Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-0917 Council Mtg PACKET (?Ae C,4,P A C 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 September 17, 1996 I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers. II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting minutes of September 3, 1996. IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS: Recognition of Safety Program Achievement by Ashland City employees. Proclamation declaring September 18 as "White Rose Day." Proclamation declaring September 23-29 as "Healthy School Lunch Week." Proclamation declaring October 1996 as "Crime Prevention Month in Ashland." 5. Introduction of Sue Shulters, Fire\EMS Coordinator. V. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees. 2. Monthly Departmental Reports - August, 1996. 3. Quarterly Financial Report for period ending June 30, 1996. 4. Approval of National Register Nomination for Whittle Garage Building located at 101 Oak Street to the National Register of Historic Places. 5. Approval of Liquor License Application for "Jungle Taco" at 250 Oak Street. A. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total.) VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: /1! Adoption of Findings, Conclusions and Orders for P.A. 96-047 (Evan �UArcherd) 2. Reading of title only of "a resolution establishing a Pesticide Policy for Department and Division of the City of Ashland." VIII. NEW& MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: 1. ptance of report of Sluicing Alternatives Committee with comments of Tom Davis, P.E. of Montgomery-Watson Engineering. IX. -ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS: 1. Lease of city-owned property located on the east site of E. Main Street at Ga eet to Community Works, an Oregon non-profit corporation. First rea 2. din f "An Ordinance amending the membership, powers, and duties of the Cable Access Commission." X. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS XI. ADJOURNMENT (Reminder: Study Session tomorrow, Wednesday, September 18 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers - Topics are: (1) Renewal Resource Purchase Policy; (2) Revision of SDC fees; and, (3) Use of public easements for walkways and bikeways. MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 3, 1996 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and Thompson were present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular meeting of August 20, 1996 were approved with the following amendment, page 9 item 2) should read "Possible study of expansion and estimate of cost". SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Certificate for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the City of Ashland by the Government Finance Officers Association. Joanne Stumpf presented to the Finance Director, Jill Turner and the City of Ashland the Award for excellence. Turner introduced Marty Levine, chairman of the Audit Committee. Levine explained some of the responsibilities of the Audit Committee. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees. 2. Monthly departmental reports for August, 1996. 3. City Administrator's Monthly Report - August, 1996. 4. Request by Senior Program Director for approval to submit a grant application for an addition to the building on Holmes Avenue.. Councilors Hagen/Hauck m/s to approve consent agenda. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Appeal from a decision of the Planning Commission approving P.A. 94-117, a request for a Site Review and Outline Plan for a 7-lot X project on Church Street, west of North Main Street (Norbert Bischoff, applicant). (Continued to September 17 at request of applicant.) Public Hearing scheduled for this planning action was postponed until the next Council meeting scheduled for September 17, 1996 at 7 p.m. to allow for the clarification of certain items by the applicant. Council meeting 9-03-96 1 2. Proposed revision of Systems Development Charges. Finance Director, Jill Turner presented a report on Systems Development Charges. Also called Fiscal Impact Fees which are charges that are based on the cost associated with growth. System Development Charges try to allocate the growth portion so that the new residences pay for growth and existing residents pay for their proper share. Turner presented a slide that pointed out that System Development Charges are 7.3% of the total Capital Improvement Funding Summary. Turner gave brief history on System Development Charges. Commented on the amount of hard work and effort by the SDC Committee. Turner explained that the System Development Charges can be of two different types. One would be a reimbursement fee, which is where the capitol project is already completed and the current citizens are reimbursed for the extra capacity that they put into that project. The second type is a improvement fee, which are based on projects that are expected to be done and the extra capacity that will be served by that new project. The methodology for calculating are dissimilar and they each have their own specific way that those monies can be used. City Administrator Brian Almquist read letter from John Nicholson which indicated his disagreement with the opinion of the SDC Committee recommendations. Mayor Golden read to the public the Systems Development Charges Minority Report. The report noted water supply, water distribution, transportation and Parks. It was determined that the committee's reasoning was flawed in regards to water supply. It makes the assumption, that because a future water supply has not been identified at this time, new growth should not be paying for that water supply that it will need. It makes the assumption that new growth will not need water, instead of that its sources is still uncertain. It was noted that in regards to water distribution, when upsizing waterlines the resulting unused capacity will ultimately be used by growth. This additional growth should not be given a free ride by way of only having to pay the incremental cost, the savings should be shared. The report indicated that the committee also flawed with Transportation and Parks. In transportation the assumption was that because specific transportation projects have not been identified, there will be minimal cost for added capacity and improvement of transportation systems needed as a result of growth. Donated park land is included in the calculation of average cost of park land, which assumes the same level of donation in the future. The consumer index is used as the basis for active parks, rather than the actual price inflation of land within Ashland. Councilor Reid commented that it should be made clearer the delineation between current residents, new construction and new building. Council meeting 9-03-96 2 Finance Director, Jill Turner made comments on the minority report and how the staff respondedNoted that there was only one difference between the majority report and minority report in that one is using an incremental cost basis of allocating the growth portion of pipe line or water line and the other one is using the average cost basis based on the capacity of the pipe. It was staff recommendation to change the method of allocating growth cost on water lines from the incremental size cost difference to a cost based on the capacity of the pipeline. Stated that in transportation there was always a difference as to what the definition was included in as a street. In Parks, the $103 change is based on basing the cost of the improvement fee on the two recent purchased versus older data. Councilor Laws commented that the committee has been accused of being unbalanced and trying to make all decisions in favor of builders and developers which he feels in unfair to the committee. He noted that the committee accepted the fact that growth should be paid for by those who cause growth as much as State Law will allow. He felt that the committee worked very hard and thoroughly in arriving to their conclusions. The issues that were challenged in the minority report are issues that are not really clear. Laws did not feel that the committee tried to avoid having new growth pay for a new supply of water in the future. He stated that the committee agreed that there should be some project or plan on the part of the City to create a new supply of water or start working toward a new supply of water and that should be paid for by System Development Charges. The committee did disagree that we use some of the costs that would be involved in enlarging the capacity of the pipeline from Lost Creek Dam to Talent, because the City Council has not adopted this as a plan. The committee felt that until this was settled, it should not be assessed as a charge to new growth when it is not known if it is going to be done. The committee's position was that yes it should be paid by new growth, but it shouldn't be paid until there is a concept and rough idea as to what is being worked toward. Laws commented that the committee agreed that new growth should pay for additional capacity in water lines, but that citizens of Ashland should not have to pay for that additional capacity. Would like to find a way so that new growth pay the same amount as the old growth, but not sure how to find that answer. Doesn't believe there is a simple answer to this problem and the committee did their best to find a solution. Laws stated that the methodology of figuring out the SDC's for Transportation is based on a cross section of rope. There was a proposal made to the committee for a full cost of an ideal transportation system. The committee found that the cross section was based on an assumption that for every unit of house, there would be so many miles of streets, which is strictly hypothetical. It was felt that this often would not have any resemblance to reality and did not want to abate this cost. That in order to come up with a equitable cost, you have to figure out a transportation plan in order to plan on where streets would be placed. Until the costs are determined we should stay with the current methodology or in the case of water, the committee did want to tie SDC's to the incremental cost. Council meeting 9-03-96 3 PUBLIC HEARING: Open 7:45 p.m. Larry Medinger/695 Mistletoe Road/Member of the SDC committee. Commented that the SDC committee was formed in the 1990's. Did not feel there was an unbalance with voting members in regards to the building community. Felt it is important as to water and transportation that the city to adopt a plan, judge how much it has to do with growth and proceed. Stated that SDC costs for transportation were based on arterial streets, and there needs to be improvements in bicycle paths. Until there is a plan, it is hard to associate a cost. Urged Council to proceed with developing a plan. Spoke regarding water distribution, questioned why the city should change its current policy of charge by increments. Commented on new business transportation costs that generate high trip generation. Sid Field/525 Tucker/Ad-hoc member of SDC committee. Stated that the committee struggled a lot during the meetings trying to understand the methodology. Did not believe there was ever a disparity in the voting members of the committee. His observation was that everyone recognized there was going to be growth. Questioned how Council could collect dollars or how the committee could set a cost on projects that have not been identified or approved. Commented on job creation and what the SDC's may do to job creation. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9 p.m. Councilor Hagen noted that the SDC committee's charge was to identify the true cost of growth. City Administrator Almquist clarified that it has been the policy of the city that when additional sized pipes are placed at the request of the city, the city picks up the difference in cost. Council discussion regarding the proposed recommended charges based on a single family residential system development charge. The proposed charges by the committee is a total of $5,630 and the total recommended charge by staff is $7,388. Finance Director Jill Turner noted that the change reflected in water is because there was a reimbursement fee based on Hoster Dam that was dropped. Turner stated that the committee decided to work on an improvement fee basis for water supply. In working out the details as to what those improvements are is what has been a stumbling block. Turner commented that it was the same issue on transportation, in that transportation is a theoretical model. Council meeting 9-03-96 4 Council questioned if the methodology used on water for System Development Charges were equitable. Discussion on the types of projects that the State will allow for System Development Charges. Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to adopt staff recommendation being a compromise between L the committee and the minority report. + (akJv- g-(u- a 7 Discussion: Mayor Golden commented on being comfortable with the city charging arging a ?',-PCs different system than what is charged developers.; Agrees there is a need for future water, but the discussion as to whether there is a pipeline put in or build another dam or not, is a very difficult community decision. Does not believe council can collect money from the community for a decision they are unwilling to make.4w—by-discussion. Councilor Laws motion to amend first motion to have the city use the same methodology for water distribution, sizing pipes, doing it on incremental basis that is paid to the developers. No second to motion to amend. Laws commented on the work by council for a policy of new growth in the city paying its fair chair and as close as possible its actual cost. His concern is to have equitable system that is understandable and can be accepted, in the spirit as well as the letter of State Law. He does not feel that the staff recommendations fit this and are leaning the other direction in trying to get as much money as we can that is legal instead of coming up with a system that is truly fair. Councilor Reid call for question on the motion. Roll Call vote: Laws, NO; Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon, Thompson, YES. Motion passed: 5-1. Councilors Hauck/Wheeldon m/s to change city policy on paying for increasing capacity from incremental to the capacity charge. Councilor Laws motioned to table discussion. Councilors Hauck/Wheeldon withdrew the their motion. Council consensus to continue discussion at the next council study session. Council discussed different means of methodology in a comprehensive sense rather than issue by issue and how it would be implemented. Laws explained it would be a change to the methodology that is being used for SDC's and would fall under State Law for the required procedure. PUBLIC FORUM None Council meeting 9-03-96 5 UNFINISHED BUSINESS Council completed appeal for Planning Action //96-047 from August 6, 1996 Council meeting. Councilors Wheeldon/Hauck m/s to deny Planning Action #96-047. Discussion: Councilor Thompson stated that this Planning Action is the kind of thing that should be favored in this town, not the kind of Planning Action that knocks down density as if it somehow gives us a more livable city and points us in the proper direction. Councilor Hagen pointed out that more likely than not, the same number of square feet would be under roof for either project and the five house proposal would have been small homes and more affordable. Councilor Laws commented on the two arguments that were made against the appeal, one which was the open space that was provided was not true open space. He feels the council needs to be clear about the message being sent to Planning Commission as to how to deal with open space in the future. Second, this was a hillside development and therefore did not fit the same standards that other developments below the hill should get, that the open space provision were not appropriate in this circumstance because of the slope. Laws revisited the location and found the slope quite gentle and a pathway does make sense which makes no sense to the second argument. Mayor Golden clarified that when there was discussion about setting aside lots with the idea of open space, that you would move out that building envelope to another portion of the lot and leave it for open space. Golden clarified she was discussing access to and from. Councilor Hauck stated it is also for protection from development of the open space that is used in the calculation for subdivision development. In his reading of the language it stated it had to be a full lot development not that only part of it would be used as part of another lot, in its self would be a lot. Roll call vote: Laws, Thompson and Hagen, NO; Reid, Hauck and Wheeldon, YES; Mayor, YES. Motion passed: 4-3. 1. Findings, Conclusion and Order for P.A. 96-047 (Evan Archerd). Councilor Hauck requested that part of his decision making included, that it didn't meet the tandard regarding being part of a development and that this be added to the Findings , Conclusions and Order. / Council meeting 9-03-96 6 Discussion by council regarding sending mixed messages to the Planning Commission on definition of open space. That if this is going to interpreted in a more restricted way, the Planning Commission should know this. Councilor Reid felt that this may need to be revisited and make sure it is moving in the direction that was intended. Reid stated that you need to continue to revisit those planning goals ideas that are put out on paper that are then transmitted onto the ground. Councilor Hauck was supportive of changing the language so it reflected more of what was trying to be done. Councilor Thompson noted that when you look at the literal you forget the vision. Council agreed to have a study session to discuss and go over the language and definition of open space. Mayor Golden requested that the photos used in the Planning Action be available for another view. Findings, Conclusions and Order will be amended with the additional request by Councilor Hauck and returned for Council approval at next meeting. 2. Findings, Conclusion and Order for P.A. 96-080 (Daryl Bonin). Councilors Hagen/Laws m/s to approve Findings, Conclusion and Order for P.A. 96- 080. Roll call vote: Reid, Hagen, Laws, YES; Thompson, NO; Hauck and Wheeldon abstained as they were not in attendance at the meeting the Planning Action was heard. Motion passed: 3-1. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Request of Councilor Reid to discuss the opening and improvement of a pedestrian way between Clay Street and Glendale Avenue as proposed by Carl Oates. Mayor Golden noted that it was a misunderstanding in the preparation of the agenda that identified Mr. Oates as the proposer of this request. Carl Oates/776 Glendale/Read letter into record regarding his denial of making any statement regarding the need for a pedestrian path from Clay St. to Glendale Ave. Councilor Reid suggested that the council acknowledge that the easement is there for a possible pathway. Feels that the property owners should be made aware of the future need of the city for the easement. Would like staff direction and have easements identified so council could be made aware. 2. Adoption of Herbicide Use Policy. Administrator Brian Almquist read resolution in its entirety. Council meeting 9-03-96 7 Brook Bittner/315 Luna Vista/Feels policy is a good first draft but there are areas that need to be improved. Recommends that under section 2 the word "minimize" should be "eliminated". Does agree with the word "practicable" but should be whenever "possible", would create be better sense of responsibility. Would like better definition as to what "posted" means. Feels there should be a ban on the use of mixtures in pesticides. Feels that the authority to use pesticides should be at a higher level rather than the Certified Applicator. Karen Carpenter/447 Walnut/Feels there should be more specific definition in the terms. Concerned with the language in proposed resolution that it doesn't address the safety. Public Works Director Susan Wilson-Broadus explained for council that the resolution was worded somewhat generically because the Street Division and the Public Works Department is not the only entity that has utilized herbicides in the past. The language was drafted at the department head level so that it would work for all the effected departments. Councilor Reid questioned the similarity of the proposed resolution to the Parks Department policy. Wilson-Broadus explained that the Parks Department policy was used as a model in drafting the proposed resolution. Councilor Wheeldon questioned if there was any environmental training for employees. Wilson-Broadus stated that there is no current policy but it has been discussed and progress is being made. Wilson-Broadus felt there was no need for the Street Division to do any mixing of pesticides, but could not answer for other departments. Mayor questioned whether it would be possible to amend the resolution to add a limit as to how close pesticides could be spray within a certain amount of feet to existing homes. Wilson-Broadus will draft proposed language as suggested. Mayor also requested that there be notification to property owners and that Department Heads initial any approval prior to the spraying of any pesticide. Wilson- Broadus will get definitions from Park Departments policy on the words that were identified as concern and include in the proposed amendments. Paul Matthew/381 Maple/Suggested that weather conditions should also be addressed as well as other concerns. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance amending the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to permit signing of plats by staff advisor rather than the Planning Commission Chair." Councilor Hagen/Hauck m/s to approve second reading of Ordinance # 2787. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and Thompson, YES. Motion passed. Council meeting 9-03-96 8 2. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance amending Sec. 4.27.020 (0) of the Ashland Municipal Code to delete the exclusion of Roca Canyon Drainageway from the definition of storm drainage facilities." Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to approve second reading of Ordinance N 2788. Roll call vote: Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon, Thompson and Laws, YES. Motion passed. 3. Reading by title only of "A resolution dedicating property for park purposes pursuant to Article XIX, Section 3, of the City Charter (Winburn Way Parking Lot/Ice Rink)." Placed on agenda in error, property had already been dedicated in the past. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Councilor Reid questioned the proposed accessway for the new ice rink. It was explained that the poles were being removed, which will improve the accessway. Councilor Wheeldon made Council aware of the upcoming planned council forums with department heads which will be broadcast over public television in the council chambers. Requested that Council members try to attend these forums. She explained that there would be three open forums, which would be topic specific. The public was encouraged to attend, along with the members of the Communication Committee. Councilor Thompson shared photos with Council from Wellington, New Zealand showing small lots with small houses and examples of townhouses with common walls. Councilor Hauck commented that he would be providing the council in their next meeting packet a report on the local impacts of the new Telecommunications Act. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Barbara Christensen, Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Council meeting 9-03-96 9 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MEMBERSHIP, POWERS, AND DUTIES OF THE CABLE ACCESS COMMISSION [ADDITIONS OTATED TO SHOW DELETIONS AND ADDITIONS. DELETIONS ARE �� AND ARE Ff >ice• THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 2.21.010 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 2.21.010 Definitions. The following words and phrases whenever used in this chapter shall be construed as defined in this section unless from the context a different meaning is intended. A. "Access ebannel" "pt31 tC t CCe " means that government access channel oF._,rhanngls provided to the City of Ashland by the Cable Company in accordance with Section 26 of Ordinance No. 2258i shall be maRaged by the Media Department ei th Gellege. it lb"EsS'F.. Cable TelevisLOn'.Onsmer Prcxfsctton and OrLapetltlon Aft of . B. ,Commission' means the Ashland Cable Access Commission created by and with authority as delineated by this ordinance. G. "Cable Assess GBMW" FReans the physeeal site an these eperate 4he-prejeet-- epeFating bud-lint to (QFd. 270 O `��� ��I'1S RL�t���ane���arrtlrttanr Tetet�K�cx1 ad�xn�tere� � �Exfendec#�;ampu�i�r�ratn�f Srsut�etT�. PAGE 1-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (F:ard\cab1r2.ana) ISW. 10, 19961 SECTION 2. Section 2.21.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 2.21.020 Commission Established, Membership. A. The Ashland Cable Access Commission is created and shall consist of twe�v members appointed by the PFesident a the-Mayor and confirmed by the Council, nufnbeFiAg ene less than B. The Commission shall also consist of the following ex-officio, non- voting members: ___ esse the City of Ashland Administrator or designee and twea representatives of the Southern Oregon State College ��^a ^ r" •e. , Gable ne. ess Genter gt u:!EtU[ll staff. SECTION 3. Section 2.21.030 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 2.21.030 Terms--Vacancies. When the first members of the Commission are appointed by the Mayor under Section 2.21.020, eriet shall be appointed for a term to expire July 19987., eaeRN shall be appointed for a term to expire July 19940 and one shall be appointed for a term to expire July 19959. When the The successors to these positions and persons appointed by paFtieipating publie ageneies shall serve terms of three years. Vacancies shall be filled by appeinting authWity as promptly as possible. A e m etings ^ '1�r Cpn �dPr ^^ ,, � 'tea an tli° ar�n Thenr#S p1` pHt'SOraS appe�rtted by parttc�pattng put�ilc�e�s�;sl�['expirs on tfte effec�ye�1a#s o �s:a{nerrdr�ertt, SECTION 4. Section 2.21.050 of the Ashland Municipal Code is deleted. 2.21.060 Manamment. The management of the Gable Aeeess GenteF shall bee The Gable Aeeess GefiteF staff and the Media GenteF shall assume­+es�� feF deeisiens pertaining to staffing, budget, equipment, and pregFaFA • SECTION 5. Section 2.21.060 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 2.21.060 Powers and Duties--Generally. IN00 mmisstatt,Ahalt. A. evew, adopt and recommend for City Council approval appropriate guidelines, policies and procedures PAGE 2-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (p:wft. l 2.m,o) (Sept. 10, 1996) ' /Pu1iccss series ttttu Felated�t��TUi�nCt�tc�ng u;�9f,� ,, '�% tom polithes'and ,i ,i 0/ ,u ,i/ i/�/� ,gip//,,, � • �%/� n/ procedures sha1C' da�i,sp�t�resofut�on (�rticess far.tie roi//,iooipt� �G" S The ... Commission shall tnoni£cir�nd assist 1n," „re , roptWhe implementation of edures. tfies guidelines, policies and proc B. Mtmor, eUia£e :11111 1111 1111111:1111111 11111)111115a! te the Gen9miss"On. staff de and mice recx r �mendat arts £o tf% +fyY fra..... re atding t effectnreness of:agreements batween the pity and Sou tther�t f)regat State Gt�Nege or others ' votufng pt;f3ltc access ramm�g, e. and fac �ttes. Pt a all t C. The Commission have the further responsibility to assess whether the public's need for community access programming is being satisfied and to develop long-range plans, strategies, and recommendations for improved community access as it deems necessary. D. The Commission shall have the authority to search out grant funds and other sources of revenue for prejeef pvbli aGbess, to foster new program development, and to seek additional participants. PAGE 3-ANNOTATED ORDINANCE (v:�d\..W>2.mo) (seat. io, 1996) CITY OF ASHLAND '°" 0 1 Op asy�.e Department of Community Development Planning Division MEMORANDUM •GREGG�, ' DATE: September 12, 1996 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development RE: Code Compliance One of the Council Goals for 1996 was the creation of a code enforcement position to assist in the preservation of the livability and walkability of our community. To that end, we have just recently hired Adam Hanks as our new Code Compliance Specialist. Many of you already know Adam from his work in the Finance and Utilities Department, and from his work in the budget process. Adam has been on the job for one week, and is currently designing the code compliance program and procedures. Adam will be at the council meeting on September 17 for introductions and questions. pf ASIA`°•.,° Aemorandum �4100 P September 13 , 1996 Q, Mayor and City Council r rum. Jill Turner, Director of Finance ,�$Jtbje& Safety During 1995-96 the City of Ashland including Ashland Community Hospital and Ashland Parks and Recreation had the lowest number of workers compensation claims since 1986-87. The 95-96 total claims costs including reserves are within $4, 000 of the lowest amount in the last ten years. In other words the City has had a safe work year. It is evident that our employees take safety seriously. They need to be congratulated. The City proper reported only 19 claims compared to a ten year average of 30. Paid losses for 1996-97 are $6, 038 compared to a ten year average of $47,000 per year. G:\ji11\wp\counci1\safety ...'\ i v,r.V d /'rwn�m�•V y r-Vn :CV „ ri1 rya ;a V d-J 1#"�'n��'�V' q /.�+�° / hl r . aa• r ,, /.._< 1/"}.f.; </ j'G"� r L.- _ tr PROCLAMATION u > ; 4 WHEREAS, Nazi Germany, defying all democratic principles, established a dictatorship that - !l)1 affected all areas of life and instituted the persecution or annihilation, or both, of Jews, Gypsies, r 1 the disabled, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, political dissidents, Poles, Soviet prisoners of NF war, and many others; and, ..i.1,.•. .. Via Rr: +le JfGj ;•<i¢•ft. WHEREAS, resistance to the Nazis and their regime of terror was difficult and dangerous. Nazisi+' � 11437 and Nazi helpers killed more than 130,000 Germans who attempted to resist; they Incarcerated -. E - hundreds of thousands of resisters in concentration camps, high security prisons, and Jalls; and =�^ they summoned more than one million people to Gestapo interrogations; and, ((! WHEREAS, the key members of the White Rose, including the students Will[Graf, Cristoph k Probst, Alexander Schmorell, Sophie Scholl, and Hans Scholl and Professor Kurt Huber, formed s ='y/• an organized resistance movement against the Nazi's from 1942-43. Their activities included ='< intT,. . 'R� >,, !�8 r"'^ subversive reading and discussion groups and the distribution of anti-Nazi leaflets publicly in =4 �r Fc•. „xy Munich. The group made contacts in the cities of Hamburg, SaarbNcken, Ulm, Freiburg, .'llll� Stuttgart, and Berlin; and, WHEREAS, on Thursday, February 18, 1943, Hans and Sophie Scholl were arrested at the University of Munich, where they had been distributing their sixth leaflet They were immediately tried and executed. Eventually, all six original members were executed. Many others Involved in ”, :• the group received prison terms; and, ? , ) l WHEREAS, the leaflets of the White Rose show an acute awareness of the Nazi persecution of iM ll) ra. t' Jews, Poles, political dissidents, and others, as well as the Nazis' dictatorial and imperialistic goals. The messages of the White Rose about peace, freedom of speech, and freedom and equal human and civil rights for all stand as lessons for all citizens in a democratic, pluralistic society. We should commemorate the group's courage and Intellectual Insights. ciY 9 P' 9 9 1 " NOW THEREFORE, 1, Catherine Golden, Mayor of the of Ashland, hereby proclaim f Y Gh' Y P j �l l September 18 to be P - l€,i € i(j WHITE ROSE DAY f y in Ashland and encourage all citizens to Join In this observance. ` Dated this 17th day of September. 