was speaking against the development because it is completely Incompatible with the Railroad District. Stucco siding does not fit the neighborhood and even If the applicant were to install wood siding, the neighbors are still faced with the equivalent of townhouse structures that do not ft the neighborhood. PHILIP LANG, 758 B STREET, stated that he appeared on September 12, 1995 in opposition to the application. He read from a second letter he has written in opposition that was distributed to each Commissioner and made part of the record. Staff Response Howe wondered why under Condition 3 that only the odd numbered units needed the adjustments. Molnar said it was to pick out single story units that did not appear to have a full ten foot yard. From the information submitted, it appears that the two-story units have a full ten feet. Howe thought unit six appeared to have no overhang with less than a ten foot yard. Molnar said that should be included in Condition 3. Howe asked how the pedestrian walkway would come along the side of unit 15. Molnar said they are not sure at this time and would like to see it now or at final plan some way to Incorporate the walk next to the deck and possibly at the rear of the compact space and at a right angle back to the walkway. For 17 units there will be a considerably large bike parking space according to Howe. Is the small bike parking rack at the back of the property an area sufficient to accommodate bicycles? Molnar said the area is 18 feet long and it could be tight if all the bike parking is put there. There has been some discussion with the applicant locating individual racks or U-bars closer to the unit entrances off the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1995 walkway. Armitage asked about the percentage of landscape breakdown. Molnar said general landscaped area Is 20 percent and the recreation area around the pool area and back yards Is another 11.4 percent. The pool can be included in the recreational area. Molnar said a condition could be added about fence height Philip Lang brought up Issues about adequate fire access that Don Paul could address. McLaughlin noted some of the difficulties for Staff with this application. There may still be some average private yards of less than ten feet that need to be addressed. The Commission can consider this tonight or at final plan. The Commission may also want dartfication from the applicant about the building height, the number of stories, and final grade for the unit near the street. It is not dear how the pedestrian access requirement off B Street and Into the project will be handled. The bike parking is not clearly addressed. The solar panel as proposed on the plan would not be allowed If over 18 Inches which it would have to be or it would not be secure. Fencing and screening of the pool has not been adequately addressed. Except for Molnar's clarification of the landscaping, the calculations have been addressed in terms of meeting the 25 percent requirement. The applicant should address this dearly. BARCHET, rebuttal, said he would like to avoid putting steps In the pedestrian walkway. If it hugs units 15 and 16, steps would be necessary, otherwise he would have to put In some fill next to the apple trees which may destroy the root systems. The building footprints on his proposal are approximately 65 percent of the footprints on Cox's buildings (a considerably lower density). Half of Barchet's are single story, compared with more than half of Cox s at two-story. If larger side yard setbacks are desired, there will be a more concentrated structure In the central portion of the property. Upon taking an informal vote, all of the Commissioners favored a minimum ten foot setback for each unit. Jarvis thought If this requirement was placed on Barchet, there would be a substantial amount of redesign that would need to be done. This may include not making a decision tonight but letting Barchet come back next month. Barchet thought he could accommodate the ten foot setback without any major redesign. Based on that, Jarvis did not think the Commission could approve anything. McLaughlin affirmed. Bingham agreed with Barchet that the architecture does not have to Imitate the Historic Dlstrict Because the project is a substantial size, he felt the application was too vague. He would like to see a sound attenuating fence.. If the solar panel cannot happen, he would like to know now. Exactly where is the pedestrian walkway going to be constructed? Average setbacks are inadequate. Giordano and Armitage agreed and added concern about the landscaping detail. Finkle is sorry this project does not connect with other properties. The connection with the pedestrian bicycle path is not shown on this plan. Bass said since Cox's project has been approved and is somewhat similar, it would be very inequitable to treat Barchet's proposal very differently. Bass is troubled with the idea the yard areas are side yards. The purpose of setbacks is to create a sense of privacy. There are going to be houses 20 feet apart, two stories high and he feels this will be a privacy problem. If the ten foot setback can meet at least the one story backyard concept, he can live with that � ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1995 Howe believes the provision for the covered bicycle area has to be more detailed. She Is not sure the 'bike rack' notation on the plans is for 18 spaces or not. Where will they be? She does not know what the bicycle covering looks like. She would like to see what the proposed fence and landscaping looks like near the bike path. Jarvis told Barchet it looked like this would be continued. Would he be willing to waive his 120 time limit for approval? Barchet said he wanted to bring his application to a vote as he thought he provided all the Information that was requested at the last meeting. DON PAUL, explained fire truck access. The staging area would be on the street or the truck could come In. Ideally, it would be nice to drive in and through or have an adequate turnaround. In lieu of being able to do this, residential sprinklers would be a benefit to reduce the fire risk. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Howe moved to deny Planning Action 95-075 on the basis of an incomplete application. Giordano seconded the motion. Armitage stated he would have to agree with Barchet in that he addressed the concerns from last month and has met the requirements of outline plan. Armitage is not comfortable with the amount of detail provided, however, he does not believe the amount of detail is Inadequate and he feels most items could be taken care of at final plan or conditioned. Howe is concerned the way the application has been presented does not show basic Information. Is it the Commission's fault If given information slowly as we go along and come up with more questions? Finkle, Bass, and Bingham believed items could conditioned. The items the Commission is asking for are minimal. Howe withdrew her motion and Giordano his second. McLaughlin warned the Commission that as they condition changes, they need to look at the Impact of the conditions. Jarvis is afraid that as conditions are made up, the entire plan will be changed in one way or another and this turns out to be designing by committee. Giordano does not believe there is enough Information to make a decision and he does not want to design by committee either. Jarvis listed the items the Commissioners were having trouble with as: bike parking, fencing, screening of the pool, constructing the solar panel, meeting the landscaping requirement, pedestrian access, grade, setback issues, and auto back-up area. Jarvis took a straw vote to see who wished to add conditions to the application in order for the applicant to obtain an approval. Those In favor of conditioning were: Bass, Armitage, Finkle and Bingham; those opposed to conditioning were: Howe, Giordano and Jarvis. The following conditions were proposed: ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1995 Bass proposed that units one through 14 have a ten foot setback. This is the minimum setback from the nearest point of the structure to the property line (not an average). (rhis is a modification of Condition 3.) Modify Condition 9 by removing "...along a diagonal line." and replacing with "and connects to bike path.". The solar panel is a non-Issue. Add a condition that fencing and screening of the pool is required with a sbc foot solid wood fence all the way around the pool. (Condition 13) The Commission is agreeable to Condition 7 to cover the landscaping requirement. The bike parking is covered under Condition 10. There are two conditions numbered "7"that need to be adjusted. Bass moved to approve Planning Action 95-075 with the above named conditions. Bingham seconded the motion and it carried with Armitage, Bingham, Finkle and Bass voting 'yes" and Giordano, Howe, and Jarvis voting "no". Giordano left the meeting. PLANNING ACTION 95-125 REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 18.24.030.K.7 AND 18.28.030.J.7 OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE INVOLVING JACKSON COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATIONS. STAFF REPORT McLaughlin reported that the ordinance needs to be consistent with the County's requirements. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Armitage moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the revised ordinance. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 95-126 REQUEST FOR THE MODIFICATION OF CHAPTER 18.92 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO OFF-STREET PARKING. SPECIFIC MODIFICATIONS INCLUDE CHANGES TO THE BICYCLE PARKING SECTION. APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF REPORT McLaughlin said Staff has worked on the bike parking standards but some other changes have been made to clean up the ordinance. There are comments added Into the text. A section has been added ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 6 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14,1995 on parking for the disabled. Finkle was concerned (page 15) that trees be planted that don't drop sap. McLaughlin said the recommended street list is being refined and in the next six months a new chapter will be added addressing landscaping standards. Finkle referred to 18.92.070 Automobile Parking, add Section B(4) back in again (shared use of driveways and curb cuts). McLaughlin noted that there has been an increase in the percentage of compact spaces allowed. Armitage moved to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. The motion was seconded and carried. McLaughlin reviewed the bike parking changes. Finkle wanted to make sure the Bike Commission could only make recommendations to the Staff Advisor with regard to 18.92.040 J(1). McLaughlin affirmed. Finkle noted on Page 8, 18.92.040 1(3) that dusters of bike parking should not he limited to 16 spaces. It was agreed to remove the last sentence in (3). At the top of Page 8, delete `...or creation of guest rooms'. McLaughlin said what Is Intended is to only require additional parking spaces when dwelling units are added. It may be necessary to add something about 'non-residential use'. Finkle disagreed with the Bicycle Commission (Page 6 - 18.92.040 A) about parking in the downtown. He feels there is need to allow for flexibility because it is more difficult to create bicycle parking spaces inside and outside because buildings are packed up against each other. Bingham said it would be difficult to find a space Inside the building. McLaughlin said he would add back In the exemption for the downtown overlay. Cloer moved to recommend the changes to the City Council with the modifications as noted by Staff. Bingham seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. OTHER A community visioning workshop is being sponsored by the Civic League to be held Wednesday, November 29th. A letter was received from Friends of Ashland regarding hillside development standards. McLaughlin said the Council will determine at their noon meeting on November 15th if this should be pursued. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 7 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14,1995 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1995 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chariman Steve Armitage at 6:30 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Bingham and Giordano. Staff present were Molnar and Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS The Minutes of the October 10, 1995 meeting were approved. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS PLANNING ACTION 95-110 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A 10,566 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT MISTLETOE ROAD AND SISKIYOU BOULEVARD. APPLICANT: STEVE BLACK This action was approved. PLANNING ACTION 95-116 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 687 BEACH STREET. APPLICANT: BOB & JOY ZIEHL This action was called up for a public hearing. PLANNING ACTION 95-117 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNIT AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 679 BEACH STREET. APPLICANT: MAGGIE ANNSCHILD &ALLEN THOMASHEFSKY This action was called up for a public hearing. PLANNING ACTION 95-119 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT STORAGE UNIT (TWO ALREADY EXISTING) AT 25 MISTLETOE ROAD. APPLICANT: S. B. STORAGE This action was approved. PLANNING ACTION 95-121 REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE A PARCEL INTO TWO LOTS AT 355 SCENIC DRIVE. APPLICANT: JOHN SPILLMAN This action was approved. PLANNING ACTION 95-122 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO REMODEL AND CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO MEISTER'S BUY-RITE SHOPPING CENTER AT 1475 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD. APPLICANT: STEVE MEISTER This action was approved. ADJOURNMENT ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 1995 . . . . . . . ••.• . . . . . . ...... . . . ASHLAND AIRPORT , COMMISSION Wednesday, ..<::»rx :, > >.': November 1 , 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Linda Katzen; William Skillman; John Yeamans; Paul Mace; Merle Mills; Lyle Smith and Alan DeBoer; City Council Liaison Mayor Cathy Golden. Staff present: Steve Hall, Lynna Batters. I. CALL TO ORDER: 12:00 Noon, COUNCIL CHAMBERS Meeting was called to order at 12:00 by Chairperson Linda Katzen. H. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Wednesday, October 4, 1995 Mills asked that the minutes reflect the Commissions' appreciation for the progress that has been made at the airport during Steve's tenure. Craven said her name should not be listed as present at the last meeting. Mills moved to approve the minutes as corrected. DeBoer seconded motion. Motion approved. Golden asked if something besides airplanes can be stored in the hangars? As long as there is at least an airplane present, other things can be accommodated. III. OLD BUSINESS: A. "CAP Area" Hangar Lottery: Lottery Dates: B. Commercial Lease Area: Standards Subcommittee Report: Hall said staff will have a recommendation for the Dec. 5 meeting. Landscaping is required at 15% per lot. The Phase I area is bounded by the new taxiway. PAGE Barlow was contacted by a real estate agent wondering when new hangars would be available. The water line will have to be extended to provide fire protection to the new hangars. Mace mentioned corporate hangars vs. T-hangars: Part of the area is ready, so the T-hangars should be built there, anywhere else will require much more work. Hall said the City? Commission? will look at extending the taxiway straight up at some point. (Tara Labs is anxious for additions.) C. Chamber Conference: Katzen: Katzen heard the conference was a success. There are planes left over. D. Wash Rack: Status Report: Skinner said he gets complaints that a wash rack isn't available. DEQ regulates the quality of the run off water. The airport wants to replace the existing drain. Mace asked if just a hosebib could be installed and people wash their planes on the pavement. DeBoer said he would get a bid for paving the area from Mountain Paving when they are out to do other work in the near future. E. Review of Safety Reports: Skinner said the new wind sock isn't a good one. He has talked to the manufacturer about fixing the light but the cost is $2,500. It seems it should be repairable for about $500 because we already have the lighted windsock frame and sock. A pole and electric supply need to be obtained. The wind "T" has been given to Beagle in Sam's Valley. IV. NEW BUSINESS: A. Report from the Ashland Airport Association: Hamilton say people are asking, "When can I rent a hangar?" We need to find out how many are really interested. Also, night landing at the airport is bad. B. Other: Hall said the existing hangars are paid for, although water sanitary facilities and fuel storage have to be upgraded by December '98. DeBoer asked if income from fuel sales could be diverted to the upgrade. Skinner said that the Medford airport isn't doing much maintenance work. If Ashland were to supply those services it could become more popular. PAGE 2-<<:�rv�wra owvs.M n) V. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT: A. Status of Airport: Transient activity is dropping off, as expected. Maintenance activities remain strong. Fuel sales are 10% below last year; industry-wide the decrease is 25%. Shop production is still strong, up 25% for year to date. VI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Merrill Bergs of Tara Labs was told they could start work on new hangars by the end of the year. When Katzen was at the Medford airport recently she was told there might be a new line coming in that will fly to Vegas and destinations to the south. It will be decided this week. Hall again expressed his thanks to the commissioners for their support. Clark asked about self-service gas and using cards for the airport. Above ground, self- contained units would be used. Unfortunately Oregon's no self service law extends to the aviation community. If that could be changed though it would be a real convenience, and would robabl increase fuel sales too. P Y VII. ADJOURN: There being no further business Katzen adjourned the meeting at 12:45. Respectfully submitted, Lynna Batters Administrative Secretary I PAGE 3 cc.,up muwc„bv ss.b+a) i r ASHLAND TRAFFIC SAFETY COX MISSION Thursday, October 26, 1995 Regular Meeting MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Laws; Ken Hagen; Walter Schraub; Christine Schumacher; Susan Einhorn and Lindsay Heard. Staff present: Officer Brent Jensen; Ray Smith, Lynna Batters and Pam Barlow. I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS: Chairman Laws called the meeting to order. H. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Thursday, September 28th, 1995 Minutes approved as submitted. III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: A. Public Forum: Lynne Likens of 315 Beach St. #3 addressed the commission regarding dust and speed control at Larkin Lane. The alley is close to a school which contributes to increased traffic and heightened safety concerns. The alley has been graded and oiled recently, and some bushes have been trimmed. Likens would like the wide end of the alley to be restricted to force slower speeds. Smith said the work (curb extension) would be done on what appears to be the apartment owners property. Other options were discussed. Likens was advised to check the legal width of the alley before doing anything. B. Alley at Post Office: John Stough John Stough of 276 B Street presented a petition which put the City on notice that a hazardous condition exists at the alley behind the post office between 1st and 2nd Streets. The petition also asks that something be done to decrease or eliminate the hazard of too much traffic on too small a throughway. This same request was made over a year ago. Recently some signs were installed, however they have not had any effect on the PAGE 1-(c ua min.r%m 95.Min) d problem. Stough proposes that the alley be divided by posts which would separate the residential and commercial sides. Sandra Prebstall presented the tallies of a traffic count she made on Monday. Causes for heavy traffic, flow patterns and other contributing factors were discussed. It was decided that all parties need to meet to discuss causes for the problem and possible solutions. The meeting should include Post Office, Copeland Lumber, Pelton House, railroad district, and bike commission represen-tatives, residents of the area and the entire traffic safety commission. Notice is to be posted at the Post Office since much of the traffic is related to Post Office visits. Oregon Vehicle Code statute 801.110 regarding definitions of streets and alleys was cited. Smith has the definition of the statute, however, the governing body of an incorporated city has the last word regarding situations such as this. Shumacher requested a traffic count be done before the meeting. C. Transportation Element Review: Comments: Ile next meeting is scheduled for Friday, November 3 at 8 a.m. F. L.I.D. Proiects: 1. Fordyce Street L.I.D.: Set Subcommittee Heard did not have anything to report. 2. Oak Street L.I.D.: Subcommittee Report Hagen noted that more and more people have come into the process over time. The group seems to be moving toward consensus. Barlow noted that it looks like a number of projects will be ready to be bid on soon. Hopefully they can be combined to result an economy of scale. G. Subcommittees: 1. Crosswalk/Pedestrian Safety: "Safety Chicken" activity Report, Halloween Signs, Events: Joanne Navickas will be the "Safety Chicken" on Halloween during the parade. Jensen said the Police Department did safety presentations at all the elementary schools relative to Halloween. Einhom mentioned a preference for crosswalk awareness in September when more kids will be present rather than in June when school is getting out. Hagen suggested having crosswalk safety events twice a year to increase awareness of both the school and tourist populations. PAGE 2—(c:u.flm;nuw%mt9s.Miu) i V. 1 Y. Einhorn, Heard, Hagen, Barlow and Navickas will be the Crosswalk/Pedestrian Safety subcommittee, with interested citizens invited also (Don Cowan, Swarthout). The school crossing guards will be contacted also. Heard said a community-wide safety fair would be a good idea. It was decided that such an event could be included at the 911 fair. 2. Handicap Access Subcommittee: Status Report Barlow has met with the ODOT signal maintenance person regarding the signal box that extends over the sidewalk, causing problems for blind people navigating with a cane or dog. The box cannot be moved but a barrier can be erected between the box and the sidewalk to deflect them from walking into the boxes. Hagen has been noting problem areas throughout town for wheel- chairs. Among the problems are: 1) Wood slats between concrete slabs that have either rotted away or expanded to interrupt the level; 2) steep ramps like the one at Granite and North Main; 3) the ramps on the plaza that have to be negotiated after it dipping off the crown of the street; and 4) the exposed aggregate surface of the pathways in Lithia Park, which require far more energy than a smooth surface. Barlow added that another problem area is the lack of a curb cut at the corner of Laurel Street (Methodist Church) and North Main. Also, driveways are a problem if they change the slope of the sidewalk. Barlow wondered about producing a flier for builders and contractors to increase thew awareness of the driveway issue, but will research that first to learn if one already exists. H. Set Holiday Schedule: Move November Meeting to November 30• December Meetine: The December meeting will be on December 14 at 7 p.m. The purpose of this meeting will be to discuss the alley behind the Post Office. Barlow will present City policies regarding alley access. The Planning Department will be invited to represent their interest in the process. By then a formal count of several alleys will have been made, so comparative traffic information will be available. Hagen noted that there are two sides to traffic counts, safety vs. necessity. (There will be no meeting on December 28th.) VII. ADJOURN: The meeting adjourned at 8:40 Respectfully submitted by, Lynna Batters Administrative Secretary PAGE 3—(c:w.�iouw\mw5.mi-) BICYCLE COAMISSION November 21, 1995 MEETING AENUTES • COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Rees Jones; Jack Hendricks; Janine Reynolds; Larry Hobbs and Keough Noyes. Staff present: Pam Barlow; and Caralyn Dusenberry. I. CALL TO ORDER: H. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 17, 1995 Jones stated minutes were approved as read.. III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: A. Pedestrian and Bicycle Element of the Transportation Plan: -Review Goals Rees stated TPAC has met several times and addressed the Bicycle element of the Transportation Plan. We are down at the very end of the multi-page document in which the goals are addressed. When adopted the City will work toward these goals. Noyes presented recommendations and Jones requested comments. Hendricks stated the statements were all very good. Item 8, Goal "I" he would like to add: "ways to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety and enforcement." Discussion was held on the role of a "pedestrian/bicycle coordinator." Darrell Gee, Siskiyou Wheelman, stated they have a member that is presenting a bicycle training program at the middle schools. This training is funded by the State. It was recommended that item "C." have an item 8 with the following wording: "Coordinate with Siskiyou Wheelman and other advocacy bicycling groups." Hendricks recommended the addition to "Goal II" "To add City wide events of bicycling and walking" to promote with a possible deduction in entrance fee to museums. Councilor Hagen stated "avoiding bicycle pitfalls" may need to be listed. Discussion was held on the City hiring a 'Bicycling Coordinator" and the PAGE 1-(<:bte\m;n"W%"uv95.M;n) possible duties that would be required for this position. Hobbs stated coordinating bicycle advocacy groups needs to be added to item "C." Also monitoring effectiveness. Discussion was held on what is realistic to provide. Noyes moved to recommend to the Council the resurfacing East Main and Walker bike lanes and propose hiring alternative transportation staff person. Hendricks seconded motion. Hagen asked if there was a need for resurfacing now and the consensus of the Commission was "yes". Discussion was held on sweeping the streets. Hobbs amended motion by adopting the "Recommendations for Transplan Goals" with addition of number "8." Motion died for lack of second. Janine moved the addition of Van Ness to Jackson Road. Noyes seconded motion. Hobbs moved the coordinating of volunteers. Janine seconded. Motion approved. Amended under "B" coordinate volunteer services and bicycle advocacy groups. Janine seconded. Motion approved. "Unified transportation Commission". Entire motion with amendments approved. -Comments/Recommendations for the next TPAC meeting: B. Facility Development Plans: -Siskiyou Boulevard, Opportunities -Central Ashland Bikepath - Update on Easement C. OBPAC Vacancy: Nominations? D. Bicycle Safety Education: Ads. draft: -"Street Smarts" - Order Status -Bicycle Hazard Report Form E. .. ..Eagle Mill Road: Request for Support on Speed Reduction: F. Committee Goal Setting? G. Other: Barlow stated East Main Street speed reduction has been approved at 30 mph and not the 25 mph as requested. To reduce the speed to 25 would require going through the appeal process. Barlow stated Siskiyou Boulevard, according to Frank Stevens, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), funding has been reinstated and is in place for the engineering and mapping. Further discussion will need to be held at a future meeting. PAGE 2-(cba�\mi.�\mOS.Min) The "Street Smarts" book publisher has been contacted. We are still working with RailTex on the Central Ashland Bikepath. RailTex only wants a restricted easement for the bikepath so that they can cancel.it if they want to. The City Attorney has been contacted and we will need to have a decision because this could affect the grant funding. IV. COMMENTS: Commission or Spectators V. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: VI. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 1:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Caralyn Dusenberry Administrative Secretary PAGE 3-(=nk.\Min,w.M95.Mi-) FOREST COMMISSION Regular Meeting „� t " November 8, 1995 (� r Members Present: Don Ferguson, Teri Coppedge, Herschel King, Lenny Neimark, Bill Robertson, Tom Sander, Melanie Magee. Staff present: Pam Barlow and Bran Jones. Councilor Ken Hagen. