HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-1019 REG MINblINUTES OF THE RfiGULAR NEETING
ASIILAND CITY COUNCIL
OCTOBiiR 19, 1971
I. P, OLL CALL:
The regular meeting eL-' the City Council was held in the Council
Chambers, City Ilall, on the above date at 7:30 p.m. The meeting
was called to order by ,Hayor PdcKeen; on roll call, Councilman
Roble was absent due to his recent hospitalization for back surgery
Council~'oman Sealerborg v,-as late in arriving.
II. APPROVAL OF ~XlINUTES:
]'here being no corrections or additions to the minutes of the
minutes of the regu]ar meeting of October S, 1971, the Hayor
approvcd them as read.
III. SPECIAL REQUEST by Council~;~oman Soderberg to make a staten~ent.
As Nrs. Soderberg had not yet arrived, no action was taken.
IV. DEPARTiqENTAL REFOI{TS:
McCannon moved to accept the departmental reports for the month of
September, 1971 and place them on file. Conk]in seconded, On voice
vote, passed unanintously.
At this point, the blayor departed front the agenda to hear a request by
the Civil Air Patrol to relocate at Ashland Airport.
City Administrator Almquist cited several conditions to be met for this
re]ocation, ~ncluding: approval of hangar location by the F.A.A.;
certification of the hangar by an Oregon registered engineer that the
structure meets the Ashland Building Code; site preparation, including
excavation of the area, grading and graniting of the taxiway', arr~lnge-
ments for separate metering of utilities (water and electric); and
construction and maintenance of a road to the hangar and provision [or
automobil e parkin~.
Iic then reviewed a master plan of the airport with the Counci], ~oting
the proposed location. A letter front the fixed base operator (Southern
Oregon Sk)-v:ays, Illmerit George) was read accepting the offer to locale
the Civil Air Patrol ba~t~ar there.
-1-
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
Charles Lockridge of the Civil Air Patrol said they had been given a
short notice from Siskiyou County Airport to relocate by January, 1972
(duo to a change of owners). He 'said a statement from the City for a
lease would be required.
Willstatter asked if the matter had been checked with the F.A.A., to
which Lockridge replied that the C.A.P. would comply with all such
regulations, in addition to moeting with F.A.A. representatives in
the area.
Willstatter had no objections in principle; and moved that the City
Attorney be directed to work ont an agreement; McCannon seconded. City
Administrator Almquist noted that a letter of intent might also be in
order, and Soderberg suggested an amendment to include this. Willstatter
moved and amended; McCannon seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously.
Lockridge gave his thanks to the Council for acting promptly in the
matter. At this point, the regular agenda was resumed.
V. S]'ANt)ING CO,~L\IITTEE REPORTS:
A. Finance & Prop_qrtT_ Committee:
Roberts deferred to McCannon to give the reports, as he had
been unable to personally attend the Committee meeting.
McCannon recommended that the City Attorney be directed
to prepare an Ordinance providing for deferral of street
improvement assessments for low--jncolae senior citizens.
He so moved; Conklin seconded; on voice vote, passed
unanimous ly.
McCannon recommended that a Resolution be prepared authoriz-
ing the purchase of the Homes Avenue property for park
purposes front the Cemetery Trust Fund for $1.1,778, with
annual payments of not less than $2,000 plus 6% interest
on the unpaid balance, beginning in Fiscal Year 1972-73.
McCannon noted this property was adjacent to the Walker
Elementary School. tie moved that this Resolution be
prepared. Soderberg seconded.
Willstatter noted the property was presently being utilized
by the Little i.eague, and had been fixed up by thcnt t'ith
the help of the National Guard. lie didn't feel the Cjty
should pick fit up at their expense since someone v~,as already
taking care of it.
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
V. A. 2.
(continued) Soderberg pointed out the property was not
suitable for cemetery use and that the agreement with the
Little League would not be upset. She noted the property
had beeu adopted for park purposes jn the 1966 Comprehensive
Plan. Soderberg also stated it would be putting money back
into the Cemetery Trust Fund that paid for the land to begin
with and free it for other Cemetery purposes.
Willstatter stated that maintainance should come out of
the Parks Fund, and felt the Council should look into the
parks budget. FIe felt their income was great enough to
make provision for this.
George Jones of 1336 ~ladrone said he had information on
this property, and proceeded to quote dollar figures and
background to the Council. He did not feel the $11,778
price to be paid was f~ir market value snd that the people
of the City of AslHand were losing on the transaction.
Conklin pointed ou~ that $20,000 was paid for the property.