1996. li %' 6• I tits 5 I�•>•=�" Barbara Christensen, Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor -��f >t 5 Sax+\A�P. a Q`A�/lam, i+� "' 1\v 1 /IV •�i % i i w, , d1iWIO t .I'�wn 4. t �wm 1. MF4 �v viP V - .�. '.7IUI ♦ 1. v7l�.LNW\t'C.. ....• -.. V'N:I��Z_._ : ..:- V'.li.i.•v 4 "r:"4 Vr� w4 m. Il/ A.._.Y lrj Y'Fp' �I TC' .. JI •`\�I1N A•i S ��\I/M\Mdgi11• / l q,:�,.i/ XIglA, •� ..^'�1�•' l/•wP 1 _ •1 i If q •N/ \1b 1.�'•• VIl•1\tl 71\ Il ,r 1 JrVI / v,�\ ""'}n1 w+^\ VV�,, ,355 �'�r AV\=e 35.Yr .*.§{ VY•. tr \ V ,?,YI�.`e • -rV�\\.-.., •fi r jly° 8 fis :'4 baI1h11\"' a%/�/'11\it i '` s, PROCLAMATION iSaryl. ;,iii,• ?; :•:411)' ,,,:Zlo,=.�: WHEREAS, The Healthy School Lunch Program is a grassroots effort to empower students, parents, educators and concerned community members to act -I;111 i it 11 together to adopt dietary practices which promote their own health and f.3 the health of the Earth; and WHEREAS, The mission of the Health School Lunch Program is to initiate and coordinate a healthy meal program.in local schools; and <s„A-S ; :.� . WHEREAS, The U.S. Surgeon General's office has reported that 68% of all deaths in ,�. this country resulted from diet-related diseases, which are preventable by tat` practicing good nutrition; andE:y t^r WHEREAS, The Healthy School Lunch Program encourages school food service administrators to offer more fresh lant-based low-fat foods like fruits >r< vegetables, nuts, seeds and beans by offering training, recipes and resources to provide nourishing and delicious meal and snack `� alternatives; and =� WHEREAS, The Healthy School Lunch Program, by working closely with parents, =r,. teachers and food service personnel, motivates young people to make r hi11 healthy food choices at school and at home; and WHEREAS, The attention and assistance of all citizens is needed to encourage and = OW promote government policies that provide organic, plant-based foods to ,N �s.a schools. NOW THEREFORE, I, Catherine Golden, Mayor of the City of Ashland, Oregon, do >:C hereby proclaim September 23 through 29, 1996 as: .E v..," y't" �V HEALTHY SCHOOL LUNCH WEEK \,r in Ashland and urge all citizens to support serving healthier lunches in our schools and continue that support and encouragement all year long. A§' Dated this 17th day of September, 1996. �`yeel-.�. .t•.i`fai •, c K: I ul year t -t tF�t eE �91G1a• ':,,1���:i Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Catherine M. Golden, Mayor �)/�a7[4/ \ • \\Yf • / \ sr \�iP, L6,ylOk >=°�\J�' 'lil rah t\r.� 1,..:""m \\ � . .�, •� nn1.J _"L %fn i° � '�. •-. ...s,/\i-UW�4.. . ..i f.S�V•� ) r ....: f •\l .( .... . .: J \ //M �:i ...✓Yl\\/�\ \_.: ..J N\N; ..... _ ..fumd•,,:.:::::^..��i:^ mr xv d �• $✓rV d " / ✓1'V d ! 1'tu..✓� d- i>;s�w V d. i / rt r�V� �y�Vp��.J •'J3� v . f rl w'l' " .-•4�Jj S/ rf?,mow j .'i• A• r-t(u .,t' "%,b :n r w Nw Y "7nY '� ''�.n' fr ew/r/( 1P: � i. F II f 3i r��l✓5 l@ �/ n'rl/!i �a 1, r .r�f.:q'vaa 1 /.ei'�/�lwe .q ec r/r N'ee `� sE r}ri`r > ';;I1.EI PROCLAMATION w ( :; I 11 �ti»�, WHEREAS, the vitality of our nation depends on how safe we keep our iPz?. u> homes neighborhoods, and communities, because crime and fear ? p 7r��hi' diminish the quality of life for all; �(�,;>. WHEREAS, people of all ages must be made aware of what they can do to prevent themselves, their families, neighborhoods, and workplaces =F ° from being harmed by violence, drugs, and other crime; (II" WHEREAS, the personal injury, financial loss, and community a (1111)K.1 M deterioration resulting from crime are intolerable and need to be ! 1} t„ addressed by the whole community; W. WHEREAS, effective crime prevention programs excel because of . partnerships among law enforcement, other government agencies, civic - groups, schools and individuals as they help to rebuild a sense ofc ;. ,tllsi, communal responsibility and shared pride; and f"' WHEREAS, crime prevention initiatives are more than self-protection ire >.� ur' and security, but must promote positive alternatives to delinquency and drugs among young people and emphasize the power of youth to better '<sjl{j communities. (1�;_ `':;�:,rll°•,... airy. THEREFORE , I, Catherine M. Golden, Mayor, do hereby proclaim October 1996 as iN CREME PREVENTION MONTH IN ASHLANDp(1i-; :G::: -. M1 i•\:iii:. and urge all citizens, government agencies, public and private institutions, 't . . i 3iFa ; and businesses to increase their participation in our community's = i prevention efforts and thereby promote good citizenships_:--: ,lY_ I 1 ree;i Fjhb,iidl Dated this 17th day of Sotember, 1996. ;i(i? "'(Rui t Barbara Christensen Recorder Catherine M. Golden Mayor , , Y �;t1�Jjs .. ,ltj` 'F `�#t'"-" ���a_''•45j\',� 01111 rr'r={ „ \�(�k` ; m� A �! �ww"1w/ i....-.A r�fi`tiuorr�''r,«� A t � '1 v-rA1 � ,\.. '1pp,n • iP/l�� : r n'3 Y •Oid aYw . :'I:iV � \ :,- .o..li \Pw\Z<!'� i.,U'. tyl.i- "•:'S7Y.. yWw ! wA V-11 „ t4itt ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Barbara Jarvis at 7:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Bass, Gardiner,Armitage, Howe, Finkle,and Giordano. Absent members were Hearn and Carr. Staff present were McLaughlin, Molnar, Knox,and Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Howe moved to approve the Minutes of the July 9, 1996 meeting. Bass seconded the motion and the Minutes were approved. PUBLIC FORUM Carl Oates,776 Glendale,submitted a letter and spoke about his concerns regarding the approval of Planning Action 96-048 which was heard before the Hearings Board on April 9, 1996. He disagrees with the results of that meeting. He wrote a letter to the Tidings, Chairperson Jarvis, Planning Staff and City Council. He distributed a copy of his remarks. He is particularly concerned with the maintenance of Clay Street. PHILIP LANG,758 B Street,spoke about the make-up of the Historic Commission and Planning Commission. He submitted a. copy of his letter to the Commission. Jarvis said Lang's letter and comments would be addressed at a study session. TYPE If PUBLIC HEARINGS n Jarvis read the statement instructing participants of the process. PLANNING ACTION 96-101 REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DMDE A PARCEL INTO TWO LOTS,WITH THE REAR PARCEL BEING A FLAG LOT LOCATED AT 321 ALTA STREET. A VARIANCE IS ALSO BEING REQUESTED TO ALLOW FOR A DRIVEWAY GRADE OF 17 PERCENT,FOR APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET IN LENGTH, INSTEAD OF 15 PERCENT AS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE. APPLICANT: LESLIE BELEW Site Visits and Ex Parts Contacts Giordano is familiar with the site and knows the applicant socially. He does not believe It would affect his ability to make an unbiased decision. The remaining Commissioners had a site visit. STAFF REPORT Knox reported the applicant is proposing to create two lots with a driveway variance. The partition being requested is off Alta, an unimproved street that is over 10 percent grade. The ordinance requires that any new lots created off an unimproved street have to be paved from the new lot to a paved street. In this case,the applicant has proposed to do the 300 foot half street improvement. The street will need to be engineered to take Into consideration storm runoff. The variance for the flag drive involves 100 feet of length. The grade is about 17 percent. If the applicant tries to meet the 15 percent slope requirement,there is a chance a redwood tree in the vicinity would be harmed by cuts. The applicant is proposing 18 percent grade near the tree (the first 100 feet)and beyond that,they can meet the 15 percent requirement by terracing. There are'nine conditions of approval. Condition 8,the clearance for the tree limbs should be thirteen feet,six inches (not ten feet). Condition 9,the last sentence should read: 'inspections fees',not"administrative costs". Staff recommends approval of this project. Armitage wondered if the back lot could be further subdivided. Knox said it could not. PUBLIC HEARING LESLIE BELEW,321 Alta,said her intention is to save the redwood tree and maintain the trees there. She is willing to pave Alta at her own expense. Howe asked Below why she decided to request a variance on the downhill side of the property instead of putting access in the middle of the larger lot which would be parallel to the existing driveway and in the future give better access to the back lot. Below said they do not Intend to split the back lot again. it does not seem appropriate to break it up further. They looked at the best place to locate the driveway according to the grade, not disturb people in the neighborhood,and keep the driveway less intrusive. Giordano wondered if Below tried to form a local improvement district. Below said they found it would take at least a year and they did not wish to wait that long. She thought the majority of property owners had signed in favor of paving. Howe asked what the half street improvement would involve. Below said she understood she would have to install a gutter on the downhill side to catch the water. Gardiner asked what problems are created from the unpaved section to the paved section. McLaughlin said engineers will have to decide how to best direct the granite someplace else. Jarvis asked Below what is unique and unusual about the property. Below said the area around the access contains cypress trees on one side and the redwood on the other which creates a beautiful feeling. It would significantly alter the quality of the whole area to remove the trees, particularly the redwood tree. Below cannot think of any negative impacts on adjacent properties. She will be paying for something the neighbors will ultimately be asked to pay far. She did not believe one extra lot would Impact the neighborhood. Below is willing to comply with Condition 8 by bonding for the hiring of an arborist. Bass hoped the new code enforcement officer would keep an eye on what is happening on the site. Staff Response Knox noted that in 1991 that the applicant processed a Minor Land Partition in a pre-application showing the lot being accessed per Howe's suggestion. At the time,there was a garage that straddled the property line. Now a pad is there with a retaining wall behind it which would mean the cuts would have to be retained. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION ' Howe moved to approve Planning Action 96.101. Change Condition 9 by deleting"administrative costs'and adding "inspection . fees". Change Condition 8 to 13 feet 6 inches of clearance instead of 10 feet. Also,applicant agrees to bonding and pre- , notification of the City. Finkle seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 96-086 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO MODIFY THE BUILDING DESIGN OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HEALTH SPA LOCATED AT 685 W STREET. MODIFICATION TO INVOLVE ELIMINATION OF THE MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM AND REPLACING IT WITH A PRIVATE'MEMBERS ONLY'OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOL APPLICANT: PATRICIA MURPHY Site Visit and Ex parts Contacts Site visits were made by all. Giordano was not involved in this part of the project but had been previously,therefore, he stepped down. STAFF REPORT Molnar explained this proposal is to modify a previously approved building design as outlined in the Staff Report. Molnar outlined the history of the project. The applicant wishes to remove the multi-purpose room and replace it with a two-lane lap pool and whirlpool. The design remains the same,however,the roof would be removed and allow for a pool. The exterior walls would look very similar. Other modifications Include additional mechanical rooms near the rear of the building off the railroad tracks. There will be a small addition on the front of the pool area to allow for dressing rooms. Staff's main concerns were the change in use of the interior of the building. Will it result in impact changes (traffic)? Staff felt that by removing the multi-purpose room and having a pool that was for members would either be a moot issue or reduce the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 13,1996 MINUTES overall traffic. Generally,health spas tend to have peak traffic times that would be different than the other uses along "A"Street. Peak times would be around 6-7:00 p.m.during the week (general office and retail peak times would be in the morning). Weekend peak times would be morning and afternoon. Office and retail would have less traffic on the weekends. The Historic Commission discussed the'A"Street frontage. The packet includes three alternatives. After the Historic Commission reviewed the alternatives, Staff feels comfortable with the new design as proposed,going from a small hip roof to the two columns in front of the entrance versus extending an entire hip roof in front of the whole entrance to the building. The building wall facing the Railroad District park originally was approved for windows. The applicant has asked to have the window openings treated with grillwork. Staff thought the vertical grill treatment appeared to look like there was an excess concern with security. Staff has recommended approval of the design modification with the added Conditions recommended by the Historic Commission. Knox said the Historic Commission was happy with what Murphy showed as an example of the grillwork over the windows. Bass asked about the Historic Commission's comment about the trellis. Molnar said that the Commission thought when the detail work is being done,it would be good to allow some flexibility and that the trellis design might add something to the entry. Bass would add the trellis cap now. Jarvis mentioned the continuation of the rock wall. Molnar said it finishes off the last corner. On alternative 2, looking at It from the street,the wall would go to the right to the property line. PUBLIC HEARING PATRICIA MURPHY, 159 Laurel Street,went to Health Department and found there were space requirements that she was not aware of when designing the inner workings of the spa. The Historic Commission agreed with the modified design. The grillwork on the window openings won't look like prison bars but will be more decorative and intricate. JOYCE WARD,549 Auburn Street,designer, said the small hip on the dressing rooms is in scale with the north elevations. The wall surrounding the pool court is the same height as the major portion on the left hand wing. The window openings are exactly the same size and placement as previously. Sunlight will be seen behind the openings. She added landscaping to one of the elevations. There will be a decorative vine up and over the window on the east wing. Ward submitted landscaping plans. Murphy added there are some cypress trees on the far right where the rock wall will be. The trees will help balance the buildings. Armitage suggested the Historic Commission approve the grillwork for final design. Finkle was more concerned about how the design changes might further impact the area. What kind of membership does Murphy project? Murphy did not know. She is interested in trying to encourage local residents to use the spa. Molnar said another Condition should be added. When the Southern Pacific property was originally subdivided and the alley created,there was a Condition placed as part of the subdivision that a fence be constructed along the rear alley frontage of lots as they are developed. Finkle wondered if there was anything required by the City Council during their review of this project that would have changed the Conditions of approval other than eliminating the curb cut? Molnar said there was wording added to the elimination of the curb cut and a reduction in the width of the opening to six feet. PHILIP LANG,758 B Street, sees this building as a 12 foot high walls with barred windows and does not like the design or feel that it is suitable for the neighborhood. He is also concerned with traffic impacts it will create. It is not safe for vehicular traffic on"A"and "B" Streets now. It will be drawing in more tourist traffic from the outside. Lang said the Railroad District was originally designed to take care of the needs of those living in just the district. He would recommend the developer build this as originally approved. Lang noted the original planner on this project is a member of the Planning Commission. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 13,1995 MINUTES Staff Response Molnar had suggested wording for Condition 3. That the rock wall be extended to the east and wrap around the alley corner. Condition 4: That the final grill design be reviewed by the Historic Commission and approved by the Staff Advisor. Condition 5: That fencing be installed along the rear alley frontage of the parcel between the railroad right-of-way and City alley right-of-way and be consistent with height and materials of adjacent fencing. Rebuttal In response to Lang's comments about the design,the wall will have openings with green growing through them and the sunlight will shine behind the windows. Traffic will be somewhat slower,fewer vehicle trips,even less during certain times of the year. COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND MOTION it seemed to Howe that this modification would cause a significant reduction in the parking requirement. She was hoping the spa would be for all of Ashland, not just for those living in the Railroad District. She somewhat resented Lang's implication that one area of town is off-limits to the rest of the town. The businesses on'A'belong to all of Ashland. Armitage moved to approve PA96-M with the attached Conditions and added Conditions 3,4 and 5 as proposed by Staff. Howe seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Jarvis explained her vote by stating the she agreed the traffic is not going to be significant and will probably decrease. PLANNING ACTION 96-094 REQUEST FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A SEVEN LOT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION 25 WESTWOOD STREET APPLICANT: ANNA HASSELL Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site visits were made by all. Giordano abstained because he Is representing other parties next to this development. He has also given counsel to the applicant. STAFF REPORT Molnar reported this proposal involves a seven lot subdivision. The application involves about five acres of the ten that she owns. Westwood splits the property. Part of the proposal involves the ultimate construction a new city street perpendicular to Westwood which would terminate in a culde-sac. The applicant has indicated Westwood would be paved to City standards through a local improvement district. A preliminary road design has been submitted. Wrights Creek is within the Westwood Street right-of-way. Staff's main concerns are with the details of the project and would ordinarily be reviewed as part of the Performance Standards. Those items include delineation of the building envelopes. The envelopes have been drawn in a very general nature, leaving extremely large building areas. There are some significant trees contained in the building envelopes. Staff feels the building envelopes can be fine-tuned to create a smaller envelope. Staff would like to have a more effective means of protecting trees by defining specific building envelopes which exclude significant trees. Staff also had a question about how the density was calculated for the project. The site can eventually develop from seven to eleven lots. The proposal as submitted is using approximately five and one-half acres and the numbers for density do not work. The applicant has expressed an interest in doing another phase at a later date where the private road would be extended off the end of the cul-de-sac. While the ordinance allows for phasing of developments,one cannot phase Outline Plan. Final Plans can be phased. The Staff report contains some options. 11,at a later date,the remainder of the property is sold,it will be clear what the overall density is for the site. If there is an intention to do up to ten units at a later date,a common open space needs to be provided. The whole project would need to be planned at this point. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMtSSH)N 4 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 1%1996 MINUTES It should be noted that the final phase (potential three lots on the other side of Wright's Creek)will require a creek crossing which would require additional engineering. Staff's recommendations have not changed. There are some details that need to be worked out. Staff has recommended continuation to work out the details and the applicant can bring it back to the Commission as a complete package. In reading the ordinance,Armitage thought that Outline Plan would need to Include the entire parcel. McLaughlin said if the project will eventually encompass the entire ten acres,It should be presented that way. If not,the application should state the leftover property will not be developed. Armitage asked about curbs,gutters,and paving. McLaughlin said the requirement for a subdivision is that there be an improved street to the nearest Improved street system which means Westwood has to be fully improved (curbs,gutters,and sidewalks). The neighbors are concerned this will change the character of the neighborhood because it will be a dramatic change from what is there now. The standards are established by ordinance by the Council. The Commission has to require that the street meet the minimum city standards, but the Council makes the final decision. McLaughlin noted the efforts that have been put into the neighborhood planning process for the Strawberry/Westwood area. The applicant is making an effort to present an a proposal that will be in line with the neighborhood plan,that is,one acre parcels. PUBLIC HEARING DAN HARRIS,2101 Dead Indian Memorial Road,represents Anna Hassell. Hassell has had discussions with the neighbors. Their concerns have centered primarily around the local improvement district. Harris met with Staff and talked about the finer details they have requested. The density of the project involves 15 acres,ten of which are in the city limits. The applicant decided to remove the property line completely and Lot 1 will go to the end of the property line as it exists now. Lot 1 will go from 1.3 acres to 10.5 acres in size. That will deal with the concern for density at this time and will allow Hassell at a future time to present Lot i to complete the process and deal with the problem of either getting over the creek with a road or coming from a different place north of the additional property so a crossing will not be necessary. Harris presented a new map showing smaller building envelopes which exclude the trees. RUSS BRAUGHTON,Edwards Surveying,816 W.8th, Medford,said he has now done a highly detailed topographical map taking in the all the Strawberry/Westwood area. They are working on getting all the trees on the topographical map. The dripline shown on the tentative map reflects the dripline physically shot in the field.. The setback lines have been drawn to not - include the trees. Harris said all the trees are now protected outside the building envelopes with the exception of Lot 1. Hassell said some the trees died during the drought a few years ago. She has been trying to save them so they have remained in the building envelopes but may be removed if they cannot be saved. Harris questioned the Staff Report's recommendation that building permits not be issued until after paving of the street, it is his understanding after talking to Engineering that building permits can be issued after the local improvement district is formed. They concur with all other Conditions. Jarvis said the applicant has not addressed the common open space area. Harris said with seven lots, Hassell is not required to have open space. If she develops the other side,the question is, how do we account for open space? it could be addressed at that time or they could look at using the Woodland Reserve area as open space. They would prefer to put off looking at open space until the next development. At that time,three lots would be developed. He would not have a problem adding a Condition that open space be addressed at that time. McLaughlin said he would like to study the topographic survey to see how the modifications were made. They have not had sufficient time to look at the information presented tonight. Harris said the applicant is agreeable to a continuance and is receptive to the Commission's feedback. Jarvis read the following written comments from PAUL ADAMS, 189 Westwood, stating he favors the project. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 13,1996 MINUTES ROBIN SCHWARZER, 138 Faith Circle,Talent,said she has signed the paperwork to purchase Lot 2 of Hassell's subdivision. She has discussed with Braughton in detail that they wish to save the cedar tree on Lot 2 at whatever cost. DARLYN ADAMS, 189 Westwood,said she would like notification of any planning meetings with regard to Westwood. This proposed development could end up being 12 because two Iota were just sold across the street(in front of Pinewood West). She is concerned about density. She believes sidewalks,curbs,and gutters would ruin the whole area. She would prefer chip and seal for the road. She Is concerned about the culverting of Wrights Creek. Adams thought the applicant was not supposed to touch any blackberries as in 18.62.050. Armitage moved to extend the meeting until 10:30 p.m. Howe seconded the motion and all approved. DAVID SUGAR, 177 Westwood Street,said he is not opposed to the concept of the subdivision. He would like to be clear on the total size of the development. MARY EATON, 155 Westwood,agreed with Sugar's comments. She would prefer not to have the street paved. She moved there because of the rural characteristics. Staff Response McLaughlin said if the applicant did the entire ten acres as a seven lot subdivision,if they want to come back and develop the larger parcel in the future,that would be a modification of the Outline Plan. The density would be calculated on ten acres. The adjustment would be to the ten acres. With regard to Condition 2,when the street is Improved,services will be extended.The Condition is to ensure that facilities are in place, and to reduce dust and erosion. They want to ensure the local improvement district is formed or the street will be paved before approving the creation of lots. Bass wondered to what extent can a ten acre subdivision be turned into ten-one acre subdivisions. McLaughlin said the applicant's long range intent was to slowly develop this at a rate that fit her development schedule. Staff's concerns is that three or four parcels have already been created which would normally be a subdivision. Staff has encouraged the applicant to come forward with the full picture. Rebuttal Harris said he will draw the other two lots onto the map and show language as to how they plan to incorporate them. They will show open space. This will be presented at the September meeting. Bass asked why the subdivision was being designed with a flag drive. is that the only way to design it? Armitage wants to see the whole plan. He wondered if the Commission approves Outline Plan that shows the crossing of Wrights Creek,what this mean to the applicant? Does she have to go through the detailed environmental constraints work for crossing or could it be dealt with in a Phase 2? McLaughlin said the difficulty from the applicant's point of view is that the ordinance requires P&E work to be done to receive Outline Plan approval. She will not know if the designed crossing Is approved unless all the engineering is completed. ' Harris said the applicant is willing to waive the 120 time limit. Howe moved to continue the meeting. The motion was seconded and approved. The meeting will be continued on September 10, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. No notice will be mailed. OTHER Armitage wondered what was happening on Orange Street. He noticed no fencing was up. McLaughlin said the application is under appeal and will be heard in a week. Joint Study Session August 21,Wednesday at 4:00 p.m,at the Council Chambers. Monte Grove of ODOT will be making a presentation. A training session was scheduled for the Study Session on August 27th at 7:00 p.m. Jarvis thought it might be good to have a discussion with the Council on small infill projects. ASHLAND PUNNING COMMISSION 6 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 13,1996 MINUTES The Hearings Board assignments for September through December are: Gardiner, Hearn,and Armitage. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 7 REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 13,1998 MINUTES ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Peter Finkle at 1:35 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Howe and Giordano. Staff present were Molnar, Madding and Yates. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 96-096 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT A PORTION OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE FOR USE BY THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. 543 N. MOUNTAIN AVENUE APPLICANT: MARJORIE & OGDEN KELLOGG Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Site visits were made by all. STAFF REPORT Madding reported that the uses surrounding the site are indicated on an area map that is included in the record. Most of the uses relate to SOSC. The area to the south is primarily residential. The applicant wishes to enclose the carport which will leave an area for about 50 seats in the upstairs. The remainder of the upstairs will remain the same. The downstairs rooms will remain the same but be more of a church use. There will be a caretaker on site so the residential character will be retained. Meeting times are Sunday from 10:00 a.m. until noon. During the week there are about two to three meetings with fewer members in attendance. With 50 seats, 12 parking spaces are required. The applicant has worked with SOSC and they have agreed to allow the church to park in their lot. The target use of the zone is one residential unit. The surrounding uses are heavily impacted by parking and traffic for SOSC. Staff feels the parking impact by people attending meetings during the week will be minimal. The most intense use will be on Sunday which is the day SOSC is least impacted. Staff is requesting that the applicant ask their parishioners to park in the SOSC parking lot on Sunday. There is no sidewalk on the street. The applicant will be required to install a sidewalk since transportation is required to and through the development. Staff has recommended approval of this application with the three attached Conditions. Giordano wondered if the City should require a formal agreement asking for use of the parking from SOSC. Molnar said it could be added as a Condition. This is a Conditional Use Permit and it the college ever rescinded their parking agreement, that would invalidate the CUP or other arrangements would need to be made for parking. PUBLIC HEARING MARJORIE KELLOGG, 2180 Sardine Creek Road, Gold Hill, OR and VINCE OREDSEN, 640 Pracht Street, Ashland, OR were available for questions. Kellogg said parking is available at the Neuman Center even for non-students. At present, their group does not meet in the evening. They are looking into the future for maximum needs. Giordano wondered if it would be difficult to get a formal agreement with SOSC regarding the parking. Kellogg assumed it was on file and a binding agreement. Oredsen noted that the SOSC parking lot is totally vacant on Sunday morning. BEATRICE NEWBY, 149 Almeda, agreed with the statements that have been made. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Howe said as far as impacts the church is already meeting close by and a half block is not going to have that much impact. Even 'rf there was an agreement for ten to 15 years, it would be highly unlikely to get an agreement in perpetuity. Is it a valuable project without the SOSC parking? Finkle lives in the neighborhood and during the week, the lots and streets are filled with college students cars. There are very few cars on Sunday and even without the parking lot, it would be less impact on the neighborhood. Giordano will go along with an approval but he believes the parking agreement is too loose and a cause for concern. Molnar suggested wording for a Condition: That the applicant provide some additional information prior to occupancy of the use of how the formal arrangements for parking and permitting of vehicles on SOSC property will occur. RE-OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING KELLOGG said when she talked with SOSC they said the letter was all they needed as no one patrolled the parking lot on Sunday anyway. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Howe suggested Staff approve any additional agreement between SOSC and Friends Society to address the use of the parking lot. Giordano moved to approve PA96-096 with the added condition. Howe seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. PLANNING ACTION 96100 REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE A PARCEL INTO TWO LOTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE ALLEY BETWEEN MORTON AND HARRISON STREETS. A VARIANCE IS ALSO REQUESTED TO CREATE A NEW LOT WITHOUT FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC STREET (OTHER THAN AN ALLEY). APPLICANT: ERIK WALLBANK Site Visits or Ex Darte Contacts Site visits were made by all. STAFF REPORT This parcel is located on an alley between Morton and Harrison Streets. It is currently a vacant, land- locked lot with public street frontage. The zoning is R-2 but the neighborhood surrounding the parcel ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 13, 19% appears to be single family residential. The alley is the property's only access. The right-of-way is 16 feet, however, the driveable portion of the alley in some places is only 12 feet. There is a lot of vegetation growing into the alley. The base density of the whole lot is five units. In dividing the way the applicant is asking, parcel 1 could hold two lots and parcel 2 could hold three. The overall density will not necessarily reduce the density. A variance is required since the lot does not have public street frontage. There are unique and unusual circumstances that apply to this site because of alley access. The parcel was created many years ago, therefore, the conditions of this property have not been willfully and purposefully self-imposed. Staff believes that by dividing this lot,the outcome may not be that much different than by developing the entire lot. By having two lots, it will create the opportunity possibly for two single family homes. The applicant has agreed that if a house is built on the lot, he will go to the Historic Commission for approval as well as approval from the Staff Advisor. The Fire Department is requiring the alley be improved to its full width. Additionally, the applicant maintain the alley in a driveable form during construction of the service lines and at the end of construction, grade the alley in addition to signing in favor of alley improvements at a future date. Molnar explained that partitioning does not require paving but if further development takes place (more than one single family residence on each lot) then the alley would require paving. Add a sixth Condition that the applicant sign in favor of paving the alley. PUBLIC HEARING ERIK WALLBANK, 2025 Tolman Creek Road, said he has no plans to build more than two single family residences on these two lots. He checked with the neighbors who accessed the alley and along the approximately 800 lineal feet of the alley, five neighbors did not want the alley paved, one wanted It paved, and one neighbor was indifferent. By dividing the lot in this manner, the lot sizes will be similar to the lots in the area. Wallbank agreed to have a hydrant installed at the corner of the alley and Morton. He has made provisions for other services. Giordano wondered what the address would be (Morton or Harrison Street or something else). TOM FRANTZ, 237 Fourth St., said his mother-in-law's home adjoins this lot and they have looked at this area as a meadow. He is happy about Erik's development because he has been concerned about maximum density. It is nice to have historic quality override the infill. CARMEN FERGUSON, 670 Siskiyou Blvd., stated she favored the proposal with a reservation. She said the alley is very poorly maintained. All of the alleys from Harrison to the library with the exception of a quarter of a block is paved. She feels that the alley portions that are currently paved are better maintained with less trash, less dog droppings; people seem to respect the paved portions more. It is a congested area because everyone parks on the alley and it can be muddy. CAROLE HOWSER, 192 Harrison, said she prefers an unpaved alley with open greenery, not hot asphalt. No paving should encourage slower driving. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 13,1996 Rebuttal WALLBANK talked to all the neighbors and heard comments from people who have lived there a long time say they did not want the alley paved. They have watched the town change so much that it is a little bit of nature left between the streets. Most thought cars would drive faster if the alley were paved and more people would use it to get from one place to another. Molnar said a Condition could be added to resurface with gravel and grade to the full physical width. Wallbank thought it was important not to end up with a spongy gravel alley that is different than all the other alleys. He would like to work with Staff to see how much gravel is necessary. Molnar thought after a ditch is run, the alley might need to be patched with something matching the granite already in the alley. COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION Giordano moved to approve PA96-100 and add to Condition 5 that the alley be graded and resurfaced. Add Condition 6 to sign in favor of future alley improvements. Howe seconded the motion and it carried. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS PLANNING ACTION 96-059 REQUEST FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TWO LOTS WITH THE REAR PARCEL BEING A FLAG LOT. AN APPROXIMATELY 26 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT PRESENTLY EXISTS FROM CLAY STREET. 702 CLAY STREET APPLICANT: DOUG NEUMAN This application was approved. PLANNING ACTION 96-093 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF UNITS FROM SIX TO SEVEN WHICH INCLUDES THE OWNER'S UNIT. 451 NORTH MAIN STREET. APPLICANT: WAYNE E. AND ELISABETH M. JONAS This application was withdrawn. PLANNING ACTION 96-097 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A THREE UNIT (INCLUDES OWNER'S UNIT) TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATION LOCATED AT 467 SCENIC DRIVE. APPLICANT: CYNTHIA WRIGHT AND PETE JAEGER This application was approved. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 9 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 13, 19% PLANNING ACTION 96-098 REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY BUILDING, INCLUDING 1784 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS (500 SQ. FT. EACH) ON THE SECOND FLOOR. 190 OAK STREET. APPLICANT: DOYLE BRIGHTENBURG This application was approved. PLANNING ACTION 96.102 REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAN APPROVAL, UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION, FOR PHASES II AND III OF THE SKYCREST HILLS SUBDIVISION. INCLUDES A MINOR AMENDMENT INVOLVING THE SHIFTING OF SOME INTERNAL LOT LINES AND BUILDING ENVELOPES. 200 SKYCREST DRIVE APPLICANT: CHARLES WILEY This application was approved. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Howe moved to approve the July 9, 1996 meeting. Finkle seconded and the Minutes were approved. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5 HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 13,1996 AD HOC CITIZEN'S COMMUNICATION COMMITTEE July 22, 1996 Minutes Members Present: Joe Eckhardt, Joanne Eggers, Don Laws, Steve Hauck and Cate Hartzell; and Staff Dick Wanderscheid. The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. The minutes of the May 13, 1996 meeting were approved with two corrections by Hartzell. On page 1 , second to the last paragraph, the words and thus were changed to so that, and on page 2 in the last paragraph, in the last sentence, the word some was inserted between in issues. health reasonsread He letter from gave out the two appendices ces hat C temporary leave peparred fore the report. months for Laws then went over his handout on procedure for citizen involvement. This is included as Attachment "A" to the minutes. When questioned about the citizen election, he referred to #2 and stated it would not be a binding legal election but advisory only. Hartzell said she felt the Council would need an additional step to digest the results of the vote. Laws said the Council could pass a resolution which would make those items that received a majority vote become a goal for the City that year. Eckhardt stated he liked this process and felt it would work much better than the current process which was attended by only two citizens last year. Eggers liked Laws' proposed process and the variety of opportunities for public input. She also felt that along with an educational effort, it could result in realistic goals being submitted by citizens. Laws said in his original idea, he would have used the entire month of December to have meetings where individuals could present goals to citizens for in is the ion.budget owever, the City Administrator felt he needed more time to make sure goals were plugged Hartzell felt there would be time in October and November to expand activities and do some of what Laws was talking about. It could be done via a town hall meeting or via Cable Access TV. Also, she questioned whether the Council was committed to annual telephone surveys as mentioned in item 2. Hauck responded the Council had already decided to do this.the Laws iked staff lsome of the lmeet ngs could blegcond cted bgy c ti October ns while hey would rbe supported by Council and staff. Eckhardt said tie would like to move to approve the idea presented by Laws and would be happy to support the idea of including them as an appendix. Hartzell stated that item 8 of the last page of the Draft Plan was being addressed by Laws' ideas. She requested Laws refine the ideas and put them in prose form. She also recommended that Eggers' suggestion about educated responses be included in this revised prose version of these ideas. Laws said he felt his approach provided the needed multiple points of access to government by the public and that we need a trained facilitator to help keep communication flowing at these meetings. Eggers felt meetings should be "topic" based as apposed to "department" based, i.e. "street improvements" instead of "Public Works Department." Laws agreed and said a topic like "City infrastructure" would need a representative from many departments as opposed to one department head. Eggers said she felt there would be a need to plan these meetings carefully with citizens, staff and Council all being involved with the planning. Hartzell said she was concerned about creating a whole new process and more work for City staff, and felt the presentation prepared by department heads for the Council goal setting would be adequate to use here also. She said a chart could be used to record possible annual City goals which come out of the process. Laws felt some of the topics that might be goals would probably need more work or investigation before they could become goals. Eggers felt some of the topics could be assigned for further work or actually worked on at the meeting by the citizens attending the meeting. Draft Plan Discussion The committee then shifted the discussion to the Draft Communication Plan that was mailed to everyone. Hartzell stated that while the first three pages were not agreed upon by everyone, she felt that everything was pretty much supported by the majority of the committee. She felt they had two tasks to accomplish: 1) review the four goals and recommendations, and table issues with anything not agreed upon; and 2) review the last page of individual suggestions and decide what should be tucked into the other goals, eliminated from the report, or left as included as a list of non-consensus items in the report. Laws stated he was impressed by the work of the committee on this Draft Plan. Hauck agreed with this. Eggers felt we should go through the Plan quickly and not get stuck on areas of disagreement; just find out what the areas are for discussion later. Laws suggested people single.out areas they disagree with. Hauck said the last item for recommendation on Goal 1 for Council and staff talked about upgrading the assisted-hearing equipment in the Council Chambers. He felt we should also investigate closed captioning of City Council meetings and this recommendation should be expanded to include this. Eckhardt said he had talked to Pete Belcastro at RVTV and had some information he felt the committee would benefit from. He said RVTV has two channels for public access and that the.City has a contract with SOSC to air City Council meetings. Pete estimates about 4700 Ashland homes, or three out of every four, have access to RVTV. Costs for a one hour show are $195 and it costs $50 per hour to rebroadcast these shows. To put a show on, a form must be filled out and a liability waiver to RVTV must be signed. It takes about one month to receive approval for a show. Pete also said the TV equipment in the Council Chambers is old and the room is problematic for TV broadcasts. Eggers said she felt this information was quite useful and ought to be included as an appendix to the report. Hartzell asked if anyone else had a modification to the Goal 1 section. Laws stated he had forgotten to ask his wife Sharon about using the Senior bus to transfer citizens to Council meetings. He would do this before the next meeting. Ad Hoc Citizen's Communication Committee 2 Minutes July 22, 1996 Hartzell said under the Goal 2 discussion, the subcommittee had spent a lot of time discussing a City newsletter and how better to get it out to people. Things like a limited mailing list requiring a sign up, or trying to distribute it in other ways than just mailing it to everyone, when many people probably wouldn't read it. Laws said maybe we should look into having it just in racks by the checkout counter in grocery stores. Hartzell said she felt we should just leave the Plan like it is suggesting a new City newsletter and let the Council decide if and how to budget for it. Laws agreed with this approach. Hartzell said it could be a joint staff/Council/citizen newsletter. Laws suggested it could be set up as a project for the college's journalism department. Eggers said the newsletter would only be useful if it included accurate unbiased information. Laws stated it also needed to be interesting or no one would read it. Hartzell said continuity in production was also very important and maybe the committee should suggest the City hire or contract with a publisher to produce the newsletter. Eggers asked what Councilors Laws and Hauck thought of the Goal 2 section. Both responded they felt it contained good ideas. Everyone agreed Goal 3 was fine as written. Eggers said she envisioned Goal 4 as monitoring of the Communication Plan only, not the way it was written. Hartzell responded she tried to merge it together with another idea she had come up with after their phone conversation. She said she now felt Goal 4 should only deal with the Communication Plan and a new Goal 5 could deal with the other aspects in Goal 4. Laws suggested under Goal 4 a recommendation be that this committee meet quarterly for one year after Council adopts the Plan to monitor its implementation. Hartzell said that as part of this monitoring reports from Councilors and staff, it should include not only how it's being implemented, but ways to improve or make it work better. Hauck said the committee might also want to set some benchmarks or performance measures to judge the success of the Plan. Eggers wanted to know if the five goals included all the ideas that will be in the final Plan. Hartzell said the last page of ideas needs to be discussed and integrated if feasible and that would have to be done at the next meeting. She also stated she had talked to Carl Beal and while he didn't want to continue on the committee, he would like to receive the finalized Draft Plan. No one had talked to Bob Taber, but felt he should get a copy also. Hauck said he felt most of the ideas on the last page could fit under Goal 5, as they were already on the Plan. The next meeting was set for 4:00 p.m. on Monday, August 5th. The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 p.m. Ad Hoc Citizen's Communication Committee 3 Minutes July 22, 1996 AD HOC CITIZEN'S COMMUNICATION COMMITTEE August 5, 1996 Minutes Members Present: Joe Eckhardt, Joanne Eggers, Hal Cloer, Don Laws, Ken Hagen and Cate Hartzell; and Staff Dick Wanderscheid. The meeting was called to order at 4:10 p.m. Hartzell said the purpose of the meeting and today's agenda is to discuss the list of left over items and decide which ones to include in the Plan and under which goal. Copies of the revised Goal 4 and new Goal 5 were handed out along with two new appendices. Laws suggested we work on the list and not discuss the items just handed out until the next meeting when everyone will have already read them. Cloer asked that the last paragraph of his appendix on "Possible School/City Projects", which was handed out at the last meeting, be deleted because it is in error. Hartzell said the addition of Hauck's close captioning of Council meetings had been added to the Plan, along with the changes to Goal 4, and the new Goal 5. The group then discussed the list of items in "Attachment A" to these minutes. Cloer said he had changed his mind about Item 1 dealing with the CCI, and while he still thought it would be necessary to do this, it should not be a part of the Plan. He then asked whether anyone had thought about implementing the ideas in the Plan, as he felt it would be useful to have someone go through and decide who would implement each item, what kind of resources would be needed, and what would be the time frame for implementation. He felt a subcommittee could do this and it might result in a different kind of organization for the Plan. Eckhardt felt the Plan should be submitted to the Council without considering these implementation questions because implementation could be worked on after the Council decided which part of the Plan it agreed with. Laws suggested Cloer, Almquist and himself could do what Cloer had suggested. Eggers felt the Plan should have some ideas on mechanism for implementation and that these ideas could be discussed at a study session with the Council. Hartzell agreed for the need of a study session with the Council to discuss the draft Plan. Cloer said it was more likely to get good implementation if you consider how to implement before the final Plan is developed. Eggers said she would support two or three people looking at these implementation issues. Eckhardt said he still felt that submitting the Plan would be Stage I, and Stage II would be working on implementation after Council input. He then asked Hagen his thoughts on this issue. Hagen responded he felt the committee should submit the Plan and then work on implementation after Council input because some ideas might be deleted or other things added to the Final Plan. Hartzell proposed that she, Cloer and one other person go through and do the implementation exercise. Eckhardt suggested Barbara Christensen could be the third person. He then asked Laws if the Council was impatient to the Plan. Laws responded there was no hurry to get it to the Council. He also suggested Wanderscheid be the third person to work on these implementation issues. It was decided Cloer would write up some language about the CCI and it would be included in the Plan. It was then decided Item #2 had already been included. For Item #3, it was suggested it was OK to mention specific groups like "League of Women Voters" and "Friends of Ashland" as examples in the Plan. Item #4, on "opinion leaders", was discussed in detail. Cloer said he would like to try it once. After much discussion, Hartzell said the idea of having diverse representation on committee and commission was very important and this might be included as an appendix. After more discussion, Laws suggested since there appeared to be no chance of everyone agreeing on this idea, it be set aside and not included in the Plan. Cloer will try and write language on diversity and broad representation in City decision making to be included in the Plan. Hartzell said she felt we should have a community celebration day to reward and celebrate citizen participation and good work the City and its volunteers do. Eckhardt said he would like to make the Council meetings more informal than they are now. Things like punch and cake at meetings provide a much more informal setting to discuss things. Eggers said Eckhardt was the only one who wants this informality at Council meetings and the remainder of the committee didn't agree with this idea. Item #5, which deals with the school/city partnership, was then discussed. Cloer said if it were to be implemented for next year, it needs to be done within one month to get it in next year's curriculum. This was discussed,in detail and Wanderscheid stated it was a lot of work and it needs to be prioritized, and then weighed against other things in the Plan. He felt we should not pursue this one idea now until the entire Plan could be evaluated and prepared for implementation. It was decided Cloer would contact the High School and try to attend the curriculum meeting. It was decided Item #6 had already been addressed in the Draft Plan. Item #7 needed to be reworded and included in a more non-insulting specific way. Item #8 would be included in Goal #2. Item #9, which was originally Farwell's idea, was discussed. Wanderscheid suggested it should be "public information" not "public relations". Item #10 was discussed. It was decided to try and develop some procedural ways that issues could be managed so they could be included in the Plan. It was then decided to hold the next meeting in one week, on August 12th at 4:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 5:35 p.m. NOTE: Subsequently, the August 12 meeting was moved to August 26th at 4:00 p.m, in the Jury Room. Ad Hoc Citizen's Communication Committee 2 Minutes July 22, 1996 ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 24, 1996 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Members in attendance were Amarotico, Chapman, Hagen, Moats, Otte, Buck, Tuck and Evans. Staff in attendance were Wanderscheid and Pearce. Minutes were approved as corrected. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Dr. Robert Palzar had planned to attend. He had a biking accident and was in the hospital. Staff talked with him and he was requesting support from the Commission for an air quality conference in the Fall.The conference would outline the Federal and Slate regulation which will impact our local situations.The conference is tentatively scheduled for September at the Smullen Center in Medford. Palzar's group is hoping for county-wide, multiple agency participation.They are also soliciting donations of both time and money. Discussion included requesting an outline of exactly what Palzar's group would like. Wanderscheid suggested telling Palzar we would cosponsor and give a designated dollar amount. Moats moved that the Commission endorse the Clean Air conference as a cosponsor to include a monetary contribution not to exceed$400 all aspects of which will be subject to review by the education subcommittee.Chapman seconded.The motion was carried with a vote of seven to one. Otte dissented because he wanted more specific as to what the donation would be spent on. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one to speak at the public forum. ASHLAND SANITARY UPDATE 1. Recycled Products Fair-The Recycled Products Fair will be Saturday the fifth of October.We will be setting up in the street similar to last year.A letter is being drafted to request Corporate Sponsorship.Any creative suggestions are welcome. 2. Compost-There was a meeting this week with Rogue Waste Systems, BioMass One,SOTJ, City of Ashland,Ashland Sanitary and Naturtech. BioMass will not be composting in the foreseeable future. Rogue Waste will be building a clean-green-only (yard - waste) facility at either Dry Creek or Southstage Landfill within the next three years.At that time, all clean-green will be - composted. The disposal of Ashland's food waste is still to be determined. 3.Worm Bins-Ashland Sanitary has ordered worm bins from Michigan and will be selling them out of the ASR office.A bin will be at the Recycling Center for demonstration purposes. There will also be a video ordered to use for presentations. 4.Association of Oregon Recycles Conference-The Conference is scheduled for September 6, 7 and 8 in Seaside and they want LESS.Amrhein will be attending but she is not sure she can get LESS there. Otte moved that Commission funds be expended for registration and mileage for any member of the Commission that volunteered to attend the AOR conference if that Commission would assist with transporting and being LESS at the conference. Motion passed unanimously.Wanderscheid requested interested parties contact him by August 6th. OLD BUSINESS A. Committee Reports 1. Precycling/Source Reduction Committee-Amarotico read the new letter to the restaurateurs. This letter will be mailed to all the restaurants and food serving businesses. A new list will be generated from the City's business license list. This subcommittee is also brainstorming a list of qualifications for the Green Seal program. Next meeting will be July 31 at 4p at Blue Mountain Cafe. 2. Education Committee-Moats reported the fourth of July activities kept this group pretty busy. This group will work very closely with the Air Quality project. This group will meet again on August 7th at 3:30p at Blue Mountain Cafe. CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES,JULY 24, 1996 CON'T 3. Tree Free Paper Committee-Evans reported research is continuing. They are still waiting on the sample packet. Wanderscheid will continue to follow up on this project. Hagen and Wanderscheid met with Mike Biondi, Purchasing Agent for the City of Ashland.They discussed postconsumer paper products for City use. Biondi's staff has found 100%recycle 60% post consumer paper. However,there is not a local market. The subcommittee will work on getting the paper here. Biondi agreed to no longer order ultra bright paper.Almquist informed Wanderscheid the Communication Committee is looking at changing the format of the utility newsletter.The new format could possibly be a bimonthly newsletter style. Until the format decision is resolved no purchasing decisions will be made regarding paper products. B. Fourth of July- Many thanks to Russ Chapman for his incredible degree of creativity and the millions of hours and pounds of energy which put it all together (especially the pink flamingo shower curtain); thanks to Kari for her hours the day before,the signs she colored and her and her son's participation in the parade;thanks to Kirk and Rise for being in the parade; thanks to Bruce and Ken for morale support the day before and thanks to all the light-hearted citizens who walked the walk in the parade. Staff reported the entire project was successful but it was too much of a last minute push. Recommendations were to begin next years preparation much earlier. C. Electric lawn Mower Update-Otte distributed and discussed his findings. Buck asked if Consumer Reports has ever published a report on electric lawnmowers. Otte state Ashland Rental would be interested in being a distributor. Discussion included push mowers and solar powered mowers. D. Saturday Classes Update - Evans had one attendee. Hagen had four attendees and the Compost class had 15 attendees. Discussion included giving freebees as a draw for classes, creating an evaluation/response form for classes, alternative forms of advertising, making contacts at the media sources for better coverage. Keith Cobb from the audience volunteered to help with a citizen survey form. Cobb was invited to the education subcommittee meeting. Buck suggested including a brainstorming session on how to find out what the public wants at the next education subcommittee meeting. NEW BUSINESS A. Solar Water Heating Program -On September 1st the City will begin this new program. Rebates will be available in addition the state tax credit. Rebates will be between$200 and $800.The rebates are available for City of Ashland utility customers who currently have an electric water heater. This program is funded through Bonneville Power Administration via OMECA (Oregon Municipal Energy and Conservation Agency). COMMISSION ITEMS 1)Jim Hellie has been working on the precycling video. His contract is being finalized to complete the project. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:50p X. AemaranAum o4FOO� September 13,1996 �0: Mayor and City Council rum: Susan Wilson Broadus, Director of Public Works �*,Abjgd.