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Bill Robertson called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. H. MINUTES OF MEETING: October 11, 1995 N3A - Regarding Eagle Mill Road - Pam said Keith Woodley would like to change "...southwest Oregon..." to "the Ashland area." The minutes were approved as corrected. III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: A. Interface Hike: Ferguson said he bonded with the other commissioners. Good questions, very informational. Pam read a list of attendees. Coppedge was sorry no Park Commissioners were there. It's changed a lot. She was pleased to meet McCormick, Main, Rose, and Duffy. Ferguson is impressed with Forest Service, particularly Bill Rose showing up with information precisely packaged. Neimark said it was great to see the work done on the trail. Pam would like to show Council just those two pieces near Morton on Loop Road. King was impressed with overall quality of work, first class professionals. Sander reiterated. Bill was disappointed in Sluicing Alternatives Committee and Council not attending. Pam said Ron McCormick was impressed with the increase in usage. Most interesting thing is ownership transition - management is now under Parks' jurisdiction. Concerns that came to Pam, not being able to use herbicides selectively, especially to control basal regrowth from madrone trees. Most of regrowth needs PAGE 1 co:ro w m nwu ow9s.M n) to be physically removed again. Got real negative feedback about removing vegetation from fuel break. Coppedge doesn't think the issue is dead. Parks staff thinks it's environmentally okay to go ahead and use careful spot application of herbicides. Citizens expressed their concerns but the issue has not been revisited. Personally, she felt there's a lot we can do. Coppedge suggested putting the item on the agenda and let people come to public meeting. Bill referred to private landholder experiments with regrowth on Tolman Creek: one site herbicide, one months and he went back to cut regrowth. Ferguson said he's tired was left for 12 g g of fighting hardwood wars. Need to select main stems to grow and shade out vegetation and knock everything else away. There are other applications, even in fuel break, he favors allowing regrowth for shade. Public Relations on herbicide use needs to be correct or you get public excited. Pam said there is no year-round fish population in Hamilton Creek. King thinks we shouldn't use herbicide. Biocides that are put into the system never go out. We should kill mechanically or with fire, which leaves no residual. Pam said it would make an interesting test patch. Coppedge said it will come up in other areas where it is not Parks' property. Magee agrees with King because if we're not absolutely sure of the effects, we shouldn't do it. Need to monitor the water. Ferguson said the data is in on every type of herbicide we might want to use. Some are very biologically persistent. It's going to be time consuming to get a consensus of opinion. Bill said the time to apply is immediately after the cut. Ferguson said general order of forest work is the crew comes and bums slash and sprays. Pam said we are creating an unnatural situation and have to commit to regular maintenance. The Forest Commission sees a four or five year cycle for maintaining City forest lands. Fuel breaks are very cost intensive. Neimark asked how long those fuel breaks have been there. Pam said some of them have been there since the 30's (CCC constructed). B. Interface Contracting: The Commission reviewed Marty Main's proposal for City lands, fuel breaks and management. Pam passed out color copies of the maps. Main suggests a controlled bum in the Reeder Reservoir area down to the lake. Should have Bill Rose take us out on some of the bums he's done in the past. King asked how many agencies do we have to coordinate with. Pam said just the City and USFS according to an existing Memorandum of Understanding. Keith Woodley said there's some feeling that the Forest Service is expecting more from the city than originally agreed to. Would be wonderful if we could utilize their professionals on our own land management. The inactive granite quarry located past the swimming hole really shows up on map. There's quite an erosion problem there. Parcel 6 is USFS to east and west. Robertson asked for opinions of anyone who had a chance to read the proposal. King said it agrees with his beliefs. He said a whole lot more needs to be done, primarily treating the lower elevation end with fire. Why are we not getting on with it? He said without maintenance, a major fire will wipe out Ashland. Did the proposal suggest selling off the Winburn parcel? Yes. Perhaps combining sales from different parcels could make this feasible... proposal also suggests getting PAGE I� resources back from Winbum. Pam said the original idea was to hold it as a second reservoir site. Robertson said it's some of the healthiest forest we own. It's quite valuable as forest land. Neimark suggests for informational purposes approach USFS with question of value. Ferguson asked if there's any forest land available that the city would want to swap with, not privatization but public to public. Robertson and King also interested in knowing value of Winbur. Pam said McCormick suggests leasing the land to the Forest Service, getting revenue to manage other lands, let USFS manage the parcel. King left at 8:07. The proposal prioritizes parcels 4 & 5 as needing the most immediate attention. Ferguson said need volume estimates, ways of complying with existing law. Ten thousand dollars is budgeted for professional services. Main's fee for the report was $700.00. Ferguson said we need a treatment level prescription. Robertson asked Ferguson for budget guesstimate for Main to write prescription, get basic plan and get bids. Ferguson didn't know. Pam said staff can go to Main and get ball rolling, contact Ron McCormick as alternative and get second opinion. We can organize the bum, do Crowson area projects, and do it on a break-even basis. Could be looking at a logging plan in a couple of months. Pam's intention was to get direction from Commission to move on specific projects, those outlined in red on map. Robertson says yes, we like the basic concept. Can we get together with Parks and combine projects to make it worthwhile for use of the helicopter? Ferguson retracts all optimism on economics. Apparently Parks said there is no economic feasibility for helicopter logging operation. Neimark hears Pam saying be conservative and hears Ferguson and Robertson saying go for whole project for the sake of economics. Ferguson will meet with Main and Pam on options. We have budget money to spend before July 1st. Hagen suggests getting plans started rapidly - goal setting is scheduled for December and the budget process will be moving along by January. Ask Main to write a phased prescription management plan just for the priority items written in the proposal. State how much we want now and will need down the road in the next fiscal year. Neimark moved that staff approach Main to write phased prescription management plan for immediate priority treatments to utilize budget monies allocated at this time and project entire proposal costs, and have it mapped out by the January Forest Commission meeting. Coppedge seconded and said we could coordinate it with Parks' projects. The motion passed unanimously. As far as alerting public, it was suggested to make a short presentation at the December 5th Council meeting. Hagen reminded Commission to plant image in minds of Council that even though it is winter, fire danger exists and rainfall level is still low. Set the framework for the urgency of this plan. Pam said there's been talk about combining commissions, i.e. Tree and Forest. Timetable question: Ferguson asked if this will require public hearings and take lots of time. Robertson said once we have prescription in hand, we should hold a public meeting, not hearing, to notify public of pending action. Also utilize newspaper, media. Magee offered to take on the public relations project because she is taking a class and has a project due in December. Everyone agreed. PAGE 3-(c:fmovni..Lo x m95.Miu) Pam said we've been working off 3-month contracts with Marty Main and would like to get into longer term contracts. Sanders and Ferguson want to be included when staff consults with Main. Need to facilitate all necessary paperwork as soon as possible. Magee will bring public media outline to next meeting. C. Bear Creek Watershed Analysis. Pam distributed only the conclusion..It says_a lot of the same things Marty Main says. Robertson asked if anyone spotted anything they disagree with. Sluicing Alternatives Committee made suggesting on mitigating erosion from the road around the reservoir. Robertson was hoping they would find a separate funding source. Pam met with John Scholtes, Director at Forest Service Nursery who did background on erosion related vegetation projects. A lot of agencies are reviewing erosion issues so maybe this Forest Commission doesn't need to.focus much energy on this task. D. Job Council Summer Work Program Barlow supported Job Council's efforts to continue the Job Council/Y.C.C. Program. E. Other Private Land - work on all interface land not just back yards of the wealthy. Pam suggested utilizing Jackson County/Prisoners - "work program" program. You can get 6-12 people and only pay for supervisor. They have basic equipment. Might be a good option for fuel break maintenance work. F. Commission Calendar Date set for Work Session - useful to take to budget meeting, November 29th, informal pizza gathering, 7-8pm Jury Room. Goal: To chart progress of this commission in meeting goals and forecast future ones. IV. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned: 9:10 Respectfully submitted, Bran Jones/Pam Barlow PAGE 4-(c:romat�miuuw�nm9s.Miu) City of Ashland PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES November 28, 1995 ATTENDANCE: Present: Pat Adams, Al Alsing, Bob Bennett, Teri Coppedge, Laurie MacGraw, Director Ken Mickelsen. Absent: None I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Alsing called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Department Office, 340 S. Pioneer Street. II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA MOTION Commissioner MacGraw made a motion to add an informal proposal by Beau Seltzer regarding creating an ice rink to the Open Forum section of the agenda. Commissioner Adams seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no MOTION Director Mickelsen reported that he had just received information from the City's newly formed Ad Hoc Communications Committee requesting that a Parks and Recreation Commissioner participate on the committee. He recommended that the item be placed on the agenda. Commissioner Coppedge so moved. Commissioner Adams seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no Chair Alsing placed the item under New Business. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting - October 24, 1995 Commissioner Adams made a motion to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 24, 1995 as written. Commissioner Bennett seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no IV. REVIEW OF FINANCES A. Approval of previous month's disbursements Commissioner Adams made a motion to approve the previous month's disbursements as indicated by Payables checks #11711 - 11839 in the amount of $119,230. 10 and Payroll checks #8919 - 8983 in the amount of $42,437.96. Commissioner MacGraw seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no Regular Meeting - November 28, 1995 page 2 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission V. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. Report by Paula Brown on proposed pilot/demonstration wetland Project Paula Brown, Wastewater Treatment Plant Coordinator for the City, reviewed a memorandum to the Commission in which she presented her recommendation as to which of several sites on Greenway park property would be most suitable for the City's pilot/demonstration wetland project. Essentially, the memorandum indicated that Site A as shown on the map accompanying the memorandum, 3 - 4 acres between the existing Dog Park and the sewage treatment plant, was the most preferable site. Primary reasons for her considering it the preferable site was proximity to the sewage treatment plant, appropriate size, and that it did not already contain wetlands which would have to be mitigated. She also requested that the Commission hold Site B, 3/4 acre, adjacent to Site A in reserve should additional soil filtration be needed for the project. In discussion with Commissioners, Ms. Brown confirmed that if use of the land is approved by the Commission, an agreement would be worked out with the City regarding keeping the area available for recreational use, ongoing maintenance and other such considerations. Commissioner Adams expressed strong concern about approval of Site A in that such a large portion of the Greenway park property in that area would be in use as wetlands. She indicated that although she supported the concept of the pilot project that, as a Parks and Recreation Commissioner, she was reluctant to have both Site A and Site C tied up as wetlands because it would greatly restrict the variety of use for other park purposes. She asked whether or not Site C could be used if the City went through the process to have the existing wetlands on that site mitigated. In response, Ms. Brown indicated that it would be possible but she believed that the time involved to go through the permit process would put the project beyond the time frame mandated by DEQ. Commissioner Adams said that she would prefer to look further into the use of Site C because so much of the area would be tied up in wetlands if Site A were used. She said that if some other kind of park usage would benefit the community that the Commission's hands would be tied at that point. Commissioner MacGraw indicated that she understood Commissioner Adam's concern but that she felt that the use of Site A was appropriate because of the time line and the opportunity for education, recreation, and aesthetics which would be created by the project. Commissioners also discussed the proximity to the Dog Park. Ms. Brown indicated that she saw no conflict with having the Dog Park immediately adjacent to the project area. Lisa Ennis (225 W. Nevada), present in the audience, expressed concern that the Dog Park area might become unusable during the construction process. Ms. Brown indicated that the initial construction phase would create some noise and dust for up to two months. Ms. Ennis asked that, if the project were to proceed, she would like to have the Dog Park users notified about when the construction would start. Regular Meeting - November 28, 1995 Page 3 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Pilot/Demonstration Wetlands Project - continued MOTION Commissioner Coppedge made a motion to approve the use of Site A as indicated on the map for a pilot/demonstration wetland project with the following considerations: that a Parks and Recreation Commissioner and the Parks and Recreation Director be included in the selection process for the firm which will develop the pilot wetland; that the Commission have the opportunity to approve a written agreement between the City and the Commission for use of the property for the project; and, that the Commission will have the opportunity to approve the final design of the wetland area prior to construction. Commissioner Bennett seconded. The vote was: 4 yes - 1 no (Adams) Following the vote, Ms. Brown inquired about holding Site B in reserve "just in case" to make the project work the additional space is needed. She said she fully anticipated that Site A would be sufficient but wanted to hedge her bets. After brief discussion, referring to Commissioner Adams' concern about committing land to wetlands which might better serve the community if used otherwise, by consensus, Commissioners indicated that they did not choose to reserve Site B at this point in time but they would keep her request in mind. B. Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association - donation to parks Amy Cuddy, Director of Public Relations, Paul Nicholson, Executive Director, and Michael Donovan, Board President for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival were present in the audience. Speaking for the Festival Board, Mr. Donovan indicated that they had been contacted by the newly formed Ashland Parks Foundation and the Commission about the donation which the Festival had made to the Commission in the mid-1980's in the amount of $12,195 in which the principal was held in trust and only the interest earned expended by the Department. Those monies are currently being accounted for by the Commission in the Park Trust Fund. The Foundation and Commission made the suggestion to the Festival Board that those monies be transferred to the Foundation along the same guidelines as they were being currently administered by the Commission. He said that the Festival Board concurred with the suggestion. Mr. Donovan also discussed the annual contribution of the proceeds of the July 4th performance which the Festival has been donating to the Commission since 1991 because of the unique and special relationship between theater patrons and Lithia Park. At approximately $25,000 per year, the donations to date have equaled about $100,000. Mr. Donovan said that, considering the establishment of the newly created Ashland Parks Foundation, the Festival Board decided to make this year's donation and future donations to the Foundation along the same guidelines as they had been previously made to the Commission. He presented a letter to Chair Alsing to forward to the Parks Foundation Board which outlined the Festival's intent regarding the donation which stipulates that the Foundation retain the principal as an endowment with only the interest earned to be spent unless some "dire need" arose. He said that in making its decision to endow the newly formed Parks Foundation was the Festival Board's direct experience with the significant benefit an organization can receive from a healthy Foundation. The Festival Board hoped that this donation would help to stimulate interest and support for the Parks Foundation and indicated that the Festival would help to spread the word among its membership. Regular Meeting - November 28, 1995 Page 4 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission O.S.F.A. donation to parks - continued Mr. Donovan presented a $25,000 check to Chair Alsing asking that he forward it to the Ashland Parks Foundation Board with the letter of intent from the Festival Board. In response, Chair Alsing said that he was extremely pleased to accept the donation on behalf of the Foundation and reiterated the Commission's and Foundation's appreciation for the unique relationship which exists between the Festival and Ashland's parks system, particularly Lithia Park. Other Commissioners included their appreciation to the Festival for its community involvement and the support it is giving to the Ashland parks system through its newly formed Ashland Parks Foundation. C. Open Forum Beau Seltzer (727 Holly) was present in the audience to determine whether or not the Commission would be supportive of establishing an ice skating rink in Ashland. He said that over the years he had been intrigued off and on with the idea, and, as no one else seemed to be pursuing it, thought he would. The concept he was proposing was a portable, artificially chilled, flat surface which would be approximately 80' by 40' in size. He said that they had been successful in other areas and could cost between $80,000 to $200,000 for a new unit. But, he happened to know of a used rink in the Seattle which was for sale for $18,000. Mr. Seltzer said he realized that there were lots of things to consider and that he had just begun investigating, but was the Commission interested in the idea? In discussion, Commissioners indicated that they appreciated Mr. Seltzer's enthusiasm and interest in pursuing the idea. They agreed that there would be a lot of things to consider but also indicated that they were open to the idea at this point in time. If he were interested in gathering more information, they were willing to listen to what he found out. Director Mickelsen indicated that he would be willing to assist Mr. Seltzer's information gathering process by contacting other Parks and Recreation organizations which may have similar facilities. Mr. Seltzer thanked the Commission for its time and interest and indicated that he would be getting in touch with Director Mickelsen. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Proposal to contract for evaluation of Park sites for environmental education opportunities Commissioner Adams presented a memorandum to the Commission in which she recommended that the Commission hire Linda Hilligoss to evaluate the Greenway park property for its potential as an educational resource. She also recommended that the Commission establish a committee comprised of two Commissioners and three citizen representatives (Julie Reynolds, Melody Noraas and Debbie Coleman) to work with Ms. Hilligoss to set guidelines for the evaluation process. As background for her recommendation, she indicated that, having participated in the park planning process in Ashland for 12 years, she strongly believed that a holistic approach which takes into consideration the overall network of parks should be taken with any and all park development. Regular Meeting - November 28, 1995 Page 5 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Proposal for park site evaluation - continued In discussion among Commissioners she said that she was looking for an impartial, objective base of information which would assist the Commission in making decisions concerning the overall planning process for those properties along the Bear Creek corridor, particularly the Greenway properties and the N. Mountain Park site. She said that she thought the timing was very appropriate to get an overall view rather than looking at the sites as isolated entities. She said that she had also been considering the idea of asking the landscape architectural firm which is being used on the N. Mountain site to come up with an overall plan for properties along the Bear Creek corridor although she was not asking that the Commission make a decision on that at this time. She said that the work and information which the 'Citizens for Wild Parks and Streams' had done regarding the N. Mountain Park site was important and would be a valuable resource when looking at the overall picture. Commissioner Coppedge inquired as to whether or not she was referring to other new properties such as the Hald/Strawberry Lane property. Commissioner Adams said no; that at this time she was more concerned with the Bear Creek corridor properties because decisions will need to be made on them soon. In response to a question regarding cost, Commissioner Adams said that in discussing the concept with Ms. Hilligoss she felt that the study could be completed for about $1,000. MOTION Commissioner MacGraw made a motion to hire Linda Hilligoss to conduct a study for the Commission regarding the environmental education potential of the Greenway park sites and possibly other park sites along the Bear Creek corridor along the guidelines which will be established by the resource committee as outlined. Commissioner Adams seconded. In discussion, Commissioner Coppedge inquired about the direction the committee would take in developing the guidelines for the study. She expressed some concern that the committee was weighted with formal educators from the school system. Commissioner Adams said that she felt that it was important to include environmental education teachers because of the nature of the study but felt confident that these citizens with the input of the Commissioners on the committee would develop guidelines which would include the broader community interests of environmental education also. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no Following the vote, Cate Hartzell, Joanne Eggers, and Gary Schrodt who were present in the audience expressed concern that they had not had the opportunity to speak on the topic prior to the Commission making its decision. Commissioners indicated that it had been an oversight and that they had not meant to exclude the audience from the discussion. Commissioners said that they would make an effort to ask for audience comment prior to making motions in the future. Commissioners asked to hear their ideas on the topic. Regular Meeting - November 28, 1995 Page 6 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Proposal for park site evaluation - continued Ms. Hartzell said that she felt that the committee should have been larger and included a broader spectrum of the community so that more diversified ideas could be heard. Commissioner Adams indicated that the committee would use a broad spectrum of people for their ideas and as a resource for information but felt that, structurally, smaller committees worked better than larger committees. She said that she anticipated that the committee would look to a wider group of persons or groups for resource information, and, suggested that if Ms. Hartzell wanted to make a recommendation it would be welcome. Commissioners Adams and Bennett volunteered to work on the Environmental Education Resource Committee as the two Commission members. B. Discussion on woodland manaizement fire suppression in forest interface Director Mickelsen said that Commissioner Coppedge had brought to his attention the fact that the City may be doing some logging work on forest interface property sometime in the near future. She had inquired as to whether or not by combining the work the Park needs to do with what the City needs to do that the concept of helicopter logging might become more viable. Superintendent Gies reviewed the various options which staff had investigated to clear the brush and small dead and dying trees from the Park's property. He said that for the material being considered, helicopter logging had proved to be entirely too costly. He said that even if the City were to find that the area they would be working on did prove practical to helicopter logging, the Parks land would not be appropriate to include because of the nature of the materials and terrain involved. He said that staff recommended moving forward with the slash and burn process. Commissioners concurred with moving forward with the project. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Reouest to participate in Ad Hoc Communications Committee Director Mickelsen said that he had just received a letter from the City which indicated that the Mayor's newly formed Ad Hoc Communications Committee had met and that the committee had expressed an interest in having a representative from the Commission participate. Commissioners reviewed copies of the letter and the minutes of the first meeting which were attached. In discussion, Commissioners expressed appreciation for having been asked to participate but each felt it difficult to immediately commit to an additional schedule of meetings. As they had not previously had the opportunity to consider the item, individual Commissioners indicated that they would like the opportunity to think about taking on the additional commitment. Regular Meeting - November 28, 1995 Page 7 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission VIII. COMMUNICATIONS and STAFF REPORTS As the Commission requested at the last meeting, Director Mickelsen reported that he had spoken with City Administrator Brian Almquist about scheduling Commission meetings so that they might be broadcast over the cable access channel. He said that Mr. Almquist had recommended that the Commission wait until after the first of the year before gathering information as the City is now in the process of re-negotiating its contracts with the College and would prefer not to take on any new partners at this time. IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS None X. UPCOMING MEETING DATE(S) and PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS The next meeting was scheduled for Monday, December 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. at the Department Office. Items for the agenda included setting fees for the golf course and a report from the golf course committee on the selection of an architect. XI. ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION - Land Negotiations MOTION Commissioner Adams made a motion to adjourn to Executive Session. Commissioner MacGraw seconded. The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no XII. RE-CONVENE TO REGULAR SESSION XIII. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, by consensus, Chair Alsing adjourned the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Ann Benedict, Business Manager Ashland Parks and Recreation Department ASHLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 1995 TO: Mayor, City Council, City Administrator and Assistant City Administrator FROM: Linda Hoggatt, Administrative Services Manager via Gary Brown, Chief of Police It has been some time since our department has been able to report to Council statistically. My last report to you stated we were having some trouble in verifying our data through the state reporting system. At the statewide Law Enforcement Data System meeting in September our representative learned that a new computerized reporting system planned for implementation last April is still having difficulties. As a matter of fact, they are unsure if the system will work or when it will come on line. We will continue to monitor the progress of the statewide system; however, in the meantime, we manually track those statistics/crimes which we have customarily reported to Council on. Each month I will submit a recap of the nine major crime areas (commonly referred to as Part I crimes). The recap will give you a view of the prior month, and an analysis of year to date figures as compared to the previous year. If you have a specific category you are interested in, or have a question regarding other activities in our city, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. STATISTICS: Thru November the Police Department had a 10.6% increase in Part I crime over the previous year. Two categories in particular have had considerable increase in reporting, those being Larceny and Motor Vehicle Theft. Larceny, a category covering shoplifting, theft from motor vehicles, bicycle thefts, etc., has had the most activity. In the last month Ashland has been hit particularly hard with theft from vehicles. This category thru November, has 804 incidents (an increase of 12.3%). Motor vehicle thefts have increased 51.6% or 47 cases (31 in 1994). Property crimes, while always of concern, are known to rise in activities during the holiday season. NOV 95 NOV 94 CLASSIFICATION RPTD THIS YEAR TO LAST YR % OF MONTH. DATE TO DATE CHANGE ----------------- --------- --------- --------- -------- HOMICIDE 0 1 1 0.0% RAPE 0 6 8 0.0% ROBBERY 0 11 8 0.0% ASSAULT 0 8 6 0.0% INTIMIDATION 1 5 5 0.0% BURGLARY 12 124 129 -3.9% LARCENY/THEFT 92 804 716 12.3% MOTOR V THEFT 9 47 31 51.6% ARSON 0 12 17 -29.4% TOTAL 114 1018 921 10.5% ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT: DETECTIVES: Investigations cited two subjects for possession of less than an ounce of marijuana and arrested two fugitives. A case of attempted robbery of an elderly couple in the Azteca parking lot was also assigned to investigations for followup. Detective Brown completed an assist to a California agency restulting in an arrest of a fugitive on felony sex charges. The Major Assault/Death Investigation Unit officer was called out to assist in an officer involved shooting in White City. TRAINING: Detective Steve Brown attended a three day regional symposium on child abuse and sexual assault held in Eugene. YOUTH DIVERSION: The Youth Diversion program continues to be a major asset to the police Department as Jan continues to work with the youth of Ashland and we see youth offenders come to completion of their diversion programs. Peer juries were held again in November allowing the youth to judge their own for the offenses they commit. The following are cases referred to the YDO for the month of November: Three cases of Criminal Mischief III, three cases of Theft III, one case of Possession of Tobacco, and one case of Criminal Mischief II/Criminal Trespass II. CRIME PREVENTION/DARE: Officer Smith has held 48 DARE Classes and over 30 class visitations in November. He has been working hard on implementating a police department trading card program. This program has been well supported by Ashland businesses and citizens alike. The cards are set for distribution in January. COMMUNICATIONS: The information for the month of November is as follows: POLICE CALLS 777 (644 in 1994) and increase of 133 MEDICAL RUNS 74 (38 in 1994)an increase of 36 calls FIRE RUNS 11 (28 in 1994) decrease of 17 calls AUTO AID 7 (3 in 1994) decrease of 4 calls AMBULANCE 42 (55 in 1994) decrease of 7 calls pf ASA L Pma rand um �4f6O�' December 11, 1995 Mayor and City Council ram: James H. Olson, Acting Public Works Director �1I�Ijptt: November Monthly Report Attached are the detailed reports from Fleet Maintenance, Street, Water Quality and Engineering Divisions: ACTIVITY SUM L4,RY AND COMPARISON Activity 11195 11/94 11189 Equipment work Orders 95 139 52 Miles of Street Swept 897 767 322 Water Meters/Services (new & 31 33 38 replaced) Utility Locates 5 6 26 Drinking Water Treated 84 - 60 77 Drinking Water Treated 65 MG* 62 MG* 53 MG* Wastewater Treated 45 MG* 55 MG* 51 MG* Sewer Cleaned 54,600 31,283 15,528 Sewer Inspected with Television 0 Feet 0** 0** Engineering Active Projects 22 17 21 Engineering 5 8 4 Subdivisions/Partitions Engineering Permits Issued 13 57 7 *Million Ganons ** Not an activity this year cc: Public Works supervisors :y.