One half of the land was sold to the schools for $13,000
and the $5,000 return received ~as "not too bad a return
for the money".
On roll call, Conk]in, ~IcCannon, Roberts and Soderbcrg
voted to prepare the resolution. Willstatter opposed.
McCannon recommended that the City Administrator be
authorized to approve Dance license applications and
waive the required bond and license fee for religious,
charitable and non-profit organizations, subject to
appeal to the City Council.
City Administrator Almquist noted that there was a require-
ment for at least ten days advance in making the application
to allow time for the Police Department to check it out.
At the present time, some applications were being received
only two to three days in advance of the requested date,
thereby not allm~'ing time to present it to the Counci] for
approval.
McCannon moved for passage of the resolution; Conklin
seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously.
~IcCannon recomn~cnded that the City accept deeds from tx,.ro
Oak Street property owners for the proposed Parkway Road
in lieu of Street Improvement assessments, and that
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
V. A. 4.
(continued) $750.50 be transferred from the General Fund
Operating Contingency to the Assessment Improvement Fund.
McCannon so moved, and Soderberg seconded.
Willstatter wondered what good were two isolated pieces
of property. He asked "What about those across the street
who might like to contribute property?" This was discrimina-
tory. Soderberg noted that people buy property where they
choose, and the City was not discriminating against citizens
if they decide to put a roadway in a certain area.
Roberts noted there were only positive responses from two
property owners (and relatively small parcels of land).
He felt the recommendation had merit and fits in with
planning, but would like to give it more consideration.
McCannon and Soderberg withdrerv
and agreed to return the matter
it on the next agenda.
their motion and second
to Committee and present
B. Public Service Committee: None
C. Streets & Traffic Committee:
Conklin noted the following were not Committee recommendations,
but minority reports since a quorum was not met for a meeting.
1. Conklin moved that an Ordinance be prepared relative to
traffic and parking regulations in the Lithia Park
Extension Project. They ~.~'ould include the following:
One-way traffic from Winburn lVay northerly to
North IMain Street;
commercial or delivery trucks only;
· Stop sign at North .Main St.
Loading Zones signs in Plaza area to be renteyed
no parking on access road
2-hour restriction on parking lot.
Willstatter seconded the motion. Jim Busch of the Planning
Commission questioned whet]ter there would be parking from
the Parkview Apartl~tents, and Chief of Police flays noted
it would be prohibited. (It was stated that other property
had been pnrchased for that parking.)
Ashland City Council
October 19, 19Yl
V. C. 1.
(continued) City Attorney Salter recommended placing a
time limit on deliveries also for better enforcement.
Busch suggested making it one leading zone, to which Salter
noted it had not been dedicated as a City Street and
therefore could not be so designated. On voice vote,
passed unanimously to prepare an Ordinance.
Conklin recommended that "C" Street and Lithia Way from
Oak Street to Third Street be designated as 2-hour parking
during the summer months only, and establishing 2-hour
parking on Pioneer Street from Main to Hargadine (Ord.
No. 1578). He so moved, and Willstatter seconded.
Conk]in stated this would help to alleviate parking at
least through tile winter months. Alsing noted there were
two parking spots by the Shakespeare ticket booths which
should remain as "iS-Minute Parking". On voice vote, passed
unanimously to prepare an Ordinance.
Conklin recommended the use of "Authorized Vehicles Only"
in the Plaza area be designated as "8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday". This would create additional
parking on weekends and evenings. He so moved, and ~Villstatter
seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously.
Conklin recommended that the 1,oading Zone at 25 N. Main St.
and the yellow curb in front of Lithia Motors used car lot
be removed and replaced with three parking spaces.
noted these drives were no longer in use for the faci]ities.
fie so moved to prepare a Resolution; Willstatter seconded.
On voice vote, passed unanimously.
Conklin recommended that an amendment to the Ordinance
relative to inoperable vehicles parked on streets be read
and also a Resolution read establ~sh~ng a 72-hour limitation
on parking any vehicle on a City street. He so moved; and
Willststter seconded. City Administrator A]mquist gsve the
first reading of the Ordinance and the Resolution. Conklin
moved to pass both to a second reading, the Resolution by
title on]y; PieCannon seconded.
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
V. C. 5.
(continued) Busch of the Planning Commission questioned
the definition of "operable", stating that anyone could
just park their car and start the motor when an officer
came around. It was explained that the resolution would
take care of cars being parked for any length of time over
the 72-hour limitation. Chief Hays noted that two common
problems were: a person owning several vehicles and parking
them all on the City streets, not allowing others to do so;
or college students who parked their cars on the streets
but rode bikes to school.