- Monthly Reports Attached are monthly reports from the Public Works Department for the month of August, 1996. Attachments (c:\pw\morpt.mem) Street Division Monthly Report August 1996 Report SWEEPER: Swept 342 miles of streets. Collected 102 yards of debris. Responded to -0- utility location requests. Patched pot-holes and sunken services. Graded several streets and alleys. Continued pre-patching future overlay streets: Mary Jane, Park Street, Pinecrest Terrace, and Walker Avenue: 421.61 tons. Continued preparation at the Water Filter Plant for up-coming resurfacing. Raised a manhole and 2 valve boots on North Main at Grant Street. Hauled off sweeper debris, 140 yards; old asphalt, 30 yards; old concrete, 10 yards. Patched both sides of the crosswalk on South Pioneer at Shakespeare. Repaired the driveway over the open ditch at 673 Tolman Creek Road. Removed/replaced the barricade at the end of Creek Drive. Placed 5.97 tons of LignoSulfate on North Mountain Avenue between Hersey Street and Bear Creek for dust control. Cleared the right-of-way of blackberries next to 495 Poplar Place. Cleared the vision problem on Siskiyou at Bellview. Patched the Oak Street/Van Ness storm drain project ditches and skin patched the cross-walk on Oak Street at Lithia Way. Used 23.62 tons of asphalt for the total project. Cut weeds on East Main between the Railroad tracks and Fordyce. Cut blackberries along the Railroad tracks City right-of-way, East of Walker. Patched sunken area around catch basin at the Airport. Patched the intersection at Granite and Winburn Way. Ground down numerous root raised sidewalk areas in the Downtown area. Project took 5 days with 3 employees. Repaired the alley off Morton, below Siskiyou, with re-cycled asphalt grindings. Repaired the shoulders on Peachey Road, off Hillview Drive, with re-cycled asphalt grindings. Repaired the alley between Sherman and East Main (2 tons of asphalt). Repaired the driveway behind 676 Liberty (alley approach). STORM DRAINS: Flushed and/or rodded several storm drain systems. Cleaned catch basin grates. Cleaned out catch basins. Continued Van Ness/Oak Street storm drain project. (See July report for details.) Cleaned the ditch at 495 Poplar Place. Replaced broken concrete 12-inch pipe with 40 feet of 15-inch P.V.C. at 1060 Timberline Terrace. Flushed out culvert located under Ditch Road at Grandview Drive. SIGNS and PAINT: Continued with painting: cross-walks, stop bars, fog lines, bike paths, handi-cap areas, center lines, yellow curbs, etc. Repainted the following parking lots: Service Center, Civic Center, Police Department and the Golf Course. Installed two 15-minute parking signs on Jefferson. Re-set post in alley between Manzanita and North Main. Installed "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE" on Canyon Park Lane. Replaced the street signs at: Mary Jane/Siskiyou, Mary Jane/Mohawk, Diane/Jacquelyn (also extended the post). Replaced the stop signs at: Airport/Dead Indian Memorial Road, Clover Lane/Hwy 66. Installed new post, "Stop" sign and bike crossing sign on Terrace/Loop Road. Trimmed the tree on Nevada at Oak for "Stop" sign viability. _MISCELLANEOUS: Installed a soil erosion retainer wall behind 545 Maple Way. Delivered 4 barricades to 53 3rd Street on August the 9th. Picked up several dead animals: 3 cats, 1 deer, 2 raccoons and a squirrel. Picked up 3 wood stoves on Oak Street for the Conservation Department. RVTD: Moved bus sign from in front of the Jade Dragon west to in front of the Pizza Hut. Replaced the post and sign on Ashland Street east of Walker and moved bus sign on North Main south of Maple to 200 feet further south. WATER FILTER PLANT: Patched, paved and re-surfaced. This was a 3 day project, using 242.56 tons of asphalt. Installed 2 asphalt water bars. Prepared 2 areas for seal-coating. Graded road. Placed 10 yards of screened granite up to new pavement. Made and installed "24 HR. .TOW AWAY ZONE" sign. Also installed a "NO PARKING ANYTIME" sign. Fleet Maintenance Monthly Report t August, 1996 3 mechanics completed work on 122 work orders on various types of City equipment and vehicles. Emergency generators at City Hall and the Civic Center were manually tested on a weekly basis. I and M certificates issued for the month: 2 sit 1 � aE, , D.E, Water Quality Monthly Report August, 1996 The following is a report of the collective activities of various subdivisions within the Water Quality Division. This report concerns only the significant activity within these subdivisions. Water Quality Monthly Report WATER Leaks: Repaired four leaks in city main lines. Repaired twelve leaks in customer service or meter, changed out five curb stops. Repaired one Lithia water leak on East Main. Meters: Installed twelve 34" meters with hand valves and one 1" meter with valve. Changed out thirty 34" meters and one 1" meter. Fire Hydrants: Repaired fire hydrant at Jaquelyn that had a broken stem coupling. Services: Installed forty-two 34" water services and one 1", forty in new subdivision off N. Mountain and Munson Drive plus one 11f:" irrigation service. Installed four water service to Cemetery on Normal Street due to upcoming sidewalk work. Split service into two 34" services on Avery. Mains: Made three large taps two 8" and one 4" tap. Chlorinated new lines in subdivision in Ashland Village Subdivision off of N. Mountain. Tied water mains at Barbara and Diane into 12" main at Tolman Creek. Abandoned old 4" main at Tolman as a result of main line work. Misc: Unplugged storm drain line under Glenn Street that was backing up and flooding. Unplugged two TID services installed twenty feet of 12" piping in the TID ditch that was leaking through the bank. Installed new Lithia fountain on the Plaza. Removed section of sidewalk on Pioneer that was covering water meter. Finished several projects at WTP. Pump Stations: Performed weekly inspection and maintenance on four booster pump stations. SEWER Repairs: Made repairs to four sanitary service lines/mains. Installs: Installed one 4" sanitary sewer service. Maint: Jet rodded 47,697' of City sewer mains using 92,000 gallons of water. Video inspection of 5705' of City sewer mains, and foamed 1,540' of sewer mains to get rid of roots. TREATMENT FACILITIES The Water Treatment Plant treated 163.08 million gallons of drinking water for oui community, and the Water Pollution Control Facility treated 57.38 million gallons of water. MISCELLANEOUS There were 102 requests for location of water and sewer utilities during the past month. ENGINEERING DIVISION MONTHLY REPORT August, 1996 1. Issued 15 Street Excavation permits. 2. Issued -0- Miscellaneous Construction permit with inspections. 3. Issued 4 Address Change or Assignment forms. 4. Responded to 12 Certificates of Occupancy reviews. 5. Completed 7 Pre-applications for Planning Actions. 6. Completed 20 "One-Stop" permit forms. 7. Performed field and office checks on 6 partition plats & subdivision plats. 8. Conducted 11 traffic safety site inspections. 9. Conducted 5 vision clearance site inspections. 10. Attended Traffic Safety Commission, Forest Commission, Bicycle Commission, Airport Commission Meetings; City Council Meetings; Budget Meetings; and SDC Review Meetings. 11. Performed the following work on the Tolman Creek L.I.D. project: a. Attended study session. b. Prepared draft report on L.I.D.s. C. Revised map of past L.I.D. improved streets. d. Prepared maps of unimproved streets, etc. 12. Updated City base map. 13. Performed the following work on the Van Ness Improvement project: a. Completed project design. b. Staked storm drain locations. C. Prepared deed for right-of-way acquisition. PAGE 1-c=Wain«�tr•RV9 14. Performed the following work on the proposed skating rink: a. Completed topo survey of lot area. b. Met with Parks Department and equipment representative for construction details. C. Prepared preliminary design of lot lay-out. 15. Prepared preliminary design & estimate for a water line extension to the Airport. 16. Performed the following work on the Central Ashland Bikeway: a. Reviewed and approved contract with consultant b. Prepared prospectus for the second phase. 17. Awarded contract for engineering services for the Crowson Reservoir study. 18. Performed the following work on the Ashland Street sidewalk repair project: a. Prepared easements for tree planting. b. Identified areas of proposed new tree plantings. C. Prepared plans for proposed improvement and repair of sidewalks. 19. Provided AUTOCAD map and/or drawings for the following departments: a. Chamber of Commerce (2) b. Jackson County (3) C. ODOT (2) d. Miscellaneous (3) e. Planning Department (2) f. S.0.S.C. (4) 20. Updated traffic accident data base. 21. Attended monthly Rogue Basin Utility Coordinating Council meeting in Medford. 22. Contacted property owners regarding purchase of right-of-way on Ann Street. 23. Performed the following work on the Indiana Street re-alignment project. a. Acquired contract for engineering services. b. Reviewed amended tri-party agreement. 24. Performed the following work on the 1996 Miscellaneous Concrete Project: a. Completed preparation of specifications & bid documents. b. Continued.plan preparation for project. C. Computed proposed quantities. PAGE 2-(c:mc ffi�r.Rw) 25. Performed the following work pertaining to Mountain Meadows Subdivision: a. Prepared interim progress payment authorizations. b. Inspected work performed by contractor. 26. Provided construction inspection for the following projects: a. Ashland Village Subdivision b. The Court on Mary Jane Subdivision C. Railroad Park Cottage Homes Subdivision d. North Mountain Avenue Improvement e. West Bellview Estates Subdivision 27. Prepared final acceptance of the Oak Street L.I.D. project. 28. Performed the following work on the proposed traffic signal at North Mountain and East Main Street: a. Prepared a contract for engineering services. b. Transmitted design information to consultant. 29. Performed the following work regarding Dogwood Way: a. Prepared Warranty Deed and mailed to owners. b. Began design of street improvements. 30. Performed the following work on the 1996 Street Improvement Project: a. Met with property owners. b. Met with Parks Department staff regarding Mountain Avenue improvements. 31. Operated traffic counts at various intersections. 32. Updated County plat maps and Assessor's list. 33. Acquired easements for storm drain construction along East Main Street. 34. Performed the following work on the Orange Avenue Proposed L.I.D.: a. Prepared estimates for proposed street construction. b. Prepared preliminary design of improvements. C. Provided information to property owners and City staff. 35. Referenced numerous survey monuments and bench marks prior to paving. 36. Updated engineering library files. PAGE 3-(,..a6.e..a4.Rw) 37. Revised water well permit application for Oak Knoll Golf Course. 38. Prepared agreement forms for sewer connection request on Crowson Road. 39. Researched deeds and easements relating to access to the Imperatrice Property. PAGE 4-<<:cnmmy.x,u emorandum G4EGGa ,. August 30, 1996 (�R: Mayor and City Council m: Jill Turner, Director of Finance ray_ p�IIQtEtt. Financial Report for June 30, 1996 7 Attached is the June 30, 1996 Financial Report for the City of Ashland. It does not include the Hospital or Parks and Recreation Commission reports which will be released to their respective boards and commissions. The Audited Financial Statement should be ready for review the first of November. Coopers and Lybrand will preform their audit field work in September. Unaudited balance sheets and expenditure and revenue reports are available for review in the Finance Office. Budgetary Compliance The first 20 pages are the Statement of Resources and Expenditures for the year ending June 30, 1996. The statements are prepared on the budgetary basis of accounting. The expenditures are listed in the same classifications as the adopted budget, therefore showing budgetary compliance. Budgetary compliance was very high. Trends Page 21 is a summary of the first 20 pages. Again this does not include the Hospital or Parks. This summary shows that the City collected 88.24% of budgeted resources. Total revenues, which include other financing resources (borrowed money) but not working capital carryover, decreased 5.9% over the previous year. When other financing resources are excluded revenues increased 4.3%. Charges for services, which makes up more than half of the City's revenues, increased $762,000 over the previous year, although the budget projected $566,000 additional charges. In comparing this information with the three previous years the overall revenue trends are favorable. Total expenditures/expenses on the budgetary basis of accounting increased $5.1 million over the previous year. Personnel services and materials and services increased 4.1% and 4.0% respectively. Capital outlay increased $3.1 million due to the construction of the water treatment plant and purchase of land for the wastewater treatment process. In comparing this information with the three previous years the trends look reasonable. Personnel costs have increased less than 6% on average even with ten new employees. Materials costs have increased 2.9% on average. Carryover Analysis The schedule on page 22 is again prepared on the budgetary basis of accounting and does not include the Hospital and Parks and Recreation funds. The first column shows the actual unaudited carryover at June 30, 1996. The first column of numbers is the Budgeted Fund Balance carryover into the current fiscal year. This schedule demonstrates that the city will be able to carry on the programs that were planned in the 1996-97 budget. Because this is on the budgetary basis loan proceeds which are not repaid within the same year are considered a resource. Under Oregon Budget Law a loan is considered a resource and the principal repayment is considered an expenditure. This is significant in both the Ambulance Fund and the Restricted Sewer Fund. The large difference in the Sewer Fund is because a loan was not completed in the 1995-96 fiscal year. The fund is in good financial shape. The opposite is true in the Ambulance Fund which shows a much larger than expected fund balance because the loan was not repaid as expected. All other funds are close to or above the budget expectations. The second column is a measure of the gain or loss (net income in private business) during the entire fiscal year. It is a measurement of whether the fund is better off now than at June 30, 1995. The final column shows the gain or loss on a five year basis. The overall fund balance compared to previous years balances are as anticipated. General Fund The General Fund performed slightly better than expected. On a five-year basis the General Fund balance (combined with the Police Serial Levy Fund and Emergency 911 Fund) has increased $679,859 to a total of $1,072,542. The present fund balance is equal to 14.8% of the 1996-97 budget and exceeds the minimum fund balance target. Ambulance Fund Gross revenues within the Ambulance Fund were within $500 of budget for the first six months of operation. Collections have been slower than anticipated. Our percentage of uninsured patients is higher than expected, making collections much harder. Staff will be examining policies which may help in collection of these accounts. Water Fund The Water Fund operation shows a five year gain of $413,160. Water sales are very dependant on the weather, which has been cooperative this summer. The large capital expenditure is for the upgrade to the water treatment plant which is nearly complete. Sewer Fund The Sewer Fund operations show a one year gain of $450,794 in preparation of the debt on the wastewater treatment plant. The Sewer Fund construction account shows an increase of only $131,777. The first expenditure of the Sewer Fund's share of the food and beverage tax went to purchase land. Electric land The Electric Fund gained $226,844 during 1995-96. Rates charged to Ashland customers have not been changed since July of 1994. On a five year basis the fund has gained $435,025 to a balance of $1.43 million which is 16.3% of fund balance. The City purchased 7.7% less wholesale electricity than in 1994-95. This was due to an overall decline as well as the curtailment at Croman. Cash and Investments Page 23 is a listing of cash and investments by fund and by type and holder of the investment. Summary The City is in a good overall financial position, although a number of the Ballot Measures, if passed, will significantly impact the City of Ashland. Staff is working on a paper on how these measures, if adopted, would affect the City. G 1jiII%wpNm=iIkgfsjun.96 CITY OF ASHLAND OREGON STATE' �N Asti y � F � r Z a � O tn LU D K En dys p#EG Oct lw FINANCIAL REPORT For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 GENERAL FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE $ RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 762,000 979,564 -217, 564 128.55% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 4,627, 000 4,651,645 -24,645 100.53% Licenses and Permits 325,000 378,940 -53,940 116.60% Intergovernmental Revenue 443, 000 350,444 92,556 79.11% Charges for Services 283,000 398,901 -115, 901- 140.95% Fines and Forfeitures 176,000 186,736 -10, 736 106.10% Interest on Investments 60,000 66,490 -6,490 110.82% Miscellaneous Revenues 61,500 64,052 -2,552 104.15% Operating Transfers In 7,500 6,612 888 88.16% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 6,745,000 7,083,384 -338,384 105.02% EXPENDITURES Human Resources 79,000 78,390 610 99.23% Economic Development 235, 000 235, 000 0 100.00% Miscellaneous 78, 000 75,835 2,165 97.2296 Debt Service 93, 000 91, 057 1,943 97.91% Operating Transfers Out 55, 000 55, 000 0 100.00% Operating Contingency 180,000 0 180,000 .00% Police 2,320, 000 2,231,711 88,289 96.19% Municipal Court 173,000 155,865 17,135 90.10% Communications 541,000 354,252 186,748 65.48% Fire 1, 912,000 1, 894,916 17, 084 99.11% Senior Program 122, 000 113,574 8,426 93.09% Planning Division 449,000 430, 939 18, 061 95.98% Building Division 327, 000 294,302 32,698 90.0096 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 6,564, 000 6, 010, 841 553, 159 91.57% ENDING FUND BALANCE 181,000 1, 072,543 -891,543 592 .57% 1 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 CEMETERY FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE % RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 98,000 106, 995 -8, 995 109.18% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 132, 000 134,709 -2, 709 102. 05% Charges for Services 45,000 50, 812 -5,812 112 .92% Interest on Investments 5,000 7,674 -2,674 153 .48% Miscellaneous Revenues 0 628 -628 Operating Transfers In 45,000 42, 033 2, 967 93 .41% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 325,000 342,851 -17, 851 105.49% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 98,000 96,669 1,331 98.64% Materials and Services 130, 000 126,440 3,560 97.26% Capital Outlay 14,500 3,886 10,614 26. 80% Operating Transfers Out 500 500 0 100.00% Operating Contingency 10,000 0 10, 000 . 00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 253, 000 227,495 25,505 89. 92% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES � 253,000 227,495 25,505 89. 92% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 72,000 115,356 -43,356 160.22% 2 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 BAND FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 57, 000 60,110 -3,110 105.461 ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 47,000 46,950 50 99.89 Interest on Investments 2, 000 4,064 -2, 064 203.20$ ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 106, 000 111,124 -5, 124 104.83 EXPENDITURES Personal Services 5,000 4,364 636 87.28 Materials and Services 46,000 40,171 5,829 87.331 Operating Contingency 2,000 0 2,000 .00%. ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 53,000 44,535 8,465 84.03 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 53,000 44, 535 8,465 84.031 ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 53,000 66, 589 -13,589 125.641 3 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE $ RESOURCES Intergovernmental Revenue 393,000 204,565 188,435 52 .05$ Operating Transfers In 15,000 0 15, 000 .00$ ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 408,000 204,565 203,435 50.14$ EXPENDITURES Personal Services 33,000 29,194 3, 806 88.47$ Materials and Services 289,700 175,371 114,329 60.54$ Capital Outlay 70,300 0 70, 300 .00$ Debt Service 15,000 0 15, 000 .00$ ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 408,000 204,565 203,435 50.14$ ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 0 0 4 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 STREET FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE k RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 425,000 700,858 -275,858 164. 91% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 338, 000 341,726 -3,726 101.10% Intergovernmental Revenue 817, 000 814,249 2, 751 99.66% Charges for Services 539, 000 560,303 -21,303 103.95% Interest on Investments 20, 000 38,835 -18,835 194.18% Miscellaneous Revenues 6, 000 121, 578 -115, 578 2,026.30% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 2,145,000 2,577,549 -432, 549 120.17% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 582,000 540,659 41, 341 92.90 Materials and Services 1,078,000 1,038,234 39,766 96.31 Capital Outlay 297,000 240, 858 56,142 81.10k Debt Service 4,000 3,116 884 77. 90 Operating Transfers Out 50,000 30, 000 20,000 60.00 operating Contingency 10,000 0 10,000 .00%� ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 2, 021, 000 1,852,867 168,133 91.689 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,021,000 1,852, 867 168, 133 91.68% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 124,000 724,682 -600,682 584.42% 5 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 AIRPORT FUND RESOURCES BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE $ working Capital Carryover 17, 000 15,797 1,203 92.92% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 57, 000 51,401 5,599 90.18% Interest on Investments 1, 000 1,596 -596 159.60% Miscellaneous Revenues 0 1, 000 -1, 000 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 75,000 69, 794 5,206 93.06% EXPENDITURES Materials and Services 42,000 37, 013 4,987 88.13% Operating Transfers Out 4,300 2,278 2, 022 52.98% Operating Contingency 3, 000 0 3, 000 .00% ---------- ----------- —-------- TOTAL 49,300 39,291 10, 009 79.70% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL .EXPENDITURES 49,300 39,291 10,009 79.70% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 25,700 30,503 -4,803 118.69% 6 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE $ RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 581, 000 919,159 -338, 159 158.20$ ---------- -----`----- --------- Taxes 223, 000 236,676 -13,676 106.13% Intergovernmental Revenue 875, 000 401,896 473,104 45.93% Charges for Services 160, 000 175,386 -15, 386 109.62% Assessment Payments 100, 000 222,933 -122, 933 222. 93% Interest on Investments 37, 000 44,018 -7, 018 118.97$ Miscellaneous Revenues 48, 000 34,871 13, 129 72.65% Other Financing Sources 1,515, 000 545,999 969, 001 36.04$ Operating Transfers In 50, 000 30,000 20, 000 60.00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 3,589,000 2,610,938 978, 062 72.75$ EXPENDITURES Personal Services 1, 000 0 1, 000 .00% Materials and Services 81, 000 73,529 7,471 90.78% Capital Outlay 2, 900, 000 1,471,176 1,428, 824 50.73% Debt Service 1,000 0 1, 000 .00% Operating Transfers Out 295, 000 206,000 89, 000 69.83% Operating Contingency 100,000 0 100, 000 .00$ ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 3,378, 000 1,750,705 1, 627,295 51.83% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3, 378,000 1, 750,705 1,627,295 51.83% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 211, 000 860,233 -649,233 407.69% CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 HOSPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 300,000 300,804 -804 100.27% ---------- ----------- ---------- Interest on Investments 30, 000 15, 874 14, 126 52.9196 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 330,000 316,678 13,322 95.96% EXPENDITURES Capital Outlay 330, 000 316,678 13, 322 95.9696 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 330,000 316,678 13,322 95.96% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 0 0 8 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 BANCROFT BOND FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 459, 000 433,246 25, 754 94.39% ---------- ----------- ---------- Assessment Payments 200, 000 164,430 35, 570 82.22% Interest on Investments 32, 000 29,175 2, 825 91.17% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 691,000 626,.851 64, 149 90.72% EXPENDITURES _ Debt Service 452,000 307,130 144, 870 67.95% ---------- ---------- TOTAL - 452, 000 307,130 144, 870 67.95% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 452,000 307,130 144, 870 67.95% __________ ___________ __________ ENDING FUND BALANCE 239, 000 319,721 -80, 721 133.77% 9 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30 , 1996 GENERAL BOND FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 256,000 248,117 7,883 96.92% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 208,000 204,681 3,319 98.40% Interest on Investments 15,000 19, 945 -4,945 132.97% Operating Transfers In 259,000 259, 000 0 100.00% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 738,000 731, 743 6,257 99.15% EXPENDITURES Debt Service 460,000 459,715 285 99.94% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 460, 000 459,715 285 99.94% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 460,000 459,715 285 99.94% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 278,000 272,028 5, 972 97.85% 10 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 DEBT SERVICE FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 97,000 101,617 -4,617 104.761; ---------- ----------- ---------- Interest on Investments 5,700 16,039 -10,339 281.39% Miscellaneous Revenues 10,000 6,225 3, 775 62.258 Operating Transfers In 298,300 208,278 90, 022 69.82% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 411,000 332,159 78,841 80.82% EXPENDITURES Debt Service 318,000 225, 936 92, 064 71.05% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 318, 000 225, 936 92, 064 71.05% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 318, 000 225, 936 92, 064 71.05% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 93,000 106,223 -13,223 114 .22% 11 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 ADVANCE REFUNDING BOND FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE $ RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1, 132,500 1, 181,455 -48, 955 104.32% ---------- ----------- Interest on Investments 60,000 10,593 49,407 17.66% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1, 192,500 1, 192,048 452 99.96% EXPENDITURES Debt Service 1,185,000 1,185,436 -436 100.04$ Operating Transfers out 7,500 6,612 888 88.16W ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1,192,500 1,192, 048 452 99.96% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 00 12 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 AMBULANCE FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE it RESOURCES Charges for Services 268, 000 268, 550 -550 100.21% Interest on Investments 0 602 -602 Miscellaneous Revenues 104, 000 1, 396 102, 604 1.34% Other Financing Sources 300, 000 400, 000 -100,000 133 .33% Interfund Loans 150, 000 140, 000 10,000 93.33% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 822, 000 810,548 11,452 98.61% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 36, 000 10,000 26, 000 27.78% Materials and Services 296,250 295,253 997 99.66% Capital Outlay 378,000 363,623 14,377 96.201 Debt Service 74,750 27,307 47,443 36 .53'- Operating Contingency 37,000 0 37, 000 .00a ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 822,000 696,183 125, 817 84.69% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 114,365 -114, 365 13 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 WATER FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 4,466, 000 4,173, 759 292,241 93.46% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 2, 936, 000 2, 900,352 35,648 98 .79% Interest on Investments 163, 000 268,373 -105, 373 164 .65 Miscellaneous Revenues 1, 000 21, 001 -20, 001 2,100.10% Other Financing Sources 25, 000 0 25, 000 .00% ---------- ---- —-------- TOTAL 7,591,000 7,363,485 227, 515 97.00% EXPENDITURES Forest Interface 115, 000 35,269 79, 731 30.67k Operations 5, 084,000 4,541,661 542, 339 89.33% Debt Service 345,000 337,435 7, 565 97.81% Operating Transfers Out 259, 000 259, 000 0 100.00% Operating Contingency 200, 000 0 200, 000 .00% Conservation 89, 000 78,360 10, 640 88. 04% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 6, 092, 000 5,251,725 840, 275 86.21% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 1,499, 000 2, 111, 760 -612, 760 140.88% 14 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 SEWER FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE Ir RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 2,380,000 2,525,333 -145,333 106.11% ---------- ----------- ---------- Taxes 890,000 945, 870 -55,870 106.28% Charges for Services 2, 034,000 1,952,342 81,658 95.99% Interest on Investments 202,000 183, 022 18, 978 90.60% Miscellaneous Revenues 5,000 652 4,348 13:04% -Operating Transfers In 2, 000,000 0 2, 000, 000 .00� ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 7,511,000 5,607,219 1, 903, 781 74.65$ EXPENDITURES Personal Services 555,000 495,166 59,834 89.22% Materials and Services 913, 000 910,857 2,143 99.77% Capital Outlay 2, 736, 000 1, 093,292 1,642,708 39.96% Operating Contingency 35, 000 0 35,000 .008 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 4,239, 000 2,499,315 1,739,685 58.96% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,239, 000 2,499,315 1,739,685 58.96% ---------- ----------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 3,272, 000 3, 107, 904 164,096 94.98'- 15 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 ELECTRIC FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1, 000,000 1,204, 056 -204, 056 120.414 ---------- ----------- --------— Intergovernmental Revenue 375,000 236,791 138,209 63.14% Charges for Services 8,423, 000 7, 846, 005 576, 995 93 .154 Interest on Investments 30, 000 67, 506 -37,506 225.024 Miscellaneous Revenues 20, 000 30,269 -10,269 151.344 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 9,848,000 9,384,627 463, 373 95.29& EXPENDITURES Conservation 550, 000 421,515 128,485 76.644 Electric 8,210,000 7, 532,213 677, 787 91.744 Operating Contingency 500,000 0 500, 000 .004 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 9,260, 000 7, 953, 728 1,306,272 85.894 ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 588,000 1,430,899 -842, 899 243.354 16 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 CENTRAL SERVICES FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE k RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 275,000 279,741 -4,741 101.72% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 2,286,000 2,315, 373 -29,373 101.28% Interest on Investments 30,000 29,433 567 98 .11% Miscellaneous Revenues 5,000 2,511 2,489 50.22% ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 2,596,000 2,627,058 -31, 058 101.20% EXPENDITURES Administration 628,500 591,428 37,072 94.10% Finance 1, 095,000 943,497 151,503 86.16k Operating Contingency 50,500 0 50,500 .00%- Public Works 527, 000 491,196 35,804 93 .21k Computer Services - 295, 000 277,733 17,267 94.15k ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES . 2,596, 000 2,303,854 292,146 68.75k ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 0 323,204 -323,204 17 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 INSURANCE SERVICES FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1,070,000 1,202,297 -132,297 112.36k ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 480,000 319,666 160,334 - 66.60 Interest on Investments 75,000 90,452 -15,452 120.60% Miscellaneous Revenues 5, 000 . 30,247 -25,247 604.94 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1,630, 000 1,642,662 -12,662 - 100.78% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 15, 000 9,349 5,651 62.33% Materials and Services 532,000 357,708 174,292 67.24 Interfund Loans 140,000 140, 000 0 100.00W Operating Transfers Out 25, 000 0 25, 000 .00% Operating Contingency 260, 000 0 260, 000 .00% ---------- -----—--- TOTAL 972,000 507,057 464, 943 52 .17 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 972,000 507,057 464, 943 52 .17$ ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 658, 000 1, 135,605 -477,605 172 .58% 18 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 EQUIPMENT FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE & RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 1,518,000 1,485,094 32, 906 97.83! ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 990,000 1, 092,555 -102, 555 110.36% Interest on Investments 110, 000 112,512 -2, 512 102 .28 Miscellaneous Revenues 0 9,636 -9, 636 ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 2,618, 000 2, 699, 797 -81,797 103 .12% EXPENDITURES Personal Services 154,000 147,522 6,478 95.79% Materials and Services 373,000 371,839 1, 161 99.69'. Capital Outlay 504,000 503,882 118 99.98'. Operating Contingency 15,000 0 15, 000 .00'k ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL 1,046,000 1, 023,243 22, 757 97.82. ---------- ----------- ---------- TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,046, 000 1, 023,243 22, 757 97.82% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 1,572, 000 1,676, 554 -104, 554 106.651 i 19 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 CEMETERY TRUST FUND BUDGET ACTUAL VARIANCE RESOURCES Working Capital Carryover 616,000 614,650 1, 350 99.78% ---------- ----------- ---------- Charges for Services 8, 500 11,236 -2, 736 132 .190 Interest on Investments 45,000 42, 033 2, 967 93 .410 Operating Transfers In 500 500 0 100.008 TOTAL 670,000 668,419 1,581 99. 