\Shy''$,�C4<<i`i'>.b;S,�no:kny�'C\::`:.:'•..:k`1....p. 4 � f Water Quality Monthly Report November 1995 cp'.Gi:y The following is a report of the collective activities of various sub-divisions within the Water Quality Division. This report only concerns only the significant activity within these divisions. WATER Leaks: Repaired five leaks in City-owned water mains and three leaks in customer service lines. Meters: Installed eleven 3/4" meters with hand valves, and one 2" and one 4". Changed out three 3/4" meters. Fire Hydrants: Removed one abandoned fire hydrant at Strawberry Lane. Installed one 12" extension at Alta to bring hydrant to grade. Installed two new hydrants. Services: Installed twenty new 3/4" water services at new subdivision off North Mountain. Installed three other 3/4" services. Replaced two 2" water services one to Bellview School and one to Gas Company at B Street. Installed new sample station on N. Mountain. Mains: Chlorinated 2000' of new subdivision water lines off N. Mountain Avenue. Installed new air valve tap for new 12" water line at the bridge. Connected new 12" water main at N. Main St. and Nursery to the existing 4" and abandoning the old 4" along N. Main. We now have the new 12" main done from Nursery to Fox Streets with all tie overs for services, and street connections completed. _ z ' i Finished the vaults and set the new 8" Pressure Reduction Valve with 4" By-Pass on the new 10" water main coming from Strawberry Lane Reservoir to upper end of Westwood Street. Made 6" x 6" main line tap for new main line tie-in at Alta and Wimer. i Pump Stations: Performed weekly inspection and maintenance on four booster pump stations. Miscellaneous: Opened flood gates at Hosler Dam and removed a downed tree in the canyon. Winterized the drinking fountains in town. SEWER Repairs: Made repairs to twenty-one sanitary service lines/mains. Installations: Installed four 4" sanitary sewer services. Replaced one sanitary sewer lateral. i Maintenance: Jet rodded 54,606 feet of various sized sanitary sewer mains, using 100,500 gallons of water. Responded to two main line plugs. TREATMENT FACILITIES The Water Treatment Plant treated 65.55 million gallons of drinking water for our community, and the Water Pollution Control Facility treated 45.55 million gallons of water. MISCELLANEOUS There were 84 requests for location of water and sewer utilities during the past month. I City of Ashland Street Division November 1995 Report SWEEPERS: (2): Swept 897 miles of streets. STO ) Collected 483 yards of debris. Responded to 84 utility location requests. Graded several streets and alleys. Patched pot-holes and sunken services. Continued raising manholes, valve boots, lamp-holes and monuments in conjunction with our re-surfacing program. Thus far for November: 8 manholes, 8 valve boots, 3 lamp-holes and 0 monuments. Placed 30 yards of screened granite on lower Alta above Wimer to complete widening project. Picked up 156 gallons of CSS-1 tack-coat from Morgan Emultech in White City. Ground out 316 square feet of sunken services on lower Park Street and patched back. Repaired the small parking area on Water Street at "B" Street washed out from a broken water main. Hauled off 260 yards of sweeper debris to dump site. Hauled off 20 yards of old concrete to concrete pit. Hauled off 10 yards of old asphalt to re-cycle pit. Graded filter plant road from the plant to Hosler Dam. Saw-cut, removed and patched back a section of concrete in the cross-walk on So. Pioneer. STORM DRAINS: Flushed and/or rodded several storm drain systems. Cleaned off catch basin grates. Cleaned out catch basins. Pulled (cleaned) the ditches and shoulders on E. Nevada: hauled off 80 yards of spoil. Put camera in the storm drains on No. Pioneer between "A" and "B" Streets and at the top of i Church Street. Conducted water tests on Ashland and Bear Creeks. Cleaned the ditch on the east side of Wightman at the R/R tracks: 25 yards of spoil. Cleaned the ditch on the west side of Walker at the R/R tracks: 25 yards of spoil. Put 108 ft. of new rod on the sewer rodder. Installed a new curb inlet catch basin, 16 ft. of 12" P.V.C. into the main storm drain with a new man-hole for the tie-in, on Maple above Catalina, to ease the system on Catalina. Cleaned the ditch on Shamrock Ln.: 20 yards of spoil. Removed a soccer ball from the storm drain on Fordyce. Cleaned the upper ditch on Mistletoe Rd.: 60 yards of spoil. Also placed 100 yards of 6" shale in the ditch to strengthen the shoulders. Cleaned the ditch on the east side of Walker/R/R tracks: 10 yards of spoil. Cleaned the ditch on E. Main, east of Walker: 10 yards of spoil. Began storm drain project on Scenic Drive between Church and Logan Drive. Project includes: marking and calling for utility locates, pot-holing (exposing) utilities, saw-cutting the pavement, removing/hauling the asphalt to our re-cycle yard, installing 882 feet of 12 inch P.V.C. pipe, 6 catch basins and 5 man-holes. SIGNS/PAINT: Painted the curbs yellow on both sides of Auburn at Iowa. Painted the stop bars on both sides of Church Street on Scenic Drive. Also painted yellow the center lines and curbs on all 4 - comers. Replaced the following street signs: Sleepy Hollow/Sylvia, Hargadine/So. Pioneer, Blaine/Dewey, Replaced the following stop signs: 3rd/C (3), Morton/ E. Main, Dewey/E. Main, Emerick/E. Main, 5th/E. Main, 6th/E. Main, 7th/B, Replaced a do not enter sign on 3rd/C Streets. Replaced the following 25 mph signs: across from 691 Oak, 881 E. Main, E. Main by Fire Station #1, Replaced one way signs at the following locations: lst/Lithia Way, ISt/P.O. alley, exiting Lithia Way parking lot, C/exiting car wash, Replaced 3 - 30 minute parking signs on Oak below Lithia Way and one 8th. below E. Main. P Replaced no parking anytime signs at the following locations: 176 Jessica Ln., 1041, 917, 881 and 6th on E. Main. Replaced dead end sign on Lynn at Hersey and extended the post 3 ft.. Replaced no parking here to comer sign on B/2nd. Replaced 5 minute parking sign on 1st in front of the Post Office. Replaced no parking signs on both sides of the R/R tracks on No. Mountain. Installed "VEHICLE HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED 60"==THIS SPACE ONLY" on the east side of Oak Street, 1st. parking space below "B" Street. Replaced the Handi-Cap sign across from 136 So. Mountain. Installed a new post and "NO OUTLET" sign in the alley above Ashland Street. between Beach and Liberty Steets. Repainted the yellow curb on So. Mountain from Ashland Street to 612. Re-painted the addresses on the curb at: 540, 562, 564, 580, 588, 600 and 612. Installed a new post and street sign at Palmer/Elm. Removed old street sign post on Palmer Rd.. Installed a "IMPOUND VEHICLES ONLY" parking space at the Justice Center parking lot. Straightened the street sign on Oaklawn/Sylvia. Replaced 2 no parking this side of street signs on Hersey between Oak and Water Streets. Re-located the street sign at No. Mountain/Hersey to the top of the stop sign for better visibility. Made up 8 - 6"xl2" black/yellow 'BOTTOM FED" signs for the Electric Dept. Made up Piedmont Drive/Scenic Drive street sign for contractor. Straightened and extended post and replaced the street sign at Ridge Rd./ Glenview Drive. Also replaced the no right turn sign. MISCELLANEOUS: Picked up several dead animals. Picked up a wood stove at 175 Hillcrest for the Conservation Dept.. Hauled in 30 yards of 3/4 minus rock and graded the "DOG PARK RD." for the Parks Dept.. Hauled a truck and trailer load of old steel culvert pipe from our pipe yard on Glenview Drive to White City. Install tarps on open parking stalls at "B" Street yard for paver and distributor. Readied 30 barricades and 30 cones for the P.D. for the parade on Friday the 24th., loading them into 2 pick-ups. Un-loaded them on Monday, the 27th.. Cleaned up a concrete spill in the 900 block of Morton. Repaired numerous lights on barricades. Replaced 11 reflective road markers along the drainage ditch on upper Mistletoe Rd.. Cleaned up equipment and facilities on a weekly basis. Helped in shop when needed. Held monthly safety meeting. Our special guest this month: Dick Wanderscheid. I City of Ashland Fleet Maintenance November 1995 Report Eight mechanics completed work on 95 work orders on various types of City equipment and vehicles. With the new numbering system in effect, work orders will no longer be reported on an individual department or division basis. The emergency generators at City Hall and the Civic Center were manually tested on a weekly basis. I and M certificates issued for the month: City of Ashland: 3 Ashland Parks Department: 4 I (0surdXshoplept.om) ENGINEERING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT FOR: November, 1995 1. Issued 8 Street Excavation permits. 2. Issued 2 Miscellaneous Construction permits. 3. Issued 3 Address Change or Assignment form. 4. Responded to 2 Certificates of Occupancy reviews. 5. Completed 5 Pre-applications for Planning Actions. 6. Completed 5 "One-Stop" permit forms. 7. Performed field and office checks on 5 partition plats. 8. Reviewed plans of Wingspread Mobile Home Park expansion. 9. Hired new engineering technician. 10. Reviewed description and prepared memo regarding acquisition of an easement on Water Street Road. 11. Attended meeting with Oregon Water Resources regarding water rights. 12. Updated City wide water and sewer utility maps. 13. Performed the following work on the Scenic Heights Subdivision: a. Met with Contractor in regards to patching Scenic Drive. b. Inspected work performed by Contractor. C. Issued "punch list" of items to be completed. 14. Attended a neighborhood meeting regarding proposed traffic calming measures on Oak Street. 15. Performed the following work pertaining to the improvement of Fordyce Street: a. Met with staff to discuss possible traffic calming measures. b. Estimated costs for improvements. C. Revised plan of proposed improvements. PAGE 1-(�:.gi..\.a,wr.Rp0 16. Performed following work pertaining to Oak Knoll Meadows Subdivision Phase IV: a. Conducted final inspection. b. Prepared revised "punch list". 17. Prepared memo regarding the termination of pre-paving agreements on Clear Creek Subdivision. 18. Inspected construction of North Mountain Avenue. 19. Attended meetings with Al Cook and Bruce Sund regarding water rights issues. 20. Performed the following work regarding Dogwood Way: a. Prepared agreement for dedication. b. Revised plan of street dedication. C. Corresponded with property owners regarding dedication. 21. Provided maps and information for the creation of a water system computer model. 22. Attended monthly Rogue Basin Utility Coordinating Council meeting in Medford. 23. Performed the following work on the Water Plant Improvement Project: a. Inspected contract work. b. Prepared progress payment to Contractor and Consulting Engineer. C. Attended monthly progress meeting. d. Approved progress payment No. 6. e. Approved change order No. 6. 24. Attended ACWA meeting in Grants Pass. 25. Performed the following work on the 1995 Miscellaneous Concrete Project: a. Awarded Contract. b. Held pre-construction conference. C. Met with School officials regarding sidewalk construction. d. Issued notice to proceed. 26. Performed the following work pertaining to Mountain Meadows Subdivision: a. Issued notice to proceed. b. Inspected work performed by contractor. 27. Attended Bear Creek Water Quality Advisory Meeting in Medford. I 28. Updated City base maps by adding new subdivisions and tax lots. 29. Contacted landscape contractor to install slope protection materials along excavated areas on Strawberry Lane. 30. Performed the following work regarding the storm drain improvements planned along PAGE 2*:�ngi.�\wmwy_RPq Q+,of emarttxtdum December 7, 1995 Q, Council r ram: Pam Barlow, PW Ad min. Asst. Clean Cities Following is a copy of the Clean Cities Coalition bulletin. The Coalition continues to succeed in bringing more and more alternatively fueled vehicles to the Rogue Valley. Here's to one more contribution to improving the Rogue Valley's air quality! It's not too early to mark your calendars--a special stakeholders' reception will be held on Wednesday, January 24. I hope you will all be able to attend. The event promises to be a great opportunity to network with other agencies and leaders, and to hear Ralph Lewis, an authority on energy resources, speak. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . �a Cities - Jet,. 4 OMvt a bulletin for Rogue Valley Clean Cities Coalition stakeholders December 1995 GRI issues proposal THE GA s RESEARCH INSTRUTE,the research and de request for natural velopment arm of the natural gas industry,,has issued its GRI-Clean Cities Deployment Initia- gas projects five Request for Proposals ■ The initiative is aimed at funding projects that deploy GRI prod- x; . Rogue Valley ucts and technologies for natural gas vehicles,increase the use of natural gas as a Clean Cities Coalition transportation fuel,and contribute to regional development of a natural gas market Approximately$500,000 is available to fund three to five projects among Clean Cit- chair ies organizations nationwide Proposals must be received by GRI by January 15,1996. Pam Barlow ■ For a copy of the RFP,application,and supporting documents,contact Scott City of Ashland Rayburn,7704401,or via e-mail,cleanerair@aol.com. 541 /488.5587 vice-chair Global energy future MARY vouR CALENDARS for an important event Neil Thorson focus of January Ralph Lewis,a nationally known speaker and WP Natural Gas authority on energy resources,will present a 541/858.4774 Clean Cities event. very special program as guest of the Rogue Val- ley Clean Cities Coalition at its annual stake- secretary/treasurer holders reception,Wednesday,January 24. ■ The afternoon event is at the Smull in Sherrin Coleman Center in Medford and will include a catered reception as well as displays of prod- RVTD uets,vehicles,and activities involving alternative fuels.There is no charge to attend 541/779.5821 Watch for details in your mail. New web page Tn.EtvwroRMAnoNARouT alternative fuels,gov- ceordinator eminent policies and regulations,Clean Cities Scott Rayburn hosts alternative activities,and other issues involving changing Synthesis Bus Comm Svcs fuel resources, data fuel technologies is available from the Altema- 541/770.4401 tive Fuels Data Center's World Wide Web home deanerair@aol.com page. ■ Among the broad range of items and topics accessible are current and past 541 /535.3770 fax newsletters,conference announcements,demonstration project reviews,vehicle manufacturers reports,fuel studies,refueling locations,and federal and state fuel laws and incentives ■ The Alternative Fuels Data Center home page address is http://www.afdc.doe,gov.It also may be accessed through the home page of the Department of Energy's Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Network at http://www.eren.doe.gov. tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt over > Chrysler newsletter THE CHARAcrERtsnca of FIVE POetnaR alternative fuels spotlights AFV topics are compared in the enclosed excerpt from Chrysler Corporation's AFV Quarterly newslet- and products ter,which focuses on the auto maker's efforts to develop and market CNG and other altemative. fuel vehicles ■ For a complete copy of the newsletter's current issue,contact Scott Raybum at 770-4401 ■ To add your organization to the mailing list for subsequent r, issues,contact Chrysler Corporation's Mike Cole at 810/948-2897. Cities Rogue Valley Publisher offers AsPEaAtsuasCRrPnox OFFER exclusively for RVCCC Clean Cities Coalition subscription deal stakeholders has been arranged withEnviron- mental Information Networks,the publisher of ... made up of 50 public agen- AltemativeFuels7bday. You'll find details about ties,private firms,utilities,and this discount offer,plus a sample daily news summary and a description of E IN's non-profit organizations advo- other alternative fuel industry publications,enclosed with this bulletin ' eating for the expanded use of alternative fuels in transporta- `' tfon.It is one of 43 Clean Cities w., organizations in the nation. r' Contacts— CW tS 4: Rogue Valley December 12-14,1995 d.' Clean Cities Coalition EVS-12 North American Electric Vehicle&Infrastructure Conference 541/770.4401 Atlanta,Georgia 0 Pam Turner,415/855-2010 deanerair®aol.com 541/535.3770 fax January 22-23, 1996 4th Annual Environmental Vehicles En V'96 do Synthesis Bus Comm Svcs Dearborn,Michigan 0 Rich Moizio,800_/659 2559 2935 David Lane Medford OR 97504-9403 January 23-25, 1996 LNG-Powered Heavy-Duty Transportation Conference&Exposition Los Angeles,California 0 Steven Shivak,713/952-9500 US DOE Clean Cities Hotline 800/224.8437(CCrrIES) January 24, 1996 ccities @afdc.nrel.gov Rogue Valley Clean Cities Coalition annual stakeholders reception Medford,Oregon 0 Scott Rayburn,S41/770-4401 February 2,1996 Fleets at the Crossroads:AltemativeFuels and Vehicle Efficiency Conference Portland,Oregon 0 Portland Energy Office,503/823-7222 June 3-6,1996 Windsor Workshop on AltemativeFuels -Sponsored byCANMET,Natural Resources Canada,and US DOE Toronto,Ontario 0 Susan Horton,905/822-4111 x 515 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t � • i'i of �Nl.... City of Ashland OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 20 E. Main 5treet A5hiand,OR 97520 CATHY GOLDEN MAYOR (503)4823211 December 13, 1995 TO: City Council Members FROM: Mayor Golden SUBJECT: Conservation Commission Appointment Confirmation is requested for Karen Amarotico's appointment to the Conservation Commission. This was the only applicant for the position. Her letter is attached. The advertisement for the position is also attached. (re�lgpemm) Attachments i YOUR CITY NEEDS YOU! The Conservation Commission has a volunteer position open. If you are interested in more information, please contact Regional Affairs Manager Dick Wanderscheid at City Hall, 482-3211, ext. 36. Please submit your letter of interest with your r6sum6 to Mayor Cathy Golden at City j Hall, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520. The deadline for applications is November 30. Saturday, November Revels'. Novem5er 16 Edition. I LPO #12690 r For information, contact Rhonda at 488-6002. f` i � I i i , ct { L.' t i r f� f 1995 4 195 Randy Ashland,OPUWULI-------------------(503)482-5498 November 30,1995 Mayor Golden City Hall 20 East Main Street Ashland,OR 97520 Dear Ms.Golden, For several months I have attended the meetings of the Conservation Commission. My interest in attending was sparked by my desire to find a way to recycle a wider variety of items and to help businesses recycle more of their waste. I am familiar with some of the issues that businesses must face as I work part-time at Geppettds and on occasion bring their non-curbside items to the recycling center. It was brought to my attention that them is a vacancy on the Conservation Commission. I would like to volunteer for that position and complete the current term. I am a mother of two, a small business owner and willing to work for what I believe in. If you feel that I would be an asset to the commission,I would be delighted to serve. Sincerely, Kltu��� Karen Amarotico G4EG0� December 13, 1995 V1 Q. Ashland City Council r Yam: Audit Committee uhjert. Audit Report & Management Letters & Responses The Audit Committee met December 12 and finished its review of the audit document, the auditor's comments in the management letters and the responses by staff. Responses to the management letters (attached) are accepted as presented by staff . The Committee wishes to clarify the Hospital' s response to the Auditor's comment #1. The Committee feels that it is an internal management decision on how the Medicare and Welfare monies are recorded on a monthly basis and the methodology used by staff in no way impacts the integrity of the Comprehensive Financial Report. Hospital records are adjusted at year end for the Financial Report based on discussion and agreement with the auditor. This years audit comments and staff responses will be revisited by the Committee at next years audit review. Audit Committee Minutes December 6, 1995 3:00 p.m. Pioneer Hall Committee members present included Chair Martin Levine, Barbara Christensen, and Robert Dozier. Auditors Don Doerr and Lance Brant from Coopers & Lybrand were present. City staff included Mike McGraw, Jim Watson, Ken Mickelsen, Jill Turner, Brian Almquist, Karen Huckins, Patrick Caldwell, and Lynna Batters. The meeting was brought to order at 3:05 by Chair Levine. Approval of the minutes of the Sept. 6, 1995 meeting was first on the agenda. Dozier moved to approve the minutes; Christensen seconded the motion. Ayes all. Terms of office for the two citizen members was decided.next. Levine proposed Dozier serve the three year term, with Amarotico serving two years. Ayes all. Hauck and Amarotico arrived at 3:10. There was a brief review of the committee functions, and Levine asked whether the committee wanted to give input to the Council relative to the audit itself or the management letter. The Hospital Letter to Management from the auditors addressed two items for review: 1. Calculation of allowances for contract reimbursement. 2. Medical payor reimbursement system. McGraw addressed the concerns, stating that for #i1 he prefers to calculate the contractual allowances on the conservative side. Since he doesn't get the adjustment until 18 months after year end, he again prefers to make his projection conservative. Levine clarified that it is the auditors proposal to change significantly from McGraw's method. McGraw replied that they are trying to strike more of a balance. The auditors have to use real numbers whereas McGraw has unknowns to work with. Turner observed that gross revenue for the Hospital was down and asked "Is that a trend?" Watson said no, that is largely a result of the Hospital's decision to stop providing physical therapy. Also, rates have not been raised for two years. However, raising rates does not increase revenues anymore. Christensen asked if the Hospital has many private pay patients, and what percent of bad debt they represent. Watson said that historically, bad debt for the Hospital is 5-6%. Some I self-pay customers are slow to pay and Hospital-wide they account for 9% of the bad debts. In the ER that rate climbs to 30%. I Doerr noted that charity cases affect the tax exempt status of a non-profit organization, however they are not similarly relevant in a municipal environment. He also noted that comment #2 about having contract information readily available and current is meant more that it should be available as a management evaluation tool than as it relates to the audit. McGraw noted that to make the software useful complex formulas have to be built in and then integrated into the admitting and receivable programs. Levine asked what is the Hospital's policy about not accepting patients (who won't be able to � pay). Watson said it is an option but ACH hasn't done that. So far the Hospital has been able to negotiate contracts which allow them to continue accepting patients. Levine asked how charity cases are accounted for. Watson said that although the Hospital does have a charity line item, they use the bad debt line item instead. Doerr also noted that Cobra discourages "dumping" patients by imposing severe fines and revoking medicare privileges. Watson said it was a good audit process and that he expects the discussion to continue with regard to medicare and welfare reporting. Doerr noted that the Hospital's net operating revenue is 7%. Most hospitals are at about 3-4% which tells him this hospital is in good shape. However, they will be keeping an eye on the Federal budget controversy, as that will have some kind of impact. The Park Department audit was discussed next. Brant noted that the transmittal letter highlights the Golf Course Fund and the Youth Activity Levy, both of which are new. Turner reviewed several fund balances. Levine asked why, if it is the purpose of the Park Department to spend money, is it good that the balances are increasing. Turner clarified that it merely reflects what was projected to happen. The difference in the Ashland Youth Activities Levy is due to several factors: having received more money through taxes to begin with, and gaining more interest than anticipated. Dozier summarized for the Hospital about the auditor's recommendations: #1--don't agree but will do it, and #2--is done. Parks summary: #1--will do when the system is on line, and #2--is still under discussion. Dozier wants specifics about what responses are and when they will be accomplished. As a result the Audit Committee requested written responses from the Hospital, Parks, and City before going to the Council with their recommendations. Doerr said there are three different kind of comments, those which address compliance issues, operational inefficiency, or finances. There was some discussion about the inclusion of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival's buildings having been included in the Park Department fixed assets listing this year. The Audit Committee Minutes Dec. 6, 1995 Page 2 I I Audit Committee December 12, 1995 9:15 a.m. Public Works Conference Room Committee members present included Chair Martin Levine, Barbara Christensen, Robert Dozier, with Steve Amarotico arriving at 9 : 35 a.m. City staff included Jill Turner, Brian Almquist, Karen Huckins and Ann Benedict . The meeting was called to order by Chair Levine. Staff responses to Audit Comments of the management letters for Hospital, Parks and City were handed out . Dozier commented that the staff responses were in line with what was requested. Discussion of City Audit . Turner noted that an accounting change for accruing Hotel/Motel and Food and Beverage Taxes was the only significant difference (five quarters are recorded in this period) . Turner reviewed pages of the audit for the various types of funds. i Review of Staff Responses to Audit Comments Hospital- Dozier stated that comment #1 was a monthly accounting procedure recommended by the auditors . There is an adjustment done at year end for the Financial Report. Dozier stated that this an internal management decision and in no way impacts the report . - Levine noted that the recommendation in comment #2 was basically done . Parks & Recreation - Levine noted that implementation is in progress with the computer software. Audit comment #2 will require a decision from the Park Commission. Christensen requested that there be a report back to the Committee on any action taken on the recommendation. City - Levine noted that the search for Financial Software seemed to be progressing. Dozier noted that the disclosure issues where informational and accounting staff was aware. Turner explained that new check lists for the single audit had been ordered. Report to City Council . Discussion was held on how the Committee would report to City Council . Turner stated that a memo could be drafted and faxed to members for approval/changes. Dozier noted that a more complete explanation of the Audit Committees views on the Hospital' s #1 audit comment needed to be relayed to the Council . I , pg 2 Audit Committee 12/12/95 The Committee agreed that at next years audit review, this years audit comments and staff responses needed to be revisited. The meeting adjourned at 10 :37 a.m. i I I i i I I I r Bowmer and Black Swan Theaters and the administration buildings are included in the value of the land, which is on the City of Ashland's books. Turner presented the City's financial report briefly. There have been significant changes in the accounting policies. The taxes in the Street, General and Sewer Funds have been booked differently. Without the adjusting entry the net general fund balance would have been -$35,000 instead of +$200,000. The Finance Department is doing a request for proposals for new accounting software. Another.meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, Dec. 12 at the Public Works conference room. It was decided that Levine will write a report to Council and they can communicate with the Park Commission about the auditor's recommendations to the Park Dept. Doerr made a few additional comments. The audit report at the front of the City's-Audit is similar to last years', however, the auditors now have to refer to compliance. The City has a clean opinion from the auditor's in that area. On page 112 the new rule, ORS 373 is included although the auditor's could not test for compliance. Dozier moved to adjourn; Christensen seconded the motion. Ayes all. The meeting adjourned at 5:05. Audit Committee Minutes Dec. 6, 1995 Page 3 CoopersCoopers& Lybrand L.L.P. 400 Country Club Road telephone (503) 485-1500 Suite 300 I &Lybrand I a professional services 5nn I � �s ,� I 'tax 81 «> September 11, 1995 Ashland Community Hospital P.O. Box 98 Ashland, OR 97820 We have audited the financial statements of Ashland Community Hospital for the year ended June 30, 1995 and have issued our report thereon dated August 4, 1995. In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of Ashland Community Hospital and Subsidiaries for the year ended June 30, 1995, we considered its internal control structure in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all-matters in the internal control structure that might be material weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a condition in which the design or operation of the specific internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. However, we noted no matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above. The attached comments, while not considered material weaknesses are being submitted for your consideration to help you strengthen internal accounting controls and operational efficiencies. Our recommendations reflect our desire to be of continuing assistance to Ashland Community Hospital. Since our comments and observations contained in this report are a by-product of the financial statement audit, the cost justification and other aspects of our suggestions have not been hilly evaluated; these evaluations should be made by management. Therefore, we recognize that, after consideration, certain suggestions and recommendations may not be practical to implement. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board and Management. Our comments deal exclusively with operational, accounting, and recordkeeping systems and procedures, and should not be regarded as reflecting on the integrity or capabilities of anyone in your Organization. Also, our comments have been restricted to conditions noted and suggested means of improvement and are not intended as commentary on the various favorable aspects of the Organization's procedures. We appreciate the cooperation we received from your personnel in connection with developing these recommendations. Very truly yours, sm ` ' Coopers d Lybrand LLP.is a member of Cooper;6 Lybrand International,a limited liability association incorporated in Switzeriand. I lS r 41 f � k Ashland Community Hospital i Report to Management June 30, 199 I The following opportunities for strengthening internal controls, and/or increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of Ashland Community Hospital's (the Hospital) operations, were identified during the 1995 engagement I 1. Contractual Allowance Calculation ^ The calculation of the contractual allowances from Medicare, Medicaid, and the various i other types of payors is a complicated process and required substantial analysis during the audit to determine the adequacy of the deductions and allowances. As a result, adjustments to contractual allowances totaled approximately $425,000. In calculating the monthly contractual allowances, we recommend the Hospital's staff should compare the historical charges to the historical net reimbursement used in the calculation to the most recent remittance advices PS & R reports for reasonableness. %r Z. Contracting The Hospital has experienced an increase in managed care contracts during the year. This change in the make up of the Hospital's revenues points out the need to constantly review and evaluate the existing contracts and to place a high priority on the evaluation of new p contracts. This includes developing systems to capture the financial data related to the F. individual contracts, periodic reporting to administration of the utilization, continuous evaluation of the impact on operations of the individual contracts, and renegotiation if necessary. r `a r i __ ASHLAND MMUNI CO Y EIOSPI7 AL Memorandum December 11, 1995 TO: Municipal Audit Committee FROM: Michael S. McGraw, hospital Controller SUBJECT: Coopers & Lybrand - Audit Management Letter The Management Letter from Coopers & Lybrand listed two suggestions to help Ashland Community Hospital become more efficient and effective in its auditing operations. one of these suggestions focused on alternative methodology in projecting potential allowances for monies that would need to be written off for Medicare and Welfare programs. Because of the uncertainty of Medicare interpretation by the Health Care Financing Administration, in Washington, as well as the potential liability to Medicare and Welfare outlier classifications, Ashland Community Hospital has chosen to continue with its current methodology in allowance determination. This approach is much more conservative, but allows for the unexpected which is generally the case in the health care environment of today. The Management Letter also focused on the need to capture financial data relating to individual contracts from third party payers. We recognize that with the increase of managed care contracts (currently 33 contracts and sub-contracts) the necessity of constant and continuous evaluation of patients and their associated expected payments to the hospital has mandated the implementation of Reimbursement Management. This system first began in late '941 and has become fully operational as of November 1995. Some of the benefits of the system are: 1. Accurate prediction of insurance reimbursements for contracted carriers. 2 . Statistical analysis of payor mix for contractual negotiations. 3 . Periodic reports to administration on carrier utilization and payments. 280 Maple Strect • P.0, Box 98 Ashland, OR 97520 • 503482-2441 i dated October 1 1995 and Medicare reimbursement rates have been updated the Reimbursement Kanagement system has been "fine tuned" to predict payments within $0 .01 of actual payments. This is an increase from prior to October 1, 1995 where the expected reimbursement was within -0. 02% . : Noted exceptions are when a patient is transferred to Rogue Valley Medical Center. The majority of Medicare payment goes to the accepting hospital . Billers now have the use of "Reimbursement Screens" for verification of amounts of insurance payments of the contracted carriers. This allows for "point of entry" confirmation of payment rates and allowances . Additionally, with the dynamic nature of carriers (mergers, inter-carrier pricing, relocation, etc. ) , billing addresses are: being updated in a regular and timely manner. This increases the throughput rate in which insurance companies are billed and payments are received. with the statistical data derived at end-of-month, we now have a "checks and balances" function for the statistical reports produced With this our reports more accurately reflects for Medicaid P actual hospital statistics_ This was noted when "Self Pay" patients became Medicaid patients three weeks after discharge . h V 'CITY OF ASHLAND :.-'C>�^ CITY HALL "- ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 telephone(code 503)482-3211 Audit Committee: December 12, 1995 We would like to take the opportunity to respond to the "Report to Management' letter provided by Coopers and Lybrand. Computer System. It has been recommended for several years that the financial software be replaced It does not address the current and growing needs of the City. An extensive search for a sound financial software has been in progress for several months. Bid responses have been received and are currently being evaluated. The finance department is interested in obtaining an open system that can integrate programs from other departments and or vendors as it becomes necessary. The programs currently being reviewed have extensive controls over access and security on various levels for each program, as well as training and documentation. After implementation is complete, Coopers and Lybrand, as part of the audit process, will review security and procedures to test the integrity of the system. Implementation of New applicable Government Standards GASB 24 requires additional reporting for grants and financial assistance when a Government acts as a agent and not a recipient. Presently the City records all grant monies as a recipient so this new standard will not effect us. Staff is aware of this requirement and will implement it if ever applicable. GASB 25 requires a significant change in the pension footnote. This will be implemented with the auditors help by June 30, 1997. GASB 27 Accounting for Pensions by State and Local Governmental Employers. This somewhat controversial proposal will be monitored for the next several years. Often implementation dates on controversial standards are delayed. Staff will estimate review the impact of this on the current financial reports in 1996. Single Audit This act most likely will apply during the 1996-97 fiscal year. Staff is aware of the standard and is reviewing Single Audit Check lists for compliance. At the last meeting, it was suggested that we may want to have an audit on the Sewer fund. I discussed this with our Bond Financial Consultant who recommended the present level of opinion (Enterprise Fund) is suff icient. Sincerely, Jill Turner CPA Director of Finance Wacctg\a ud iflcomme nts 9 I V ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION • 340 SO. PIONEER STREET ASHLAND. OREGON 97520 PARK COMMISSIONERS: ;'a OF ASN4 KENNETH J. MICKELSEN PATRICIA ADAMS V �, O Direcbr ALLEN A.ALSING - BOBBENNETT '� TER]COPPEDGE ..4. TEL (503)4885340 LAURIE MacGRAW OREG'Oa FAX (503)488-5314 MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Audit Committee City of Ashland FROM: Kenneth J. Mickelsen, Director DATE: December 12, 1995 SUBJECT: Response to Auditor's Comments in Management Letter Regarding the two auditor's comments in the auditor's Report to Management, the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission responds as following: Item #1. COMPUTER SYSTEM The Commission concurs with the suggestion and the Department will implement the appropriate controls pertaining to access and security for the new accounting program. The goal is to have the new system operational prior to June 30, 1996. Item #2. GOLF COURSE FUND The Commission will examine this suggestion during its 1996-97 budget process for the Golf Course Fund. Since the City Finance Director has raised some concerns about the suggestion, those concerns will also be examined. After reviewing the issues related to this suggestion, the Commission will determine the direction in which it would like to proceed. Home of Famous Lithia Park To: City Council From: Debbie Miller Re: Chapter 18.108 revision My comments were written soon after the Planning Commission study session in October,but since the Commission did not meet again to discuss this chapter,I shall forward these suggestions to you for consideration before you vote. I certainly agree with the change back to Council appeals,rather than needing to go directly to LUBA if a disagreement occurs. Since you are the City's elected officials,you should be apart of the decision-making. While I am sympathetic to the charge that the power of Planning Commission is/ will be eroded if appeals to Council are easy and common,I also feel that the Commission needs to carefully weigh all aspects of planning actions foftheir compliance with the Comp Plan and Ordinances. The broader the scope of criteria used to measure,the more secure the decision will be, and the more satisfied the participants. It is crucial,then,that the Council be able to hear all relevant testimony from all parties,and not limit its ability to learn all pertinent facts before reaching a conclusion. I would like to offer a few minor changes to the draft you will be studying tonight. I am using the hand-numbered copy of REQUEST TO AMEND THE PROCEDURES CHAPTER...(with I!neouts and grayed-in additions). p.4 B. S s Time=limits:.. 3.c. I would suggest that property owners with 200 feet be notified. One hundred feet may be only 2 lots on either side of the property in question. p.5 A. ''�pe,1 z? edure Actions-tncluded 7.c. A 50%reduction in yard setback is quite a lot;in some cases one could hardly walk between houses. Should this be allowed with a simple review? p.6 Time Limits B. 3. This is a town full of travellers.Why not give affected property owners 14 days to file an appeal for a hearing? p.7 Type III Procedures 2. If I am reading this correctly,zone changes would not be automatically reviewed by Council? p.9 Posted Notice Anna Howe had an excellent suggestion for including more information at the site. I hope it will be put into action. p. 14 Annexations This is such an important matter,please give it prompt attention! 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-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anning%cada\rav-1 oag.ard) 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, three copies of a complete application shall be submitted to the Planning Department. 1. Complete applications shall include: a. All of the required information for the specific action requested, b. Written findings of fact, c. Complete and signed application form. The application must be signed by one or more property owners of the property for which the planning action is requested, or their authorized agents. The application shall not be considered complete unless it is accompanied by 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. Ministerial Actions. 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. Planning Actions. All planning actions shall be subject to processing by one of the four following procedures: 1. Staff Permit Procedure f 2. Type I Procedure 3. Type II Procedure 4. Type III Procedure C. Legislative Amendments. Legislative amendments shall be subject to the procedures established in section 18.108.170. 18.108.022 Ministerial Action Time Limits. A. Within 21 days after accepting an application for a ministerial action the Staff Advisor shall deny or approve the PAGE 2-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anninq 1coda\rev-108g.ord) II 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. Actions Included. 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. B. Time Limits, Notice and Hearing Requirements. Applications subject to the Staff Permit Procedure shall be processed as follows: PAGE 3-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:V1wninO1code\rev-t oap.ord) i 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. Actions Included. 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 I procedures. 4. Amendments to conditions of approval. 5. Creation of a private way, as allowed in section 18.80.030.8. 6. Conditional Use Permits involving existing structures or additions to existing structures, and not involving more than 3 residential dwelling units, or temporary uses. 7. Variances for: 1, a. Sign placement. PAGE 4-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:planninglcode\rev-108g.ord) 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. i. 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. B. Time Limits, Notice and Hearing Requirements. Applications 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 18.108.030.8.3. 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. 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: PAGE 5-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anniag\eoda\rav-1 oeo.ord) 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 Staff Advisor 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 Commission or Board to be heard as provided in section 18.108.040.B.4. 18.108.050 Type II Procedure. A. Actions Included. 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. Time Limits, Notice and Hearing Requirements. Applications 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 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 be subject to the Type III Procedure: 1. Zone Changes or Amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps, except for legislative amendments, 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Changes or changes to other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 3. Annexations. 4. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments. PAGE 6-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:planninp\code\rev-1080.ard) B. Standards for Type III Planning Actions. 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section 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 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.A.1 and 2, 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.A.3 and 4, the Commission 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 and Appeals. 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 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 PAGE 7-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION Jp:plannin&ode�rev-1 080.ord) 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 Actions. 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, unless appealed to the Council as provided in section 18.108.110.A. If a public hearing is held, the final decision shall be effective 15 days after the findings adopted by the Commission or Board are signed by the Chair of the Commission or Board 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. 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, 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. 4. Type III Planning Actions. For planning actions described in section 18.108.060.A.1 and 2, 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.A.3 and 4, 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. 5. The City Council may call up any planning action for a public hearing and decision upon motion and majority vote, provided such vote takes place in the required time period, as outlined below. 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. 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 2G-.1.0`'days prior to the hearing to: .::..:.... 1. The applicant or authorized agnt, 2. The subject property owner, and PAGE 8-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anning\codelrev-I08g.ord( Y 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 2& )3Edays prior to the date of the Commission meeting. Failure by the applicant to post a riotice, 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. 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. PAGE 9-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:planning%codeVev-10 8g.ord I i 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. F. Whenever it is demonstrated to the Staff Advisor that: 1. The city did not mail the notice required in § 18.108.030.6; 2. Such error adversely affected and prejudiced a person's substantial rights; and 3. Such person notified the Staff Advisor within 21 days of when the person knew of should have known of the decision, the Staff Advisor shall schedule a hearing 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 conducted as provided in § 18.108.100. If a hearing is conducted under this section, the decision of the Commission or Hearings Board shall supersede the previous decision. G. Whenever it is demonstrated to the Staff Advisor that: 1. The city did not comply with the notice requirements in § 18.108.080.A through E; 2. Such error adversely affected and prejudiced a person's substantial rights; and 3. Such person notified the Staff Advisor within 21 days of when the person knew or should have known of the decision, the Staff Advisor shall schedule a hearing before the Board, Commission or Council that heard or would have heard the matter involving the defective notice. a. The Staff Advisor shall notify by mail all persons who previously appeared in the matter and all persons who were entitled to mailed notice but were not mailed such notice. b. The hearing shall be conducted as provided in § 18.108.100 if it is a hearing before the Board or Commission, except that the record of the previous hearing shall be reviewed and considered by the Board or Commission. If it is an appeal before the Council, the Council may hear such matters as are permitted in § 18.108.110. A decision made after the hearing shall supersede the previous decision. H. Notwithstanding the period specified in subsections F.3 and G.3 of this section, the period for a hearing or appeal shall not exceed three years after the date of the initial decision. I 18.108.100 Public Hearings Procedure. A. At the commencement of a public hearing 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 PAGE 10-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION w:plannine1codeVev-I080.o•di �I 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 or Council 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; the Commission, for hearings before the Commission, or the Council for hearings before the Council, 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 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 I decisions for which a hearing has been held, of Type II decisions or of Type III decisions described in section 18.108.060.A.1 and 2 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 PAGE 11-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:P1anning\codelrev-I08g.ora) decision should be reversed or modified, based on the applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 3. Any party not fihng a Retice of appeal, Fnay file a netiGe Gf GFess appeal within ten days a fteF the etii. of the ..peal ailed as pFa yideA etien 10 108.11 G A A The ....ti.... of .. al shall .. ..1..i.. these .matt..... . ed in a etwe . ..t appe ..I The paFty filing a netlee of eFess appeal shall mail a eepy of sueh netiee te all etheF ..._ ..__. � v�v.a.a uYww shall nan, a„vw 49. 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 to the hearing. . The appeal shall be a de novo ked to the gFOunds stated in the netiee, 9 the appeal was initiated le ......................... .. . .................... appeal, ev<dentsary hear . 66. 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. , remand the FnatteF if it is satisfied th Fespeeting: ; el. Date netiee was given te atheF paFties as te an attempt te admit; and B. 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. I 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. PAGE 12-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:plamilngkode\rev-lose.ord) 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. 18.108.170 Legislative amendments. A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions. A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment 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 a legislative amendment 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 PAGE 13-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anning%codcNrev-l 08g.ord) 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, (comprehensive plan maps or other official maps including the street dedication map described in section 18.82.050, 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 plat that: A. Does not increase the number of lots or parcels created by the subdivision or parti- tion; 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. Zoning permit. 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 it PAGE 14-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (wPlanning\code\rev.108g.ord( I 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 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 accordance 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. E. Written findings addressing the criteria in 18.106.030. 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. PAGE 15-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anning%codekrev-108g.rrd) 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 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 1 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 a private 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. 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: PAGE 16-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:p1anning\coda\rev-108g.ord) 18.08.130 Commission. The Planning Commission of the City. 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. B. 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. C. 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 !P encourag�n he Guest appropriate use of land; to promote orderly growth; to provid&%dequate 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 ands other dangers; to facilitate adequate provisions for maintaining sanitary conditions; tl o 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, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin or disability shall not be an adverse consideration in making any decision under the Land Use Ordinance. 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 Staff Advisor 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.t General contractors shall obtain all permits for a given 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 zoning permit to the Building Official by the applicant. ` �^ `` " PAGE 17-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p;pI.nning�coda rev-108g.ord) Such zoning permit shall 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. a 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. C. Any decision by the Staff Advisor is subject to review before the Planning Commission 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: PAGE 18-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1p:planning\code\rev.108g.ordl 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 commenced within one year of the date of approval. A use or phase shall not be considered commenced until the permittee has actually obtained a building permit and commenced construction or has actually commenced the conditional use on the premises. 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 18.70.060.6 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: B. 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. c. There are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. 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 structure 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. PAGE 19-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:pimningkodekew 1 oep.ord) 3. A non-conforming structure may be enlarged, reconstructed or structurally altered if its footprint is not changed in size or shape. SECTION 15. Resolution 78-38 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY O F A SHLA ND 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. ry ail PAGE 20-ORDINANCE: TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:Plannine\codelrev-iose.ora) I 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 308 tl15 €�€e ?pcatrc-- nference �8'�g8;D�7' . .P�aplrta�rs 18.108.{{0{{20 Types offJi}Pro��cj}edy!ures y �t>uviY. 18.108.030 Staff Permits r wo 18.108.040 Type Procedure 18.108.050 Type II Procedure 18.108.060 Type III Procedure 18.108.966 AnnexafieRs 18.108.070 Appeals-Effective Date of Decision 18.108.080 Public Notice 18.108.100 Public Hearings 18.108.110 ResubmiRall ef ApplieatieRs ON I 18.108.120 Effeefiye and Fm a! Date ef I—d 48.408.130 ApplieatieAs and Deadlines 18.108.140 Fees 18.108.150 Council or Commission May Initiate Actions 18.108.160 Ordinance Interpretations 1 i< 18.108.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures to initiate and make final decisions regarding planning actions. PAGE 1-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:Pl..no%eode\rev-ioeo.we)toctobw 19. 1995) f it ..................... ....... C. N V. F". MNrs,' RM,M W. ............ 18.108,017 Applications EMOVED FROM 48.108.480]. A. 11705AN opies of a complete application shall be submitted to the Planning Department by.the appNeatien deadlines be! 1' Complete applications shall includet. All of the required information for the specific action requested, Written findings of fact, Complete and signed application form Q'I-1, signed by one or more property owners, eF theiF autheFized agents, of the property for which the planning action is requested, ..0.,.,."r,.I...... ..►I....ON .............. . kT Ed n- application fe he appropriate e. 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 1, 11 and Ill 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. All planning aetiens shall be subjeet te pFeeessing by ene ef the feUF fellewing pFeeedUFBS! Staff POFFflk PFeredUFe Type PFOeedWe Type PFeeedUFe Type PFeeeduFe—A. Ministerial Actions. Tfifi.118:071tl' UMM 0 'vliar'atat�i to '0 ....... ... ....... ..... Xg: gg PAGE 2-TITLE 18.108 REVISIONip:pl.nig�codoWev-108a.wo)[Oaobw 19. 19951 �ii:p. iag- Wev Ml"M - MWM�.M zw'.5MM M'AWMX' WE ................................ ............ . AC 0 MM 0.53% m ....... py 'ep 18.108,030 Staff Pe.p.A.."P.—rocedure. A. The following 6M6 the Staff Permit Procedure: actions shall Wlew�. pow 1. BeundaFy Li:-- ism 2. Site Rey*ew f9F 2 eF 8 Fesidential units an a single let. Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permits as allowed in Chapter 18.62. 3. Variances described in Section 18.70.060. 4. Site Reviews fOF GeFnFneFeial, Emplayment, eF MaRUfaStUFing Uses-#Iat-ef�§ gl Pj. -,- Q, 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. 0 erseti ix 99214ER ffifflg ,L Oj W .s MIM .�M ............ i.... &Wre' ��Mft ON, 41 "MMMM A 'd" P her, g . 1 4 M.-M.ON 110'1*�". ON ...... ...... nm;n am' xiy 16.*' Rim ........ .... NO, .............. Mffio�iffi"R. tt td IJ.......... 31 ............ .. ... MAN klwm.. ........... pe ................. O's 15 ;' ktwtdi ?t PAGE 3-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:pf.nic�codaXtev-108g.mo)[0ctoba 19, 19951 —7 . Ati �ns#aflat+ons"cs#tneGhat�i�al equipment ut � 1� taFf iw �����1VS 41 ��PTS��GWt3,ia,I#l� [riAf�;uN4 �2��yx jm�f Elt$n[7bf4Xrir[ierpal I1SH Irl alre:sderhal ZQhfr7e �;° �tn�r�rtar,�e ta�a�truc�ure a�sted ?e�Nanai Rist�ei""`�' H15tOriC. 'iQu desf as=sins 9C�#�the�taff f'erm�t l��oge�ure`� 8 s a#k>er'ple..... c!ter desrnard ashiaQ ►r=lit q prc 'dure X p c s s mTnN6f.. ark' t1 Asw . �� om c�ashMe l� p'E�sq0u err>e,rls ts t it 1. Within 40-wer -,, 4 days after receipt of a complete application► tte' Rdv�sar shall appraue, �ay�raue� bcmd�ti'cins or deny the appGcation�lntess sl�c�a . curie �ri�tati€art is�scterts]ec( witE�#he ocsnsen# of the�apGcant ,The Staff Actvisgr shad eri��r findings ar�d ti�riduelarls to�sas>�fy ���leciswn 2. Rablis-aetise-Notice pf,the dscis�on;shall be mailed within seven werk+ag days of the de s.od The nptir, shelf txtntairt th6 follawing 1nfPrrrEation , � ,F `°a. The- FSYOri#�f�t1e Staff Advusor 8titl the dat8 Gf the s�ee�s'�>far� �.` ��rte pi+i�lie hear�ig will be'hatd ur11QSS sper��eauy ri�quQS#etd< > e�agues#for a public heaning must tas made by the date Itfd�tied orl t......e ttce iCi ars�er fior publlG hearing #o fae scheduled: tlr�That a r+sques#far a pubGe heanrrg shall�ncTude the name Sand acids ass o€#kie person questsrlg the puUllo hearing, the file number�the pt�nl# �n and tfrs specific gl'�s�prwu>��ch the +dec�stp�should ba rsverst�e carCrlad�f[ed; baseCl ors the �r]r�lieatrte cr�terra !fir ocedi�rat rrre afar, ° z :A.,.,.nA.>c::.. 3. �eeerr+e i�al 0t s Si d 17a frlailed M. f0[lMorfg p #Sgria w. �. '17'10 1�iaCltx tN'3�ti�70nZe(�agent b f The sak�aa prcerty owner c, � owners csf rec1 t>f`prsrperty orr�'the most€acen#pr�"x essr�ht roll:x��ih�#�ir� r�a%ce `defined as iliac area v�hi��#�f�t�tif su>a��u�; Qr 4. arsons#fl w m"VARe"' ter a rs rrrailesi shall`fiaue"1 f I! days#rolxs the ��#e��mati�ri�tip c�#a request�`pl��llc hearing.:.Ftequ, `�al',� .., 17U17�C ttearsrig s1�1 s�cet th8.fpfltrwfnrequ�ements= .. .� SThe ret�uest shall tae fi�ea fne t��e speed �n iii n�a#iCe of PAGE 4-TITLE 18.108 REVISION it:pl.ning�aaealrev-10ft.ana)[oc obe 19, 19951 s' he fq$in wrrr�ng artd�rlc+cie#he` ►pe� 1t*srar mailing ef the n k k y 3{ PAP j$ f i atass ����a�ur���af the pfngk�caar� and t�s� �itle�`grax` fcirh��� � 5. If a request for a public hearing is tai� � i eceive a public hearing shall be scheduled for the next regular PlaRRiRg Commission or Hearings Board meeting allowing aR-adequate be the same eSfOF 8 Staff PeFM*t-' e tD Beet the rlfltlCe`requuents 'f scttar# I$ `ttl�l�l�� watt the requ�r�t�nt$ �1 S® i�t�i 18.108.040 Type I Procedure. A The following planning actions shall feNevw E 4jethe Type I Procedure: 1. Final Plan Approval for Performance Standards Subdivisions. 2. Site Reviews ther than those subject to a Staff Permit Procedurei§r; 0 3t.Pr0*40'. 3. MiROF Land Partitions ;s-which require no variances or only variances subject to Type I procedures. 4. MiREW mendments to conditions of approval GeRnmIssien. 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 the eenStFuetien ef a new eeFnMeFeial building eF more than 3 residential dwelling units, or temporary uses. 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% YaRanee eedct rbn in lot width or lot depth requirements. I. Up to 50% or parking requirements in Ashland's Historic District as eWined dE5 it5t € n section 18.92.055. jrtlp 1 %variance a heigll ;. fh1 rah, .tQn c�#hecrrfnio ttthervhest�d this sehon Shit,C�esilac Ube Standards as prr� �dedt etitutt 78tj9 8 The fallowingleueloprients �k�(��t4�3j;9�BaaSjtB I�S��� �t9`Cj"�S'e�t�f'fd�fEf5 �^wGCtldtt�'1$ 7`,�.Ci {};3a �.. �1rsy'e�ange°in use �f a [ot#ro une generat use�ategc3ty�o another !� u o�t�cny,;e�,�ram,� tderttiaj to comrnerraal, as dan�d by the ztrtun PAGE 5-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (n dmnaw\code\rev-109p.wo)10e obey 19, 19951 cl II k�w�Arry:r�#dent�sf �a tivtucki resu�� ��ira+�,dwalung units pr inm'�an fdt �.��A� never struet€rres�r addmons�r���'2��,�4e� 'e #eet, �xeePt �C dexeio� silts�riclutfed IC1.s�aCt>�bris't8a10$O�,AR�3` Qq }yam ]�^] 1y}}},YYY B �e E RfeeedUre Iiati£s tiee� sg7, Appilpns slx�ltt�e,prp�essed,as faltt�s° 1 Complete applications 3F W the ne) half tSe rdvfevlred at the far5t re> u1�r scC"educt Garrn�sston meetingrrucn Is fields fat 3ti days #ftere St7tsgf z .tpEte appiieattn. w 2 Within 38 werl<+r ! ,days after receipt of a complete application, an a. The Staff AdViSOF BF his eF heF designee she'! ast as HeaFiF;gS- Use OFdbnanee. b. A deees6en shall be FendeFed at the adFniniStFative hearing, with he Staff Adva�or shall epp pye, mpprove with t uttlitatxts ar tferly the appl��atipn,unless suc tine �mitatior?iS extended IWO ffifth egnserrt Af the applicant, late stafflclvisor shall enter findings and ranclus�ri�s to l�astdy thees►an u.. 3. F4+blie Notice of f11E'decislprt shall be "a ;ed tin seven days tkf the cisc�sian the persons clesrxed in N-1 2TO 33,< d es ltppntaus the fdfarrrratts Ct regv[red Sect n fi #4 k�0 pup Stetstne��tfrttt,unies a Ile flaarlt>g requested, thetloC� vrlli;#�e re�+i�wed,Ry tha t:csrmisSign; arsons ttt vthph riat#G .S tra (i snall have 10 days from the date of mailing in which to Offiew W the Planning equest a publ1- hearing befora Commission. Requests for a public hearing shall FAa the Type 11 pFeeedUFe, emeept that netwee shall be sent as FeqUiFed 1eF a Type I aeti Depwtment within 10 days ef the mailing ef the netiee, the aetien shall be Feyiewed by • r�eet�agcnr�orm to �equlren�ants of seGtlort 'f�,'Eg8 k S 4. 