Almquist gave the second reading of the reso].ution by title
only. Soderberg questioned the impact of the Resolution
if a person should go on vacation for more than three
days. The City Administrator noted the intent of the new
Resolution was to have something to fall back on when a
person called the Police Department with a complaint. He
said they weren't looking for problems.
Majorie Smith, a lady in tile audience, noted it was the
nature of the town which caused parking problems. There
were not enough alleys or garages with old houses.
Willstatter felt that off-street parkjng should be reviewed
and some arrangements had to be made for parking.
On roll call, Soderberg voted NO because she felt the wording
should be better. Roberts also voted NO because he felt
the Resolution should be given more consideration, although
he agreed with the intent. Willstatter, Conklin and McCannon
voted YES, passing the Resolution. Soderberg suggested it
be referred to tile Streets & Traffic Committee again for
further study. The Mayor did so for possible improvenlents.'
VI. COMblUNICATIONS: Oral from the Audience
There was no new material presented at this time.
VI[ . COMHUNI CATiONS:
Writ ten
Soderberg moved to accept the minutes of the Planning Conm~ssion
for Septcruller 13, Septen~ber 20 and September 27, ]971 and place
on file; Willstatter seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously.
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
VI I. COMMUNICATIONS: Written (Continued)
Soderberg moved to accept the minutes of the Development
Commission for September 24, 1971 and place on file; McCannon
seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously.
A letter from the Sign Review Board was read recommending an
amendment to the Sign Ordinance relative to dangerous or
unauthorized signs. Conklin suggested it be referred to the
Public Service Committee for study.
A letter of resignation from W. E. (Bart) Bartelt was read by
City Administrator Almquist. Mr. Bartelt was resigning from
his elected post as City Recorder/Treasurer effective January
1972.
Council members expressed their regret at the announce-
ment. Conklin asked whether they had to accept the resig~a~on.
Roberts thought Bart would "go on forever". Willstatter hoped
he could be induced to stay until May. To all of this, the City
Recorder stated his decision had been made and he hoped the
Council would honor his request.
McCannon moved to accept the resignation with
seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously.
they would all miss him terribly.
regret; Conklin
Soderberg stated
The Mayor pointed out to the Council that this position would
have to be filled by non~ination and election by the Council.
Mr. Bartelt did not have any recommendations for a replacement.
Upon a question from the Mayor, Bart stated the position ~,-ould
be filled for the duration of the unexpired term.
A letter of recommendation to fill the vacancy on the Parks
and Recreation Commission was read. Under the terms of the
City charter, the vacancy had been caused by the resignation
of E. E. McGrew due to his move out of Ashland. The post was
to be filled by nomination and election by the Council.
The Mayor opened the floor for nominations. Willstatter said
the recon,nendation of the Parks Commission of Don II. Dealrick, St.
be accepted. Conklin made the nomination; Willstatter seconded.
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
VII ·
(continued) As there were no other nominations, McCannon moved
to close the nominations; Soderberg seconded; on roll call,
passed unanimonsly. Willstatter moved that the staff draw up
a resolution thanking Mr. MeGfew for his service; SodetherS
seconded; on voice vote, passed unanimously. The City Adminis-
trator noted the move by Mr. McGrew also left a vacancy on the
Citizens Budget Committee, which the Council should consider.
Soderberg moved to confirm the appointment of Mr. Dedrick;
Willstatter seconded; on roll call, passed unanimously.
VIII.
SPECIAL, AGENDA ITEMS:
A. Unfinished Bus~ness:
City Administrator Almquist
Howland, ttayes & Merryfield
questions asked at the last
Sewerage System Study.
read a letter from Cornell,
(CH2M) in response to some
council meeting regarding the
Willstatter brjefed Roberrs on his question concerning
cooling water being dmnped in the City sewer system by
Bag]ey Canning. He had felt commercial entities in sewage
systems could bring down the sewage capacity. The report,
and Roberrs, noted that this action was requested of the
company by the Oregon State Department of Enviromnental
Quality.
Soderberg moved to accept the resolution accepting the
Sexverage System Study plan and pass to a second reading
by title only. McCannon seconded. On roll call, passed
unanimously. Almquist gave the second reading by title
only; Soderberg moved to adopt the resolution; Conklin
seconded; on roll call, passed unanimously.
New
& Miscellaneous Business:
Public [learing - 8:00 p._.m_.: Proposed annexation of property
Fituated south of Ilighway 66 and west of Interstate S Freeway
(Harry i',lmore, et. al., applicants).