76% EXPENDITURES Operating Transfers out. 45, 000 42,033 2, 967 93.41% ---------- ----------- --- TOTAL 45,000 42, 033 2,967 93 .41% ---------- ----------- ---------- ENDING FUND BALANCE 625, 000 626,386 -1,386 100.22% 20 CITY OF ASHLAND STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (BUDGETARY BASIS) For the twelve months ended June 30, 1996 SUMMARY OF FUNDS 95-96 95-96 92/3-95/6 Budget Actual Variance Percent Increase ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------ ------------ Taxes 6,465,000 6,562,257 97,257 101.50% 1,855,334 Licenses and Permits 325,000 378,940 53,940 116.60% 99,038 Intergovernmental Revenue 2,903,000 2,007,945 (895,055) 69.171; (23,259) Charges for Services 18,509,500 17,942,882 (566,618) 96.94% 3,580,499 Fines and Forfietures 176,000 186,736 10,736 106.10% (69,782) Assessment Payments 300,000 387,363 87,363 129.12% 84,165 Interest on Investments 922,700 1,048,236 125,536 113.61% 467,393 Miscellaneous Revenues 265,500 324,066 58,566 122.06% 4,121 Transfers In 660,300 546,423 (113,877) 82.75% (256,094) Other financing Sources 4,005,000 1,085,969 (2,919,031) 27.12% (1,214,031) ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------ ------------ Total Revenues 34,532,000 30,470,817 (4,061,183) 88.24% 4,527,384 Working Capital Carryover 15,509,500 16,532,652 1,023,152 4,218,108 ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------ Total Resources 50,041,500 47,003,469 (3,038,031) 8,745,492 Personal Services 9,714,000 8,983,351 (730,649) 92.48% 1,341,818 Materials and Services 14,348,450 13,190,765 (1,157,685) 91.93% 1,731,899 Capital Outlay 11,256,800 7,356,273 (3,900,527) 65.35% 2,466,963 Debt Service 2,947,750 2,637,132 (310,618) 89.46% 76,757 Transfers Out 731,300 601,423 (129,877) 82.24% (401,832) Other Financing Uses 150,000 140,000 (10,000) 93.33% Contingency 1,402,500 0 (1,402,500) 0.001; ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------ ------------ 40,550,800 32,908,944 (7,641,856) 81.15% 5,215,605 Unappropriated 9,490,700 (9,490,-700) 10,704,642 ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------ 50,041,500 32,908,944 (17,132,556) 15,920,247 21 CITY OF ASHLAND SUMMARY OF FUND EQUITY As of June 30, 1996 ACTUAL BUDGETED FUND FUND CARRYOVER 1 Year 5 Year BALANCE BALANCE BUDGET Gain Gain Fund 1996-97 June 30 96 DIFFERANCE 4 (Loss) (Loss) ----------------------- ___---_____ ____ __-------______ ___---___----_ General Fund 1,072,542 976,000 96,542 109.89& 92,979 679,859 Cemetery Fund 115,357 104,000 11,357 110.92$ 8,361 45,402 Band Fund 66,589 63,000 3,589 105.70& 6,479 29,075 Community Block Grant Fund 0 0 0 0 0 Street Fund 210,303 95,000 115,303 221.37& (77,151) (63,936) Street Fund Storm Drain 330,100 468,000 (137,900) 70.53& 63,018 330,100 Street Fund SIC 184,279 109,000 75,279 169.064 37,957 184,279 Airport Fund 30,502 27,000 3,502 112.974 14,706 18,143 Capital Improvements Fund 860,233 809,000 51,233 106.334 (58,926) (346,929) Hospital Construction Fund - 0 0 0 (300,804) (400,187) Bancroft Bond Fund 319,720 293,000 26,720 109.124 (113,525) (82,294) General Bond Fund 272,029 273,000 (971) 99.644 23,912 158,834 Debt Service Fund 106,223 109,000 (2,777) 97.454 4,606 16,056 Advance Refunding Bond Fund 0 0 0 .004 (1,181,455) (1,428,582) Ambulance Fund 114,364 41,000 73,364 278.944 114,364 114,364 Water Quality Fund 1,057,678 625,000 432,678 169.234 246,845 413,160 Restricted Water 1,054,082 1,034,000 20,082 101.944 (2,308,844) 1,054,082 Sewer Fund 1,069,177 953,000 116,177 112.194 450,794 667,533 Restricted Sewer 2,038,728 5,270,000 (3,231,272) 38.694 131,777 2,038,728 Electric Utility fund 1,430,900 1,358,000 72,900 105.374 226,844 435,025 Central Services Fund 323,203 350,000 (26,797) 92.344 43,463 174,632 Insurance Services Fund 1,135,606 1,070,000 65,606 106.134 (66,691) (91,253) Equipment Fund maint 6,239 19,810 (13,571) 31.494 (70,581) (1,067,962) Equipment Fund equipment 1,670,359 1,677,190 (6,831) 99.594 262,085 1,670,359 Cemetery Trust Fund 626,386 623,000 3,386 100.544 11,736 26,215 Ski Ashland 0 0 __---_______ ___________________________________________________ Total City Component 14,094,601 16,347,000 (2,252,399) 86.224 (2,438,052) 4,574,705 (978,873) 22 CITY OF ASHLAND SCHEDULE OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS For June 30, 1996 and 1995 3 06/30/95 06/30/96 FUND GENERAL 1,003, 984.60 1, 094,824.85 CEMETERY 109,753 .89 119,937.38 BAND 67,237.31 67,857.98 COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUND 28.89 (396.38) STREET 640,112.40 673,080.90 AIRPORT 16, 169.48 34,695.45 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 870,426.68 702,355.00 HOSPITAL CONSTRUCTION 310,669.53 0.00 BANCROFT BOND 429, 931.92 317,118.58 GENERAL BOND 247,450.63 273,023.68 DEBT SERVICE 90,910.28 96,076.42 ADVANCE REFUNDING BOND FUND 3,792.02 AMUBLANCE FUND 6, 728.33 WATER QUALITY 552,418.48 715,219.93 WATER CONSTR. SUB-FUND 3,452,235. 92 762,815.92 SEWER 434,405.39 888,845.70 SEWER CONSTR. SUB-FUND 1,676,922.00 1, 805,634.42 ELECTRIC UTILITY 797,771.27 1, 106,233.73 CENTRAL SERVICES 484,166.36 514, 031.98 INSURANCE SERVICES 1,516,422.90 1,404,399.58 EQUIPMENT 1,504,212.42 1,679, 546.62 CEMETERY TRUST 614,650.21 626,386.06 SKI PARK FUND 698,192.00 542, 547.00 HOSPITAL 5,566,499.48 5, 517, 017.59 PARKS & RECREATION 1,304,402.98 1, 776,190.19 ---------------------------- 22,392,767.04 20, 724, 170.91 PETTY CASH 948.00 973.00 GENERAL BANKING ACCOUNTS CONCENTRATION ACCT. 336,880.91 425,499.19 FIB GENERAL 1, 000.00 1,000.00 BANK OF AMERICA 1, 007.84 1,010.78 FIRST NATIONAL (CITY) -CANBY (445, 902.29) (331,244.21) USNB (CITY) PAYROLL (28, 172 .59) (3,511.59) FIRST NATIONAL (HOSPITAL) (24, 757.38) (15,408.23) USNB (HOSPITAL) PAYROLL (5, 826.12) (7,679.66) USNB (APRC) PAYABLES (21,923.80) (21,650.80) USNB (APRC) PAYROLL (1,839.98) (59.61) BANK INVESTMENTS L.G.I.P. 8,662, 809.63 9, 983,302.06 U.S. GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS 13, 914,012.31 10,691, 939.98 NON-BANK INVESTMENTS INTERFUND NOTES 4,530.51 0.00 ---------------------------- TOTAL 22,392, 767.04 20, 724,170.91 23 CITY OF ASHLAND s y of Ash r`• Department of Community Development Planning Division MEMORANDUM Ro ,••' DATE: September S, 1996 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ashland Historic Commission RE: NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION At its regularly scheduled meeting of September 4, 1996, the Historic Commission unanimously agreed to recommend favorable approval of the Whittle Garage Building located at 101 Oak Street to the National Register of Historic Places. A copy of the nomination is available for your review in the Planning Department. CITY OF ASHLAND ' CITY HALL ASHLAND,OREGON 97520 � r telephone(code 503)482-3211 g Office of the City Recorder/Treasurer September 13 , 1996 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder/Treasurer SUBJECT: Liquor License Application Application has been received from Tyler Riopelle, Scott McTaggart and Shauna McTaggert for a. LIQUOR license for an ESTABLISHMENT, Jungle Taco at 250 Oak. Street #1 and #2, Ashland. OLCC has completed the necessary background investigation and approval of this application is recommended. BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 6, 1996 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #96-047, REQUEST FOR ) OUTLINE AND FINAL PLAN APPROVAL OF SIX-LOT SUBDIVISION ) FINDINGS, UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION LOCATED AT 1452 ) CONCLUSIONS OREGON STREET. ) AND ORDERS APPLICANT: EVAN ARCHERD ) -------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: 1) Tax lot 6600 of 391E 15BA is located at 1452 Oregon Street and is zoned R-1-7.5; Single Family Residential. 2) The applicant is proposing a six-lot subdivision under the Performance Standards Options. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Community Development Department. 3) The criteria for Outline Plan approval are as follows: a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. b) That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. c) That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas. d) That the development of the land.will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. e) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. f) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on May 14, 1996, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. 5) The action was properly appealed to the Ashland City Council by surrounding neighbors and property owners in a timely manner. 6) The Ashland City Council, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on August 6, 1996, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The City Council denied the application for failure to meet the density bonus requirements for open space. Now, therefore, the Ashland City Council finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Ashland City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The City Council finds that the proposal for a six-lot subdivision does not meet all applicable criteria for approval under the Performance Standards Options chapter 18.88. Specifically, the Council finds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the open space proposed for a density bonus under 18.88.040.B.3.b meets the purpose as stated in 18.88.040.B.3.b.1. 2.3 Specifically, the Council makes the following findings in relation to the criteria for approval: a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland. Setback requirements along the perimeter of the project will be identical to those found in the R-1-7.5 zoning district. A rear yard setback of 10 feet per story is required, with a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet, excluding garages and porches. Condition #17 requires that the building envelopes be modified to comply with the above setback requirements. Compliance with the City's solar setback standard will be evaluated at the time of individual building permit submission. All lots with a slope of less than 15 percent in the northerly direction will be required to comply with solar setback standard "A". As indicated on the Outline Plan, the two private flag drives serving the four interior lots will be paved to the widths described under 18.88.050. Neither driveway will exceed a maximum slope of 15 percent. b) That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. Paved access to the project is provided via Oregon and Windsor Streets which are paved, with curb and gutter. City sewer, water, electric and storm drain facilities are located within the public rights-of-way of Oregon and Windsor Streets. Also, a 15 inch storm drain runs down the west side of the property. A concrete walkway will be installed through the project, providing pedestrian and bicycle access between Oregon and Windsor Streets. c) That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable areas. An inventory has been compiled of the existing trees on the property. A site visit was conducted by Planning Staff and Don Todt of the Ashland Parks Department to better ascertain the potential impacts on the trees from the development. The project incorporates as many existing trees into the project design as possible, given the underlying zoning. As stated in the applicant's findings, only five out of 58 trees will be removed to accommodate improvements associated with the project. Other than trees, no other significant natural features have been identified on the property. d) That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan. The adjacent properties west of the project have been developed consistent with the permitted uses of the zoning district. Each property has existing, legal access onto an abutting city street that will not be impeded by the proposal. The two properties east of the project site have legal access on Oregon and Windsor Streets. No evidence has been presented which would infer that the proposal would prevent the adjacent parcels from being developed in accordance with the zoning district. e) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. Common areas and mutual access driveways will be maintained through the Homeowner's Association. A copy of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the development, outlining maintenance responsibilities, will be submitted for approval prior to signature of the final survey plat. f) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter. The Council finds that the applicant's request fails to meet the burden of proof regarding the density calculations related to the granting of a density bonus for open space. Density calculations, as proposed by the applicant and modified by the planning staff, are as follows: Base Density = 1.398 acres x 3.6 du/acre = 5.03 units Conservation = 15% x 5.03 = .754 units Bonus Open Space = (7.4% - 2%) x 5.03 = .271 units (4554 sq. ft.) Total = 6.05 units Utilizing the open space density bonus option, the applicant applied for a 0.271 unit increase in the base density. The City Council finds that the open space, as designed and presented by the applicant for this project, fails to provide a "significant amenity to project residents", and that the applicant failed to prove that 'project residents will realistically interact with the open space on a day-to-day basis." Therefore, the Council denies the density bonus for open space, reducing the project density by 0.271 units. This reduces the total number of units to less that six. The project total, as requested by the applicant, is six lots. The proposed density for the project then fails to meet the"base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter." Further, the Council finds that the open space, as configured, does not constitute an area that could "be sold as individual lots"and therefore fails to meet the purpose requirement of section 18.88.030.B.3.b.1. The proposed open space constitutes an area smaller than the average lot size of the project. Therefore, the Council denies the credit for an open space density bonus. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Ashland City Council concludes that the six-lot subdivision under the Performance Standards Options, as proposed by the applicant, fails to meet the criteria for approval. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, we deny Planning Action #96-047. Mayor Attest - City Recorder Date 'FASN�o. � emorttnt�ixm , �4fpO� July 26, 1996 ZQ: Sluicing Alternatives Committee �r- rom: Brian L. Almquist, City Administ 06LIIIjCCt: Adoption of Committee Recommendations Last December, following the transmittal of the Committee's report to the Council by Steve Hall, I requested that Tom Davis, P.E., of Montgomery-Watson, review the recommendations. This is the environmental engineering firm that prepared our 19T7 report regarding the Ashland Watershed and Reeder Reservoir. Tn addition, this firm also acted as the City's representative during an EPA review of their report by Jones &Stokes, who were employed by EPA to prepare an environmental impact study of the recommendations pursuant to NEPA. Due to the firm's involvement in flood mitigation engineering work during the late winter/early spring flooding in the northern part of the state, I did not receive Mr. Davis' final review until July 11. I am enclosing a copy of Mr. Davis' comments for your information. Basically, Mr. Davis concimod with the recommendations of the Committee,but made several observations about some of the specific physical material removal suggestions of the Committee. Former Public Works Director Al Alsing also reviewed Mr. Davis' comments and concurs with his observations. 17 ' The Committee's report will be on the September X Council agenda for acceptance, together with Mr. Davis' observations and comments. Enclosure - 1 07/11/96 12:50 $503 226 0023 MONTGOMERY POR 1 Qoog/006 © MONTGOMERY WATSON July 11, 1996 Mr.Brian Almquist City of Ashland, City Hall 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Subject: Comments on the Sluicing Alternatives Committee Recommendations Dear Brian: Attached are my comments on the"Sluicing Alternatives Committee Recommendations to the City Council". It appears that the reservoir sediment deposition rate has decreased in recent years,and there isn't any imminent need for sluicing. This probably reflects less severe storm patterns and the watershed measures implemented by the Forest Service,including the road closure. If the sediment deposition continues at a low rate,or declines,the feasibility of dredging, as compared to sluicing, will look even less inviting than before. Overall,the recommendations reflect the interest of City residents in their water supply,the watershed and the aquatic health of Ashland and Bear Creeks. This interest will continue to provide the catalyst for sound watershed management. Sincerely yours, MONTGOMERY WATSON Tom Davis, P.E. Project Manager 1800 S.W.FtNt Avenue Tel:5032267377 Serving the World's Environmental Needs Suite 350 Fax 503 226 0023 Portland,Oregon • 07/11/96 12:50 $503 226 0023 MONTGOMERY POR 1 Q003/00 1 6 REVIEW AND COMMENT on the SLUICING ALTERNATIVES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The City of Ashland requested that Montgomery Watson review the seven "Sluicing AlternativevCommittee Recommendations to City Council" which were completed in November of 1995. Montgomery Watson is the successor to James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. (JMM) which prepared the 1977 report regarding the Ashland Watershed and Reeder Reservoir. The primary sources of information used were the "Water Resources Management Plan and Facilities Study", (JMM, 1977); "The Reeder Reservoir Maintenance Operations Final EIS"(EPA, 1980); and the " Origins and Characteristics of Sedimentation in Reeder Reservoir", and the "1995 Bear Watershed Analysis" both published by the Rogue River National Forest. In addition to reviewing the reports a visit to the reservoir and watershed was made with Dennis Bamts from the City of Ashland. RECOMMENDATION #1. This recommendation concerns monitoring of sediment buildup in Reeder Reservoir and the small East Fork and West Fork reservoirs. This recommendation is consistent with all previous information regarding the reservoir and the watershed. RECOMMENDATION #2. This recommendation concerns the continuation of the City's practice of removing material from behind the east and west diversion dams to minimize sediment transport into Reeder Reservoir. The recommendation is consistent with good reservoir management but may be difficult to implement on a consistent basis, based on past City experience. Access to the east and west fork pools is difficult and the present access road may present problems for hauling out the removed material. RECOMMENDATION #3. This recommendation encourages cooperative investigation to minimize erosion in the watershed. The 1977 JMM report concluded that the primary cause of Reeder Reservoir sediment problems was erosion in the watershed resulting from both mass erosion and surface erosion of the road prism. The 1995 Bear Watershed Analysis appears to concur with the conclusion regarding surface erosion of the road, and all parties have always agreed on the impact of mass erosion. However, changes have occurred since the 1977 report. The most significant change is the road closure above much of the watershed feeding into Reeder Reservoir. According to Dennis Barnts there has been significantly less, accumulation of sediment in the reservoir during the last five to ten years. This may reflect the remedial measures applied in the watershed by the Forest Service and the road 1 7/11/96 07/11/96 12:51 $503 226 0023 MONTGOMERY POR 1 Q004/006 closure. The lower intensity of storms and runoff during recent years is also a factor, so it will take time to understand the cause-effect relationships. Although new numerical information concerning watershed-specific erosion and reservoir sedimentation was not found during the review, it does appear that erosion rates and sedimentation have decreased in recent years. Based on this the following recommendations are offered. • The range of surface erosion coefficients for the roads and the factors involved in sediment routing through the system (and eventually into Reeder Reservoir) should be researched by the Forest Service. • The roads in the watershed should stay closed. • Methods of modeling watershed erosion should be explored by a City of Ashland- Forest Service task force. • The current City of Ashland and Jackson County local water pollution control requirements (as provided for by §313 of PL92-500) for the watershed should be reviewed and updated to the degree needed. RECOMMENDATION #4. This recommendation discusses sluicing and we believe that spring sluicing, as previously implemented by the City, is the most feasible alternative. As the recommendation states the variables that affect sluicing success are primarily the frequency needed and the annual timing of when sluicing is done. Previous studies have pointed out the challenge of balancing the City's need for adequate quantities of drinking water, spring runoff volumes, downstream water quality and fish runs. The most important factor is the need for Reeder Reservoir to fill and provide an adequate water supply for the Summer-Fall period. This implies an early Spring time slot to ensure that enough water is available. In addition, if sluicing is scheduled too late in the Spring the runoff can not be handled by the workers. This dilemma could be more easily resolved if alternative water sources were available to the City. . RECOMMENDATION #5. This recommendation offers some suggestions regarding sediment management in Reeder Reservoir. As the recommendation states the Corps of Engineers believes that a piping system to help remove sediments does not exist for the types of soils that accumulate in Reeder Reservoir. Regarding dredging, the 1980 EPA EIS concluded that either dredging or spring draining and sluicing could be implemented by the City and the environmental trade-offs between the two were close to being equal. Dredging was concluded to create fewer water quality problems and spring sluicing would present fewer anadromous fish 7/11/96 2 • ,07/11/96 12:52 '$503 226 0023 MONTGOMERY POR 1 /0005/006 problems. The City's experience with dredging the reservoir has been,bad because of: • Weather related problems. • Need for,highly experienced full time staff. • Costly equipment. • Maintenance costs. In addition to the previously experienced problems it may be less desirable to utilize dredging than in the past if the recent decrease in sediment accumulation is sustained . over the long term. Dredging would be most feasible if considerable amounts are needed annually, but if main reservoir sluicing is needed no more frequently than every five to ten years, the comparable capital, operation and maintenance costs of 'dredging would be high, and likely prohibitive. If sediments are accumulating in Reeder Reservoir at a slower rate, it appears that dredging is now less feasible than in 1977 and sluicing is more feasible. If high rates of sedimentation were occurring, as compared to previous rates, dredging could occur on close to a full time basis, and the feasibility balance might tip in its favor. However, since less frequent removal of sediments. appears to be needed in the future, the less capital intensive option of draining and sluicing during the early spring appears to be the best choice. Opening the small, older sluice gate during high sediment movement events is risky due to the possibility of plugging. The City's past experience with this involved 24- hour monitoring to clean the gate and maintain flow. It is also unlikely that this would remove much sediment from the reservoir. RECOMMENDATION #6. This recommendation concerns environmental awareness and sensitivity training for City of Ashland staff_ Brown bag lunch sessions for staff, annual watershed tours for the public and staff, and, possibly, a public workshop or seminar on the watershed and its relationship to the City's water supply, are all possibilities if such training is pursued. All of the activities in the Watershed, not just the City's, should be addressed. RECOMMENDATION V. This recommendation involves progress reports. The timing and frequency of progress reports is a decision for the City Council and City staff. An annual reporting of sediment accumulations in late winter or early spring at about the time the decision is needed regarding spring sluicing would be useful. More frequent reporting is probably unnecessary. 7/11/96 3 , 07/11/96 12:53 $503 226 0023 MONTGOMERY POR 1 0006/006 OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS. As the seven recommendations were reviewed and the field and document review completed a few other recommendations appeared timely. These are as follows. • Monitoring of sediment accumulations in the reservoirs is important but a better understanding of the erosion transport and sedimentation process above the reservoir is also important. It is not clear, based' on the information briefly reviewed for this report, whether or not the 1977 recommendations have been implemented regarding erosion/sedimentation monitoring and research in the watershed. They should be re-visited by the City, the Forest Service and DEQ to determine what should and can be accomplished. • Communicating with the public regarding all of the past, existing and potential/future activities in the watershed and reservoir is of critical importance and various approaches to such communication should be explored. • At three to five year intervals the City would benefit from formally reviewing the watershed management program for the Ashland system. This could include, for example: - Monitoring and research status on surface and mass erosion; - Current erosion-sedimentation conditions; - Forest Service plans and intentions for the watershed; and, - A checklist review regarding all aspects of the watershed and reservoir. i Tom Davis, P.E. MONTGOMERY WATSON 7/11/96 4 4�{Of ASh4y '•,GREGGa,� November 14, 1995 Brian Almquist, City Administrator M. Steve Hall, Public Works Director Lt�jEtt. Sluicing Alternatives Committee Recommendation RECOMMENDATION city Council adopt attached 'Sluicing Alternatives Committee Recommendation to City Council' as a policy document. PRESENTATION Jim Moore will present the report on behalf of the Sluicing Alternatives Committee. DISCUSSION I wish to thank the volunteers who spent many hours listening, thinking and working to produce the attached recommendation. The end product is an excellent start to meeting the needs for cleaning Reeder Reservoir (sluicing) to protect Ashland's water supply and the natural environment. A brief overview and history of the committee is listed on the attached report. Also included are the 'regular' members of the committee that consistently participated in the process. Also listed are all other individuals who participated on a limited basis or provided information to the committee. In all. 45 people participated in the process as interested parties and/or experts in specific areas. I believe the process has been a success. cc: Sluicing Alternatives Committee Participants Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer encl: Sluicing Committee Recommendations Sluicing Alternatives Committee "Regulars' Sluicing Alternatives Committee Participants k\r\awiun.m.m) s City of Ashland Sluicing Alternatives Committee RECOAMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL November 9, 1995 BACKGROUND Following the Reeder Reservoir Sluicing event of 1993, Public Works Director Steve Hall agreed to form a committeee of interested parties to review background information, investigate new options and, ultimately, to recommend a plan of action to the City Council that would maintain the capacity and function of Reeder Reservoir with minimal impact on the natural. environment. The committee held it's first meeting on August 11, 1994 and was facilitated by Keri Green. At that time the majority of the committee expressed a desire to incorporate the Valdez Principles endorsed by the City Council in May of 1990 in our continuing review of sluicing alternatives. We listed the overal values and purposes as seen by the committee: Understanding natural systems Improving watershed health (including fire reduction activities) Using biologically, environmentally and ecologically sound methods Maintaining storage volume in Reeder Reservoir without degrading the environment Reducing Sediment production as a way to achieve watershed health Encouraging interface with City on projects Focusing on the health of whole basin Interfacing with the community Since our initial meeting, the committee has met monthly with presentations by individuals and/or experts relating to the history and background of sluicing, fisheries habitat, stream enhancement, sediment production from decomposed soils and methods of sediment reduction. Councilors Susan Reid and Ken Hagen have attended many of the meetings. Members of the committee have examined Reeder Reservoir and walked the West Fork of Ashland Creek. Based on these trips, a review of existing literature, and numerous discussions, we have come up with the following observations and recommendations. OBSERVATIONS A review of the August 1987 Origins and Characteristics of Sedimentation in Reeder Reservoir indicates a good understanding of the basic problems and prescriptions for moderating erosion, and monitoring for a better understanding. None of the recommendations have been implemented. Major sedimentation deposition occurs primarily when major periods of runoff occur. This is usually in conjunction with a major late winter warning trend and rains that affect earlier snow packs. Geologically speaking, these might be called "equilibrium punctuations", sudden and abrupt changes in the normal processes of runoff and erosion that occur constantly. Proper monitoring on a yearly basis (in the fall) should give us better data on yearly sedimentation deposition in Reeder Reservoir. A better understanding of the normal cycle would allow for better planning of when removal of sediment is needed from the reservoir. We suspect that with proper maintenance procedures, a better awareness by city employees, and yearly removal from the basins at the mouth of the East and West Forks, the need for sluicing will be reduced. RECOM MNDATIONS 1. City personnel will perform annual Fall monitoring of sediment buildup in Reeder Reservoir and the small reservoirs located behind the East and West Fork Dams of Ashland Creek. City Council has allotted $5,000 for items related to sluicing in the 1995- 1996 Water Fund. Perhaps this money could be used for monitoring purposes. 2. City personnel will remove material, mechanically, from behind the East and West diversion dams on an "as needed" basis determined by annual monitoring, to minimize sediment transport into Reeder Reservoir. Removed sediments should be stored for use by the City, disposed of as land fill, or possibly sold for commercial purposes. 3. City, U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Mount Ashland Ski Association are encouraged to find opportunities to cooperatively investigate and implement methods to minimize erosion in the watershed. Peripheral road and adjacent cut-bank erosion need to be reduced. An example is working current cooperative effort between the City and the J. Herbert Stone USFS Nursery to develop native ground covers. Methods for reducing erosion due to routine operation and maintenance of the watershed need to be pursued using Best Management Plan to reduce erosion. 4. City pursue an amendment to the current memorandum of understanding for more frequent sluicing, sluicing outside the occurence of spring fish runs whenever possible and to allow sluicing be tied to natural occurrences of peak stream flows, recognizing that "natural process" has wide variations. 5. City Pursue methods of modifying existing structures to allow the peak flow discharge of water from Hosler Dam during high sediment movement events in the watershed. Examples include opening the small, older sluice gate during high water flows and dredging. City needs to continue investigation of potential options for a piping system to remove sediments from Reeder Reservoir. The U.S. Corps of Engineers have indicated that such a system does not exist within the United States. 6. City provide training for all city employees to generate an awareness and sensitivity to the effect of their activities on the natural environment. This should include examining ordinances, planning, walklover of projects and day to day activities. A specific person or persons should be identified to coordinate the program. 