4. If a request for a public hearing Is timely�receive • , a public hearing shall be scheduled for the next available- °c,} trt Commission or Hearings Board meeting, .allowutt PAGE 6-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:ple nine%code%rev-1080.wo)[Octobm 19. 19951 I� lv �4�Ftt1718F�L# C9�lyawl�3, sL'��}tty��(}L�r$7E11eC]t& �R�eCfCt3ri���� �©`��'�3� 5. If no request for a public hearing is tr ly'received, the ast♦er� t�St ,: .shall be reviewed by the Commission or Hearings Board at theSfegularly scheduled meetingrg }tgaa, b The Commission Qra..,H. nay: a. Amend the decisio ; in such case, the action shall e re-noticed as a Type I decision, with a 7-day appeal-period .. .... L RZ. zhlioarrltexce t that the Commission shall not review the decision again should there be no p ` g appeal,�tTOF�.tatj�esffiled. ..,t > b at2a} teartcigw ffig !�S k3, through a majority vote of those in attendance, to be heard at the following month's regularly scheduled Commission r€ ctarj{kmeeting. c. if planning aetiens-T& <r(C of the meeting when the decision is scheduled to appeaFOn the agenda, . In such case the decision is final the next day. 6 orEtu the f* Advts applicants qtr th@ Air may request thate+��ar}rlg actions 501ap ��YP�?�,pro�edure be heard,by the�c�mrntsSr3n Qr,Bclar . ... <` ry Bch Laser the StSff,4dvisat )f nor , a ilprl,an€['Sha� Seduta a hearing kfor�the Opmrnisslon t3par�ltq .be heels 7. :P;e Staff AdYiSeF Fnay pFeGeSS Type 1 planning a9tieAS URdBF the Type Type 1 appleeatien fee. prtw�ded;ut s�ci�n � �i�Q40�4 18.108.050 T e II Procedure.ocedure A ixfed The following prig,actions shall feRew-§MeWhe 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). 6. MajeF Land PaFtitiens. 6§. Final Plan approval for all subdivision requests under the Performance Standard Options not requiring Outline Plan approval. 70• Any ublic hearing has been-requested of a Staff decision resulting from the Staff Permit Procedure. 8.i �awt. x ........:.m:.:,:..:.;:...y...H. a:a"... .....:.,,..: ... . 8 ::. ..,.wfa.a..r,i.t,t «». en. l�t. .. - ;as subject,�a the Type #I Prcx;edure,; B Type Preeeddre7itrta LlmttS; �<an... Hearg Rqurrrxtetatslppli ^:asftpr3 sttb t a thdn ype t1 f'rc�txedtrr shalE, a praresM.Ai f.W! wsx 1 Complete applications be fit aht `f1rSt regtary st iedu`fd,'1drttmts5rt3ft rtt i#ice w11 t 1 Ys P d at least 30 days PF09Ftethe next PAGE 7-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (o:wm,,,ino�codekrev-ioe,.wo)(octob« 1% 19951 1\ li after the submission of the complete application. 2. t�l'e Notice ctf the t1eHn i (ad. 5nded_Ht W8.108.080. 3. Public hearing shall be held before the Commission in accord with the requirements of section 18.108.100. At sueh publie heaFffing, 4. The deeisien of the Planning Gemmissien Fnay be appealed te the Gity GeuReil as eutlined in 18.109 670 • 18.108.060 Type III Procedure. A. The following t..a r "actions shall feHevw ' U.bjeeE xthe Type III Procedure: 1 Zone Changes or Amendments to the Zoning Map EN n� €ogat fA1apS �t 1r�K"le�istatnre�mendtnent�,�xeept fbr th��affiaat street ciedicat�n"Enas 3�. Comprehensive Plan Map Changes"rat'.c}tar&es tt,., ther� ,`ta�l mi�psfi I ec�pt qtr le��laf� �rnendment�.//// . Annexations. 64. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments. B. Striwd"fl S<t TType III Planning Actions--6eaefally . 1MvF"M!!F=�}r�ve'�plc^�r1 � L�1ant,�'es�5ub�ct�#fs��Typ� tll j3t't1 ;dura Ctrtlf tttt prmay be approved + er����i Cgttrplre iila plsri,a��lone of the following conditions exist:blic 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 18.Q8.s65 t . 3. Urban growth boundary amendments shall be a t �J- the 9 rY , "iteiafiineif<in the Urban Growth Boundary Agreement between the City of Ashland and Jackson County thereon. C. Type III Procedure 1. Iflit+atiep e€ a Appcatitt(1S SuBCt ttr t{tType III AetieaCOCedu�e Made by SF.` 1[.be t el s folj06 PAGE 8-TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1o:pl.ninpleode\r"-109o.weuoc[eber 19. 19951 agenis. Complete applications (.—, ti �rt '.p. . '— l ts least 45 days k: �< 30. f4blie-Notice k of r G ;shall be sent eut, jellewing the �reeeddresref/�� �taCI �r;�E3Y�Gc#�3G�' ,. .Ctt18.108.0dv�80.jQ��� �<�} k--Z[ ({. �v� i �� �k�A'.'Y.SDAWSA3iiX ' SvU`�YL3 M> '*—A 1 � 4. The astien May be Faviewed by the Gkizens Planning AdviseFy �♦�'}i��A+1//V"��i{.3`y(`�((..,y,���1{1y�yfSii A : �0. ) 141 1 r p V{'1a11#gave �f�\ eV3 i1V{�?y.14 �V �t���tE1t� �Lh��°$rK3 gf�lle,S��1$��,E9Sl3�t f;�`die"�BG�&tflTl'�kt�ltltll;"�t�3i��7P��G'�[E31'iW�� OW", ....... .w as t s, rt3,trJ,decf`trt £ �r l fir: 9 03:0, >::..Y.QkX'. dYa � C` r ; A ,Btche Commission shall make a report of its findings and recommendations on the proposed action. Such report shall be forwarded to the City Council within 45 days of the public hearing. Upon receipt of the report, or within 60 days of the Commission hearing, the Council shall hold a public hearing in � C 18.108.100. Public notice of such hearing shall be sent in aeeerd 8 . , The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. The-Geuneil r the date, time, the publie heaFing shall be stated. AfteF sweh statement, no fuFtheF publiG F18tiGe Shall be FequiFed. 9. AppFeYal Of Type 111 aetiens shall be by erdinanee enly. Denial Type 111 aetiens shall be by adeptien ef Wings ef denial. 18.108.070 C)atie"t ""r� t1 Appeals. A. r •v . Actions subject to appeal: 1. Staff F�WDecisions and-iRterffeteti The deeisien ef the Planning PAGE 9-TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1a:d>y i g\.W.\,.-1o99.wo11oeobw 19, 19951 11 4: :M<.:4: M:E:rr:«... ter etat+eRS r�essa��ts e pubtac nng i �g,� P v�RM ne P'C` P'Fa a$ga C' `£y'ny E `(Fy'F t�Y{{ }ice' y'} yL'�( S'S a .8..^°: >� i i $ r4'lCN4 i2',2W4#5S $ SPnYF` b M R y i `k 3 ��` b G4�fi J j £ t Vi�9�`e>� .�b .}�' 0� 1keear�+hr�ab � #art Gaya af#e+�£ e� a +£ $res 0i $lfah x xN2 vSS b& 7t41'a 4 Sax EP x s SS a E B SfoR 0,111K � #= d�R a ¢`n� a. ? aFn n. •o"';�Fc ��� Eb�tl��6���3��b aiA&< 4►dd.Exf3 ss,�aYt.,,�,.�s �. ,��a. s°a�E.� S;.�w'.•...�4..,.r,`,1,.i,.�a.J...... M. 2. Type I Planning Actions. The deeisien ef the Planning GeFnFn'ss*en shall be the final dee'sien ef the Gity an appeals ef all planning aetiens subjeet te the Type-4 Planning PFeee f##� i a,'o, E ttt'h�f��i�ft;3ASEit{�f�l'�"�t#��Y�� � tl7tctg��' adltreF �tst3y�h��,Gtsrrt�tk5s,tlr�bor� xd��(f a�ubUc he�'��� �1d �x£t���turt�� ttea g lsahBjti, a ftKt tFdacl tli Shalt bB effepflVa t5 a� iie k l tpl S tap#at T. Tay�# e r�n�ssitart�r BQar�F�;iy&tgne� by the Char�the �C>rrtr�ts��on cu tci art�l 1�laiI�.t{#p jtJ�y tiw' 1', ��adsw��pf Fht•1 Ctxxttl� Ott be Etta€#tnaj:d��ltlt�of�'te Cdr ��i�'�'+C` 4^� k P� t�yF#he God, taf€bctive the day the�Ir?g�;�dQPteda�2t!��� €snt ` �ra�si .#�t the Mayar and �d�d tti f�h8 parkes� 3. Type II Planning Actions. The decision of the Cbffi lhumixt the final decision of the City en appeals of all planning aetiens subjeet QSUtttng Irgm 2ha >�x �F�r�lrtg +rq � VVVp @ tsrP vh@ i� use ings opted4by the ezrr►ri�ss�ort arafisi a tt� haf Mad �a` t�e�F�£n:�#he,.�arl�asl ut1(ass a,�pf~alsc# #tie��n�t�S�i�ati�tdda settr�i i ? e ���it,,.,a �i R yEx iy}y}i {{1fi.�1�'bb.Ee k aaAe fi w�}'jy��za1]k�'1$,{t�<�i��4is:Rysyf�l G'#c�{tse1•e� e ii�I o r n h#aP 1t 1�e ee ffaFj`ce g�r7t4P" �q sa aistff�vb r>r#$^.a,�x�q a 9 bp11g s R k[iPi�f ��r Y �.,w1`"^'t�'s'� tlrltltt ahait.bs �3MW��ixMC�$�¢x4�� �s fht Sfy�? 3 �.➢ LS/�'$� e Y 'e£.a�,e,.s F $ 5jµ {jµiC�y y"y��.{ /(y"tt` fRE<'a"E§ �.`{ $yRf� �,�j^: ���(.7at .. i��el �� ��C6v84�)GTQ��ilO']iiSUIr�A4�L���R�LF YI r � 9the l�Ffi, TSi[�iiyTi�M�+�lilui W�eJ� 4tCTFfQi St e 'A`yx "a a K �1�1 '^36:-LS� :� )Z,f Y�a.�. Yxn4�3i a4 �3�XJv�e�a�yiu�� �n�SQOVa�L'� Gai$' �;Slt� t�tt�3@ Nl�yca�at'tt'�"m�lt�t�#� tll$a��fiti��3 e �"#�trt[' 'kt�tlt[3'lLy g,"f��7SC`�',E�t3�3[ re.&.b ao><: R�,pYb ,fib?a14„#�a"iC1;;..0, p",4wRO bh a£ $Z )4 = o b u:�x4h o ,Qo4'5?o°a• �.��c. a oR aa'aa � yt��piM �ee �?ttlyBxaS4 x� d. *ypctral 5 � �1� d 3W 7 ##7i�NCi4.i# y�'.CN'law>w.nY...,»baoo>. M- :s. .4F..aa,....,., W 4 .The City Council may call up any planning action for a public hearing and decision upon motion and majority vote, provided such vote takes place in the required time period, as outlined below. 13. Appeal PffieedWes� 1. Appeals ef Staff deeisions and inteFPFBtatiGAS Shall beffeeessed as Type PAGE 10-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:pienninplcode\r"-109p.eno)[Octobw 19, 19951 I �� appeal.a. The 'led within 16 days afteF sueh Gtaff-deeisi� seheduled Planning Gemmissien meeting allowing adequate t;F:Re te Meet the PU 2. Appeals ef Type 11 Planning Gemmissien deeisiens shall be heaFd and Fee shall 198 MqUiFed as PaFt 9f the 8pplieatieR. a. The appeal shall be filed within 16 days afteF the final date ef b. The appeal shall be in miting and filed with the Gity AdmiHistFateF'S GeFAFn;ss;en meet;--., ell iRfeffnatien pFesented by the . defined as the fellewing� , 1. The appimeapA- ef appeal. 1). FFive1eus Appeals The Gity Gewneil may dismiss an appeal 9 R finds that the . MM.:T,:>E1:x�;.;�:.. 18.108.080 Public Notice. Public notice If... t3ng before the W i tag Board_: Crs(E7t;;fo#.regariaQ aN planning actions shall be lo given as folws: PAGE 11-TITLE 18.108 REVISION IP:d--i-g%cuaehev-10e9.wo)(oembx is. 19951 1<' ttra. �l,CfI�Pkz""yt�z :bx< a. '�� i�� !;�PytC {��4N'Ftlttl'�pCCI?8g$C�d yyK l flwnet" :..[c.,,<�.'_:...<..:.:;vv:?:>!e:'syj:%Mi`ii!).`t F,:,.,n:>.>.;>y..>....>awj„ax[.>y»>:[z:[.a<�.>.,<y�:”[icy....,reaz•...»r,>.m,a»a:o.:.a. ../a.>(r�ayry;�»ya:. ,ra,...rru.<.,a,.„ra>u. » .m:omm�wywy>o>�xyu»ya{, IM b .��k�+3 f'cprstp�tytn �;�� enb �s ,. ir' �tCt1it��C6t�uC��1C3f�U T 4<h�„kp ykk��t4tS b s r• �Q s. yjs�¢p r�'+z p s s �S,y a,,,,,,.,w.,,, waaanau„z.�<..au&.ww'w�..<u awrw u[ , !n!Yi'i�\[,kq�ak,<,uQ IWW lE 11I 'KMkp qr :. A4* AI�Mailed notices shall contain the following information, ( 11 ? >ir and- 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 ti ta>time nct 1a t[o of kt aCin# q�"Laf tl t mee i s nt It ng� inuatved ��x�rys'�7�T$�¢pro+nde Suffi�ver���feClfic�t i;(T af[or�tbe,dlc�rt�s[�atcerfar�i q � w s(acxxf ttas 3sse precludes ar> ppeat to tie mid ts�Baaf ba .��w V � kled��2hF�t kfSSUB° f�k�fitr'���tey�ftl tlt E3at d hd^d�tfatul irf1111er1t5 >3r:@YI{1ett a..... Wit m� ^ S�JWIk1Y k* tQ� fiYnitt�Cr54 '#rt I�� gS #9tt�eClt it�f.[1,8pi13ere 15 k cbrlUnu�anCe, t#` 3rtlfYp ;q,#ttt��jryC, p�bVf�rMr �p. .�l3�y�,,s > z4kF7 gifuea f r lei pi , Ur�TQ.PItM1910M mbwdwd,dml. ' C T-YP- P"do — VIII Mringto-b►wb-d-W PAGE 12-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (r:plm,noq\code�rev-ioea.mko)io�ob� is. 19951 4'm- -4 dw M-"4,m_ to the City Co.-AW,- h-- — h-hlr a_ s'syP.114pEA61i.+I W»r I- -ad. t /ih P uhf h--ring S%Mmmps that -copy W the-call F-P-Ft will W 40F Ot RG 000% M 10-04 PFi-F hold.- ! PAGE 13-TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1p:planning\codelrev-108g.anollOctober 19. 19951 1� I ���F�psfed f+lotice �cCepffi?r Stafff3erna�t Prdure planning,�c�ie�sts,$el,notil � destatCf.�cCn C;his subsectid�,�sCt�1C b�perstad„un,�hie subj�t prop's-bY tFle apps IAN"traEa ra s�i nni�r as tc� Cie ole�riy vis�ti$,f�tam pub�C ighf-i?f why at lei 5t2 ¢a k `i ytha elate t�f the Ci3aam�s �o meeang�` allure by the applicant E os ; r bf p" t' l�=c;Caar view rota�ubCie�t�ttf�f way shaCC #�cvnside�ad•art ancanaptettE3 a�lir�ort,� 4The appticarit aha�t i�erkify� far tha i @COrd�f�€fe hearii3p,,#hat the posting sarasairearnpt[shed The ta�Ora r�#qtr pps#ed rsiattcea tR Naafi rtn tha property�ha�i ' not invalidate the proceeduir,�s a�Tha ppsfed ruttice shaft only retain the fotCo�itag �ritc� eECar);3 plannfig alter, brie€ descrCp€iat�ti€the pr�osatx,pt€c�nl3;nu,�b �d eiiictress for r�tiact of.,_ ;Ad�'Ianning f'3epartme�t l�,tkJ�ddittor�t Requtremenfs fed Typi3°[I �'id ttl E�WbIiC f1ipC;tGa. to addit�pri� tha natter 6pe> in sectiorf f81C#8fI6 #A, iid , nsit►aa feu Cype CI arytf CtCarai~eCCuEeS ehall< kie pi�btistaa'rl to a newspapt�pf3geri circti[atac>ntn tf�ii;r�tijt at �:�5#,-1t) sfaysn�tru� L n I the sfatentri,the hearing brsfi:ire the�:vrr�missidn PS. 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. 1? Whei,eyer tx is r�ernanstrat�t to�e Staff Ad�isar#aat nn.:. � The city d1d'not maip the no#icerequired �� '18"tt�.t)3i}B, �.`Such ewer adverseCy atf�c#ed and pre�ta�ced a fxersari's substaitfaat#Tghts! act ;� , `l�tach persai nc#itCad the Stsif€,�ttv3s�r itiFtin 2� t€ays;of wf3en the poCSait kneHt<a#ehvuCd hav+3 tcnawn df the de�s�an, eels Staff Advisor staa� s�heduCa�a`f'1e �Cii'the<rle5it regular Corrlmissi�ri'i ar I�Ceantigs card rrieet� alCdwutg.adequate tlhle to i'+aTYtp[j+<with the iaotiCe raquirorriar►#S t�€secttpn -[� ti?A Th�.pub�i�.Cti�aru�. l b (:odiac#ed es piivid8d an § 81t}&iGttl ; tf a tisar�tg�s rxartducted unde►�yftais sechon, the=cCecision taf Cl3ri'ur#i5S�r1_�?r H��gs�#3aard shall superdea���prau>ac�s t�c�icrr�: eGI�Nhenevar.i#is derrfc>nstratetl tt the S €€Advisor that Y f?s<q!ty ifid nc�t �grriply w fha nt�tide rgqutremi nts`K'� f8,ff}&.t l thrcu.igki Ir, Such erraridvi3rsely`affeit and prejudiced aers 's suCstsrit7 its q� �f l i 'd Sl1C«�'i perSari iia#ified the Staf€Advisor wi#hin 27 t�"d�?S:of wh�ia �'ie persc� kne'rt cr shouCd have tcrirswn� t€ie d�cisi©n,tfie�#a€f AdviSCSr'shaq scC3sduta a h$artng;< � before t€`ie �i�ard, lwgmrr�ssi�n rrr Ctx�cd thiat petard or v>rauld„haul h�a� #i��,�ar lrntal�tinsfhs dafacfiv rt3ce _,...,. :�. The Staff Ad+�sar spoil nofa€y hY mad aq. persons who previously appearecfan#h8 matter and alt pe�rsans wthe vere entitled to malted n�€iC�but der rust ouch notfC@ PAGE 14-TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1a:plmninulcodekr ev-1080.melloaobe. 19, 19951 I t� �gl�`5 �48a �5l° 1 `�1 Its hEI�CI!'� b8#oF'82 oc"��#kpt�"`C�ol�f'fSOt� t*t�tpk"�F't�t'jl��Ti3t'C1��'tf��!�J' y fi�F` 1Q�81� " ,: .. cwt m�heft„supl•,tfi�,rn�tt��s� bra,p�m€ltted i �k�scasian °his` 1 �g�ts�p�rsa� ie�ra+, c���d�isfon H. Nt�dritE�St�1di1��'�� twirl�psC.ifiedk�!�ubs���n�£ 3 �nd'� "E?� 3 sl3etio�„t�'1H C18CfSIW;:w A. AdmiHiStFatilye HeaFingS shall be held feF all Staff PeFFRitS and Type 1 Planning Aetieas— . ' planning astien, fellewiRg the Type 11 . 18.108 100 Public Hearings Prtcecfure.ea. A. Publie heaFiAgS shall be held befeFe the Planning Ge 11-a+ G '. At the commencement of a public hearing 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 eFkefia deser+bed-abeve-��Stliewsfl1sERu 'trltera, or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or Land Dib 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 9 P :<p ttFLB . 5. States the presentation and rebuttal time limits for ..te applicant, proponents, and opponents. PAGE 15-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:Plan.ingleodelrev-1090.mouoctubw 19, 19951 i f� 9 G n suppeFt ef the applieatien aFe submitted less than 20 days PF4eF te the initial feF at least seven days unless them;iq R Pentinuenee. 90. Other general rules of conduct for the public hearing as deemed necessary by the Board or Commission. �crurx� rnerr�bers shaCC dealare arty actual�r pates#aC tx�tfl cts of�terast and an�;;�; �� F contacts �ncludrtg the s�bstanee fsfthhc�se pantacts �d arry egnclusiorts,th hlember ruched Caecause pf thaw tranfaats. 'f Na member sha1C serge an any proceeding i� vuhrc�t s�c�rr�emf3er ha5ua ��aE t:orrtfltct ta#anteestt in rvh�ah the rr�ember; ar thas;� persons ar bustrtesses deeir!�n C1RS 227 0� , tias a duet; ar aubstantCaC flnanpal rnteret; �3r;k �nih # member ISid vim.refuse is d�sq�iaCity C �m cr C�erseEfi, the3rd,iar f �5 bfare Board, the OQCnm�ss3an, fqr artr�gatefare th8 O�arnmissurt, t t�ie;,:,+t�oFinpC,for`C�Ban€�� b`effars�e�Ce►�c�,wstiai� baY€�tt�e pc��wer ts�a�®mtaue due rr�'srnbar#�r that�araceedir�� Allartaas shatC be aulssd ftrat thgy hWt[ e�ht trz' t ?e sufasarrf any°ex'`parte aommoraCaahor�s, faAt f�q�ubtur hear<�tg, afta�>�'ecgi�t`a�pubi�a teshmtirty;the Ba����r��iss�arr �n,�y.'apprt�ue, app�+re h aar�dtt3ans�3r deny U1�request <The �tt7ar�sar a �� a ats r cant ricra the' cabin h iry tv the r� xt t eehnc� tc� qa-W.#Or" W. �frNttaf'of adaaC�foXmatwa� +xde�atiott�tbe,�Cecis�an� At�e publ ha rtrtg, ttie date time, end tocat<s�n#or the contutuanrp ty#the puC ii heannr �ha rMe PROVED FROM FORMER scf;R,A#tar�suc�� t�t� en�,. �dit3a����bCicFna��e;sC�etf b�recfuir�d� . . ����tt��oTr 'af££thdsa memb�fs�ss �t tt����s�dc�n�r�m�u��t� at> m,:. . of Type C decjartS for WCi�ch a Cearm<t$ Sas� rees�t iaetd Ap Rai"1 ype II peals decisions �t' ?fJ8 , r stlQFix 't :f36 } 'IW Mhall be R afat�; a"i�itCce of appeai: ied with ttteit}tin�ruustratorf The standard Appeal fee shall be required as part of the appAeat+eri-t11�ttC$ ��ilute tt�pa�iha P�ppia�t C=BS�tL t[r�8 a The appeal shall be fled PAGE 16-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:plmnc„o�ceae%,ev-ioaa.wa)(oaob� 19. 19951 i Z� apPFOYal/denial ef the land use deeisien, as defined in 48.108.120-prior to the effective date of the decision of the Commission. 142, The appeal shall be OR WFi4iAg and filed with the Gity AdFninistFat8F'6 0 Sdeh appea4 .0 zhall include the appellant's name, address, and speeifleally stating 4 $r8rt3` pct�Sts �#n b rsyswetl, 3taferttsn# ttw#h� tt r�a�it��s�>#'party,#�s data �t��tledswn Ea�>ng app�a��d,,, t��p�G��gr�aur�c fQr c�the decisrvri thouki,be reuecsecf��nQcGfred; based on the applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. e. The appeal heaFing shall be seheduled feF a Gity Geuneil meeting allowing findings and minutes ef the Planning GGFnFnissi9n—. $_ � � rct�#iGt����rQt�Ge of appeat, mayy fr'Ce a natlre,Qf crQSS appeal wrttun #ert slays after the notice Qf the appeal �s mailed as provided an section #81[tS �#£}.�;4, The 7t�tlGGa Ct# Gass appeal shalt Gcrltart #hose Ettat#ets i'equlred tt� a ncatrce of appeal Tl1e party filirr� � notice pf prose appeal shall; a�1 a,copy cif suetti notice #a alt other pariu3s< 4 The c�QtiGe f appeat,tcgefFlE`r with rrottGe of the date, ...m a+td place of fhe hearir� tut tFie eppeat �y rho: csunpil shall be.meiled,to the parties at Mast� daiys prtt�r`to the#�car�ngt e�. AThe ppaal shall be eer�eted--as-a de novo , 898 fee revue aY the r�c9rd rife MW ID rnrmt,SSCQn �m�tetE tt�> # grtancs appFeve the eFiginal planning aetien, appFeve with eenditiens, eF deny the planning sail fir►�e notice f>'.the appal Vas.n�t�atsd �y,stac�t tlr.�, and,3r►tht'?t rwtic��€ Grass appeal;,if ar;y. t�. , The Council may asHe� iri;rs+ar mntlly tts�dr, grid ptiyppres±reey;thegi+ t, Qr Elate, time, and leeatien ef the eentinuanee ef the heaFiAg shall be stated at the appratat withantlEtians. stilt make#ir�dltrs grid ttusrQns, h8 C� make r� sr 6assd on#taiacard be#orb ltd jtftGatfon for rte aGtlara � GQt�shalt mouse Gstptes vfyatalter#t7 sent#off parts parse�paUn rr� ppeat the Counc� may 4..... the smatter=# is 98#tSfred that leStfrr[o[ry qr ethaC eutdenGe r QulCl npt tV8 been preSeri#ed at heatng belowi in depsdsng si�eh remand, theour?crl sf} r eQnsidar ar1r1 m>�tte XM:. cortGtWSaans CseChdg . a {P'r�juL'cGcepto parttye,Sy,. .. ♦j pM �} p j { �{} y t]i nleruentsa'ora\rattakG;y QfIldence atttlQ tit tj#eIi�atllTYrigF, t:, Surprrse #Q ttppgssng partlea, SI a# r t7Qt was` ire tQ ether pertiss tie to an ahem st tai adroit, ez3t3 e The Gs�mpetar' y, relavdnGy and mater�atrty of the prc=pvsed tesfttngnj, Qf`.'.1 .:BYtC18r1Ce: PAGE 17-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:plenning\code\rev-1088 eno)(October 19, 19951 T� . 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. 18.108.130 Aselieatiens and Deadlines.[MGVFmD TO 48.408.047] A. Rye eepies of a eemplete applieetien shall be submitted to the Planning • 227.178. The Gity will WeRH the applieant ef defleieneies within 80 days ef applieatien. applieatien is deemed eemplete, eF at the end ef the 31 day peFied, the Gity will begin 3. Staff PeFFRit appi4eatiens shall be submitted 40 days PFieF te OR adminiStFative- 4. Type 1 applieatiens shall be submitted BE) days PF'OF tO a FegUlady seheduled seheduled Planning Gemmissien meeting. B. All applieptlens feF Type " and Type "' planning aetiens shall have eempleted a the Anal applieatien. G. A final deeisien shall be FRade by the Gity, iReludiAg Fese!Wen ef all appeals within 420 days afteF the applieekien is deemed eemplete. The 420 day P8Fied Fnay be • 18.108.140 Fees. A.-Fees for applications under this Title, and feF the Felated 'and shall be set by resolution of the Council. pFeeess a Type 1 peFFRR as a Type 11, will net affeet the fee ehaFged. The fee will be to this TMe: PAGE 18-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:pi.inplcodekev-108Q.ma)[Octobm 19, 19951 Z'L 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 u adopted b the respective bod b #u�g the app7rpnate Y Y P Y K.,, NO MR.. a a'aMWVta;�rScC�da�Itl�s 0 4plrt a� . 18.108,160 Ordinance Interpretations. A. The HeaFiAgs GffiGBF, HeaFings BeaFd, the Went ef the land use eFdinanee wheneveF aA ambiguity appears in said eFdenanee. �`*��j �kii Rr�73�L� �i� �`IwFw�P b�/In'Vlxl��xi lt�T��G� �iAr511n,�Y7{l'1 r�t�rlt;E#h� rrutab411tya�a#uses �4ta�ih�t#R�' thsgk�rtf�,ar4t�g a�a vaard c�r�Phr�s�r4tf � :�zA,dsa��r�ay Interpret the��4a�lslarr fry tMt9#ili�or ref�bt�4ebprat�sral�#a ti�e� Cali�il'�ssi4f�rr Ir�ter�rretatlt��� prrltrrlsslatt sf3aq Issue arl rrlte4pr'etat4pntlrt �Zl'�SL1Itf�1�edaubt.. �84t�`4e1`: >a�'t��C�YASAr'$�Plt�l'�EBtatI�N1 CiE��11�'IrCrrlln1�55rC1E1'S sl'48If�thp'�rffer::t ckf arnersi#4ng ll�e pCaufs4ans af`#hs<i�uae#�tse tJl'dfr»rG�, May 4 r etat4 4rt can$ider0€ars The t�rnprshensrve , �t The'purp�se end 4ntent�the I"aRc� Usk QrcGhenGe as i�ipl4ecl to the p�rtiaular seot4nn rn quastic�n, .and S �"C13e aprnrar ta#the Crty Attorrrey< '� d krt tet4crr,�f the ."i �tdwd shelf b #brw-; 3d the Carrrm slo � t st�t�e�e at.�harityy ta£Irrad4�+�e �tterpreta#�n�b Thp xitel'pCetat4gn+�fey �,miSrtishall be iorvrarded #��ie t✓ounpil ��thariever swctr en rntarprat�tr�rn� ��pul�fc 4rltereSl:, capies.q��iieh'1ntlre�shy,Ise rn�ie av� e'fnr bbl d4�t4on< n..:...:.....:.::.....:..: :::.::::..,.:.......,.::: :..:<.<:t.,..H.... i8 1ti$ l70' Legislative amertctments A If p;# e neGessery#raM. : w ttt f� fa the text ttre t a4 c3 Use t tl'i ar 4e1te kh'to siet4v am i�cimgrits r o �7r�8r`tt) arn'f tnnthi the aarrrpr�;hensly& plan 4r to meef 1�ti'4er phanges lri a�txtr=nstes end a�andnc�lhs, �;Je�rsleWe am8ndment 4S �,Ie��Slatrve�Ct�`ol�y tart � e>�thanty_�i#the Cauna�< > Sry�isls#lrre am�ndmerlt��ay bs�1tltia#edxy by� � rr4lssfic ss � ePAx_flrt4s43x prQpertysawr�eF,Brresrdet�tof the tty «1 he l;Qmrr>4 �arl[ � 12at bl�a he r4rlg do p @d sm rtd ent st earirest r t4t�b1, x m , bm4ttd,bn b# lriy.lyaftere tte�ringeimrrr �i��,L7ct4�E�jC 7��r1i , �fi5�t5)rti��"�fi,:G�Ci`gt�3GCIIfC�IOt��t�F th�EtSC�,�z�,�klGi 3'18r1r1�k1�3C� !G�Axt PP n 1Car aramerrl Ir pltzPert�'Peru re�c#er s#iaU t4Eed fte l�'tarining l�ep�rtent#h �IeysEprlcrr t+x�4e Ccrnm�sror4;relin�;st whf�hr f�?�st��� bef�rst; siciere4E.; ��}��eal�arrb�f4aQ,l��, ac,�orr4p�rried^}�y,tk I; WCel ice: 8eftnre tef a4nelh ptt pECs"t5c#smerid4nertt+#he 4rflmFSSitr1 shm hpld5e pul�ti �heering Affer reaelpt�f the report try the-emender'rt#r�4m the mt�7€iis�icm€r.#ht#, auc4crl,sh�ll hatd,� pul�t�hea,Ei�4t�`�rrt#h8 ��er�d4r�ert�.� f�c�ti � PAGE 19-TITLE 18.108 REVISION IO:plenninolca elrw-1080.enollOctober 19, 19951 23 I ,I ,I I� PAGE 20-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (n:M.o*�-v--ioeo-woitoaobw ie, issst 2� ...t;.::.....:. ,;:i...:. ar[n�ndrya$ fw��#iII b8 g�rerct nRtao� ��?f �rtauEat� �the !tY 3A.� DYneRe e� `aS�.DA }..�$�... �fi ��a1u >3f a prc�p�rty ctw ter�e r�sicE>3��'or � E��,sfatEVe arn�dmen 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, comprehensive plan maps or other official maps including the street dedication map described in section 18.82.050, 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 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 PAGE 21-TITLE 18.108 REVISION la:plm uGglcedelrev-109o.we))oeteber 19. 1995) 2S 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. Zoning ep rmit. 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 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 accordance with ORS 308.225. Such description and map be prepared by a registered land surveyor. The boundaries shall be surveyed and monumented as PAGE 22-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:pl..ing%coaetrev-ioeo.d,a)1oaobw 19. 19951 ' 2�O required by ORS subsequent to Council approval of the proposed annexation. E. Written findings addressing the criteria in 18.106.030. 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 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. PAGE 23-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (p:pl.")ooloodelr"-109p.mo)(Octobw 19, 1995) a1 18.106.040 Boundaries. When an annexation is initiated by a private 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. SECTION 5. Section 2.14.050 of the Ashland Municipal Code 1s deleted. 9 SECTION 6. Section 18.08.130 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 18.08.130 Commission. The Planning Commission eF HeaFiRgs Bea the City. SECTION 7. Section 18.100.020.13 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. Fights- Go. 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 l this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. OP.. That the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely N self-imposed. PAGE 24-TITLE 18.108 REVISION iv:oi.,�oNcodeNrov-ioeo.d,auoctobw 19, 19951 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. 13it?lIgie¢ t tki�� qty,±de�st��tt�z`ic�3r th��i. 3t� Use�r�r� �� �' 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 #eaFiags 9ffisefS#aif# nscx 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 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 planning #r "j p jt0 the Building Official by the applicant. Such uUt3 prFlfshall 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: PAGE 25-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (c:plmminp%code\rev-toao.m,ul(oc[nbm is, 19951 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. C. Any decision by the Staff Advisor may be " ' he Planning Commission as aAType 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 developedmeGjiivithm one year of the date of approval. 0,0 ttf ttas °fWi nt5l bra LiCtStd rYftft tie ° a >..n.:..... ?:n,::b..�:^..;`.:..;:». tr 3• .. niq>9:..Y::%4A::�.o,R;Q' (a r i r� ' a " ft5i it a tafrl i ndirig'parm n mr nc d a.. M.ffl gi£ sitxrrrertcezt the ofiLprra! rise°on'tFsprESast 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 18.70.060.6 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to k read: PAGE 26-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (a:N..ing�.d.Vw-ioeo.wo)1octobw 19, 19951 B. in addKien te the findings feF a YaFianee eentained in GhapteF 48.4GG, a4,1 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 speck 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. tel a are unitjue or lanusual rris sucrt a}a# r ,ttus site �i�>E�Y,,do t ty� n�t�p�iy �risewtrera,. 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, a lard-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 Tittle. �3. A n -t�r�€�rm'��g Strt�ettar�t Iris k en1�C��`���C<In�trttl:�'t strucra�y attered ��#aotpnr�t fps,nQt d�anged�!`sue or shape 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 PAGE 27-TITLE 18.108 REVISION (P:plenni glcodelrev-108g.eno)[0c obey 19, 19951 �i resolution 88-20 entitled "A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE LAND-USE HEARING RULES ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION 78-38° are repealed. I! PAGE 28-TITLE 18.108 REVISION 1c:dm+"uw1c"a"km,-10eo.m"eoMd,m 18. 18851 �L P. 1 �P1 FROM KENT LAYDeN 0 SOLUTIONS FAX MEMORANDUM TO: Brian Almquist PROM: Kent I.ayden RE: 1996.37 Council Goals DATE: December 10,1995 Here is a draft of the Council goals as a result of our work session Friday and Saturday' da I felt the Council u Council,and staff on Friday and Saturday. reductive Good fully work with you,, ed to work through differences in a P was fully engaged and managed manner. Staff assistance on Friday was I most helpful. Council Goals ear including Council acknowledges that much has been accomplished in the p ast Y for will fuels reduction and sidewalks Co�QI isomost pleased ` ongoing funding overnment communication program- ,. of Eective citizenlg ressed an 81% satisfaction rate(41`�'o very satisfied)with that overall,citizen's exp Survey. City services in the 1995 Community the on going program of work for the coming Council,in additioEnTeop maintaining goal from 1995-96: year in electricity olice,and public works,acknowledged citizen interests an initiated three new goals for 1996"97 and carried forward one g transportation modes through such means as: e alternative transp ,. 1. Encourag ve `,�.alkability • Encourage streetscape improvements that Improve remove barriers (dead trees,tall such as code enforcement to G.•a�So^� hedges,eta) bicycle access from Jackson ICM� • Complete negotiations d tracks• Roads along trea ortation coordinator position• • Exxplore development of a transp 2. Assist in siting a teen center. 3. Reexamine growth management policies as they affect density, transportation,and City services. 4. Resolve office building/space needs issue (carry over from 1995'961• FROM P. 2 KENT LAYDEN e SOLUTIONS 9 q Notes to Staff Council advised staff on several items: I 1. Planning Department consider CUP hv en Railroad District is reviewed. 2. The City Recorder will video tape and make available Council Meetings to interested members and the public Video tapes will be available for 1 year. S. Administration will continue to explore purchase of land for a Transportation Center that ensures the option for a future rail link. 4. Administration will work with School District and RVTD to develop a bus route to East Main and Walker that serves the Pacific Northwest Museum of Natural history. S. Police Department consider extending bicycle patrol through Railroad Distinct. 6. City Administrator recontact to see viability of Vogel property. 7. Councilor Hauck will study and report back to Council recommendations for the laity's role in economic development. Possibly use SOSC interns to assist. S. Computer services will evaluate as part of its on-going assessment internal City needs for new technology and present to Council through Administration. Councilor Hauck will continue to review and present broader community needs to Council for consideration. Possibly use SOSC interns to assist. Other Points Council notes and remains particularly interested in Staff efforts respecting Lost Creek water, non point source pollution,encouragement of accessory and other u affordable housing,broadening of City revenue base through updates of SDCs and consideration of fees,and enhancement of employee sensitivity to the environment. y I BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 19, 1995 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #95-101, ) A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ) FINDINGS, FOR A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (COUNSELING) ) CONCLUSIONS AND AT 144 NORTH SECOND STREET. THE OFFICE ) DECISION WILL PROVIDE A VARIETY OF SERVICES FOR ) DISADVANTAGED FAMILIES AND ) INDIVIDUALS IN THE ASHLAND AREA. ) APPLICANT: INTERFAITH CARE COMMUNITY OF ASHLAND (ICCA) -------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: A. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for the operation of an office on Tax Lot 9200 of 39-1 E-09BA located at 144 North Second Street. The property is zoned R-2, Low Density Multi-Family Residential. B. The planning commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on October 10, 1995, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission denied the application as presented. C. The applicant appealed the decision of the planning commission to the city council. The city council, following proper public notice, held public hearings on November 21, 1995 and November 28, 1995 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. A decision to approve the request was made at the December 5, 1995 city council meeting. D. The representative for some of the opponents raised an issue that the applicant failed to state the basis of the applicant's appeal from the decision of the planning commission. The basis for the objection is that the issues the applicant wishes to raise �(0-Jor in paragraph 2.3 of the planning commission decision not paragraph 2.4. The representative for the applicant responded that in the written decision received by him the paragraph was misnumbered as 2.4 and he cited the number as received by him. The director of community development confirmed that the document was misnumbered and was later corrected by staff. We find that the applicant complied with the requirements of the ordinance for appeals from the planning commission. CRITERIA: The approval of a conditional use permit is subject to the criteria for approval in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) § 18.104.050, which are as follows: 'A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance PAGE 1-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (v:wenninoVjcce.fai 4 with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program. "B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. "C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. 2) Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. 3) Architectural compatibility with the impact area 4)Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. 5).Generation of noise, light, and glare. 6) The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. 7) Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use." TESTIMONY, EVIDENCE, AND FINDINGS: The council makes the following findings and conclusions regarding the relevant criteria: 1. 18.104.050A 'That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program." The proposed use will be located at 144 N. Second Street, which is identified as tax lot 39-1 E-09BA 9200. This lot is 50' in width and 142' in depth, having a total area of 7100 sq. ft. From the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO), R-2 Low Density Multiple-Family Residential District(ALUO 18.24.040-General Regulations),the minimum lot width for one unit shall be 50' with a minimum depth of 80'. The minimum lot area shall be 5000 sq. ft. The lot at this location meets or exceeds these minimums. The council finds that this lot conforms with all lot dimension standards of the R-2 zoning district. The proposed use will be located within the existing structure at 144 N. Second Street. As stated in the Staff Report dated October 10, 1995, this structure is an existing single family home of 1350 sq. ft. The building is of single story construction and less than 35' in height. The maximum building height allowed within the R-2 zone is 35'. No changes PAGE 2-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (p:p1wninaicca.fa) h y� or additions to the structure are proposed by the applicant that would affect the current setbacks from property lines. The total area covered by impervious surfaces is approximately 35%, below the R-2 zoning district requirement of 65%. The council finds that this structure is in conformance with all setback, building height, and lot coverage standards of the R-2 zoning district. Off-street parking is provided in accord with the requirements for a general office as found in ALUO 18.92.020.13.5 and we find that the proposed use meets all the requirements for off street parking. One space is required for each 450 sq. ft. of gross floor area. The building is 1350 sq. ft., necessitating three parking spaces. Two parking spaces are provided at the rear of the property, and one space is provided as an on-street credit, in accord with ALUO 18.92.025. Opponents argue that the street is currently unavailable for parking due to impacts from the downtown and existing uses within the Railroad District. Further, the opponents state that on-street parking credits should be curtailed in the Railroad District. - The council finds that the application meets all requirements for granting credit for an on- street parking space. The lot has 50' of street frontage. Two on-street parking spaces require 48' of uninterrupted curb (ALUO 18.92.025.B.1.). This provides for a credit of one space. The property is located 200' from the C-1-13 zone, complying with ALUO 18.92.025.F. Further, the council notes that the ordinance language regarding on-street parking credits is mandatory. The language is as follows: "18.92.025 Credit for On-Street Parking A. The amount of off-street parking required shall be reduced by the following credit provided for on-street parking., one off-street parking space credit for every two on-street spaces up to four credits . . ." (Emphasis added). The council finds that ordinance language is clear and unambiguous in the granting of on- street parking credits, and the property at 144 N. Second Street is eligible to receive a one space credit. Opponents argue that there will a greater number of staff at the proposed location than their current office.Therefore, additional parking is needed. Further,the opponents argue that more clients of the use will use cars than has been estimated by the applicant, necessitating an increase in the need for parking spaces. The council finds that the parking requirements are calculated based only on the gross floor area of the proposed use, and are independent of the number of employees or workers at a location. The council finds that the provision of two parking spaces at the rear of the property and one on-street parking space credit provide the three parking spaces required by the Ashland land use ordinance. PAGE 3-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (a:p1wnin9UceaJd) 4 Opponents argue that the level of use of the proposed services will increase, necessitating additional parking.The opponents refer to the applicant's information stating that they will provide expanded services from those currently provided. The council again finds that the parking requirements are based only on the gross floor area of the proposed use, and are independent of the activity level of the use. Should the applicant propose to increase the size of the structure, additional parking would then be required. However, the applicant is proposing to use the existing structure without expansion or modification. Opponents argue that the proposed use fails to comply with the purpose statement of the R-2 Residential District. ALUO 18.24.010 states as follows: "Purpose. This district is designed to provide an environment suitable for urban living. The R-2 district is intended for residential uses and appurtenant community services. This district is designed in such a manner that it can be applied to a wide range of areas due to the range of residential densities possible. In addition, when appropriately located and designed, professional offices and small home-oriented commercial activities designed to attract pedestrians in the Railroad District are allowed." The council interprets the purpose statement of the R-2 district as not constituting a separate approval standard for the zone, but rather provides a descriptive reference for the district to be used in the manner we interpreted in planning action #93-128 involving an appeal regarding an interpretation of city's solar access ordinance. In that matter we interpreted the role of the purpose statements of each zone as follows: "The purpose sections of the various chapters of the Land Use Ordinance are not standards in and of themselves, rather they are guidelines to interpretation of the ordinance where the requirements of the ordinance are too general or unclear, subjective, ambiguous or vague. To the extent that it is not apparent that the purpose sections in the ordinance are guidelines only, we so make such interpretation of the ordinance." (This case was appealed and the decision of the council ultimately upheld by the Court of Appeals.) See Sullivan v. City of Ashland, 27 Or LUBA 411 (1994) reversed 130 Or App 480 (1994). We make the same interpretation here. We find that the proposed use is an allowable use under conditional uses for the R-2 zoning district. Whether or not the conditional use requested by the applicant is one that falls within the allowable conditional uses in this zone is a matter of interpretation of the ordinance. Arguments have been made by the opponents to this application that the proposed use is not a professional office as that phrase is used in section 18.24.030.E. This section provides: PAGE 4-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (rPdeuninu6cce.fd) "Professional offices or clinics for an accountant, architect, attorney, dentist, designer, doctor or other practitioner of the healing arts, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster, investment or management counselor or surveyor." (Emphasis added.) This section allows a broad range of professional offices. In addition to the more traditional concept of professional offices being permitted, such as for a doctors, dentists, attorneys or accountants, more diverse activities are contemplated. For instance, an insurance adjuster is permitted as well as a surveyor. These professions frequently involve more than mere office visits by patients or clients to a doctor or lawyer. Frequently an insurance adjuster may have to ins of r damages to vehicle driven to the adjuster's office and a surveyor may load and load surveying equipment daily. The term professional office as used in this ction is a broader concept than what may be generally considered as a traditional profession. The applicant has characterized the use to be made of the property as a professional office with counseling as the primary service. Many of the uses specifically listed in this section have as an integral part of their profession some form of counseling. We find that the uses described by the applicant fit within the term used in this section as management counseling. The proposed use includes interviewing people who are seeking assistance of one form or another, evaluating those requests, proposing solutions or alternatives and providing remedies. This use is very similar to what the more traditional professional services, such as lawyers, doctors and accountants, offer. Because we interpret this section to permit more than the traditional view of a professional office and because the proposed use is similar to many of the services offered by the more traditional professions, we interpret the phrase "management counselor" as used in this section to include the uses of the property to be made by the applicant to fall within this phrase. We interpret the phrase "management counselor" to include, at a minimum, the management and counseling of people and their problems including those services to be provided by the applicant as described in this proceeding. Even if we did not interpret the proposed use as falling within a listed use in section 18.24.030.E, we interpret section 18.12.050 to permit the proposed use as a conditional use in this zone. This section provides: "Similar Uses. Where a particular use is not listed as permitted or conditional use in a given zone, the Planning Commission may, after appropriate analysis, determine that the use is similar to those listed in type, kind and function, and therefore properly allocated to that zone." Based on the analysis set forth above, we determine that the use is similar in type, kind and function to those listed in the section 18.24.030.E. The opponents have not identified any comprehensive plan policies not implemented by any city, State, or Federal law or program. The opponents have included several comprehensive plan policies in their arguments, but have not addressed how the PAGE 5-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (a:p1"n"ng4cc".fd) S I application fails to comply with these policies. These policies are all implemented by the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. The opponents have cited Policy VI-2a of the Comprehensive Plan but have provided no evidence as to how this application does not comply with this policy. This policy states: "Do not allow deterioration of residential areas by incompatible uses and developments. Where such uses are planned for, clear findings of intent shall be made in advance of the area designation. Such findings shall give a clear rationale, explaining the relationship of the area to housing needs, transportation, open space, and any other pertinent Plan topics. Mixed uses often create a more interesting and exciting urban environment and should be considered as a development option wherever they will not disrupt an existing residential area." The implementation of this policy is provided for in Chapter XIII of the Comprehensive Plan -- "Comprehensive Plan Policies and Their Implementation." The implementation of Policy VI-2a is by "conditional uses allowed in the R-2 zones (18.24)." This ensures that any uses which may be considered incompatible must be found to comply with the requirement of a conditional use permit to ensure the compatibility of the use. The council finds that the proposed use an allowable conditional use within the R-2 zone, and that the application for a conditional use permit for this use constitutes compliance with this policy. The opponents have also cited Policy VI-2c of the Comprehensive Plan, which states: "Develop programs and efforts for rehabilitation and preservation of existing neighborhoods, and prevent development which is incompatible and destructive." No evidence has been provided by the opponents as to how this application does not comply with this policy. From Chapter XIII of the Comprehensive Plan -- "Comprehensive Plan Policies and Their Implementation", the implementation of Policy VI-2a is by "council Policy, Zoning Code." The council finds that the application complies with the zoning code, through the conditional use permit process, and therefore complies with the plan policy. The council finds no evidence to indicate that the application as presented is not in compliance with this plan policy. The opponents cite Policy X-10a of the Comprehensive Plan, which states: "Discourage non-residential vehicle parking in residential neighborhoods." No evidence has been provided by the opponents as to how this application does not comply with this policy. I PAGE 6-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (o:dw"inwuCC".rd) I From Chapter XIII of the Comprehensive Plan -- "Comprehensive Plan Policies and Their Implementation", the implementation of Policy X-10a is by "council Policy, Chapter 11.24'." Chapter 11.24 of the Ashland Municipal Code regulates parking within the city. ' Chapter 11.24 reads as follows: 11.24.010 Method of parking. A. No person shall stand or park a vehicle in a street other than parallel with the edge of the roadway, headed in the direction of lawful traffic movement, and with the curbside wheels of the vehicle within twelve (12) inches of the edge of the curb, except where the street is marked or signed for angle parking. B. Where parking space markings are placed on a street, no person shall stand or park a vehicle other than at the indicated direction and within a single marked space, unless the size or shape of the vehicle makes compliance impossible. C. If the owner or driver of a vehicle discovers that the vehicle is parked immediately in front of or close to a building to which the fire department has been summoned, he shall immediately remove the vehicle from the area unless otherwise directed by police or fire officers. 11.24.015 Vehicle—Defined. As used in the Ashland Municipal Code,the term vehicle shall include the terms trailer and camper. (Ord. 2411, 1987) 11.24.020 Prohibited parking. In addition to the provisions of the motor vehicle laws of Oregon prohibiting parking, no person shall park: A. A vehicle upon a bridge, viaduct, or other elevated structure used as a street or within a street tunnel in this City, unless marked or indicated otherwise; B. A vehicle In an alley except to load and unload persons or materials not to exceed twenty (20) consecutive minutes In any two (2) hour period; C. A vehicle upon a street for the principal purpose of: 1. Displaying the vehicle for sale; 2. Washing,greasing,or repairing the vehicle except repairs necessitated by an emergency; 3. Selling merchandise from the vehicle except in an established marked place or when so authorized or licensed under the ordinance of this City; 4. Storage, or as junkage or dead storage for more than seventy-two (72) hours. D. A vehicle upon any parkway except where specifically authorized; E. A vehicle upon private property without the consent of the owner or person in charge of the private property; F. A vehicle within any area marked off by yellow paint upon the street or upon the curb, except where specifically authorized by a traffic sign. (Ord. 1557 S13, 1968) G. A vehicle or any part thereof upon a sidewalk or bicycle path. 11.24.030 Use of loading zone. No person shall stop, stand, or park a vehicle for any purpose or length of time other than for the expeditious unloading and delivery or pickup and loading of materials, freight, or passengers in a place designated as a loading zone during the hours when the provisions applicable to loading zones are in effect. In no case shall the stop for loading and unloading of passengers and personal baggage exceed five (5) minutes, nor the loading or unloading of materials exceed fifteen (15) minutes. (Ord. 1557 S14, 1968) 11.24.040 Use of passenger loading zone. No person shall stop, stand, or park a vehicle for any purpose or length of time other than for the expeditious loading or unloading of passengers in a place designated as a passenger loading zone during the hours when the provisions applicable to passenger loading zones are in effect. (Ord. 1557 S15, 1968) 11.24.050 Buses—Taxicabs—Generally. The driver of a bus or taxicab shall not stand or park the vehicle PAGE 7-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (xpl.ninotiooa.fd) The council finds that this use would comply with the requirements of Chapter 11.24 and therefor would not conflict with this policy as implemented. The council therefore finds that the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any city, State, or Federal law or program. 2. 18.104.050.6. 'That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property." The existing single family residence is served by city water and sewer, and the applicant has not proposed any increase in need of these services beyond those currently provided. The council finds that there is adequate capacity of city water and sewer to this site from the current services. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. Paved access is provided to the property by Second Street, a fully improved city street. The council finds that there is adequate paved access to and through the development as provided by Second Street. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. The existing single family home is served by City of Ashland Electric, and the applicant t has not proposed any increase in need of these services beyond those available to the site. The council finds that there is adequate electric service to this property. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. I upon a street in a business district at a place other than at a bus stand or taxicab stand, respectively, except that this provision shall not prevent the driver of a taxicab from temporarily stopping for the purpose of and while actually engaged in the loading or unloading of passengers. 11 24 060 Buses—Taxicabs—Restricted stand use No person shall stop, stand, or park a vehicle other than a bus in a bus stand or other than a taxicab in a taxicab stand, except that the driver of a passenger vehicle may temporarily stop for the purpose of and while actually engaged in loading or unloading passengers when the stopping does not interfere with a bus or taxicab wafting to enter or about to enter the zone. (Ord. 1557 S17, 1968) 11.24.070 Movina vehicle. The moving of a vehicle within a block shall not be deemed to extend the permissible time for parking it there. (Ord. 1557 S18, 1968) 11.24.080 Lights on parked vehicle. No lights need be displayed upon a vehicle parked in accordance with this chapter or parked upon a street where there is sufficient light to reveal a person or object upon the street within a distance of five hundred (500) feet. (Ord. 1557 S19, 1968) 11.24.090 Exemption. The provisions of this chapter regulating the parking or standing of vehicles shall not apply to a vehicle of a City department or public utility necessarily in use for construction or repair work, or to a vehicle owned by the United States while in use for the collection, transportation, or delivery of the United States mail. (Ord. 1557 S20, 1968) PAGE 8-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (P:P1.nirgv....fd) I The applicants are not proposing any changes in the property that would affect the existing urban storm drainage such that it would not be able to adequately accommodate storm water flows. Therefore, the council finds that the existing urban storm drainage is adequate to accommodate the use. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. The location at 144 N. Second Street is served by a fully improved city street, adequately providing service for automobile transportation. Second Street has fully improved sidewalks connecting to the nearest arterial street (Lithia Way) providing adequate pedestrian access to the property. A transit stop is located approximately one block from the site, providing adequate access to transit services. The council finds that there is adequate transportation for the proposed use. 3. 18.104.050.C. 'That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone:" The "impact area" for determination of effects of the proposed use is define in 18.104.020.A., which states: "That area which is immediately surrounding a use, and which may be impacted by it. All land which is within the applicable notice area for a use is included in the impact area. In addition, any lot beyond the notice area, if the hearing authority finds that ft may be materially affected by the proposed use, is also included in the impact area." The council finds that the area within the notice area for this proposal constitutes the impact area. That area is 200' from the borders of the site at 144 N. Second Street. No additional lots beyond the notice area were included in the impact area. The "target use of the zone" is determined in accord with the definition for "target use" as found in 18.104.020 B.3., which states: "R-2 and R-3 Zones: Residential Use complying with all ordinance requirements developed at the density permitted by the zone." The density permitted in the R-2 zone is determined in accord with 18.24.040.A. Permitted Density. The dimensions of the lot proposed for this application are 50' in width, 142' in depth, with an area of 7100 sq. ft. Section 18.24.040.A.1. states: "Minimum lot area for 2 units shall be 7,000 sq. ft. with a minimum width of 50'and a minimum depth of 80'." The council finds that the proposed lot of 7100 sq. ft. would accommodate two residential units (duplex). Throughout this process, starting with the staff report, the planning commission hearing and decision up to the arguments before this council, the assumption PAGE 9-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (p:p1aaai gVccaJd1 has been that the target use is a duplex. For the purposes of this decision, we find that the target use is such, meaning the target use is two residential units (duplex). We note, however, that there are other residential uses in the R-2 zone which could be a target use. Those other residential uses are boarding or rooming houses, fraternity or sorority houses and dormitories. See 18.104.020.B.3 and 18.24.020.C. 3.1. 18.104.050.C.1: "Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage." The property at 144 N. Second Street contains a single-story home of 1350 sq. ft. The home was constructed in approximately 1900, and is representative of other in the area. The applicant has not proposed an exterior changes to the homes pp p p Y 9 structure other that the provision of a ramp to allow for disabled access. The surrounding homes and structures on Second Street are of a similar scale and size, with the majority of homes constructed in the same time period as the applicant's property. The council finds that the existing home, with the proposed ramp construction, is similar in scale, bulk, and coverage to that of a duplex residential structure. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. 3.2. 18.104.050.C.2: "Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities." The applicant, in its findings presented with the application and reiterated in the Staff Report dated October 10, 1995, has indicated that the proposed use would i generate an average of approximately 3.6 vehicle trips per day. Others visiting the proposed use would arrive by other travel modes, primarily transit and walking. This determination was made by the review of visits made to the existing office operated by the applicant. By comparison, the target use for the zone, a duplex, would generate approximately 14 vehicle trips per day, as determined by the manual 'Trip Generation", 5th Edition, 1991, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Opponents have argued that the applicant has failed to adequately address the vehicle impacts associated with the proposed use, and have indicated that the number of vehicle trips to the site will be greater than that stated by the applicant, in their opinion. They have also stated that the trips generate by staff will be greater than indicated by the applicant. Further, the opponents speculate that the level of service provided by the applicant will increase from their current location, and will result in increase vehicle trips to the site. The opponents have also argued that the use of ITE vehicle trip estimates is inappropriate, in that national averages do not apply to a small town neighborhood such as the Railroad District. Opponents have questioned the statistical data submitted by the applicant and have referred to statements made on a television program and in other places outside of these proceedings as evidence that the applicant's traffic flow and impact data are incorrect. We find that the statements made by representatives from the Interfaith Care Community of Ashland outside PAGE 10-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION Jc:a1..ing cca.fd) of this record are not inconsistent with the traffic flow data submitted to the Planning Department. The applicant keeps very specific information concerning its clients, including the manner in which people arrive at the site. We find that the traffic flow and impact data submitted by the applicant are correct. The applicant has provided a study indicating actual visits to their office, and the mode of travel used. The council finds that this evidence is clearly supportive of the request and the opponents have failed to provide substantial evidence that would indicate that the applicant's information is false or misleading. The council further finds that the comparison to ITE vehicle trip estimates for a duplex is an appropriate measure. The ITE manual provides a consistent estimate of vehicle trips based on many studies conducted nationwide, and no substantial evidence was provided by the opponents indicating that a duplex in the Ashland Railroad District would be significantly different from those nationwide. Further, the council finds that the difference in vehicle trips between the proposal, at 3.6 per day, and the target use, 14 per day, provides a buffer to allow for increases in the number of visits to the site, and still maintain vehicle trip impact less than the target use of the zone. 3.3. 18.104.050.C.3: 'Architectural compatibility with the impact area." The existing single family home is 1350 sq. ft. bungalow-style structure constructed in 1900. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the building with the exception of the construction of a ramp to allow for disabled access. Surrounding uses in the block include residential structures of similar size, scale and architectural design. The council finds that this existing structure is architecturally compatible with the impact area. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. 3.4. 18.104.050.C.4: 'Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. The applicant has indicated to no additional impacts to air quality will be generated by the proposed use, and have indicated that the since the proposed use will result in fewer automobile trips, and therefore fewer environmental pollutants. The council finds that the proposed use will not have any greater adverse effect on the impact area in terms of air quality than the target use for the zone. This issue was not disputed by the opponents. 3.5. 18.104.050.C.5: "Generation of noise, light, and glare." The applicant has indicated that there will be no greater generation of noise, light, and glare by the proposed use than by the target use of the zone. All office operations will be conducted indoors, and no additional lighting will be provided beyond that normally used in residential situations, such as motion-detectors connected to yard lighting. PAGE 11-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (p:p1..i.QXiCCaJd) The opponents have argued that the motion-detector outdoor lights will be used to keep loiterers away, and will result in increased light and glare in the neighborhood. The council finds that the proposed use will not generate noise, light and glare beyond that of the target use for the zone. The use of motion-detector yard lights is a common residential practice, and will not be of a greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area than if such lights were used on a duplex structure at this location. 3.6. 18.104.050.C.6. 'The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan." The adjacent properties are zoned R-2, the same zoning as the subject parcel. Opponents have argued that the approval of this use will encourage other residential properties, either adjacent or nearby to convert to non-residential uses. The council finds that the proposed use, with no change in the exterior of the building or the size of the building, and operated in the manner proposed, will not adversely materially affect the development of adjacent properties for either permitted or conditional uses allowed within the zone. The opponents maintain that there should be a "dominant residential component" on the property to preserve the residential neighborhood and that without the residential component the neighborhood land uses would be "tipped" toward non-residential nature. We disagree. Assuming that the term "residential component" means an apartment or i other structure or configuration which might be rented, leased, or otherwise available for full-time residential occupancy, the Ashland City Code does not have any such requirement as a part of approving a conditional use permit. The council finds that approval of this use will not change the residential nature of the neighborhood. The comprehensive plan designates adjacent properties as Multi-Family Residential. Chapter II of the comprehensive plan describes the Multi-Family Residential land use classification as follows: "This (designation) is intended to be a higher density area, up to 20 units per acre, for multiple-family units, single-family homes, small professional offices, and small, home-oriented, light retail commercial uses in the historic Railroad District. Implementing codes should not encourage the removal of structurally sound housing for new units. They could allow, however, for older homes to be converted to multiple-family use." The Council finds that the approval of this use will not adversely affect the ability of adjacent properties to develop in accord with the uses referenced in the above description of the Multi-Family Residential land use classification. 