Before opening the Public flearing, the ,Mayor suggested
limiting discussion to thirty minutes. ilichard Cottlc,
represent:inS McGrew Brothers Saw Mill and employees, st:,tod
that the matter being consi. dered before the Council w~s in
a Public i!earing rather th~n art election of the people and
should be gi~eu more than a hail hour.
-8
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
VIII.
B. 1.
(continued) Willstatter stated he resented substituting
a Public flearing for the "voice of the people" because of
its long-range ramifications.
The Mayor the~ decided that some ground rules should be
made: after a person has spoken, he should allow others
to speak before again speaking himself. fie also suggested
remarks be kept as brief as possible. He then opened the
floor.
City Administrator Almquist gave the general background for
calling the public hearing, noting all necessary publications
had been made. He read a letter front Marilyn Briggs of
590 Glenview Avenue opposing the annexation, noting the
industrial potential of the land (and that neighbors should
also be given relief) in addition to the fact that no public
letters had been in favor of the annexation other than
property owners involved, but opposed.
Soderberg felt that, planning-wise, it was not good to put
200 families next to an industrial area, and that people
must have some objection to living next to an industrial
area and railroad tracks (if not intially, then in due time).
Because of its "unl~vab~l~ty" and the need of a buffer zone,
she was not in favor of annexation for this purpose.
McCannon reminded the Council of the questionnaire sent to
citizens of Ashland. Of the 1600 responses, 80% favored
mobile home parks, providing they met high standards. He
then asked the City Administrator to read the aarcement with
Elmore for conditions to be met in developing the property
as a mobile home park.
The City Administrator stated this was only a draft and was
being worked out between the attornies. Willstatter raised
a point of order, in that the Council was studying an annexa-
tion and not an agreement. tle was "unalterably opposed" to
this annexation for (1) the urban spra~.H it created, (2) like
areas in the City should first be deve]oped, and (3) the City
could not afford the annexation.
The Mayor allowed the r.eading of the conditions of the drafted
agreement in order to understand the proposed development,
and Almqulst read the items. Conklin asked whether all
conditions had been agreed upon, to which Sjd Ajnsworth
(attorney for ILlmore) replied that Mr. Elmore had agreed to
all conditions at a Public llcaring held by the Planning
Comm i s s i on.
-9-
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
VIII.
B. 1.
(continued) Ainsworth told the Council that they had
directed the staff to prepare an agreement regarding the
proposed annexation. It was then sent to the Planning
Comlnission for a Public Hearing (which was held), at which
time the Planning Commission did not vote in favor of
annexation of the property to the City. After going to
the Council, the applicants were again referred to the
Planning Commission to review conditions or instructions
for a conditional use permit. This was the second Public
Hearing with the Planning Commission, at which time they
voted against a zone change and subsequent conditional use
p e rm i t.
Conklin asked whether the applicants had applied to the
County for a zone change. Elmore stated there would be no
reason unless the property would be taken into the City under
agreement. tie stated he spent $]25 for plans and didn't get
to say a word. Ainsworth pointed out the County was not
equipped to give services to the area. Elmore agreed he
did understand he would have to go through the County Planning
Commission, but would have to have an agrecnlent with the
City of Ashland be.forehand.
Ainsworth noted that, through some of the hearings and
discussion, the question of cost to the City was raised.
He sa~d there would be none, basically, because of the
property line today (bounded on three sides by City limits).
He noted the 1~ per sq. ft. assessed against the property
would more than pay for any fees. He noted, in answer to a
question by the City Administrator as to assessed value of
a mobile home, that it was assessed the same as a house.
For tax purposes, they are assessed the same as any area of
a subdivision. tie pointe~ out that a study showed costs
for the City as far as fire, police protection, etc. was
low compared to any other area.
Ainsworth then presented information that the State had
adopted a plan to rearraage Clover Lane for an interchange
and that would allow 110 spaces in the proposed park at the
maximum on the property now, and not the "200" referred to
by Firs. Sodcrberg.
He also pointed out that one of the reasons for entering
into an agreement with the City to make improvements first
was to give the advantage of an increase in the tax base
for the City. Ainsworth again referred the Council to the
Comprehensive Plan, which showed the area as use in h~gh-
density population and as such as a mobile home park. A
map showing the location of the proposed development in
relation to HcGrew l~rothers Saw Hi I] was presented te the
-10-
Ashland City Council
October 19, 197].
VIII.