7. City staff shall provide progress reports to the Council every'six months. The initial report will be due three months after Council adoption of these recommendations. While we have expanded our knowledge of how the natural cycle of events affect Reeder Reservoir, there is still more work to be done. Monitoring of the process is an integral part of improving the process as is learning about how City and private activities effect the natural environment. Future sluicing activity should be done only after public communication of the action to be taken and the necessity for such actions. This should include programs to make the actions as benign as possible while closely mimicking nature. This report is not to be considered complete and conclusive. This is a beginning and the City needs to continue to evaluate the effectiveness of these recommendations while continuing to seek ways to improve the sluicing process while decreasing the impacts on the natural ecology of Ashland Creek. Sluicing Alternatives Committee "Regulars" Page 1 of 1 Joanne Eggers Headwaters/WET ASHLAND Myra Erwin Sierra Club ASHLAND Jim Moore Rogue Flyfishers & HeadwateIs/WET ASHLAND Frank Hirst LWVA ASHLAND Ken Hagen City Councilor ASHLAND Gary Arnold D. E. Q. MEDFORD Klaas Van de Pol Citizen ASHLAND Ell Sluicing Alternatives Committee "Participants" Page 1 of 4 Betty Wilson League of Women Voters ASHLAND Gary Schrodt Ashland Wetlands Coalition ASHLAND Dist. Ranger Tom Lupes U.S. Forest Service ASHLAND Eric Dittmer S.O.S.C. Department of Geology ASHLAND City Admin. Tony Paxton City of Talent TALENT Ron Henri Bear Creek Corporation MEDFORD Ken Mickelsen Ashland Parks Dept. ASHLAND Roger Christianson S.O.S.C. Department of Biology ASHLAND Ron Roth Citizen ASHLAND Dale Johnson U.S. Bureau of Land Mgnt MEDFORD Sluicing Alternatives Committee "Participants" Page 2 of 4 President Dan Boyd Rogue Valley Flyfishers MEDFORD Plato Doundoulakis Citizen ASHLAND Marc Prevost Water Quality Cord. R.V.C.O.G. CENTRAL POINT Cate Hartzell Citizen ASHLAND Al Alsing Parks Commissioner ASHLAND Susan Hunt Headwaters/WET ASHLAND Charles Lane Geology Department S.O.S.C. ASHLAND Richard Hart Headwaters/WET ASHLAND Pepper Trail Headwaters ASHLAND James Carter Citizen ASHLAND Sluicing Alternatives Committee "Participants" Page 3 of 4 Jaci Hillmann Citizen ASHLAND Toni Figueiredo Citizen ASHLAND Keri Green Facilitator ASHLAND Susan Reid City Councilor ASHLAND Rob Winthrop Past Councilor ASHLAND Kari Tuck Headwaters/WET ASHLAND Robin Thompson U. S. Forest Service ASHLAND E. Kendall Clarke Rogue Flyfishers ASHLAND David Jacob CENTRAL POINT B. G. Hicks Citizen ASHLAND Sluicing Alternatives Committee "Participants" Page 4 of 4 Gregg Stahl U.S. Forest Service ASHLAND Daniel Boyd Citizen ASHLAND Darrell Hegdahl Citizen ASHLAND Debbie Whitall U.S. Forest Service ASHLAND Su Maiyo Citizen ASHLAND Linda Chesney Headwaters ASHLAND Kenneth S. Baldwin HAPPY CAMP Jeannine Rossa Ashland Resource Area U.S. Bureau of Land Management MEDFORD September 16, 1989 REEDER RESERVOIR Memorandum of Understanding : Recitals WHEREAS, Reeder Reservoir constitutes the; primary water supply fqi the city of Ashland and the protection and maintenance of ,; that water source is imperative to the public. health"and `; welfare of the residents of Ashland : and WHEREAS, the unstable and highly-erodible granitic soils of the : upper Ashland Creek watershed have, on some years , washed downstream and deposited in major quantities in Reeder Reservoir , necessitating removal of sediments by the city; and sWHEREAS, due to the steep_ character of the canyon, the method of_, disposal is generally limited to sluicing sediments -: downstream through a sluicegate at the base of the dam; and WHEREAS, sluicing has been generally confined to the spring months of March, April and May because of 1) the uncertainty of adequate precipitation and snowpack in earlier months to fill the reservoir and 2) the occurrence of ice on the creek which can preclude sluicing in winter months ; and WHEREAS, the population of steelhead which spawn and rear in Ashland Creek below Reeder Reservoir has experienced loss or severe reduction on sluicing years either directly by the sediment sluicing operations , or indirectly through temporary loss of food organisms ; and WHEREAS , populations of steelhead and chinook salmon which spawn and rear in Bear Creek from the confluence of Ashland Creek to its mouth at Rogue River have been damaged by the sediment sluicing; and WHEREAS , orchard growers along Bear Creek , who must be ready to irrigate fruit trees in the instance of spring frost, have experienced equipment failures from silt interference and resulting damage to crops on certain occasions of sediment sluicing ; and WHEREAS , on certain occasions the city of Talent ' s potable water infiltration system on Bear Creek may have been rendered temporarily ineffective due to sediment sluicing ; and WHEREAS, the Division of State::Lands, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Department of Environmental Quality, are charged through their respective programs to provide for the Protection, conservation and best use of the waters of this state and need to coordinate their efforts to provide ,`consistency and avoid duplication; and WHEREAS, the following mitigative and monitoring actions have been`developed to protect, conserve, and provide best use of ::the water resources of Ashland and Bear. Creeks : 1 The city of Ashland will sluice Reeder Reservoir every third year unless a major sediment load accumulates in the reservoir in which event a more frequent sluicing may be necessary. Assuming normal sediment deposition, planned < sluicing years would be 1990, 1993 , 1996 , 1999. . . . 2 If a designated sluicing year coincides with a subnormal ". snowpack year, a decision will be made by the city--no later than February 15--whether to abort . that year ' s sluicing. Sluicing would then occur the following year, adequate snowpack permitting. 3 . If in the consensus opinion of the city of Ashland , the Division of State Lands, the Department of Fish and Wildlife , and the Department of Environmental Quality, there has been such minor volume of sediment accumulation in Reeder Reservoir that discharge on a designated sluicing year is not warranted , the decision of whether to discharge may be postponed to the succeeding year. 4 . The city will notify the Division of State Lands, the Department of Fish and wildlife, the Department of Environmental Quality, Rogue Valley Council of Governments and the city of Talent , if sluicing will or will not occur on the designated sluicing year by February 15 of that year _ A. press release of �that decision will also be submitted to the Ashland and Medford newspapers. 5 _ No more than 6 . 000 cubic yards would be discharged in any sluicing event unless a major erosion event occurs in the upper Ashland Creek watershed which would warrant a larger volume of sediment removal _ 6 . Sluicing will occur during the period of February 1 through March 31_ 7 . A diversion structure will be installed near the mouth of Ashland Creek to divert Ashland Creek to Bear Creek by way of a 1-112 acre sediment trap . Memorandum of Understanding Page 2 of 4 2166f F; i' 8 . The diversion structure will include a concrete apron installed flush with the streambed • and removable flashboards . 9 . On planned sluicing years , flashboards will be installed on the diversion structure on December 15 to block upstream passage of steelhead . in the event the city decides not to sluice, pursuant to item 2 above,. the °f iashboards will be removed on February 15--or earlier if . the°:decision not to sluice is made before February 15. On !years when flashboards are installed and sluicing occurs, the-city- will coordinate with the Oregon Department of .rFis h _and Wil dlife to determine the appropriate date to remove the flashboards_ Factors determining the date will include fishery status , stream bedload and remaining pond capacity. 10. The;-1-1/2 acre sediment pond shall be maintained by the city. of Ashland with capacity to capture no less than 4 ,000.cubic yards of sediment for each use. The inflow and outflow structures shall be designed and manned by the city to assure maximum sediment entrapment within the pond . 11. The city will conduct the following monitoring efforts during sluicing : a . Daily water quality samples will be taken to measure settleable solids , turbidity and_ suspended solids at: • a point in Ashland creek just upstream of the sewage treatment plant ; • a point at the inflow location to the sediment pond ; • a point in Bear Creek , just upstream of the 'discharge pipe from the - sediment pond; • a point at the outfall location from the sediment pond ( the discharge water ) ; and • a point in . Bear Creek just downstream from the natural confluence of Ashland Creek . b . When the pool of Reeder Reservoir is dropped in preparation for sluicing , established spot surveys shall be taken to determine amount of sediment which has accumulated . Memorandum of Understanding Page 3 of 4 2166f covenants NOW, THEREFORE; THE UNDERSIGNED RESOLVE! TO abide by the above mitigative and monitoring actions ; TO issue permits under the guidance of this Memorandum of Understanding to the extent permissible under statute;. To encourage and assist the city of Ashland: to actively pursue establishment of a long-term supplemental water _supply ' at the Winburn site on Ashland Creek or other appropriate. locations; TO review this Memorandum of Understanding following each Sluicing operation and to add, delete, or modify. the recitals as::. necessary to improve effectiveness of the: operation and reduce impacts to the resources and uses of Ashland and Bear Creeks ; and TO communicate openly with each other and the. .public and to solicit public input on the sluicing operation_ at every opportunity. U Ct i% Divisioonn� of !State ands / City of Ashland Dirt n t nvironmental Quality Depar me t of Fish and Wildlife `RO e Valley/Co'uncil of Governments J C} n County Board of Commissioners City of 'talent Memorandum of Understanding Page 4 of 4 2166f Resolution No. 90-_, , A RESOLUTION OF TBE CITY OF ASI AND, OREGON ENDORSING THE VALDEZ PRINCIPLES AS A GUIDE FOR DAY TO DAY CITY OPERATIONS-AND PROGRAMS. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland has consistently shown our concern for environment; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland has provided many energy saving programs to our citizens; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland worked to provide recycling and altorriative transportation opportunities for pur citizens; and WHEREAS,the Valdez Principles embody an environmental framework for future City actions. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the.Mayor and City Council as follows: The City of Ashland hereby endorses the attached set of Valdez Principles . as modified. for the City.. of Ashland. The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ashland on the day Of '72? � , 1990. Nan E. Franklin Catherine Golden City Recorder Mayor Valdez Principles By endorsing these Principles,we publicly affirm our belief that the City of Ashland, Oregon has a direct responsibility for the environment We believe that we must conduct the publics business as responsi ble stewards of the environment and seek goals in a We believe that the City must Flot manner that leaves the Earth healthy and safe. compro mise the ability of future generations to sustain their needs. We recoglte rhea to be a long-term'commitment to update our practices continually in light of advances in technology-and new understandings in health and environmental_ science. We intend to make consistent, measurable progress toward the ideal that these principles desaibe, and to apply them wherever we operate, in a manner consistent with our other obligations under law. 1. ProtectJtu cif t`..e ElaspbaL 6. Safe Prodocts and Ses+ivs We will nrrElbe and drive to climinite We will provide services that ra,tnmru the release of say pollutant that may oust adverse environmental impacts and that are safe for wvironmcnts1 damage to air,water, or earth or its Consumers. We wilt inform Coruvmers of the inhabitants• 'We wsll ssfegeard habitats in crocks, environmental impacts of our services Pow, mod; aatcral areas and will minimize contributing to global warming, depiction of the 7. Damage��nnobili for an hum we ozone layer, add run to smog We will take rapo ry y c1Tort to cause to the cnviroomw ry t by making eve 7- Sustainable fhe of Natural Resources. fully restore the environment and to com =-rte We wal rake cutainable use of renewable those persons who are adversely aRcrscd_ natural resources. such as water, wits and forests Dlsefosucn We will coaser5i nonrenewable natural resources & end to through efficient use and careful planning. We will We will disclose to our emptoytcs that protect wildlife FabitaC open spaces and wilderness, the public incidents relating to our operations write t wildlife biodixrsiry• muse environmental harm or pose.health or ssfcty hazards. We will darlmc potential emsronmcntal, 3. Reduction and Disposal of Waste. health, or safe himcls posed by our open ions the creation of waste,and and we will not take any anion against employ 's We Coll a^;^e who report an Condition that creates a danger to wherever pom I ra7rJe materials. We w 11 Po Y hazards. dispose of all wastes through safe and responsible the cavuoamcat or posts health end s.L`Uy methods. 9• Envlronmaital Directors acrd Mana6ers' At least one member of maoagtm"' will 4. We tlu of mae e o uali6ed to represent ensiroamental We wiil make every c[ToR to tut be a perso 9 p cmcat resourccs. environmentally sane tajn ne and sysable enu w gy soers intuests, and will Commit manaS to meet our needs. µ'e wilt invrSt in and promote to implement these Principles. energy etLCeucy and mnson'atton in our operetions 10. Mnuel AsscssmenL and that of our cheers. Wowill conduct and wake pobGc an annual self-evaluation of our progress in implcr'cnting S. Risk Rrduc0oa applicable We-'Nill imatihecnvironmenta�hcslth these Princip luAnd iammplyiagwithallapp and safety risks to our employees and the laws and regulations communities in which we operate by employing safe (cchnologics and operating procedures and by being constantly prepared (or emergencies. _ E�d.�d�r ir,c KW.M 6ir covncit t•(q is. t7b R ' LEASE Date: 8 19 h Lessor: City of Ashland, Oregon ("Lessor") Lessee: Community Works, an Oregon non-profit corporation ("Lessee") Lessor leases to Lessee, and Lessee leases from Lessor, the real property (the ,.premises") described on the attached Exhibit A. The premises are leased for a term (the "Term") of 25 years (subject to an option to extend for three terms of five years each as set forth in section 18), commencing on the date of this lease. Lessor and Lessee agree as follows: 1. Project Conditions. 1. intend Ftkislease struct.a bu , ing (the "lurA ') ands improve is o rider, r the pre s. The Band alr th ela ed improvem ts areferre s lease "Proje Project a : any future alterations ' d s, reps, or rridific ons to Project durin he Term of this lease are referred to as the "Improvements." This lease shall be conditioned on Lessee and Lessor determining that the Project is feasible after completing a due-diligence investigation of the condition of the Property and obtaining all necessary governmental approvals, consultants reports, financing commitments, final plans and specifications, design and construction contracts, and any other approvals, loan and lease commitments, or contracts reasonably determined to be necessary by the Lessor and the Lessee. 1.2. The foregoing condition shall be for the benefit of both parties and must be satisfied or waived by both the parties on or before 5:00 p.m. on .tune 30, 1997, or this lease shall terminate and be of no further force and effect. In such event neither party shall have any further liability under this lease except for liability accrued before the date of termination. 1.3. Lessor shall cooperate with Lessee in all respects in connection with satisfying the condition. Lessor shall execute such applications and other instruments reasonably necessary to satisfying the condition, provided that Lessor shall not be required to pay any application fees or incur any other costs or liability in connection with satisfying the condition. 2. Construction of the Project. Lessee shall construct the Project in accordance with the final plans and specifications approved by Lessor, which approval shall not be PAGE 1-LEASE (p:r.a1\c owrk.Jsa11AuGust 21, 19961 unreasonably withheld or delayed. Lessor's approval will be based on its desire.to have the premises resemble and be compatible with the architecture and colors of the existing improvements of the Civic Center Campus. Excavation for the foundation of the Building shall commence no later than 60 days after the satisfaction or waiver of the condition to this lease stated in section 1.2. Lessee shall, subject to acts of God, strikes, or any other reason beyond the reasonable control of Lessee, diligently prosecute the work to completion by no later than 270 days after it is commenced. The work shall be performed in accordance with all Legal Requirements and in a good and professional manner. The term "Legal Requirements" includes all present and future laws, ordinances, orders, rules, regulations, and requirements of all federal, state, and municipal governments, departments, commissions, boards, and officers, foreseen or unforeseen, ordinary as well as extraordinary. Lessor shall have the right to inspect the work at reasonable intervals subject to the supervision of Lessee and in a manner that will minimize any interference with the work. 3. Minimum Rent. 3.1. No rent shall be payable with respect to the premises. 3. shall out notice, cept as rovid " ' lease, and witho abat ent, d uc Vin, or seto I sums, im< sit ns, costs other payments ich ssee in r�of the pro of this I e ssumes o grees to pay 4. Purposes. 4.1. Lessee shall use and occupy the premises continuously during the Term for public services relating to a youth and family resource and community center serving a population comprised of least 51% who have low or moderate incomes as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The premises may not be used for any other purpose or be the subject of a change in concept without the written consent of Lessor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessor shall have the right to approve any signs or displays Lessee may desire to erect on or about the premises that are visible from the exterior of the Building, in order to ensure that Lessor may control the quality and character of the presentation displayed by Lessee. 4.2. Lessee shall permit and encourage any civic groups or governmental agencies temporary use of portions of the premises when such use would not interfere with use by Lessee. Lessee may charge fees for such use to cover its costs. 4.3. Lessee shall not use or occupy, or permit or suffer all or any part of the premises or the Improvements to be used or occupied (1) for any unlawful or illegal business, use, or purpose, (2) in any such manner to constitute a nuisance of any kind, or (3) for any purpose or in any way in violation of the certificate of occupancy, PAGE 2-LEASE IV:reel\c.mnwrk9.1seJJAugnsr 21. 19961 or of any Legal Requirements, including but not limited to Legal Requirements respecting Hazardous Substances, or (4) for any business, use, or purpose deemed disreputable. The term Hazardous Substance means any hazardous, toxic, or dangerous substance, waste, or material that is the subject of environmental protection Legal Requirements, including but not limited to the items listed in the United States Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Table (49 CFR §172.101) or designated as hazardous substances by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (40 CFR pt 302). Lessee acknowledges that the term Legal Requirements includes but is not limited to all environmental protection laws such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (42 USC §6901 et seq.), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 USC §6901 et seq.), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 USC §1257 et sec.), and the Clean Air Act (42 USC §2001 et seq.). 4.4. Lessee shall observe and comply with all conditions and requirements necessary to preserve and extend any and all rights, licenses, permits (including but not limited to zoning variances, special exceptions, and nonconforming uses), privileges, franchises, and concessions that now apply to the premises or that have been granted to or contracted for by Lessor or Lessee in connection with any existing or prese rmplatedpspf the premisAs or the I _ ents. 5. Liens. i 5.1. Lessee shall have no power to do any act or to make any contract that may create or be the foundation for any lien, mortgage, or other encumbrance on the reversion or other estate of Lessor or on any interest of Lessor in the premises. 5.2. Lessee shall not suffer or permit any liens to attach to the interest of Lessee in all or any part the premises by reason of any work, labor, services, or materials done for, or supplied to, or claimed to have been done for or supplied to, Lessee or anyone occupying or holding an interest in all or any part of the Improvements on the premises through or under Lessee. If any such lien shall at any time be filed against the premises, Lessee shall cause the same to be discharged of record within 30 days after the date of filing the same, by either payment, deposit, or bond. 5.3. Nothing in this lease shall be deemed to be, or be construed in any way as constituting, the consent or request of Lessor, express or implied, by inference or otherwise, to any person, firm, or corporation for the performance of any labor or the furnishing of any materials for any construction, rebuilding, alteration, or repair of or to the premises or to the Improvements, or as giving Lessee any right, power, or authority to contract for or permit the rendering of any services or the furnishing of any materials that might in any way give rise to the right to file any lien against Lessor's interest in the premises or against Lessor's interest, if any, in the Improvements. Lessee is not intended to be an agent of Lessor for the construction of Improvements PAGE 3-LEASE IP.reel\comnwrks.IsellAugust 21. 19961 on the premises. Lessor shall have the right to post and keep posted at all reasonable times on the premises and on the Improvements any notices that Lessor shall be required to post for the protection of Lessor and of the premises and of the Improvements from any such lien. The foregoing shall not be construed to diminish or vitiate any rights of Lessee in this.lease to construct, alter, or add to the Improvements. 6. Taxes and Other Charges. 6.1. Lessee shall pay all real and personal property taxes assessed against the premises, such payments to be made no later than November 15 of the year in which the taxes become due and payable, and will submit a copy of the receipt for the taxes to the City's Director of Finance. 6.2. Lessee shall promptly pay any charges for electricity and all other charges for utilities which may be furnished to the premises at Lessee's order or consent. Lessee shall install such utilities as may be required for the use to be made of the premises. 7. Insura 7.1Les at Les sole cost pense, saintain, fo : he mutual r benefit of and Le r, ualty i urarr coveril lloss or damj_ by fire, and other risks as may be embraced within all-risk insurance insuring the full replacement cost (excluding foundation and excavation cost) of the Improvements. If all-risk insurance becomes unavailable, then Lessee shall insure the Improvements with such coverage as is customary from time to time for comparable first-class buildings in the City of Ashland. The amount of such insurance policy shall be increased from time to time as the full replacement cost of the Improvements increases. In the event of any casualty damage to the Improvements, Lessor may make proof of loss if Lessee fails to do so within 15 days of the casualty and after 10 days' written notice from. Lessor of its intent to do so. If the insurance proceeds (the "Proceeds") of any insurance on the Improvements equal more than 10% of the replacement cost of the Improvements, then all Proceeds shall be paid to the First leasehold Mortgagee, if any, and if none then to a bank trust department (the "Trustee") as trustee for the parties. The Trustee shall be selected by Lessee and approved by Lessor, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If the Proceeds are less than such amount, then the Proceeds shall be delivered to Lessee. Unless the casualty occurs within five years of the Expiration Date of this lease, Lessee shall promptly repair or replace the damaged and destroyed Improvements in substantially the form on the date of the casualty or in a manner reasonably satisfactory to Lessor. The Trustee shall pay or reimburse Lessee from the Proceeds for the cost of repair, restoration, or replacement on satisfactory proof of PAGE 4-LEASE (p:1ee1\C0m..,ks Ase)1A.ow 21. 19961 expenditure by Lessee, satisfactory evidence of sufficient progress on the work, and satisfactory evidence of sufficient funds available to complete restoration.'The Trustee shall not be liable to the parties except in the event of gross negligence or fraud. The Trustee shall be entitled to deduct a customary and reasonable charge for its services. 7.2. Lessee, at its expense, shall maintain at all times during the Term of this lease public liability insurance in respect of the premises and the conduct or operation of its business, with Lessor as additional insured, with $500,000 minimum combined single-limit coverage, or its equivalent. All casualty insurance policies shall include contractual liability, severability of interest, and cross-liability endorsements. When Lessee conducts demolition or excavation work, the exclusions now customarily referred to as the X, and U exclusions shall be deleted from Lessee's liability insurance. Lessee shall deliver to Lessor and any additional named insured such fully paid-for policies or certificates of insurance, in a form satisfactory to Lessor, issued by the insurance company or its authorized agent, at least 10 days before the Commencement Date. Lessee shall procure and-pay for renewals of such insurance from time to time before the expiration, and Lessee shall deliver to Lessor and any additional named insured such renewal policy or certificate at least 30 days before the expiration of any existing policy. All insurance policies shall contain provisions whereby (1) losse payabt to the negli nce of a .L ha urable interest in >e Im veme ' ; the Pr oce will be pa < in ccordanc ' ith the terms of t leas " and (3 • olicies c e cance o modified less Lessor and any a �iti . named .;.s are gi : n atast 20 s' prior writte; notice of such cancellation or modification. 7.3. All insurance policies shall be written as primary policies and shall not be contributing with or be in excess of the coverage that either Lessor or Lessee may carry. All such insurance policies shall be issued in the name of Lessee, being included in the insurance policy definition of who is an additional insured and shall be primary to any insurance available to Lessor. 7.4. All policies of insurance shall be issued by good, responsible companies, reasonably acceptable to Lessor and that are qualified to do business in the State of Oregon. Certificates shall be delivered to Lessor within 30 days after the Building is completed and thereafter within 30 days before the expiration of the term of each such policy. As often as any such policy shall expire or terminate, renewal or additional policies shall be procured and maintained by Lessee in like manner and to like extent. All policies of insurance must contain a provision that the company writing the policy will give Lessor 30 days' written notice in advance of any cancellation, substantial change of coverage, or the effective date of any reduction in amount of insurance. 7.5. The obligations of Lessee to carry the insurance provided for may be brought within the coverage of a so-called blanket policy or policies of insurance; provided, however: PAGE 5-LEASE (V:reaIX.. o.rka.Ise)[Aupnst 21. 19961 r 7.5.1. That the coverage afforded will not be reduced or diminished by reason of the use of such blanket policy of insurance; 7.5.2. That the requirements set forth are otherwise satisfied; and 7.5.3. That, as to all insurance, Lessor shall be named as additional insured. 7.6. Lessor may from time to time, but not more frequently than once every three years, require that the amount of public liability insurance to be maintained by Lessee under section 7.2 be increased so that the amount adequately protects Lessor's interest based on Lessor's maximum liability for tort claims under ORS 30.270 or any successor statute. S. Lessor's Right to Perform Lessee's Covenants. 8.1. If Lessee at any time fails to pay any tax in accordance with the provisions of this lease or fails to make any other payment or perform any other act on its part to be made or performed, then Lessor, after 10 days' notice to Lessee (or without notice in case o rgency thout waiviror releas' ee fr ,bligation of Lessee ntai ' in thi ;,ea or from a:: efault by Vn and with t waiving Lessor's ri " t to e suc n as may . rmissible this leas ; s a result of such defa (but sh , b der noiblig&n to): 8.1.1. Pay any tax payable by Lessee pursuant to the provisions of this lease; or 8.1.2. Make any other payment or perform any other act on Lessee's part to be made or performed as provided in this lease, and may enter the premises and the Improvements for any such purpose, and take all such action, as may be necessary. 8.2. All sums so paid by Lessor and all costs and expenses incurred by Lessor, including reasonable attorney fees, in connection with the performance of any such act, together with, if Lessee does not pay the same within the 30-day period after notice from Lessor, interest from the date of such payment or incurrence by Lessor of such cost and expense until paid, at the annual rate of 18% shall be paid by Lessee to Lessor on demand. 9. Compliance with Legal Requirements. 9.1. Throughout the Term, Lessee shall promptly comply with all Legal Requirements that may apply to the premises or to the use or manner of uses of the premises or the Improvements or the owners or users of the Improvements, whether or not the Legal Requirements affect the interior or exterior of the Improvements, PAGE 6-LEASE (v:redlaumnwrksJse)1Augusz n. 19961 S �Z necessitate structural changes or improvements, or interfere with the use and enjoyment of the premises or the Improvements, and whether or not compliance with the Legal Requirements is required by reason of any condition, event, or circumstance existing before or after the Term commences. Lessee shall pay all costs of compliance with Legal Requirements, but Lessee shall have the right to cease occupation or use of, or to demolish or remove, all or any part of the premises or the Improvements in lieu of compliance with any Legal Requirement that may require expenditures on behalf of Lessee for continued use or occupation of the premises. 9.2. Lessee shall have the right, after prior written notice to Lessor, to contest by appropriate legal proceedings, diligently conducted in good faith, in the name of Lessee or Lessor or both, without cost or expense to Lessor, the validity or application of any Legal Requirement subject to the following: 9.2.1. If, by the terms of any Legal Requirement, compliance may legally be delayed pending the prosecution of any such proceeding without the incurrence of -any lien, charge, or liability of any kind against all or any part of the premises or the Improvements and without subjecting Lessee or Lessor to any liability, civil or criminal, for failure to comply, Lessee may delay compliance until the final determination of such proceedi ril A� bility 9.2. If any J rss , o wo nc urr!Tdrea so n of any such la ssee n rt1 .1 ss ma cont" t the m er and delaliance, provided that such delay would not subject Lessor to criminal liability or fine, and Lessee 9.2.2.1. Furnishes to Lessor security, reasonably satisfactory to Lessor, against any loss or injury by reason of such contest or delay, and 9.2.2.2. Prosecutes the contest with due diligence. 