3.7. 18.104.050.C.7. "Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. PAGE 12-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (p:p1.ni g%icca.fa) The opponents, and to some extent the planning commission, have identified several livability factors they feel relevant. The factor identified as a residential component is addressed immediately above. Opponents argue that the Draft Infill Strategy for the Ashland Railroad District prepared by Demuth Glick Consultants, Ltd., of Portland presents evidence of the desire and need to protect the Railroad District and that allowing the conditional use permit in this instance is inappropriate. We disagree. The Draft Infill Strategy referred to is an unadopted report of a consultant, prepared after meetings concerning the Railroad District. It contains unadopted recommendations which may or may not become law in the future. Certainly, those recommendations are not law at this time. Insofar as any of those recommendations vary from the Ashland City Code and the Comprehensive Plan, we are bound to follow the code and the Comprehensive Plan, rather than the recommendations. If the recommendations are adopted in the future, they may only be adopted in part and, in their present form, present no basis for denying the conditional use permit. Other factors considered by the planning commission or raised by the opponents which affect properties beyond the impact area or which have not been addressed elsewhere in these findings are found not to be relevant. The opponents have also raised the factor of loitering in the impact area. The record is replete with problems of loitering which now exists in the impact area and the Railroad District. This loitering is not connected with the proposed use since there is no similar use in the impact area or the Railroad District and the present location of the applicant's operations is several miles from the impact area. The evidence is uncontradicted that the neighbors of the present location of the use caused no such problems and that they did not even know the use was occurring next to them. There is no evidence to show that the existing problems of loitering in the Railroad District will increase if this use is located there. We find that this factor is not relevant. DECISION All requirements have been met by the applicant for approval of the conditional use permit. The permit is approved with the following conditions: 1. That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2. That a building permit be obtained prior to the installation of a wheelchair ramp. The final ramp design to be reviewed by the Historic Commission Review Board and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. That all debris adjacent to the rear two parking spaces be removed prior to operation of the center. 4. This conditional use permit will be reviewed one year after activity under the permit is initiated on the property. The review will be conducted by a committee appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the council and shall consist of two persons from the Railroad PAGE 13-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (p:p[mningVcca.fd) l I District who are on record in this proceeding as opposing the application; two persons from the Railroad District who are on record in this proceeding as favoring the application; a council member and a community development department staff member. The committee will review the activities conducted on the property, compliance with the conditional use permit, and the effects on the neighborhood. The committee shall meet, gather such information as it shall deem relevant and necessary, and report to the planning commission and council its findings and recommendations. Mayor Attest — City Recorder i PAGE 14-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (p:planninp\icca.fd( V I City Attorney City of Ashland (541) 482-3211, Ext. 59 MEMORANDUM December 15, 1995 TO: The Mayor and Council FROM: Paul Nolte SUBJECT: City of Ashland, Oregon, Policy and Procedures for an Alcohol and Drug Testing Program to Comply with Federal Highway Administration Requirements On February 15, 1994, final rules implementing the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 were issued by the Federal Department of Transportation (DOT) Office. Under the new rules, the city is required to conduct pre-employment/pre-duty, reasonable suspicion, random, and post-accident alcohol and controlled substances testing of individuals who perform safety-sensitive functions for the city. Generally those city employees who are required to have a commercial driver's license fall within the definition of safety-sensitive functions. In addition to compliance with extensive new recordkeeping and reporting requirements, the city must also adopt a federally-prescribed employee alcohol and controlled substance misuse program that provides alcohol and controlled substance misuse information to covered employees, establishes a supervisor training program, and institutes an employee referral program for employees who violate the new requirements. Under this federal law, the city is now required to take appropriate steps to ensure that its employment practices and policies ♦ Conform with the federal rules, including rules governing protection of privacy in collection techniques; ♦ Incorporate federal mandatory guidelines for controlled substance testing and comparable safeguards for alcohol testing; ♦ Require that confirmation of any initial positive result is quantified; ♦ Require (in most cases) collection of split urine specimens; ♦ Guarantee confidentially of test results; and ♦ Provide for a scientifically-random selection of employees to be tested Employee unions affected by this policy have been consulted and realize that the policy is required to be adopted. The attached policy implements the federal requirements. Attachment IsAcwnc1N1m&dc.nwN . r CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR AN ALCOHOL AND DRUG TESTING PROGRAM TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this policy is to describe a program for alcohol and drug testing within the City of Ashland in order to satisfy the city's obligations under alcohol and drug testing rules (49 CFR 382 and related parts) established by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). These policy and procedures shall become effective January 1, 1996. 2. DESIGNATED PERSON TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE MATERIALS The following individuals are designated by the city administrator to answer questions regarding this policy: Assistant City Administrator 488-6002 City Attorney 482-3211 3. ALCOHOL AND DRUG TESTING APPLICATION All city employees or volunteers subject to the alcohol and drug testing requirements of 49 CFR 382, including but not limited to the following job classifications, are covered under this policy: Utility Worker I Utility Worker II Utility Worker III Utility Worker/ Water Quality Tech. Cemetery Maint. Worker Line Installer Lead Working Line Installer Line Truck Driver Mechanic Chief Mechanic Street Supervisor Water Quality Supervisor Transportation Specialist Treatment Plant Operator, Waste Water Treatment Plant Operator, Water Quality These classifications involve safety sensitive work as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 and 395.2 (1)-(7) and this city policy. 4. WORK DAY/SAFETY-SENSITIVE FUNCTIONS From the time an employee begins to work or is required to be in readiness to work (reporting time) until the time the employee is relieved from work and all responsibility for performing work (quitting time) safety-sensitive functions are any of those functions set forth in 49 CFR 382, as follows: PAGE 1-Drug and Alcohol Policy 1p:wdWmg-fd.Po0 4.1. All time at a carrier or shipper plant, terminal, facility or other property, or on any public property, waiting to be dispatched, unless the employee has been relieved from duty by the employee's supervisor. 4.2. All time inspecting equipment as required by 49 CFR 392.7 or 392.8 or otherwise inspecting, servicing or conditioning any commercial motor vehicle at any time. 4.3. All driving time, i.e., time spent at the driving controls of a commercial motor vehicle in operation. 4.4. All time other than driving time, in or upon any commercial motor vehicle. 4.5. All time loading or unloading a vehicle, supervising or assisting in the loading or unloading, attending a vehicle being loaded or unloaded, remaining in readiness to operate the vehicle, or in giving or receiving receipts for shipments loaded or unloaded. 4.6. All time spent performing the requirements of 49 CFR 392.40 and 392.41 relating to accidents. 4.7. All time repairing, obtaining assistance or remaining in attendance upon a disabled vehicle. 5. PROHIBITED CONDUCT The following conduct or activity is prohibited: 5.1. Alcohol Concentration No employee shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater. 5.2. Alcohol Possession No employee shall be on duty or operate a commercial motor vehicle while the employee possesses alcohol, unless the alcohol is manifested and transported as part of a shipment. 5.3. On-duty Use No employee shall use alcohol while performing safety- sensitive functions. Also, no employee who may, during the course of the work day, be assigned to perform safety-sensitive functions shall use alcohol during the work day. 5.4. Pre-dLV Use No employee shall perform safety-sensitive functions within four hours after using alcohol. 5.5. Use Following an Accident No employee involved in an accident which involves the loss of human fife or for which the employee receives a citation under State or local law for a moving traffic violation arising from the accident shall use PAGE 2-Drug and Alcohol Policy Ip:wd%drua-fd.Pon alcohol for eight hours following the accident or until the employee undergoes a post-accident alcohol test, whichever occurs first. No employee shall use any controlled substances for 32 hours following the accident or until the employee undergoes a post-accident controlled substances test, whichever occurs first. 5.6. Refusal to Submit to a Required Alcohol or Controlled Substance Test No employee shall refuse to submit to a post-accident alcohol or controlled substances test, a random alcohol or controlled substances test, a reasonable suspicion alcohol or controlled substances test, or a follow-up alcohol or controlled substances test required under 49 CFR 382 or this policy and procedures. 5.7. Controlled Substances (Drug) Use No employee shall report to duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions when the employee uses any controlled substance, except when the use is pursuant•to the instructions of a physician who has advised the employee that the substance does not adversely affect the employee's ability to safely operate a commercial motor vehicle 5.8. Controlled Substances Testing No employee shall report to duty, remain on duty or perform any safety-sensitive function if the driver tests positive for controlled substances. 6. CIRCUMSTANCES FOR TESTING Unless otherwise described in this policy, all of the following described testing, will be required for all employees in the classifications listed above who perform safety-sensitive work as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 and section 4 of this policy and procedures: 6.1. Pre-placement Testing No finalist for employment with the city in any of the job classifications listed above shall be hired until the employee has undergone testing for alcohol and controlled substances with the following results: An alcohol concentration of less than 0.02, and A negative controlled substances test result as verified by the Medical Review Officer. The requirement for pre-placement testing may be waived if the finalist has participated in a previous employer's testing program in a manner which satisfies the requirements of 49 CFR 382.301 (b) and (c), and if the city can readily obtain verification of such participation from the previous employer. No current employee who has not been subject to this policy shall be permitted to perform safety-sensitive functions until the employee has undergone testing for alcohol and controlled substances with the following results: An alcohol concentration of less than 0.04, and PAGE 3-Drug and Alcohol Policy (p:wdWd u-fd.Pon A negative controlled substances test result as verified by the Medical Review Officer. Further, in this case, if the alcohol test result indicates an alcohol concentration greater than 0.02 but less than 0.04, the employee shall not be permitted to perform safety-sensitive functions until the provisions of 49 CFR 382.505 and corresponding portions of this policy have been satisfied. 6.2. Random Testino The following specified proportions of all employees in the job classifications identified in section 3 who perform safety-sensitive work as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 and section 4 of this policy are subject to random selection for alcohol and/or controlled substances testing: Alcohol Testing: 25 percent of work group annually (this may be reduced to 10 percent or increased to 50 percent of the work group depending on determination by FHWA based on industry-wide experience under the FHWA rules). Drug Testing: 50 percent of work group annually (this may be reduced to 25 percent of the work group depending on determination by FHWA based on industry-wide experience under the FHWA rules). 6.2.1. The selection of employees for random alcohol and/or controlled substances testing shall be made by a scientifically valid method, such as a random number table of a computer-based random number generator that is matched with employees' social security numbers, payroll identification numbers or other comparable identifying numbers. The random selection and testing process shall be carried out on a quarterly basis, and each employee shall have an equal chance of being tested each time the random selections are made. 6.2.2. All employees driving a commercial vehicle as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 one or more days during the course of a calendar year are subject to random testing. If randomly selected for testing in any quarter as described above, the employee will be tested for controlled substances whether or not the employee is performing safety-sensitive work on the day of the test. 6.2.3: An employee shall only be tested for alcohol while performing safety-sensitive functions, just before performing safety-sensitive functions or just after performing safety-sensitive functions. 6.2.4. Randomly selected employees not performing safety-sensitive work on the day testing is scheduled will be tested on an unannounced day when they are performing safety-sensitive work. i� 6.2.5. Each employee who is selected for random alcohol and/or controlled substances testing shall immediately report to the testing site (or to a specified on-site location for transporting to the testing site if the testing site is PAGE 4-Drug and Alcohol Policy (P:«mars-fe.Pop I� . f other than at a city facility) upon notification to do so by the employee's supervisor or other designated city representative. 6.3. Reasonable Suspicion Testing An employee must submit to testing for alcohol and/or controlled substances whenever the employee's supervisor or other city representative meeting the training requirements of 49 CFR 382.603 has reasonable suspicion to believe that the employee has violated the prohibitions of 49 CFR 382.201 - 382.215, except 382.204, and the corresponding portions of the prohibitions of this policy. The determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the employee to undergo an alcohol and/or controlled substances test must be based on specific, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech or body odors of the employee. In the case of controlled substances, the observations supporting a reasonable suspicion finding may also include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of controlled substances. 6.4. Post-accident Testing An employee who is involved in an accident which involves the loss of human fife or for which the employee receives a citation under State or local law for a moving traffic violation arising from the accident shall be tested for alcohol and controlled substances. Any employee who is subject to post-accident testing shall remain readily available to such testing or the employee may be deemed to have refused to submit to testing, provided that this requirement shall not be construed to require the delay of necessary medical attention for injured people following an accident, or to prohibit the employee from leaving the scene of an accident to obtain necessary emergency medical care. The results of a breath or blood test for the use of alcohol or a urine test for the use of controlled substances, conducted by Federal, State or local officials having independent authority for the test(s), shall be considered to meet the requirements of this section, provided such tests conform to applicable FHWA requirements and the requirements of this policy and further provided that the results of such tests can be obtained by the city. 6.5. Return-to-duty Testing Before returning to duty requiring performance of safety-sensitive functions, any employee who has engaged in conduct prohibited in 49 CFR 382.201-382.211 or sections 5.1-5.6 of this policy and procedures concerning alcohol must undergo a return-to-duty alcohol test with a result indication an alcohol concentration less than 0.02. Before returning to duty requiring performance of safety-sensitive functions, any employee who has engaged in conduct prohibited in 49 CFR 382.211-382.215 or sections 5.5-5.8 of this policy and procedures concerning controlled substances must undergo a return-to-duty controlled substances test with a verified negative result for controlled substances use. 6.6. Follow-up Testing Following a determination under 49 CFR 382.605 (b) or section 10 of this policy and procedure that an employee is in need of assistance in resolving problems associated with alcohol misuse and/or controlled substances, the PAGE 5-Drug and Alcohol Policy (p wdld.o-fd.P.Q employee shall, upon returning to work, be subject to unannounced follow-up alcohol and/or controlled substances testing. The number and frequency of such follow-up testing shall be as directed by the substance abuse professional, and shall consist of at least six tests in the first twelve months following the employee's return to duty. The requirement for follow-up testing may extend for up to 60 months from the employee's return to duty based on direction from the substance abuse professional, but the-substance abuse professional may terminate the requirement for follow-up testing at any time after the first six tests have been administered, if the substance i abuse professional determines that such testing is no longer necessary. 7. EXPANDED PRE-EMPLOYMENT TESTING All finalists for employment with the city in any of the job classifications listed in section 3 will be subject to pre-employment testing as described in 49 CFR 382.301 and related parts whether or not they are initially expected to perform safety-sensitive work as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 or section 4 of this policy after being hired. In addition, all finalists for-employment with the city in the following additional classifications will be subject to pre-employment testing as described in 49 CFR 382.301 and related parts: Road Maintenance Worker Extra Help (when the employee will perform flagging or otherwise work with regular or regular part-time employees subject to this policy and procedures) This requirement is based on 49 CFR 382 only in so far as finalists are being considered for safety-sensitive work as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 and section 4 of this policy and procedures. Pre-employment testing for any other position in the categories listed in section 3, above or this section is city policy and is not based on 49 CFR. 8. REQUIREMENT TO BE TESTED Any employee who is subject to being tested pursuant to the requirements of 49 CFR 382 or this policy and procedures must submit to being tested for alcohol and/or controlled substances immediately upon notification to do so by the employee's supervisor or other designated city representative. 9. REFUSAL TO BE TESTED An employee who is subject to being tested pursuant to the requirements of 49 CFR 382.211 or section 5.6 of this policy may violate 49 CFR 382.11 or this policy by refusal to submit to a required alcohol and/or controlled a substances test through any of the following: ii 9.1. Telling the employee's supervisor, other city representative or the person(s) j conducting tests or collecting urine specimens that the employee is refusing to be tested. 9.2. Failing to report to or leaving the city job site or test site, or, failing to report to or leaving a specified on-site location for transporting to the testing site if the testing PAGE 6-Drug and Alcohol Policy 1a:ord\dmo-fd.Pa1) site is other than at a city facility, before the required testing and/or collection is completed. 9.3. Failing to remain readily available for post-accident testing, provided that this requirement shall not be construed to require the delay of necessary medical attention for injured people following an accident, or to prohibit the employee from leaving the scene of an accident to obtain assistance in responding to the accident or to obtain necessary emergency medical care. 9.4. Failing to provide adequate breath for alcohol testing without a valid medical explanation. 9.5. Failing to provide adequate urine for controlled substances testing without a valid medical explanation. 9.6. Engaging in any other conduct which clearly obstructs the testing process. A refusal to be tested shall be treated as a positive test, i.e., an alcohol test result of 0.04 or greater or verged Positive controlled substances test result. 10. CONSEQUENCES OF PROHIBITED CONDUCT OR TREATMENT/FOLLOW-UP VIOLATIONS Any extra help employee, or new probationary employee who violates any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 of this policy will be terminated immediately. The following provisions will apply to all other employees in regular or part-time regular positions in the classifications listed above performing safety-sensitive work as defined by 49 CFR 382.107 and section 4 of this policy. 10.1. Any employee who violates any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 of this policy will be removed from the job. Any employee who violates any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 of this policy and procedures may not return to work until all of the applicable requirements from the following list are completed: 10.1.1. The employee must be evaluated by a substance abuse professional as defined by 49 CFR 382.107. The substance abuse professional shall determine what assistance, if any, the employee needs in resolving problems associated with alcohol misuse and/or controlled substances use. 10.1.2. If determined necessary by the substance abuse professional, the employee must properly follow any treatment or rehabilitation program identified. The employee must be re-evaluated by the substance abuse professional to determine that the employee has properly followed the prescribed treatment or rehabilitation program. The treatment or rehabilitation program used may not be the substance abuse professional's private practice or be provided by a person or organization from which the substance abuse professional receives remuneration or has a financial interest. PAGE 7-Drug and Alcohol Policy (P:o.dWmg-fd.Pol) 10.1.3. The employee must undergo a return to duty alcohol test with a result indicating an alcohol concentration less than 0.02 if the violation of prohibited conduct involved alcohol, or a controlled substances test with a verified negative result if the violation of prohibited conduct involved a controlled substance. 10.2. The city will not provide non-safety sensitive work for an employee who has violated any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 of this policy. Time off the job for any employee who violates any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 of this policy shall be unpaid leave for remainder of that day and until a verified appointment with a substance abuse professional has been scheduled. After an appointment has been scheduled, the employee may use accrued leave. In addition, the city will, upon notice of a positive test, begin disciplinary action pursuant the appropriate collective bargaining agreement. 10.3. Before being permitted to return to work, any employee who is.off the job due to a violation of any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 of this policy shall be required to sign a "Return-to-Work Agreement." A subsequent instance of lost time resulting from a positive alcohol or controlled substances test will result in the employee's termination. This is city policy and is not based on 49 CFR 382. 11. EMPLOYEE'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR TIMELINESS This section is city policy not based on 49 CFR 382. Any employee who violates any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-382.215 or section 5 or 9 of this policy and procedures is responsible for vigorously pursuing all requirements of section 10 of this policy and procedures in a manner which allows the employee's return to work as quickly as possible. The employee shall sign an agreement allowing the city administrator, or the administrator's designee, to contact the substance abuse professional to assure continued progression in the prescribed treatment. Failure of the employee to make a verified appointment with a substance abuse professional within five working days following the violations will be cause for the employee's employment with the City of Ashland to be terminated. Failure to continue meaningful progress toward completing prescribed treatment as determined by the substance abuse professional may be cause for the employee's employment with the City of Ashland to be terminated. 12. CONSEQUENCES OF AN ALCOHOL TEST RESULT 0.02 OR GREATER BUT LESS THAN 0.04 No employee tested under this testing program who is found to have an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 shall remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions. The employee may not return to work until the start of the employee's next regularly scheduled duty period, but not less than twenty-four hours following administration of the test. Time off the job will be unpaid leave for the remainder of the day. Following, the employee may use accrued vacation for the remainder of the twenty-four hour period. PAGE 8-Drug and Alcohol Policy (p:ord\drug-fd.Pou In addition the city may take disciplinary action pursuant to the appropriate collective bargaining agreement and may refer the employee to a substance abuse professional and may require a return to work agreement. 13. PAYMENT OF PROGRAM COSTS 49 CFR 382 does not prescribe payment of costs associated with alcohol or controlled substances testing, or related requirements to either the employee or employer. This section is city policy and is not based on 49 CFR 382. 13.1. The city will pay all costs, including, but not limited to, paid time, for random, reasonable suspicion and post-accident testing. The candidate must pay for the preplacement testing, but the city will reimburse the candidate for the testing cost when the individual is hired following a negative test result. The candidate's time for a pre-employment test will not be city-paid time. 13.2. Any employee who violates any of the provisions of 49 CFR 382.201-328.215 or section 5 of this policy will be responsible to make all arrangements and pay for the dependency evaluation, treatment, return-to-duty testing and follow-up testing, if any. An employee who has a test performed on a split sample following a positive drug test must make the arrangements and pay for the test. The city will reimburse the employee for the testing cost if the re-test result refutes the initial positive test. 14. CERTIFICATE OF RECEIPT As a condition of employment, each employee subject to the requirements of 49 CFR 382 and this policy is required to sign the attached statement certifying that the employee has received a copy of this policy. The original of the signed certificate will be maintained in the employee's official Personnel File. Upon request, the employee shall be provided a copy of the signed certificate for the employee's personal records. 15. MAKE WHOLE PROVISION An employee shall be made whole for any action taken by the city as a result of a false positive test including: reinstating any used vacation or sick leave, reimbursement for any unpaid leave, retraction of discipline, and nullification of a return-to-work agreement. PAGE 9-Drug and Alcohol Policy ia:o,d%druc-m.Pan CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR AN ALCOHOL AND DRUG TESTING PROGRAM TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS CONSENT AND CERTIFICATE OF RECEIPT I, the undersigned employee of the City of Ashland, certify that I received a copy of the written City policy and procedures dealing with implementation of Federal Highway Administration rules and regulations (49 CFR 382) pertaining to alcohol and controlled substances testing of individuals performing safety-sensitive functions. I understand that the original of the certificate will be placed in my official personnel file as a record documenting my receipt of said policy and procedures. I give consent for the City of Ashland to obtain or pass on to either previous or present employers information concerning alcohol and substances test results obtained while employed by the City of Ashland pursuant to section 5 49 CFR 382. Name (Type or Print): Signed: Date: i PAGE 10-Drug and Alcohol Policy iv:«d1drw-fd.voo °fASN o { emaranAunt December 11, 1995 Q: Honorable Mayor and Council .. „.