B. 1.
(continued) Council for review. Ains~vorth pointed out
the Oak Knoll develop~r~ent across the freeway from the saw
mill, and noted no complaints had been received from them.
FIe also said that mobile home owners leased the property
and did not buy it; tenants would not be a problem to McGrew
Brothers. Elnlore agreed.
Willstatter stated this was "inverse condemnation". He felt
that if there were no annexation, there would be no problems.
He said the Oak Knoll development was out of City limits and
that Ainsworth was "mfix~ng apples and oranges". Willstatter
said, "The only reason you want to annex is for sewer and
water services". To this, Ainsworth replied, "Exactly."
McCannon asked what the annexation fee totaled, to which
Elmore replied about $12,000. Conklin noted the srea was
already practically snrrounded by City limits. Ainsworth
then pointed these out on the map, amd noted it answered
Mrs. Soderberg's question about an "island" by the adjoining
property owners request for annexati on.
George Jones, of ]356 Madtone, felt that due to the magnitmde
of the question, it should be submitted to a vote of the
people. He felt the annexation would cost the people ~n the
future as far as police, f~re protection, and other services
in addition to overloading the sewage plant and a lack of
water to service these people.
McCannon asked Alsing, Director of Public Works, what the
"real story" was on the water situation. He replied that
Ashland had been using Talent Irrigation District water with
Ashland Creek water during dry periods as far back as 20 years,
and it was a matter of loo~ing ahead. He pointed out the City
was looking into another possible site for a dam in the
watershed, and that water and sewer services would grow
with the needs of the City.
~illstatter reminded the Council that there were 75 individuals
within the City to which they had a moral obligation for
serwices. He did not feel the City should take on this
"instantaneous growth" to the water and sewer serv~ces.
Two gentlemen from the audience sopke up: the first stated
that there had been al~nexations to the City over 15 years sgo
to ¥;bich utilities have not been connected; the other man
fclt the City was "looking too far ahead".
Ainsworth told the Conacil if water w~s a problem, just
sewer services; the development could provide an
e×cellent source of water from we]is in the area.
to
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
VIII.
B. 1.
(continued) At this time, Richard Cottie (representing
McGrew Brothers and some employees) stated they opposed
this particular annexation. They felt there was a land
use problem in question, and that the only point in favor
of it was its contiguous area with City limits (bounded
on three sides). McGrew BroiLhers were afraid of what would
happen when the area would become populated with a high~
density ratio. He stated the saw mill had been in Ashland
since 1964 and had a present payroll of 162 persons. He
questioned the security of their future if this "mobile
home park and overnight stand" were developed. This would
affect working people and not retired persons.
Cottle then briefed the Council on the possible economic
impact: (1) McGrew Bros. employed both full-time personnel
and part-time help from the college; (2) there was a
$3,000,000 payroll (which was figured to turn over 16 to
17 times in the community); (3) tire company paid approxin~.ate]y
$42,000 for utilities in the plant, and $56,000 in personal
property taxes; (4) sales of $~.~000,000 annually--most of
whicl~ was from outside the Ashland area; and (5) $530,000
worth~ of improvements had been put in since they began.
Cottie stated this was better than tour]sm; this was "butter
and egg" type of business from this payroll. Employees
purchased autos, trucks, shoes, etc.
tte then cited a case in I~hoenix in 1967, wherein the
Steve Wilson Lumber Company was declared a public nuisance.
The majority of complaints had come froin tenants of a
trailer court and a townhouse development. What was once
overlooked for a while snddenly became a "public nuisance".
Cottie then went to the aerial photo map e~rlier presented
to the Council, and pointed out the log deck areas ("a noisy
operation") in addition to traffic area~s ("smoke, noise and
dust"). The proposed area for annexation would be good for
physical use, but even high standards could not counteract
the noise and dust produced.
McGrew Brothers was not fighting annexation in general. They
did no~ want to seem to make the town stand still, but to
encourage other industries to come to this area. They just
opposed the annexation from a standpoint of what was good
for property use. McGre~I Brothers was asking t~te Council to
protect the wage- earner.
Cottlo pointed out the qucstionuaire did not say the mobile
borne parks favored should be located ia this psrticu]ar spot,
tie felt more planni~g should be givo~q to location of sttch
dev e 1 opmc~ ts.
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
VIII.
B. 1.
(continued) Rlr. Yates, an employee of FIcGrew Brothers
and a member of the Ashland Police Reserves, felt that the
proposed annexation would jeopardize his job and was not
fair. He pointed out the noise created and the unpredictable
winds in the area.
Gordon Mauer, another employee, said he felt the same. His
wife and children were dependent on his paycheck and the
Council should give some thought to the working man.