9.3. Lessor shall execute and deliver any appropriate papers that may be necessary or proper to permit Lessee to contest the validity or application of any Legal Requirement, provided all the requirements of this section have been satisfied by Lessee and Lessor will incur no cost. 10. Repairs and Maintenance. Lessee shall maintain, repair, and replace the premises and the Improvements as necessary to keep them in good order, condition, and repair throughout the entire Term. Lessee's obligations shall extend to both structural and nonstructural items and to all maintenance, repair, and replacement work, including but not limited to unforeseen and extraordinary items. Lessor shall maintain the common areas of the development in good order, condition, and repair throughout the entire Term. Lessor shall be responsible for all aspects of maintaining the parking area, including but not limited to security patrols, landscaping, cleaning, snow and ice removal, and lighting. PAGE 7-LEASE (p:real\cor wrks.Ise)l August 21. 19961 11. Alterations, Additions, and New Improvements. The term Modifications means any demolition, improvement, alteration, change, or addition, of, in, or to all or any part of the premises or the Improvements. The term Minor Modifications shall mean any Modifications costing less than $25,000, and the term Major Modifications shall mean any and all Modifications other than Minor Modifications. Multiple Modifications occurring within a period of 365 days shall be deemed a single Modification for the purposes of applying the provisions contained in this section. At any time during the Term and at Lessee's own cost and expense, Lessee may make or permit to be made any Minor Modifications, provided there is no existing and unremedied default on the part of Lessee, of which Lessee has received notice of default, under any of the terms, covenants, and conditions of this lease. Major Modifications shall require the prior consent of the Lessor. All salvage material in connection with any Modification that Lessee is permitted to make shall belong to Lessee. 12. Title to Improvements. Title to Improvements shall be and remain in Lessee until the expiration of the Term, or any extension, unless this lease is terminated sooner as provided elsewhere in this lease. Upon such expiration or sooner termination, title to the Improvements shall automatically pass to, vest in, and belong to Lessor without further action on the part of either party and without cost or charge to Lessor. During the Term7tvssee shall b d for all tax 'on purposr�aim casery deduction ti nd t like o '< he proveme 13. No f :.. ssee sh .� n o or s era waste Jdamage, disfi rement, or injury to the premises or the Improvements. Demolition of all or any part of the Improvements done in accordance with the requirements of section 11 shall not be considered prohibited by the terms of this section. 14. Inspection and Access 14.1. Lessee shall permit Lessor, or its authorized representative to enter the premises and the Improvements at all reasonable times during_usual business hours for the purposes of inspecting the same and making any repairs or performing any work that Lessee has neglected or refused to make in accordance with the terms, covenants, and conditions of this lease. Nothing in this lease shall imply any duty or obligation on the part of Lessor to do any such work or to make any Improvements of any kind whatsoever to the premises (including, but not limited to, repairs and other restoration work made necessary due to any fire, other casualty, or partial condemnation, irrespective of the sufficiency or availability of any fire or other insurance proceeds, or any award in condemnation, which may be payable). The performance of any work by Lessor shall not constitute a waiver of Lessee's default in failing to perform the same. 14.2. During the progress of any work on the premises or.the Improvements performed by Lessor pursuant to the provisions in this section, Lessor may keep and store on the premises all necessary materials, tools, supplies, and equipment. Lessor PAGE 8-LEASE (p:real\comnwrks.Ise)lAuguet 21, 19961 shall not be liable for inconvenience, annoyance, disturbance, loss of business, or other damage of Lessee or any user by reason of making such repairs or performing any such work, or on account of bringing materials, tools, supplies, and equipment onto the premises or into the Improvements during the course of the work and the obligations of Lessee under this lease shall not be affected by the work. 14.3. Lessor shall have the right to enter on the premises and the Improvements at all reasonable times during usual business hours for the purpose of showing the same to prospective purchasers of Lessor's interest and, at any time within two years before the Term expires, for the purpose of showing the same to prospective Lessees. 14.4. Except in the event of emergency repairs, all entry to the premises by Lessor shall require at least 24 hours' advance notice to Lessee. In the event of any emergency repairs, Lessor shall use reasonable efforts to give Lessee the earliest possible notice of the same. 15. Lessor's Exculpation and Indemnity 15. a is an a in exclu a control perotE�emis Ten the Improvem ts, a Lesso :; h of in any nt whatso liabl injury or damage t ny p t<.perty o ; ny person Wing onboumises or the Impro or any i u dama_ to t premisor the Imnts or to any property, whether belonging to Lessee or to any other person, caused by any fire, breakage, leakage, defect, or bad condition in any part or portion of the premises or of the Improvements, or from steam, gas, electricity, water, rain, or snow that may leak into, issue, or flow from any part of the premises or the Improvements from the drains, pipes, or plumbing work of the same, or from the street, subsurface, or any place or quarter, or due to the use, misuse, or abuse of all or any of the Improvements or from any kind of injury that may arise from any other cause whatsoever on the premises or in or on the Improvements, including defects in construction of the Improvements, latent or otherwise. 15.2. Lessee shall defend, indemnify and save Lessor, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising that may be imposed on or incurred by or asserted against Lessor by reason of any of the following occurrences during the Term: 15.2.1. Any work or thing done in, on, or about all or any part of the premises or the Improvements by Lessee or any party other than Lessor; PAGE 9-LEASE (,reenc.m-wrks.1s01Auoust z,. 19961 0 15.2.2. Any use, nonuse, possession, occupation, condition, operation, maintenance, or management of all or any part of the premises or the Improvements or any adjacent alley, sidewalk, curb, vault, passageway, or space; 15.2.3. Any negligence on the part of Lessee or any of its agents, contractors, servants, employees, sublessees, licensees, or invitees; 15.2.4. Any accident, injury, or damage to any person or property occurring in, on, or about the premises or the Improvements; or 15.2.5. Any failure on the part of Lessee to perform or comply with any of the covenants, agreements, terms, provisions, conditions, or limitations contained in this lease on its part to be performed or complied with. 15.3. In case any action or proceeding is brought against Lessor by reason of any such claim, Lessee upon written notice from Lessor shall, at Lessee's expense, resist or defend such action or proceeding by counsel approved by Lessor in writing, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Lessor shall not make any claim against Lessee with respect to any of such risks as to which Lessee has furnished Lessor w' _ nce po certificates f insuran cing , of such risks unle ' and til the i ur fails or ref to defen an or pay al ' r any part of a third- rty cl 16. Assignment and Subletting 16.1. Lessee shall not sell, assign, or in any other manner transfer this lease or any interest in this lease or the estate of Lessee under this lease without the prior consent of Lessor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Lessor may base its consent on the ability of the prospective assignee to fulfill the purposes of this lease as described in section 4. 16.2. Lessee shall have the right to sublet portions of the premises and/or of the Improvements at any time and from time to time, but only for a term or terms that shall expire before the expiration of the Term, and provided that each such sublease shall be in writing, shall be for the uses described in section 4 and shall be subject and subordinate to the rights of Lessor under this lease. 17. Default; Remedies 17.1. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events of default constitutes a breach of this lease by Lessee: 17.1.1. If Lessee defaults in the payment of any sum due and payable by Lessee, and such default continues for 30 days after Lessor has given Lessee a notice specifying the same; or PAGE 10-LEASE Ip:reellcomnwrks.IsellAupust 21. 19961 17.1.2. If Lessee, whether by action or inaction, is in default of any of its obligations under this lease (other than a default in the payment of any sum due Lessor) and such default continues and is not remedied within 60 days after Lessor has given Lessee a notice specifying the same, or, in the case of a default that can be cured but not within a period of 60 days, if Lessee has not (1) commenced curing such default within such 60-day period; (2) notified Lessor of Lessee's intention to cure the default; or (3) continuously and diligently completed the cure of the default. 17.2. During any 12-month period, Lessee shall be entitled to only two notices pursuant toy section 17.1.2. 17.3. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, Lessor may exercise any one or more of the remedies set forth in this section or any other remedy available under applicable law or contained in this lease: 17.3.1. Lessor or Lessor's agents and employees may immediately or at any time thereafter reenter the premises either by summary eviction proceedings or by any suitable action or proceeding at law, or by force or otherwise, without being liable to indictment, prosecution, or damages, and may repossess the same, and may remove rom ises, tot end that tWOTTay h Temitime and enjoy thiiname t Less m elet th who " r anyt of the prom to time, of Lessor or otherwise, to such Lessees, for such terms ending before, on, or after the expiration date of the lease Term, at such rentals and on such other conditions (including concessions and free rent) as Lessor may determine to be appropriate. To the extent allowed under Oregon law, Lessor shall have no obligation to relet all or any part of the premises and shall not be liable for refusal to relet the premises, or, in the event of such reletting, for refusal or failure to collect any rent due on such reletting; and any action of Lessor shall not operate to relieve Lessee of any liability under this lease or otherwise affect such liability. Lessor at its option may make such physical changes to the premises as Lessor, in its sole discretion, considers advisable and necessary in connection with any such reletting or proposed reletting, without relieving Lessee of any liability under this lease or otherwise affecting Lessee's liability. 17.3.3. Whether or not Lessor retakes possession or relets the premises, Lessor has the right to recover its damages, including without limitation all lost rentals, all legal expenses, all costs incurred by Lessor in restoring the premises or otherwise preparing the premises for reletting, and all costs incurred by Lessor in reletting the premises. 17.3.4. To the extent permitted under Oregon law, Lessor may sue periodically for damages as they accrue without barring a later action for further damages. PAGE 11-LEASE 1F:reencumn.rk .IcellA.Qvs1 21. 19961 17.4. No failure by Lessor to insist-on the strict performance of any agreement, term, covenant, or condition of this lease or to exercise any right or remedy consequent upon a breach, constitutes a waiver of any such breach or of such agreement, term, covenant, or condition. No agreement, term, covenant, or condition to be performed or complied with by Lessee, and no breach by Lessee, shall be waived, altered, or modified except by a written instrument executed by Lessor. No waiver of any breach shall affect or alter this lease, but each and every agreement, term, covenant, and condition of this lease shall continue in full force and effect with respect to any other then-existing or subsequent breach. 17.5. Each right and remedy provided for in this lease shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other right or remedy provided for in this lease or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise, and the exercise or beginning of the exercise by Lessor or Lessee of any one or more of the rights or remedies provided for in this lease or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise shall not preclude the simultaneous or later exercise by the party in question of any or all other rights or remedies provided for in this lease or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. 18. Exte Term. se is nA default;�E�s�e, up nt of the Lessor as ovid " in sec <n 4 shall option re ew this le a or three successiv erms f 5 yea ch, as foi ` s,== zz Y . 18.1. The renewal term shall commence on the day following the date of termination of the preceding term. 18.2. The terms and conditions for each five year renewal term shall be on the same terms and conditions as provided in this lease for the initial Term unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Payment of all additional charges required to be made by Lessee as provided in this lease for the initial Term shall continue to be made during the extended Term. 18.3. The option may be exercised by written notice to Lessor given not less than 120 days prior to the last day of the expiring term. The written notice shall include a copy of this section 18. 18.3.1. Within 30 days of the notice, Lessor and Lessee shall meet to review and evaluate the terms and purposes of this lease and the performance under the lease by Lessee. 18.3.2. Lessee and Lessor shall fully cooperate with each other in the review and evaluation. PAGE 12-LEASE (p:r"IXco .,ke.I.a)(AuBust 21. 19961 18.4. Lessor may refuse to consent to the extension only if it finds after diligently conducting the review and evaluation in good faith that Lessee is not adequately fulfilling the terms and purposes of this lease. 18.5. If Lessor does not consent to an extension, then at the termination of the lease, provided Lessee is not then in default, Lessor agrees to use the premises for the purposes described in section 4.1 or any program activities similar in nature. 19. Quiet Enjoyment. Lessee, on observing and keeping all covenants, agreements, and conditions of this lease on its part to be kept, shall quietly have and enjoy the premises during the Term without hindrance by anyone claiming by, through, or under Lessor as such, subject, however, to the exceptions, reservations, and conditions of this lease. 20. Surrender. 20.1. Except as otherwise provided, Lessee, on the last day of the Term, shall surrender and deliver up the premises and all Improvements to the possession and use of Lessor without fraud or delay, free and clear of all lettings and occupancies, and free of all I R encumbr : es other se, if ently existing or reat or suff essor, ut any pa a or allowa e whatever by Lessor ac nt of oveme the pi s. 20.2. When furnished by or at the expense of Lessee or any sublessee, furniture, fixtures, and equipment may be removed by Lessee at or before this lease terminates, provided, however, that the removal will not injure the premises or the Improvements or necessitate changes in or repairs to the same. Lessee shall pay or cause to be paid to Lessor the cost of repairing any damage arising from such removal and restoration of the premises and/or the Improvements to their condition before such removal. 20.3. Any personal property of Lessee or any sublessee that shall remain on the premises after the termination of this lease and the removal of Lessee or such sublessee from the premises may, at the option of Lessor, be deemed to have been abandoned by Lessee or such sublessee and may either be retained by Lessor as its property or be disposed of, without accountability, in such manner as Lessor may see fit, or if Lessor gives written notice to Lessee to such effect, such property shall be removed by Lessee at Lessee's sole cost and expense. If this lease terminates early for any reason other than the default of Lessee then, anything to the contrary notwithstanding, Lessee or any sublessee shall have a reasonable time thereafter to remove its personal property. ' 20.4. Lessor shall not be responsible for any loss or damage occurring to any property owned by Lessee or any sublessee. PAGE 13-LEASE (p:reel\comnwrks.lse(IAugus[ 21, 1996) 20.5. The provisions of this section shall survive any termination of this lease. 21. Invalidity of Particular Provisions. If any term or provision of this lease or the application of the lease to any person or circumstances is, to any extent, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this lease, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected, and each term and provision of this lease shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 22. No Representations. Lessee acknowledges that it has examined the premises and that no representations as to the condition of the premises have been made by Lessor or any agent or person acting for Lessor (except as expressly provided in this lease). Before any construction commences on the premises, Lessee shall conduct tests of the subsurface and soil conditions to ascertain the suitability of the premises for the contemplated.Project and shall furnish such fill and take such other steps as may be required before the commencement of construction. Lessor shall have no liability because of, or as a result of, the existence of any subsurface or soil condition, either on the premises or on adjacent land, that might affect Lessee's construction. 23. Esto t�.ertificateRo arty, withi 10 days aft.. westP to time made by t oth�`. party ut char all give a erti cation 1n ling to any person, fir or poratiably s by the i3qu ting party (1) that this le en in fnd eff: tan nmodif ,�, or if modifi stating the modifications; (2) that Lessee is not in default in the payment of any sums due to Lessor, or if in default, stating such default; (3) that as far as the maker of the certificate knows, neither party is in default in the performance or observance of any other covenant or condition to be performed or observed under this lease, or if either parry is in default, stating such default; (4) that as far as the maker (if Lessor) of the certificate knows, no event has occurred that authorized, or with the lapse of time will authorize, Lessee to terminate this lease, or if such event has occurred, stating such event; (5) that as far as the maker of the certificate knows, neither party has any offsets, counterclaims, or defenses, or, if so, stating them; and (6) any other matters that may be reasonably requested by the requesting party. 24. Notices. 24.1. Any notice required or permitted by the terms of this lease shall be deemed given if delivered personally to an officer of the party to be notified or sent by United States registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return-receipt requested, and addressed as follows: If to Lessor: City Administrator If to Lessee: Executive Director City of Ashland Community Works 20 East Main Street 900 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Medford, Oregon 97504 PAGE 14-LEASE (p:ranncomn ,ks.ka)[Aaaus[ 21, 19961 or such other addresses as may be designated by either party by written notice to the other. Except as otherwise provided in this lease, every notice, demand, request, or other communication shall be deemed to have been given or served on actual receipt. 24.2. Notwithstanding anything in this section to the contrary, any notice mailed to the last designated address of any person or parry to which a notice may be or is required to be delivered pursuant to this lease or this section shall not be deemed ineffective if actual delivery cannot be made due to a change of address of the person or party to which the notice is directed or the failure or refusal of such person or party to accept delivery of the notice. 25. Costs and Attorney Fees. If either party brings an action to recover any sum due or for any breach and obtains a judgment or decree in its favor, the court may award to such prevailing party its reasonable costs and reasonable attorney fees, specifically including reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection with any appeals (whether or not taxable as such by law). 26. Entire Agreement. This lease contains the entire agreement between the parties and, except as otherwise provided, can be changed, modified, amended, or terminate an in in writing ecuted by ies. It ' Ily acknowled d a agree y see and or that th e a no verb agreements, represent ns, rrantie ther and ings affe ng his lease. Lessor: City of Ashland, Oregon By: Mayor By: City Recorder Lessee: Community Works By: Its By: Its PAGE 15-LEASE (P:reel\eomnwrks IsellAugust 21, 19961 RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN HE R�CIDE AND PESTICIDE POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTS AND DIVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The following herbicide and pesticide policy is adopted for all departments and divisions of the City of Ashland. This policy does not apply to the Ashland Parks and Recreation Department which is administered by the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission. The Ashland Parks and Recreation Department has a similar policy in place. 1. Purpose. This policy is designed to reduce the risk of illness or injury resulting from employee and citizen exposure to herbicides and pesticides used in the course of performing city operations and also from the accidental exposure of employees and other persons to such herbicides and pesticides. The policy requires workplace practices designed to reduce or eliminate exposure to herbicides and pesticides. 2. Use of Herbicides and Pesticides. Use of�erbicides pESiiOde , including but not limited to herbicides, insecticides and growth retardants, shall"b ed eliminated excsp#,as provlded_�n this poticyr. 2.1. Mechanical and cultural methods shall be utilized whenever praetieable prar�ical for control of noxious vegetaUOn and pests act,ca�ty Shad be determi;�e;y by an pragoit Certified Pesticde Applicator and the respective Department Head;of the Aepartment Nead's t9es,gr}ee Woiker,safety and terrain,shad ba �mQng the #actor considered in#h,s Judgement:, awof l�cq— 2.2. When mechanical and cultural methods are not praet+eable � only the safest, lowest toxicity products available shall be used. No 'restricted use" herbicides or pesticides shall be used. Pr,&Ct ASE ;e rev,ew 2.3. Primarily, species which do not require high inputs of herbicide shall be used in landscaping. L a",V&to Vl S-h C's 2.4. Staff shall monitor noxious vegetation and pest populations and rely on biological control when appropriate and effective. 3. Application. 3.1. All herbicides and pesticides shall be applied by, or under the supervision of, an Oregon Certified Pesticide Applicator. The Certified Applicator shall be responsible for overseeing and authorizing all herbicide and pesticide use by city staff. 3.2. If herbicides or pesticides having a greater acute PAGE 1-RESOLUTION toxicity than table salt (LD 50 = 2,500) are applied, the area of application shall be posted in advance and for the duration of the re-entry time specified on the herbicide or pesticide label or MSDS sheetgr thpss appltcattpn areas wtYun fifty M:1,e of fhb rroFiertY tube oi;a tesitlenCe,Yartttatt:ndUCe stzalt tae glen to such t'es�tiertce by ma�.or 3 Effort shal°Iae made o de2ertn the E3 5t}. f innxt ingre snts pn4r to Trct,bn of an herb,ade ax astaoid ' Deferent peshcde or har6lCtdes stu�ll not ba mom; a P v�nu vvt c�viali o 4,AA p .. � .. 9n U l n . coltj c�l ou o 4. Training and Authorization. 1 "� I 4.1. No employee shall use or apply any herbicide or pesticide without prior training. 4.2. No employee shall use or apply any herbicide or pesticide mechanically or by hand without appi bvaE of fhd employee's t)epartm6i7t Head 10 the Oiv{�artmeri> EaCt'S designee anisevent specific authorization from a Certified Applicator. 5. Purchase of Herbicides and Pesticides. Herbicides and pesticides shall only be purchased by the City Purchasing Agent after consultation with a Certified Applicator and the approval of the respective Department Head or the Department Head's designee. 6. Storage. All herbicides and pesticides shall be stored in a safe, secure environment. The Park Superintendent, Certified Applicators and Department Heads shall have exclusive access to the storage area. 7. Annual Review. An annual review of policies and procedures regarding the use and application of herbicides and pesticides shall be conducted at the Department Head level. Attendance at the review is mandatory for all personnel who apply herbicides and pesticides. 8. Violation of Rules. Violation of any of these policies shall be grounds for disciplinary action. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1996. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 1996. PAGE 2-RESOLUTION Catherine M. Golden, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 3-RESOLUTION It �;. SEP 12 1996 . MILLER CONSULTING L�C5�L�U'LTL�� E N G I N E E R S __-""'""""—"� September 6, 1996 Brian Almquist, City Administrator City of Ashland 20 East Main Street Ashland,Oregon 97520 RE: Existing City Hall Building: Extension of Second Story Floor Area and Addition of Third Story (MCE File No. 960625) Dear Mr. Almquist Per your request, Raymond T. Miller, PE, of Miller Consulting Engineers, Inc., reviewed the plans of the existing City Hall building for the purpose of extending the floor space of the second story and adding a thins story to the building. The present structure of the roof consists of wood joists spanning from exterior unreinforced brick masonry on the west to interior unreinforced brick masonry wall. The second floor is wood joist with a wood beam down the center, which is supported on wood columns to the foundation. (Please see enclosed revised detail.) The proposed addition of floor area to the second story will yield an additional 420 square feet of office space and will replace the present Mechanical Equipment Area. The corridor area between the east wall and the neighboring wall will remain as it exists. The additional third story will offer 4064 additional square feet of office area and will cover the entire second story. The total floor area added will be 4484 square feet. 9570 SW Barbur Blvd., Suite 100 Portland, Oregon 972195412 Phone 15031146-1250 Fax (503) 246-1395 Amerlcen Consehlnp%II,Engineers Council To Brian Almquist City of Ashland Addition of P Story to City Hall(File No.960625) If the proposed new light-structured walls are placed on top of the existing brick walls, the new loading to the existing foundation would be the weight of the new walls (100#/1) as well as the weight of each new floor(1500#/1). Costs incurred for the extension of the second floor would include the following: • Removal of existing concrete walls and roof structure • Installation of a metal wall system • Addition of new floor structure over new metal studs(which will be four feet away from the neighboring wall) • Structural strengthening of the existing unreinforced brick walls and foundation. Costs incurred for the addition of a third story would include the following: • Structure to be added to the present wood roof joists, in order to strengthen and level to floor joist capacity • Erection of a metal wall system from the top of the existing parapets and extension of new metal wall system from the second floor to the new roof system • Creation of a metal roof system, spanning between existing walls • Structural strengthening of the existing unreinforced brick walls and foundation. Opinion of probable cost following this method of construction, including cost to upgrade the existing building,is$658,000. The second method in which the new walls could be added involves building the walls approximately three feet inside the existing exterior walls. This would allow for an outside walk area and an area for cleaning windows. The opinion of probable cost for this alternative is $682,000. Items taken into consideration for both methods include the following: • Removal of existing concrete walls and roof structure at second level, "east annex" area • Addition of stairs to the third story and provision for a level floor at the present roof • An elevator to the third level • Fulfillment of the requirement of a second exit from the third level • Strengthening requirements of the existing structure to cant' the new loads plus the lateral forces to the foundation • Construction of additional foundation • Compliance with present Code requirements • Additional electrical and mechanical • Finishes. gag 2 To Brian Ahnquist City of Ashland Addition of 3r°Story to City Hall(File No.960625) It should be noted that this type of work will be very disruptive to the everyday operation of the building (and this cost is not included in the above figures): In addition, both options for construction will involve lost space on the main and second floor areas. If you have any questions regarding the above,please contact me. Respectfully, Miller Consulting Engineers,Inc. Raymond T. Miller,PE RTM:lm Enclosure �' 3 I I L -r-A T 99 E F-Ill Il ' I � i�llllllll ii,".i� Ogg r� x ! � LL I in I I T. Id SECOND FLOOR PLAN g m U LU CL U < co rro J_ �e <J m us o= y m —® E5 2< I � I i i i i (0 FEN)M G A` REQuiP'ED 4 I I i it i � I li . I : h l ; l ; I � 940250 IPJ' l OU11M OW 1 8/12/94 NEW THIRD FLOOR PLAN ® �. a. 5 COST ESTIMATE COMPARISONS THE EAST MAIN OPTION Cost for new building = $604,000 (memo from John McLaughlin 7121195) Cost for City Hall upgrade = $33000 (Miller-Gardner Inc.Seismic Evaluation 515/94) Total Cost = $934,000 Area gained = 6800 sq. ft. _ $137.35 /sq. ft. THE MODULAR BUILDING OPTION Cost for new building (purchase) _ $335,000 (estimate from G.E.Capitol Corporation) Cost for City Hall upgrade = $330,000 (Miller-Gardner Inc.Seismic Evaluation 515194) Total Cost = $665,000 Area gained = 6000 sq. ft. _ $110.83 /sq. ft. THE CITY HALL THIRD FLOOR OPTION (recycle City Hall) Cost for City Hall upgrade with second floor expansion and third floor addition = $658,000 (Miller Consulting Engineers,Inc.report 9/6/96) Area gained = 4484 sq. ft. _ $146.74 / sq. ft. Note: Additional cost will be involved with any increase in office space. TILE CITY OF ASHLAND All IlOC SPACE NEEDS STUDY COMMITTEE kl:PDXI' 1'0 THE1 CffY COUNCIL April 13,.1994. '11►e City, of Ashland Ad Iloc Space Needs Study Committee has concluded that additional space in needed for certain downtown offices for lie following reasons: 1.'llne Department of Community Development is currently working in overcrowded conditions in a substandard building. 2. 'llne Ligiueering Depa hnenl is cwreully housed in a rented space filial is inadequate for it's needs. Additionally: A) 11►e Idsloric location of City Hall functions are on We plaza. I3) In our comprehensive plan we repeatedly emphasize die need to make the urban core of dowrilown more dense. In our transportation goals we are attempting to develop nodal equity. 11"e only way to reinforce Unis is to keep city services in We tuba"center. C) atublish an increased visibility in our civic buildings. We want our architecture to reflect our civic calm"iBment. D) Public officials must be accountable to the public. It is symbolic to remove We public governing body to a remote location outside of die tuba► core. We want to increase the visibility of our govenuuent. Given Wese_cuuclusicns,.ILis coaaaittee wakes tie following reco►waendations to lie City Cow►cil: 1. All fordo cwreully eannm ked for tie construction of We proposed city building at the Past Main Civic Center be ea narked for almd to acquire,maximize and improve space for city offices in the downtown core as defined in We Downtown Plan. 2.11►a1 the City of Ashland commit to the acquisition ofthe HillahTemple as soon as possible. 