-�2 YQIII: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator p� � Cd. Citizens' Bu ll dget Committee Three positions on the Citizens'Budget Committee expire December 31, 1995.Martin Levine and Regina Stepalvn have requested your consideration for reappointment. The third positron was vacated when Carole Wheeldon was appointed to the Council. Advertising for the three portions was completed with Dick Trout applying for appointment A Dopy of Mr. _ .Tricot's interest7euer:and t�g—are included for your review. A copy of the advertisement is also provided for your information. _ (rsa`xamm._) _ Attachments - 5 YOUR CITY NEEDS YOU! Applications are being accepted for open positions on the Citizens' Budget Committee. These volunteer positions have a 3-year term expiring December 31, 1998. State law requires members to be city residents. The majority of the meetings for this committee are held Thursday evenings during the months of March and April. !I For more information, please contact City.Recorder Barbara Christensen at City Hall, 482-3211. u The deadline for applications is November 30. If you are interested in applying, please submit your letter of interest with your rdsum6 to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520. UBLISH: Monday, November ; Monday, November 13 and Revels' November edition. - - LPO 1/12693-= For information, contact Rhonda at 488 6002. !I C I T Y O F A S H L A N D C I T Y H A L L ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 telephone(code 503)4W-W11 November 2, 1995 Ms. Regina Stepahin 320 Orange Avenue Ashland OR 97520 Dear Ms. Stepahin: Your position on the Citizens' Budget Committee expires December 31, 1995. Please fill in the bottom of this letter and return it to me at City Hall by Monday, November 13, 1995. These positions will be advertised for applicants during this month. Appointments or reappointments will be considered by the Council at their December 19 Council meeting. If you are reappointed, you will be contacted after the Council meeting. Thank you for your assistance. Cordially, Rhonda E: Moore Executive Secretary c�o®teaeue�.e� Yes, 1 would like to be considered for reappointment. No, 1 am not interested in being reappointed. Signed: CITY OF ASHLAND CITY HALL 0 ASHLAND,OREGON 97510 telephone(code 503)481.3211 d November 2, 1995 I Mr. Martin Levine P.O. Box 465 Ashland OR 97520 I Dear Mr. Levine: Your position on the Citizens' Budget Committee expires December 31, 1995. Please fill in the bottom of this letter and return it to me at City Hall by Monday, November 13, 1995. I� These positions will be advertised for applicants during this month. Appointments or reappointments will be considered by the Council at their December 19 Council meeting. If you are reappointed, you will be contacted after the Council meeting. Thank you for your assistance. Cordially, Rhonda E. Moore Executive Secretary (r.Comm\9e5ntcap.iv) Yes, I would like to be nsideredfor reappointment. No, 1 am t interest d in be'ng reappointed. 'j Signed: II ! u Nov 2 01995 City Recorder Barbara aiChristensen City Hall , a Ashland , Oregon 97520 November 16, 1995 Dear Ms Christensen: k' I am applying for a position on the Citizens' Budget Committee. This is a position in which my skills and experience could be of benefit- to the City, and one that I feel that I would enjoy c• performing. E; is lied for this po A couple of y sition, through an x•` ears ago I applied Franklin . Although I was told resumes are kept on file ; the enclosed one is updated and " just in case" the older one is no longer around. Sincerely Yours , i Dick Trout J 830 Garden Way Ashland , OR 97520 482-97847 6 l.. i tot,. G, (r t II E RESUME for Citizens ' Budget Committee Position Richard L. Trout 830 Garden Way 482-9747 Ashland, Oregon November, 1995 - Resident of Ashland for 12 years. - Watershed Patrol Volunteer for 7 years. - Retired. Broad computer expertise and management experience. Education: B. S. Economics, Santa Clara University. Post-graduation courses in mathematics , political science, accounting, law enforcement ( 24 quarter-units) , education . _ - Management Related: numerous university, IBM and in-house courses. Technical : Many IBM, Univac and university courses. Business Experience: Thirty-one years with United Airlines. i - Mgr. of Apollo Business Systems: installing and supporting mini-computer based accounting systems for travel agencies nationwide. - Mgr. Information Center : installation and support of personal computers in Western U. S. ; support of users accessing main- frame databases. - Programming Mgr. : on United' s realtime reservations system. Project manager for several very large-scale computer applications. i; - Sideline business: designed , programmed and marketed programs F for personal computers . ii Other: Married ; good health . Individual outdoor sports, gardening , reading. Age 64. - Military: Army Military Intelligence, 7/53 - 9/56. - Vice-chairman Education Accountability Committee, Cherry Creek Schools (Denver Metro) , Colorado; two years. - Have IBM PC; good typing skill . i ASHLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM December 4, 1995 TO: JIM OLSON, Public Works Administrator FROM: GARY E BROWN, Chief of Police -via LINDA HOGGATT, Administrative Services Manager i SUBJECT: VEHICLE PURCHASES FY 1995-96 Several factors have necessitated our taking a look at alternative source of vehicles for the Police Department with regard to purchase this year. The most significant of which, is the fact that Ford has discontinued the mid-size line (Taurus), police package vehicles, and does not have plans to remanufacture the line in the future. The imminent disappearance of "police equipped" vehicles limits the choices for administrators of patrol vehicles. Recently in September 1995, Law and Order Magazine in an article Large Cruisers May Become a Thing of the Past stated, 'There is no guarantee that the large cars law enforcement has used in the past will always be available. The disappearance of the Caprice should indicate that there will be major changes in the availability and selection of police cruisers in the near future." As an aside, we had previously opted to switch to an intermediate size police vehicle to save fuel consumption, obtain front wheel drive and improve the handling on narrow, curving streets. Since Ford is dropping production of the Taurus police package the LUMINA is the only game in town for traditional mid-size vehicles. The article indicates that even Chevy may not continue production of mid-size police vehicles in the future. With this trend we began research into the purchase of alternative vehicles, including looking at police equipped four wheel vehicles (4x4). Utility vehicles offer more versatility in what we can carry (the mid size has been restrictive in the room available for light bar consoles, radios, radar, cell phone and other equipment), are all terrain, all weather vehicles, and have a great service life under less than ideal conditions. Smaller vehicles, have their limits. The major need is a vehicle that has adequate room in it, enough to carry our equipment. While the Ford Taurus has been 1- adequate for most officers, its smaller size did not comfortably fit some and was sometimes cumbersome for loading and unloading prisoners. JEEP CHEROKEE Sport is a police package vehicle that has been utilized in law enforcement and has proven itself to be not only flexible with weather conditions but capable of meeting the diverse needs of law enforcement officers today. These vehicles add another dimension to our ability to maneuver the streets of Ashland in all seasons from summer through the winter. Again, in September 1995 Law and Order Magazine reported, 'repair rates are no higher for the four wheel drive cars than for traditional RWD cars. No department reported excessive front end alignment problems. Four wheel drive cars offer safety and security in snowy or rainy weather." It would be seldom that chains would be necessary in the winter, reducing damage to patrol cars, roadways, and necessity to call in shop personnel to put on chains. It is also our recommendation that turn over for police vehicles be at a more rapid rate than customarily done in the past. The best way to get your money out of a car is to buy a new one, drive it a year (40,000 miles) and then sell it. Traditionally, the method of obtaining patrol cars has been to buy them, drive them for a set number of years and then sell it for what the market will offer. Vehicles used in that way are, to put it bluntly, in less than adequate condition for sale. Buy the end of the second year, we are seeing a car in the shop more and more often and the mileage is up around 70,000 (significantly reducing the number of people interested in purchasing this type of used vehicle). Very little is known about the FORD EXPLORER with regard to Police use. The 1996 model is the first model of the Explorer to offer a Police package. Although the Ford Explorer has a good track record for citizen usage, only time will tell how it holds up under extensive and prolonged usage. RECOMMENDATION: The cost of the JEEP CHEROKEE is $4,921.25 at purchase is more than the LUMINA ($21,675.65 v $16,754.40). However, the resale of the vehicle is sufficient enough to reduce the cost increase of purchasing the four wheel drive to approximately a wash. The FORD EXPLORER is also more expensive at initial purchase with an estimated added cost of $3,600. The explorer, however, does have a high trade in value and there is a local dealer. For additional information I had Dan Nicholson and Kip Thomas do test rides of both the Jeep Cherokee and the Ford Explorer. Their comments have been added as Appendix A and B I recommend City of Ashland - Ashland Police Department purchase three (3) Jeep Cherokee vehicles as replacement fleet vehicles this year. Attachments: Cost analysis breakdown Appendix A - Dan Nicholson With regard to trade in value of the vehicle at the end of a normal usage period (presently 2 years for police vehicles) the following table looks at costs based on the purchase price before add on's and resale/trade in values suggested by local dealers. Calculations for resale purposes, in this report, have been based on 70,000 after 2 years; however, this does not preclude the City from keeping the car longer (especially if they prove to wear better than the sedans have in the past and continues to retain a higher resale value). FORD CHEVY JEEP EXPLORER LUMINA CHEROKEE BASE COST AT 24,290.50 16,754.40 21,675.65 TIME OF PURCHASE 35,000 p/year estimated 9,000.00 * 5,000.00 10,000.00 70,000 TOTAL max value resale ESTIMATED NET 15,290.50 11,754.40 11,675.65 COST *Blue book information for resale value is based on prime condition vehicles with little or no modification. To get a truer picture of resale value, I spoke with dealers and have lowered the estimated value to a more realistic value knowing the wear and tear a police vehicle encounters. True blue book values were: $17,200 for the FORD EXPLORER, $8,600 for the LUMINA and $15,450 for the JEEP CHEROKEE. The following is an analysis of the Purchase of the Chevy Lumina and the Jeep Cherokee utilizing both the State of Oregon bid system and Lithia Jeep of Medford, Oregon. NEW PURCHASE STATE BID FORD STATE BID DEALER - CHEVY EXPLORER JEEP 4X4 LITHIA JEEP LUMINA 4X4 4X4 "no 4x4 available BASE PRICE 15,663.00 22,902.50 21,276.23 19,720.60 DEALER FEE 0.00 .00 0.00 200.00 4 SPEED 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 AUTOMATIC DELIVERY CHARGE 89.00 .00 125.00 500.00 Speed Control 193.13 .00 195.50 195.50 Defroster/Rear 151.30 .00 136.85 136.85 Light group 267.00 .00 165.75 165.75 Power Door & 291.92 867.00 459.00 459.00 Window Window wiper/rear 0.00 .00 124.95 124.95 Cloth seat bucket & 0.00 238.00 51.85 51.85 bench 34.00 34.00 Undercoat 59.00 139.00 95.00 139.00 door controls 40.05 144.00 Wea°SUB TO4AL 98,7 4.40 24,2W.500 22,092.20 21,075.06 ADDITIONAL COSTS TO EQUIP VEHICLES Police Radio 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00 Consoles Seats 370.00 .00 0.00 0.00 Cages 0.00 .00 0.00 0.00 Overhead lights 879.00 879.00 879.00 879.00 Manuals 148.00 800.00 800.00 800.00 BULL Cc�o TS 90.281., o 20,0080.500 2,4,,W1.20 23,4N.65 Appendix B - Kip Thomas cc: Peggy Christensen Brian Almquist Jerry Glossip Mike Biondi Jill Turner Keith Woodley Pete Lovrovich RESOLUTION NO. 95 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SrrE-SPECIFIC SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE FOR THE ASHLAND RETIREMENT RESIDENCE, 540 N. MAIN STREET, PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.20.050(F). THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 4.20.050(F) of the Ashland Municipal Code, the City Administrator has determined that systems development charges for congregate residential facilities were not contemplated in the adoption of said charges. SECTION 2. The City Administrator has reported that impact on the Ashland Retirement Residence, 540 N. Main Street, calculated on the basis of a multiple family dwelling presents a special circumstance such that the calculated fee is grossly disproportionate to the actual impact of the development. SECTION 3. The data submitted by the developer for similar projects throughout the United States indicates an average occupancy of 1.09 persons per dwelling unit with a high of 1.26 and a low of 0.95 persons per dwelling unit. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby determines that an average occupancy of 1.2 persons per dwelling unit shall be applied to the methodology adopted in resolution No. 92-12 for calculating water, sewer and parks system development charges for the project at 540 N. Main Street. 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 wed a to orm: Paul Nolte, City Attorney of ASN w •1100 , December 13, 1995 Mayor and Council I�I ram: James H. Olson, Acting Public Works Director '�[I `� �uhjet:c Transfer Of Property To Sammons "" GENERAL: Dr. Sammons has requested that the City relinquish to him fee title to two narrow strips of land adjacent to his property off Terrace Street. The properties were acquired for utility access to lots on Ridge Road. BACKGROUND: On January 10, 1966 the City accepted a deed for a number of narrow interconnected parcels of land from Dodge and Cony(Document No. 66-01016,attached). The parcels have the appearanoe of alleys, however the deed has the unusual stipulation that the deeded property be used for utility services. As the owner of this property the City is called upon to maintain these strips, basically by cutting grass and brush growth. The property is not open for vehicular travel and could probably never be used as such due to the steep grade and narrow width. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that a portion of 39-lE-9CB Tax Lot 1500 be deeded to Peggy Ann Sammons,Trustee,by Bargain and Sale Deed for the sum of$250.10. (This amount covers staff time and recording fees.) The property will be entirely subject to easement for utilities(existing sewer line)and for bicycle and pedestrian usage. Although the property will no longer belong to the City we will retain rights to use the property for current and future purpose. ACTION REOUESTED: Council to consider this proposal at the December 19th City Council meting and authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to sign the attached Bargain and Sale Deed. cc: Brian Almquist John McLaughlin Paul Nolte t't FIRST PAGE RECORDING REQUIREMENTS PER ORS 205.234 NAME OF TRANSACTION: Bargain and Sale Deed NAME OF PARTIES: Grantor: City of Ashland Grantee: Peggy Ann Sammons, Trustee of the Peggy Ann Sammons Living Trust under Trust Instrument Dated ' 199 DOCUMENT TO BE RETURNED TO: Peggy Ann Sammons, Trustee of the Peggy Ann Sammons Living Trust, 155 Terrace Street, Ashland, OR 97520 TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION: $250.00 UNTIL A CHANGE IS REQUESTED, SEND TAX Peggy Ann Sammons, Trustee of the Peggy Ann STATEMENTS TO: Sammons Living Trust, 155 Terrace Street, Ashland, OR 97520 BARGAIN AND SALE DEED City of Ashland, Grantor, conveys to Peggy Ann Sammons, trustee of the Peggy Ann Sammons Living Trust, 155 Terrace Street, Ashland, Oregon, the real property described on the attached Exhibit A. Grantor reserves a non-exclusive easement in gross in the entire real property being conveyed under this deed to construct, reconstruct, Install, use, operate, Inspect, repair, maintain and remove utility lines, including but not limited to lines for electricity, sewer, water, gas and telecommunications, and all necessary related facilities over and under the real property being conveyed together with a non-exclusive easement in gross in the entire real property being conveyed under this deed for the purpose of providing bicycle and pedestrian access for the public across the property. The true and actual consideration for this conveyance is$250.00. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. DATED this day of 1995. GRANTOR: CITY OF ASHLAND BY Catherine M. Golden, Mayor BY Barbara Christensen, City Recorder State of Oregon County of Jackson This Instrument was acknowledged before me on 1995, by as of the City of Ashland, Oregon, and by as of the City of Ashland, Oregon. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires: PAGE 1-BARGAIN AND SALE DEEDy:mw\� d.A EXHIBIT 'A' A portion of that parcel of land deeded to the City of Ashland and recorded as document No. 66-01016 of the Official Records of Jackson County Oregon; situated in the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing @ a point on the West line of Terrace Street, which point is North 00° 02' West, 628.0 feet from the intersection of said West line of Terrace Street with the center line of Holly Street (extended) in said City; thence South 890 58' West, 180.0 feet; thence North 000 02' West; 160.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continue North 00° 02' West, 144.0 feet; thence North 890 58' East, 180.0 feet to the West line of Terrace Street; thence North 00° 02' West, along said West line, 16.0 feet, thence South 89° 58' West, 180.0 feet; thence North 000 02' West, 40.0 feet; thence South 89° 58' West, 16.0 feet; thence South 00° 02' East, 200.0 feet; thence North 89° 58' East, 16.0 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.14 acres. City of Ashland to Sammons 39-1E-09CB TL 1500 City of Ashland Engineering Division September 21, 1995 ?E°°�' December 13, 1995 �ID: Mayor and Council rOm: James H. Olson, Acting Public Works Director lj�tjpt}: Transfer Of Property To Sammons GENERAL: Dr. Sammons has requested that the City relinquish to him fee tide to two narrow strips of land adjacent to his property off Terrace Street. The properties were acquired for utility access to lots on Ridge Road. BACKGROUND: On January 10, 1966 the City accepted a deed for a number of narrow intertoaviected parcels of land from Dodge and Cony(Document No. 66-01016, attached). The parcels have the appearance of alleys, however the deed has the unusual stipulation that the deeded property be used for utility services. As the owner of this property the City is called upon to maintain there strips, basically by cutting grass and brush growth. The property is not open for vehicular travel and could probably never be used as such due to the steep grade and narrow width. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that a portion of 39-1&9CB Tax Lot 1500 be deeded to Peggy Ann Sammons,Trustee,by Bargain and Sale Deed for the sum of$250.00. (This amount covers staff time and recording fees.) The property will be entirely subject to easement for utilities(existing sewer line)and for bicycle and pedestrian usage. Although the property will no longer belong to the City we will retain rights to use the property for current and future purpose. ACTION REQUESTED: Council to consider this proposal at the December 19th City Council meeting and authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to sign the attached Bargain and Sale Deed. cc: Brian Almquist John McLaughlin Paul Nolte (c:\cogioecrleemmme.mem) FlRST PAGE RECORDING REQUIREMENTS PER ORS 205.234 NAME OF TRANSACTION: Bargain and Sale Deed NAME OF PARTIES: Grantor: City of Ashland Grantee: Peggy Ann Sammons, Trustee of the Peggy Ann Sammons Living Trust under Trust Instrument Dated , 199 DOCUMENT TO BE RETURNED TO: Peggy Ann Sammons, Trustee of the Peggy Ann Sammons Living Trust, 155 Terrace Street, Ashland, OR 97520 TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION: $250.00 UNTIL A CHANGE IS REQUESTED, SEND TAX Peggy Ann Sammons, Trustee of the Peggy Ann STATEMENTS TO: Sammons Living Trust, 155 Terrace Street, Ashland, OR 97520 BARGAIN AND SALE DEED City of Ashland, Grantor, conveys to Peggy Ann Sammons, trustee of the Peggy Ann Sammons Living Trust, 155 Terrace Street, Ashland, Oregon, the real property described on the attached Exhibit A. Grantor reserves a non-exclusive easement in gross in the entire real property being conveyed under this deed to construct, reconstruct, install, use, operate, inspect, repair, maintain and remove utility lines, including but not limited to lines for electricity, sewer, water, gas and telecommunications, and all necessary related facilities over and under the real property being conveyed together with a non-exclusive easement in gross in the entire real property being conveyed under this deed for the purpose of providing bicycle and pedestrian access for the public across the property. The true and actual consideration for this conveyance Is $250.00. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. DATED this day of , 1995. GRANTOR: CITY OF ASHLAND BY Catherine M. Golden, Mayor BY Barbara Christensen, City Recorder State of Oregon County of Jackson This instrument was acknowledged before me on 1995, by as of the City of Ashland, Oregon, and by as of the City of Ashland, Oregon. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires: PAGE 1-BARGAIN AND SALE DEEDa:r.W% „ 1.dd) I EXHIBIT 'A' u A portion of that parcel of land deeded to the City of Ashland and recorded as document No. 66-01016 h of the Official Records of Jackson County Oregon, situated in the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: u Commencing @ a point on the West line of Terrace Street, which point is North 00° 02' West, 628.0 feet from the intersection of said West line of Terrace Street with the center line of Holly Street (extended) in said City; thence South 89° 58' West, 180.0 feet; thence North 00° 02' West; 160.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence continue North 000 02' West, 144.0 feet; thence North 89° 58' East, 180.0 feet to the West line b of Terrace Street; thence North 00° 02' West, along said West line, 16.0 feet, thence South 890 58' West, 180.0 feet; thence North 00° 02' West, 40.0 feet; thence South 89° I 58' West, 16.0 feet; thence South 00° 02' East, 200.0 feet; thence North 890 58' East, 16.0 feet to the point of beginning, containing 0.14 acres. V V City of Ashland to Sammons 39-1E-09CB TL 1500 City of Ashland Engineering Division P September 21, 1995 �I P U U II I� V 6 U u II h I� II I 0 I� 391E 980 I GLENVIEW DR. „o.w,,.',; ;B ,JAN 0 9 - - —I - i 100 =; I TERRACE e . I � r zoo 7, . 400 m s'a I C ` �.500 uo S. ;• % W G� W 700 800 •'° tF-, 1.1w I 1. 1000 900 Iv-5e53'1 SAMMONS PROP. 1 N p.bnn noo ' SUMMIT t c STREET r 3 1300 PROP. REQUESTED BY SAMMONS SAMMONS PR Pf oKD 1'\ . 1 I P-45641, II 1401 u o Z 12 J` 1400 P-56281 �\ .. ... 9y 1600 0 1700 �9 IOWA - - _ STREET nc1 F 7 1900 — — REDUCEDSCALE 1800 W U r1 2000 zoos W CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION AUGUST 16, 1995 th II a WARRANTY DEED r KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS That ROBERT E. DODGE and RAE . I p DODGE, husband and wife, and CHESTER E. CORRY and DORIS FAITH CORRY, husband and wife, Grantors, in consideration of Ten and no/100 ($10.00) �i Dollars, to them paid by the CITY OF ASHLAND, a municipal corporation li of the State of Oregon, Grantee, do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns, all the following real property, with the tenements, hereditaments and appur- tenances, situated in the County of Jackson and State of Oregon, bounded and described as follows, to-wit: Beginning at a point on the West line of Terrace Street, which point is North 0002' West 628.0 feet from the intersection of said West line of Terrace Street with II the center line of Holly Street (extended) in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 89 058' West 180.0 feet; thence North 0.02' West 304.0 feet; �I thence North 89'58' East 180.0 feet to the West line of Terrace Street; thence North 0°02' West along said West line 16.0 feet; thence South 89058' West 180.0 feet; thence North 0'02' West 40.0 feet; thence South 89'58' West 16.0 feet; thence South 0'02' East 360.0 I� feet; thence South 89 058' West 168.12 feet to the Easterly line of Ridge Road; thence South 27'30' East along said line 10.14 feet; thence North 89'58' East 209.55 feet; thence South 0.02' East 245 feet; thence North 89°58' East 12.0 feet; thence North 0'02' West 239.0 feet; thence North 89.58' East 140.0 feet to I� the West line of Terrace Street; thence North 0°02' I� West 15.0 feet to the point of beginning. To Have and to Hold the above described and granted premises �VVVI unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. p It is agreed and understood that the above described property pN' will be used for utility services furnished by the City of Ashland. And the Grantors covenant that they are lawfully seized in fee simple of the above granted premises free from all encumbrances, and that they will, and their heirs, executors and administrators shall, warrant and forever defend the above granted premises, and I i it -1- �I I �I b6-ui(:is every part and parcel thereof, against the lawful claims and demands of all persons whomsoever. witness their hands and seals this day of January, 1966. -1-r�t< (SEAL) (SEAL) (SEAL) 2 (SEAL) STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Multnomah ) On this /d day of January, 1966, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared the within named Robert E. Dodge and Rae I. Dodge, husband and wife, who are known to me to be the identical individuals described in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same freely and voluntarily. - ,t.IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed C•':t; •. ESgkal seal the day and year last above written. " ' °•"'' <,�>' Nota y Public Tor Oregon �ld �C,6`rfamission expires ,,, ,acv COmmisslon F Puns Oct 2,1969. STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Jackson On this J3 day of January, 1966, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared the within named Chester E. Corry and Doris Faith Corry, husband and wife, who are known to me to be the identical individuals described -2- 66-01016 h in and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same freely and voluntarily. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year last above written.- Notary Public for Oregon/ 4L II *•..... �_.• ission exp ires I , :' L'YLS'.,:r.,�::`•:C+:::SIG.fl51951 f pC�Y7K17.:rt :z € U of, P ' ,lncrser counr:caecoa 6 coo• II 1966 Jh4 27 PM 17_ 56 U BY F- jZ�O I I I III I III �I I n DRESCHER & ARNOLD TEL :503-482-4941 Dec 13.95 14 :44 No .002 P.01 DRESCHER & ARNOLD 147(MM a LAW WOE.MAIN. • PAl eaoc.M ALLEN G. DRESCHER,Pin ABR AM OREGON 07640 TELEPHONE(6"AK�LQW 0.PHILIP ARNOLD December 12, 1995 FAX(5 4U4041 Cathy Golden, Mayor Ashland City Council Re: Interfaith Care Community of Ashland Planning Action No. 95-101 Mayor and Members of the Council: Included in the appeal application letter which I sent to Mr. Almquist on November 1, 1995, I requested that the appeal fee submitted to the Planainq Department by the Interfaith Care Community of Ashland be waived and returned to the ICCA for use in its mission. You did not address this issue 'when dealing with the" appeal on its merits, and I again present it for your consideration. Thank you. �` $ihcerely, p GPA/amy Carolyn Johnson Sue Crader DEC 13 19% ASHLAND . d CITY HALL C T Y O F � ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 telephone(code 503)482.3211 December 14, 1995 Dr. Christian P. Hald 600 Roca Street Ashland OR 97520 Dear Chris: As requested in your letter of December 13,I will include copies for members of the Council with their next agenda packet' TO hopefully set your mind at rest, the new entity proposed for creation will�be a for profit HMO,but a 501(c)3 not-for-profit corporation of which the City will be the sole member. The Mayor and City Council would continue to appo int the board members and be required to consent to any modifications to the articles of incorporation or by-laws. The facilities would then be leased to the new corporation. In addition, financial reporting and controls are being built into the lease agreement and by-laws to protect the City's interests in the Hospital. Under the terms of the lease, the City would be in a position to 'take back' the management of the Hospital in the event that these controls are b reached. Finally, since it is in the interest of our citizens W in a financially viable local hospital and, since all of the funds on hand were generated by user charges to patients, those funds need to be maintained by the Hospital its on- . to continue to support i on-going 8 8��on. Prior to any final decision by the Mayor and Council to transfer the non-fixed assets and_lease the fixed assets. to the newly-formed, not-for-profit corporation, the City and Hospital are fully committed to a full and open public process so that all the issues can be fully disclosed and discussed. We invite you to be a part of that process. Thank you for your continuing interest in our Hospital and for the stewardship you and other community members continue to provide for this very important community asset. Sincerely, Brian L. Almquist City Administrator trwu.mt cc: Mayor Comic James tson, H ital Administrator 13 December 1995 SUBJECT: Privatization of Ashland Community Hospital. TO: The Mayor and City Council of the City of Ashland. 1. The information contained in this letter is based on my memory of events concerning the building of the Ashland Community Hospital and the agreements II that were entered into with the City of Ashland for the operation of the Ashland Community Hospital. �I 2. In about 1958 or 1959 a committee, consisting of Christian P. Hald, M. D., member of the Medical Staff of the Hospital; Mr. Ed Roundtree, Editor of the it Ashland Daily Tidings; Ed Singmaster, Ashland businessman; and Walter Bosshard, City Council member, was appointed and charged with obtaining the II funding to build the Hospital and accomplish the same when funding was available. �I This was done. If memory serves, the agreement with the City of Ashland was that the City would guarantee the loan and that the Hospital would be self supporting, but if the Hospital could not pay its bills, the City of Ashland would step in and pay that which the Hospital could not pay. Also, if memory serves, the hospital has been financially sound since the day it opened in about 1961. At the opening of the �I hospital I served as Chief of Staff of the Medical Staff'and was significantly involved in all aspects of the Hospital,its management and its financial status. 3. Assume that which I have said is true, then the City of Ashland had agreed to be II the financial- supporter of the Hospital in the event of fiscal misfortune. This suggests that the Hospital had an agreement with the City and that, based on that agreement, I believe that the City has the right to severe its connections with the Hospital, but in so doing I feel that money held by the Hospital should revert to the City. I have been told that the Hospital has about six million dollars in its account. tl When the Hospital leaves the covering wing of the City, I feel the money, what ever amount it may be, should revert to the City and the taxpayers. The money should not depart with the Hospital to an HMO. 4. I call this to the attention of each of you and ask that you investigate this matter. Certainly the City could well do with six million dollars for the many needs that we all know exist. I do not believe that it is the obligation of the City or its taxpayers to fund an entity that is to become a for-prfitkfflo. b Chnsti A. g 600 Roca Street Ashland,Oregon 97520 II p li I�I