Dick Soderberg spoke up from the audience. t!e informed
the Council that the Ashland Economic Development Commiss~on
had made a study checking into new areas for industrial
and job-making prospects in Ashland, noting railroad access,
flat lands, etc. The Commission had recommended tile land
in question for annexation for use as an industrial area
and that plans should he changed accordingly.
Another employee of McGrew Brothers felt that any business
that moved into the area would possibly be plagued with
complaints from the proposed trailer court, and put even
more jobs in jeopardy.
In answer to these statements, Ainsworth pointed out that
there were three other industrial facilities in the vicinity
which expressed no concern over the matter. He also stated
he was the owner for many years of the property in question
raising catt]e, and was not bothered by the "pollution".
He also ~rought up the fact that the Steve Wilson Lumber
Company referred to (not burned down) was not in an industrial
zone to begin with.
As far as good industrial property, the proposed aunexation
was substantially above the railroad tracks and could not
get a spur in there; therefore that argument was not feasible.
And the cost for locating in Ashland was prohibitive to any
company when compare~] to the benefits offered, say in White
City, with roads, railroads and financing available,
Willstatter felt, that while the property owner should not
be asked to hold his property for some future use, the City
had no moral obligation to annex the property.
Another employee of blcGrew's suggested the Council consider
the type of mobile home park planned (i.e., children, dogs,
etc.) and should impose limitations. Ainsworth stated the
plaus were for a "first quality" park, and that it would
include a swimn!ing pool and a recreation center.
Ashland City Council
October ]9, 1971
VIII. B. 1.
(contint',ed) Richard Cottle pointed out that tile real
issue with the Steve Wilson Lumber company was not zoning
but dust and fall-out which hampered the "convenience" of
the residents of the trailer park.
Jim Busch of the Planning Commission emphasized to the
Council that they had not reconm~.ended approval of the
proposed annexation but simply made recommendations for
terms to be included in an agreement should the annexation
be made, He said the job of the Planning Commission was
to insure that plans for the mobile home park would comply
in every way as those within the City of Ash]and would be
required to do, The major purpose of the Planning Commission
is to study applications in light of the laws for land use,
Busch was also concerned with an is]and developing of
surrounding County area, lie asked the Council just how
they wanted to bring it in,
Bnsch also questioned whether there was a need for this
type of establishment, since there were some vacant or
uncomp]eted ones within City limits. He stated if these
were not using the zones within the City for what they
were intended, why annex something outside the City. Busch
also noted the Comprehensive Plan of 1966 referred to was
"the plan of the day" and ~,,'as currently being updated.
Conklin questioned whether there would be a time l~mit
established in the development of such a mobile home park.
Salter pointed out that, under the proposed agreement, it
would be built in two phases, including such things as
roads, etc. in Phase I.
Ainsworth added that the entire peripheral wall would be
completed, and ~%lr. Elmore was willlug to post bond to have
it look like a finished product (as defined in Phase II).
A discussion on developing property and tax bases ensued,
with Dick Soderberg noting that the City of Ashland has a
record of assisting new business (water, sewer, roads, etc.)
At this time, the Rlayor closed the public hearing and
called a recess for ten minutes.
When the meeting was ag~lin called to order, lV~llstatter
moved to deny the annex~tion request. Sealerborg seconded.
Roberts felt it was ap?ropriatc to take action on the
matter at that time, s~ncc the Council had already used a
grcat deal of ~dr. Elmero's time and c:,:po~se r~nc] he was
entitled to hear a decision.
Ash] and City Counci 1
October 19, 1971
VIII.
B. 1.
(continued) Before voting, McCannon remarked be ]lad
abstained the first tinlc in order to get more information.
He felt McGrew Brothers were unduly disturbed about the
development, siuce McCannon's interviews with residents
indicated no objections to living close to the mill. tie
stated that, if in his opinion there was any danger to the
business, his vote would change. ttowever, the proposed
annexation seemed to be an asset for the City of Ashland.
On roll call, McCannon and Conklin voted "NO", thereby
giving approval to the annexation. Roberts, Soderberg
and Willstatter voted "YIiS" to deny the request. The
Mayor so declared the annexation request DENIED.
Due to tire late hour, the Mayor changed the order of the agenda, to
not act upon items 2 through 6 of "New and Miscellaneous Business".
The following selected items were considered under the next heading.