3. 11nat We City of Ashland co►mmnit to die rehabilitation of the existing City Hall building as soon as possible.'1Lis rehabilitation to include.as a muumuu, counplele compliance wild all current applicable codes ordinances and energy conservaion standards. 4. In die event the acquisition 01'1110 Ili Ilal►'1'emple.i's delayed, the rel►abililatiou of die existing City Hall building may include the addition of a Wirt floor mid expansion of We second floor to acconanodate all cwreut downtown city employees wiW lie possible exception of We Depmhuent of Public Works Administration. " 5. 111a1 ILe City.of Ashland hire a► engineer as uullined.by OAR 137-35-00U ll"rouglr 137-35-080,Model Rules for Public Coutrasliug Agency Screening aid Selection of Persons to Perfonn Architectural and Digineering Personal Services Conti auto,for die pwpose of evaluatu►g We existing City Hall building and making recoiauendalions regarding cost mid methods to accomplish recommienJalious 3. and 4. move. 6. 11ne city, council shall,hold a spacial public hearing devoted solely to this issue. RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ESTABLISHING AN All 11OC CITY SPACE NEEDS STUDY COMMITTEE. r WHEREAS, the City Council believes there are present and future city governmenL- space deeds; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is in the best interest of the City to secure widespread support for any proposal to _meet these needs, NOW TH) REFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASHLAND AS FOLLOWS: i SECTION 1. 'That the City Council agrees to postpone any action on the proposed new city office building from the date of adoption of this resolution until such matter can be properly resolved through an ad hoc committee process as outlined below. SECTION 2 . That the City Council authorizes the Mayor to appoint an ad hoc committee to examine the space needs of the City, propose the best feasible solutions to any space needs, and to recommend how and when the solutions should be implemented. In addition to the Mayor the committee may consist of but not necessarily be limited to one or more individuals from the Planning Conunission, Historic Commission, the Our Town Committee, Friends of Ashland, city employees, the City Council, and citizens at large. SLC11QOH 3 . That if the City Council does not adopt the commit-tee's report, the City Council will place on the ballot at the next election date authorized by state law the Our Town Committee' s proposed initiative measure clarified to reflect that approval of a building subject to the initiative shall be by majority vote of the electors voting. SE'C'TION 4 . That the .City Council withdraws the City's application for a site review for a building located at 1175 East Main Street.. The foregoing resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City, of Ashland on the 30t ,day ,of November, 199,3.E:' ; Nan:!E • Franklin, .City .Recorder L1�0 P ��, 1993 . SIGNED' and, APPROVED �this .� day, o Patricia J. Ac in, Acting Mayor 1 viewed s `.to form :. +PP Pau1,1 Nolte. ' ' City Attdrney . , ? ` COMMITTEE RESOLUTION PAGE• 1 AD ,IIOC CITY SPACE NEEDS STUDY i ISABEL H. SICKELS 170 CHURCH STREET ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 September 23 , 1996 City Council of Ashland City Hall Ashland , OR 97520 Kindly accept myobservations concerning the city' s space needs into the record for tomorrow night . I will not be able to attend the hearing, on this matter . I believe it would behoove the city to continue nego- tiations to purchase the Hillah Temple building as a first choice primarily because of the additional park- ing this property would provide . A third story added to the existing City Ball would provide additional space and, I assume, would also then provide for additional employees - without additional parking for them or for visitors to City Hall who now find it exceedingly diff- icult to find parking spaces when they come to City Hall on business (especially when Shakespeare play matinees are on) . On an unrelated matter : if the city is the owner of the Alice Peil Walkway, would staff kindly cut back the plant material on the wall thus allowing room for some- one walking up the stairs to do so at the same time as someone is walking down, and also clean the stairs? The accumulated debris is getting dangerously slippery. This stairway is used by a surprizingly large number of per- sons ! Thank you for serving on the City Council . Sincerely, p occI/re � A Q, -- AL� Isabel H. Sickels 6 c3, Jar- Anne & Al Bodin 119 Cypress Circle Ashland, Or. September 23, 1996 To: Ashland City Hall Re: City Hall Space Needs - City Council Special Meeting (9-24-96) We would urge that a resolution to accommodate City Hall space needs be accomplished without further delay. A considerable period of time has passed since an Ad Hoc Committee was established for this.purpose. In April 1994, specific recommendations were presented to the City Council and will be pleased to finally have the Council address this matter at its special meeting on Sept. 24 with opportunity for public input. We strongly favor the Ad-Hoc Committee's proposal to have City Hall facilities remain downtown by means of adding a third story to the present building, or if it were viable, the purchase of Hillah Temple. Along with the numerous citizens who have opposed construction of a new building on East Main, we believe it to be extremely important to maintain City Hall facilities downtown and not have its services or functions divided into two locations quite removed from one another. The identity, history, and sense of community is synonymous with the City,Hall center downtown on the Plaza as was intended according to requirements in the City Charter. Inasmuch as there is a pressing need to remodel City Hall to meet earthquake and ADA standards as well as over-crowded conditions, does it not make sense to fully assess a plan which is loyal to the original intent and purpose of maintaining our City Hall downtown? The suggested 3rd floor addition would achieve this goal and at the same time remain true to a past mandate. One problem that we must take into consideration in terms of an East Main location is the lack of bus transportation to the area. With recent budgetary constraints, the curtailment of service and a failed transportation levy, a serious drawback for those who depend on this public access. Finally, we believe that Ashland citizens need to base their decision on the dedication to retaining a cohesive downtown locality for community operations. This should be a primary factor in our deliberations. Sincerely yours, MEMORANDUM June 6, 1995 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John McLaughlin, Planning Director RE: CITY OF ASHLAND OFFICE SPACE UPDATE -- HILLAH TEMPLE APPRAISAL Attached is the previous memorandum regarding city office space needs dated March 21, 1995. At that time, estimates were made of acquisition of the Hillah Temple. After presentation of that memorandum, the Council requested staff to pursue more accurate information regarding the acquisition costs for this property. The city engaged the services of Evan Archerd, MAI, of Southern Oregon Appraisal Services to perform an appraisal of the Hillah Temple site at 51 Winburn Way. A copy of that report is available for review from the City Administrator. Following is a short summary of that report. Mr. Archerd has estimated that the market value of this property is 5445,000. This is based on several different forms of analysis and comparison. As you may note in the attached memo previously prepared by me, I had estimated the purchase of this site to be approximately $500,000 to $600,000, based upon early conversations with the Hillah Temple. They have stated that their interest is in acquiring a replacement building and site.in Medford. Included in the appraisal report is an estimate of the replacement cost for this building. Mr. Archerd has estimated the replacement cost for a 6,480 sq. ft. concrete block structure at approximately $452,000. While there is no estimate for land costs in Medford, staff estimates those costs to be approximately 5100,000 to $150,000 for a lot of adequate size to accommodate a new temple. Therefore, the cost to construct a similar concrete block building in Medford, as was earlier indicated as desirable by the Hillah Temple, would be approximately $552,000 to $602,000. This is what we project to be the replacement value requested by the Temple. If the Hillah Temple can be convinced to sell at current market value, then we can assuming the purchase price to be $445,000, and the estimated cost to convert the building to city office use (including upgraded HVAC, fire sprinklers, seismic retrofit, flooring, etc...) has been stated at $454,000 (see previous memo). The total cost of acquiring the building and getting it into shape for use as city offices is estimated to be approximately $899,000, but may be higher dependent upon the final acquisition terms. I believe that this addresses the requests made by the Council in March. Staff awaits direction from the Council regarding future action on this matter. MEMORANDUM February 21 , 1995 Ashland Planning TO: Mayor and City Council DRAFT FROM: John McLaughlin, Planning Director Fe,^ruary 6, 1995 RE: CITY OF ASHLAND OFFICE SPACE UPDATE After the Space Needs Committee met last year, the Staff has attempted to compile information comparing the costs and benefits of different options regarding additional office space for City purposes. The following lists several of those options, and estimated costs associated with those improvements. While the estimates are based on the best available information, they are still open for modification. The list is also based on what we believe are the most realistic options. CURRENT SITUATION: Current situations include Public Works/Engineering in the Wong Building across the Plaza from City Hall. This relatively recent move and renovation came available when other tenants of the building moved out. This has allowed for a temporary occupancy of almost the entire second floor of the building, resulting in greatly improved working conditions for the Public Works Department, and greater coordination with the Engineering Division. The renovation was primarily cosmetic, however, and the problems identified with the Space Needs Committee are still there, most importantly lack of ADA compliant access, substandard wiring, and poor HVAC. Since the building is not in City ownership, extensive repairs and remodeling would not be an effective use of public dollars, and this location is considered only as temporary until a more satisfactory space solution becomes apparent. Community Development remains in the cramped quarters of the first floor of City Hall. Options are being considered to more efficiently use the existing space, such as modular office furniture and different file storage systems. Storage remains the major hurdle. Finance remains split between the two floors, with Utilities on the first floor in a remodeled space, and Accounting upstairs. Administration is located upstairs, with some small newly remodeled offices accommodating the City Attorney/Secretary and Assistant City Administrator/Secretary. 1 It is assumed that the Department of Community Development, Finance, and Administration will remain in the downtown area, but that other departments may move based on space availability. INCREMENTAL EXPANSION OF EXISTING CITY HALL This option involves relatively small expansions to the existing City Hall, both on the second floor. The third floor expansion option was not fully explored due to the anticipated high costs, and the long term relocation of the entire office staff currently housed in City Hall during construction. Concerns were also expressed about the impact on the historic integrity of the existing two story building. The second floor expansions include an addition to the south end of the building, adjacent to the alley and above the jail. This space area would be adjacent to the current Finance Department. Construction of this area would add approximately 696 sq. ft. of area to the building. This area would most likely be used by the Finance Department. The other area for addition would be what is locally known as the "donut", or the area between the OSF/Ashland Bakery building and the second floor of City Hall. This area currently houses the HVAC equipment. Construction of an addition in this area would add approximately 434 sq. ft. to the building. This area would be used as an additional office or conference room. It is also proposed that while this work is being done, that a common elevator between the OSF building and City Hall be constructed to meet ADA access requirements. The estimates for the additions of these two areas estimated to be approximately $169,500, excluding the costs for the elevator. These costs include seismic upgrading of the areas affected by the new expansions. These costs are at approiiimately $150 per sq.. ft Positives/These expansions would most likely fee all current and future space/needs for the Finance Department. If the<City Recorder were moved from/the downstairs office to this new "donut"office, additional space would be made available to Community,Development downstairs. Without the �Recorder move, the space wauld likely serve as a conference room. Seismic improvements will occur to the building;,as well elevator access. Negatives: Without the move of the City.-Recorder, no additional space is provided for Community Development. Also, no additional space provided _ - 2 for Public Works, leaving them in the Wong Building. This building does riot have an elevator ensuring ADA compliance. Summary: Space Added -- 1130 sq. ft. Total Cost -- $169,500 Cost Sq.Ft. $150 HILLAH TEMPLE: Previous conversations with the Hillah Temple have indicated a willingness to discuss and consider offers. it appears that their prime concern is obtaining enough money in a sale to build a replacement hall, preferably in the Medford area. Purchase: It is estimated at this time that a replacement hall in Medford would cost approximately $500,000 to $600,000 to construct. Whether this matches the true value of the existing building (based upon an appraisal) waits to be seen. But for this exercise, these numbers provide a cautious basis for comparison. Remodel: The City hired Miller Consulting Engineers of Portland, OR to conduct a study regarding the costs of bringing the Hillah Temple up to current seismic and structural standards. Their report is attached. In summary, they found some existing problems with the building, and estimate the cost to bring it up to code to be approximately $111,000. This only addresses the issues relating to structural and seismic. Other issues, such as making the existing "hall" space habitable for offices, were addressed by Tom Giesen Consultants of Eugene, OR. Mr. Giesen found that the costs to upgrade the building to allow for office use (fire sprinklers, improved HVAC, flooring, etc...) to be approximately $343,000. The total estimate for purchasing the structure, and getting it in shape for office occupancy would be approximately $954,000 to $1 ,054,000. This would essentially be an interior remodel with structural improvements. The exterior of the building would remain basically as it exists. No costs for landscaping improvements are included as part of this estimate. These costs are at approximately $147-$162 per square foot. Positives: Provides approximately 6500 sq. ft. of additional office space in the downtown area, very near the existing City Hall. This would address many of the concerns of moving Community Development out of the downtown area. It is most likely that some or all of Public Works would be relocated to this Hillah Temple to better utilize the space. Preserves the Hillah Temple as a downtown structure for public use. This could be an 3 important building in the future as the acquistion of downtown buildings and properties becomes more difficult. Negatives: Preserves the Hillah Temple as a downtown structure. Aesthetically, this building is not the most attractive. Additional monies would need to be spent for a cosmetic upgrade. Limited space (6500 sq. ft.) may not be enough to adequately handle Community Development and Public Works, given the expanding needs of both departments. Summary: Space Added -- 6500 sq. ft. Total Cost -- $954,000 to $1 ,054,000 Cost Sq.Ft. $147 - $162 Other possibilities -- purchase the site, but tear down the building and start over. No costs have been prepared for this option. DOWNSIZED CIVIC CENTER EXPANSION: This plan involves reducing the size of the building previously proposed for behind the current Council Chambers. The building would be sized only for Public Works, with the possibility of the. Fire Department administrative staff and Computer Services occupying a smaller area than previously designed for Community Development. This building was previously estimated at $752,000 for the full size. It is proposed that the building could be reduced by approximately 25%, resulting in a building of approximately 6800 sq. ft. The estimated cost would be approximately $564,000, with an additional $30,000 for site work that would likely be carried out by City crews, and approximately $10,000 for landscaping that would also be installed by City crews. The total cost is estimated at $604,000. These costs are at approximately $89 per square foot. Positives: Provides new working space specifically designed for the occupants -- Public Works/Engineering, Fire, and Computer Services. Ample parking. Consolidates all of Public Works offices at the Civic Center site (Public Works, Engineering, Water Quality, &. Streets). Addresses additional space needs (Fire and Computer Services) not considered in other options. Negatives: Doesn't address needs of Community Development. Further, may conflict with some philosophical concerns about building additional city office_space outside of the downtown core. 4 Summary: Space Added -- 6800 sq. ft. Total Cost -- $604,000 Cost Sq.Ft. $89 DO NOTHING/NO EXPANSIONS OR NEW BUILDINGS: If we continue with just the current space we have available, we will be able to operate for only a limited time in the future. We are currently exploring ways of maximizing every available square foot by looking at new modular office furniture that may more efficiently use existing space. With the moving of the Public Works Staff (Director, Administrative Asst., and Secretary) to the Wong Building, some additional space has been made available on the second floor. This is presently being remodeled with the Assistant City Administrator occupying the old office of the Public Works Director, and the old storage room has been remodeled into an office for the City Attorney's secretary. One office space has been made available on the second floor. Accounting remains in their current configuration. On the first floor, Utilities remains in their current configuration. Community Development remains tight, with some temporary employees and interns "floating" between offices while people are out, on vacation, or at lunch. Some minimal improvements are being proposed in the near future to allow for additional file storage, our biggest problem at the moment. Positives: Cheap Negatives: Doesn't address any of the problems of space needs, ADA accessibility, efficiency, conference room, employee morale, etc... Summary: Space Added -- 0 sq. ft. Total Cost $ to be determined with furniture options Cost Sq.Ft. $0 RECOMMENDATION: No matter how you slice it, there is no easy answer apparent in these options. It appears to be a wise move to expand the current City Hall with the small second floor additions, but this only adds approximately 1130 sq. ft. Should the City Recorder move upstairs into the new space, then some additional downstairs space will be available for Community Development. But should that not happen, then this option provides space, but none of it specifically designed for Community Development or Public Works, the two departments in the most difficult space 5 situations. A conference room would be of benefit, and so would additional office space for Finance. And given that the elevator is proceeding, the addition proposed for the rear of the building above the jail seems very appropriate. From there, the most cost effective solution involves the Downsized Civic Center option. At approximately $89 per square foot, it provides the most economical space, while best meeting the needs of the Public Works Department. It also addresses the ADA problems currently plaguing the Public Works Department in the Wong Building. This option has special appeal in meeting the needs of two departments that have been generally overlooked in the space needs debate -- Fire Administration and Computer Services. The Hillah Temple provides the most reasonable option for the acquisition of additional office space in the downtown area and should be seriously considered. It would seem very appropriate for the City to own such a centrally located building, with its relationship to downtown and Lithia Park. The location would tend to meet many of the concerns related during the space needs process in keeping city offices in the downtown area. At the current time, however, the acquisition costs are an unknown. And the remodelling options are expensive, given that the total area will only be approximately 6500 sq. ft. when it has been shown that approximately 10,000 sq. ft. is needed to meet the anticipated needs of the Departments of Community Development and Public Works. While the building does have its down sides, it is the only option which adequately addresses the long-term space needs for the Department of Community Development. It would allow for the department to remain under the same roof, while maintaining a presence in the downtown area. Ideally, the solution is to consolidate all the options into one, and do them all. All of the different department space needs would be met by the combination of the incremental City Hall expansion (Finance, Administration, City Attorney, Mayor), Public Works, Fire Administration, and Computer Services would be well served by the Civic Center expansion, while Community Development would be easily accommodated in a renovated Hillah Temple. The total cost would be approximately $1 .7 million, unfortunately, well beyond the funds available. Therefore, since this is not a perfect world, I believe that the best solution would be to do the incremental expansions of the current City Hall, but move the City Recorder upstairs into the newly created space. This would at least free up some additional space downstairs for Community Development that is not presently available. From there, the most cost effective new space solution would be to have the downsized building constructed at the Civic Center to accommodate Public Works, consolidating their departments while getting away from the ADA problems currently found in the Wong Building. This would also help Fire and 6 Computer Services. The total costs for this option would be $773,500. And the City should keep its eye on the Hillah Temple. It is a tremendous resource to the downtown, merely for its location. Should an opportunity arise to acquire it, we should seriously consider the options. 7 /| } ! `1 � 2 ! §0 !# � § \ It § } 4!! r w` }/@ � b%—d . %gip ! � \w �go , 3lG:9 . > § ii!\ i/!# | \< / z � 2Ssls2, b, 6 , � 8 \ t R!d#I } \�} \I °�$\ � U) o & m a LO ± 2 m % / / m mm m % • 0 2 / R o 00 0 / \ » ez 0 o ¥ o ) gym / / e \ § 0 a0u LL.Do \ \ U / / \ / \ / % i° _ e a Z j § ° [ \ \ ) 3 \ 3 j y20 z \ Lu 3 \ C) 0 \ Report t• the Ad Hoc Space " • s Study Committee on City Hall (we can have it all with City Hall) CITY MA LL f� v � !f r i � 9p ,� w' Report to the Ad Hoc City Hall Space Needs Study Committee March 16, 1994 Subject: Existing City Hall building By: Rick & Gayle Vezie RICHARD VEZIE & ASSOCIATES 94 Third Street, Ashland 488-1453 THE FOUR PRIMARY ISSUES: • I. Space requirements for City Offices currently housed in or near City Hall. • 2. Addressing ADA and UBC chapter 31 accessibility requirements. • 3. Seismic concerns. • 4. The money. SPACE: The Committee seems to agree that the City Departments at City Hall need additional space. Most of us agree that it makes sense for Public Works to move out to the East Main location. This however, doesn't free up much space and we still have Engineering across the street paying $1500 a month for a less than ideal location. In the mean time, the Department of Community Development (DCD) is crammed in like sardines at. City Hall. The rest of the people in the building seem to have at least a tolerable situation, as far as space is concerned. Clearly, DCD has it the worst. ._ . How a space is utilized can be every bit as important as how much there is of it. As with the saying "a penny saved is a penny earned", using space efficiently is like acquiring additional space for free. The existing Main and Second Floors of City Hall don't allow for the efficient use of space because they are so badly broken up. Essentially, the building is divided into two long tubes on each floor because of the two story brick wall that runs the length of the building. The tubes are further divided by various offices and compartments that were apparently fit into or added to the existing structure over time in an effort to deal with changes in use or other needs as they arose (see Fig. 1). ACCESSIBILITY: According to the ADA report by Darrel Ackerman, the City has a measure of "exposure" under the ADA. The final paragraph of Sheet 01 1 of his Facility Evaluation reads: NOTE:This second floor houses the primary activities of the city government and is not accessible. This is discrimination under ADA Title II and is therefore your highest exposure risk of litigation under the ADA. These executive offices must be located in an accessible location. No matter what we do to the City Hall building, we will incur some cost to make the building accessible. The question is, how much? This will cause us to address some interesting questions. Do we want to do just enough to past the law? Do we want to make the building truly accessible? Do we want to arrive at some area in between? The only clear way around the Accessibility issue is to sell the building. Maybe we could get around the Helman Agreement with some legal slight of hand, but there is also the moral issue envolved of honoring the intent of an agreement. If we decide to hold to our agreement, keep the building, and start upgrading at some level to comply with the ADA, the trail leads to the next issue, where not to be when the big one hits. SEISMIC CONCERNS: Unreinforced masonry buildings are a seismic nightmare. We have additional problems with the City Hall because of the additions. While some upgrading took place during the last remodel, it didn't involve all of the building. Major areas are still just old non- seismically retrofitted unreinforced masonry. A lot of it up pretty high. If you played with blocks as a child, you know what that means. This brings to the table additional questions. What should we do to try to protect the people who work in the building? What are the "reasonable" expenditures? This leads to the next issue, there's never enough money. THE MONEY: Now that we're looking at spending some big money, we need to address both the cost of our decisions, and what we might expect to get for our investments. THE BEST ANSWERS: If only we could open up the spaces in the building to allow flexibility in their uses. If there was some way to remove a bunch of the interior walls, especially the big brick wall (see Fig. 2). The City Administrator has said on several occasions "the existing City Hall building can't support a third floor". This may be true. This led to the thinking that to try to impose a third floor on the building is all wrong. A better and simpler solution is to construct a third floor that would be mostly structurally independent of the existing building, but, along with it's support structure, would actually help support and reinforce the existing building's two floors and walls (see Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5). This could be done by using a system of steel columns and beams A large beam would replace the interior two story brick wall. We would also want to get rid of the two vaults which occupy and waste valuable space in the center of the building. This work could be done with much of the existing floors in 2 place. We would have to install shear walls between some of the columns for bracing, but we would have some flexibility in their placement. Some portions of the main floor would have to opened up to pour footings. The best configuration for a third floor is to incorporate it into the roof itself as suggested by Brent Thompson, Marilyn Briggs, and others (see Fig. 5). This also provides a third floor that causes minimal visual impact oil the character of the building (see Fig. 6 and Fig. 7). The elevator and stairs to the third floor pose no additional space penalty on the lower two floors as they are needed for the second floor anyway. The third floor should be of light weight construction (see Fig. 5). The roof trusses would help stabilize the existing exterior walls without imposing any additional loading on them (as with the third floor cantilevered floor trusses). We also pick up over 500 sq. fl. of storage space on the third floor at very little additional cost. We should save what we can of the last remodel on the Finance side. What will it all cost? unfortunately, the only way to find out is to have working plans drawn up and put it out to bid. Keep in mind that we save the $1500 a month that Engineering spends on rent, and we would have expenditures for seismic and ADA upgrades to the building anyway (before we world pick up an inch of extra space). This plan provides the space the city needs right in the bulls eye of the most valuable space we own and should solve all of the issues. Of course additional time would be needed to work out the specific Space Plans and professional engineering would be required to work out the specific design. Maybe the best news is that this project could provide us with an unique opportunity. If we were able to turn this into a "CAMPAIGN TO SAVE CITY HALL", we might be able to pull in contributions from citizens and corporations. It could provide an opportunity for our local government and it's citizens to work together. The real issue here has to do with ownership. I think Ron Roth said it best ("who is the City of Ashland?"). if we provide a chance for people to help City Hall, maybe they'll think of it as theirs. Existing Main Floor 4272 sq. ft. Existing Second Floor 3 169 sq. ft. Total Existing 7441 sq. ft. Proposed Second Floor Addition 863 sq. fl. Proposed Third Floor Addition 2287 sq. fl. Total Additions 3150 sq. fl. Total Floor Area 10591 sq. ft. Additional Internal Storage 529 sq. 11. 3 m v� z O \ m cn = z O - U m - n TI O z r O _ 0 - i N � LL U- o € 0 Z 0 W U) y O CL O L O O 1 o 0 0 _.. ` LL ' Z a 3 - a cn _ = O a O J o� � I 0 38' 9-1/2" ti I . r---- ------------------------ I I - - -- ------------------------ I LI I 11 I I 1 II I I y II STORAGE 1 I z 11 I r °o Ij a 11 I r I 1 m Ij -4 1 I � n O II m I CD I I 1 m II O I 0 1 m II 0 I —{ I I m = 11 a 1 w _ m Do I D I '' 0 II I 11 I m II I O l II I II I II 1 11 I 11 I II 1 11 I II I 11 I -n I O 11 I 1 W ---- ------ip W 33' 6" N t............ :,." C3 .a LL i - - - G J - O i 06 Z w i - i r^ i vJ 6 t 5 W M i W i i - 5 S�. 1 O - J LL t - - Z cz y ........�..........i....L...........i.... ................ . . ... ....... .................. C7 m .................... .... ............. ............ .. ..... .. . O C7 � LL ® � i i I Z O w p � U � wa cco wJ 0- LL w Z o � H I i m , El m n m D 0