C. Ordinances, _P~e__s~J_u._t.i__o_ni__&_C__o.!Lt_ra+cts:
Contract with the State thmlan Resources Department (Employ-
ment I)ivision) implementing the provisions of the Emergency
timployment Act of 1971. Almquist noted tile funds allocated
to the City of Ashland totaled $53,975. The local matching
share was $S,475. This last amount was for services, such
as' training expenses, supervision, administrative costs, etc.
tie noted the federal government was picking up 100% of the
cost of employees' salaries.
The City Administrator also told tile Council funding was for
a period of nine or ton months, and that it would expire on
August 23, 1972. At that time, it would be assumed that
the program would be continued, provided the unemployment
rate in Jackson County continues above 6%. If at any time
it should fall below that rate for three consecutive months,
the program would only continue for three more months.
Willstatter questioned v:hether the prospective employees
would be informed of this period of employment, to v.lhich
Almquist replied it v:as included in the job announcements
and also brought up during the interview.
Conklin moved to sign the agreement on behalf of the City
of Ashland; Soderberg seconded; on roll call, passed
un an i mo u s ] y.
-1S-
Ashland City Council
October 19, 1971
III, %ff%~jViT~ffS~jST by Council;,,oman Sealerberg to make a Statement.
The Mayo~' backtracked on the agenda at the request of ~lrs. Soderberg
to allow her to read a prepared statement (attached).
In reply, Conklin stated either route chosen would affect his
property (in fact, the Oak Street interchange would benefit it more).
Willstatter informed }.ira. Sealerberg that an option was available on
his Twin Plunges if she cared to pick it up. tie also stated that
appointlnents to the BCATS Committee (for he and Conklin) were made
in January, and the study hact been going on five years.
The Mayor felt the Councilmen would have withdrawn their vote if they
felt there was a "cottflict of interest". All members of the Council
had an interest in the interchange jn d~fferent ways, but personal
accusations were not ~ood and the Council should move away front them.
He reminded the Council they had indicated an interest in getting
more information about the interchange, and that couldn't hurt.
Councilwoman Soderberg apologized for "feeling she had to bring
documentation of conflicts, but thought it was necessary after
Conkiln insulted her ini'egrity as a Councilwoman".
Conklin did not feel that x'entark deserved a reply, but stated his
primary concern was priorities. He could not justify a $5- or $4-
million project when s~reets and sewers needed repair.
Roberrs said the issue had gotten out of proportion and it pained
him to see this type of conversation continue. It was d~fficult to
determine how someone could have a "conflict of interest" with
sometiring that might occur' in 1980 or 88. The Council had decided
by a majority vote to write a letter on the freeway interchanSe;
they should write it and drop the issue. There was no point mn
continuing such discussions.
The Rlayor agreed and suggested the Council continLle with the agenda.
/nck
Roberrs moved to adjourn; Willstatter seconded. Jim Ragland of the
Planning Comluission told the Cm~ncil the item skipped on the agenda
was a matter of concern, and be would wr~te a letter explaining the
details to the Council for their consideration.
On voice vote, passed unanimously to adjourn the meeting at ll:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted.
q
~': ~. W. E. Barie] t
City Recorder/Tre~surer
(Attachment A to the Minut'es) ' "' '' ~ -'
-. October 19, 1971
TO: ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: COUNC I LWOHAN SODERBERG
Recently, I proposed that the City of Ashland send an
official request to the State Highway Commission forState
and Federal funding of a ne~ freeway interchange at Eagle
Mill Road( Oak St.) with connecting routes to downtown
.Ashland. and to Southern Oregon College perimeter road area.
( as illustrated in the BCATS Plan.) I was sure that this
was one City project that all City CounciL members could
wholeheartedly support. The need was urgent. Previous
councils had accepted the concept as shown in the 1966
Comprehensive Plan and the 1967 Central Area Plan.
Councilmen Willstatter and Conklin both had taken interest
in and represented the City of Ashland on the BCATS Committee.
'The Whole Council had accepted the BCATS Plan Interim Report
earlier this year with no adverse comments. This was a step
in getting Ashland moving again - solving its problems
planning for %he future - encouraging business investment
and protecting the livabili~y values that Ashland has.
~Vhen strong opposition ~rose to my request and none of
the teasong given for the opposition made sense, I was amazed.
I felt there must be other reasons than those stated,
especially after Councilman Conklin requested that I quit any
further research into the freeway question. After further
research, I believe I now know the reason for this opposition,
and I feel it is in the best interests of the Community to
speak out now.
Ifthis opposition cause. a la~k of Community support
for the freeway interchange and that'in turn?cahsei!Lthe
loss,>6f the interchange, then Dressure will come from the
community to relieve the traffic congestion in downtown
Ashland in another manner. The BCATS Plan provides an alternate
Plan for such relief. (See BCATS Report, INTERIM REPORT,
daied June 1970, p. 24, par." The CBD ")
This aI'ternate (Van Ness -"C" Street Couple't) will
provide temporary relief for only the downtovrn area traffic
problems. It will provide no help for the Siskiyou Blvd.
or the North Hain St. traffic problems.
This alternate (Van Ness ,C" St'. couplet)' as shown in
the' BCATS Plan will pass through Councilman Willstatter's
TWIN PLUNGES and Councilman Conklin's fuel storage yard.
Therefore, I feel it important for the Council and the
Community to be a~are of the personal interest of Councilmen
Conklin and Willstatter in deciding ~hich is the first
"Priority" - - - The freeway interchange and connecting
roads orI the altern-ate Van Ness "C" St. Couplet.
Now Gentlemen, that we understand each others position'
better, I would ask you at this time to join together to
get Ashland moving again; to forget our differences; and
do the job we were elected to do in a responsible manner..
j
-]8-
Southern Oregon College it one of the principal, if not the principal, traffic
generator in the town. It is necessaxS, to provide .sufficient capacity for coilego-bound
traffic and the best way to do this is by new routes that use no part of the existing
system which will be overloaded in the future. Therefore, a new fail interchange ts
proposed for the I-5 freeway, at Eagle Mill Road, or Mountain Avenue, or somewhere
in between. For illustrative purposes only the proposed interchange is shown at. Eagle
Mill Road. This proposed new interchange will be connected to the college pa~41ing
areas by a combination of new controlled access sections and portions of existing
Mountain Avenne, Morse Average and Beach Street. This is to be a two-lane facility
from the. freeway to Siskiyou (with four-lane right-of-way purchased or reserved) and
four lanes on Beach.
The importance of the effect of the location of parking lots and access ico the
college cannot be over-emphasized because a major change in college plans could destroy
tile effectiveness of the plan in relieving overloads on Siskiyou and Green Springs.
To provide for an expanding campus, the college has proposed the vacating of
Mountain, Pahn and Indiana Streets south of Siskiyou Boulevard. It is further proposed
that a new east-west collector be built between Ashland Street and Oregon Street
bordering the campus on the south. This new facility would use Madrone Street. a
section of Oregon Street as well as new sections to be constructed. It is a proposed
48' wide facility with two, twelvesfoot lanes and parking. Should additional capacity be
needed in the future, it is proposed that parking be removed.
The CBD : "
To relieve the congestion on the Lithie WaysEast Main Street Couplet ~nd allow
the redevelopmeat of the Plaza and tire CBD, it is proposed that East Main revert to
two-way traffic. The present northbound portion of the couplet would be changed to
southbound except for the section of Lithia Way between "C" Street and Siskiyou
Boulevard, which. would be two-way traffic. A new northbound couplet; ~vould be
constructed from the intersection of Lithie Way and "C" Street using new yi~t-of-way
to Van Ness Street and then by an ~proved Van NesS to junctio~ with ~e
southbound leg of the couplet at North Main Street. These facilities are prolSosed to be
two-lane with parking. If greater capacity is needed in the future, parking is to be
removpd permittin~ four _n~oyin~ lanes o.n each section. _ .
"" ..... I~i*"'iSrd~i~ "~'G'iS~t"'ilfe" 'CBD" 'i.'Gtti" tfid pfcip'b~e~" h~z::;'~L'd'v'intd~5~ihnge;: i
hi~-grade, two-lane controlled access facility with parking, will be built between the
interchange and Water Street, following generally, the course of Ashland Creek. Water
Street will also be hnproved. :
Green Springs ·: ,
The Green Springs Highway is to be impfox;or to four-lane traffic from, and
including, the structnre over the I-5 Interchange to Siskiyou Boulevard. Parking will be
limited should increased capacity be required.
A Paralleling Route to Siskiyou Boulevard "
Within the City of Ashland, no alternative presently exists to the through route
(Green Sprlngs-Sisl:iyou-Main) which was mentioned earlier. The City has long desired to
deveAop a paralleling street to Siskiyon and Main, not only to relieve traffic on the
present througtl route, but to se5,e as an emergency alternative in the event of major
fire or other disaster.
The plan shov:s the proposed new two-lane, bypass beZinning at the Green
Springs Highway, just east of the railroad track, a~d cocmectiz~g with existtug Walker to
Main Street. From this intersection a new two-lane facility would take a northeasterly