Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-0902 Council Mtg PACKET - pg 83 thru 93 CITY OF ASHLAND AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 2,2008 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street 6:00 p.m. Executive Session to consult with legal council regarding pending litigation pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(h) 6:45 p.m. Annual General Meeting for Hospital Board and City Council 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES V. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? [5 minutes] 1. Executive Session of August 4,2008 2. Study Session of August 4,2008 3. Executive Session of August 5, 2008 4. Regular Council of August 5,2008 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS VII. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes] 1. Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Ap'plication from Paul Maurer dba Harper's at 36 S. 2nd Street? 3. Should the Council tentatively deny the Measure 49 claim for approximately 2i25 acres of W- R zoned land located at the end of Hitt Road and notify DLCD and the claimants of the tentative decision? 4. Should the Council delay the discussion of the Transient Occupancy Tax revenue distribution to the October 6,2008, Study Session to allow the Finance Director to be in attendance? 5. Will Council approve a personal services contract with Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $33,750.00 to design, develop, and implement the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007 -16? VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject of a Land Use Appeal. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council {AMC 92.04.040}) None. COUNCIL IvlEETINGS ARE BROADCAST L.IVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT 'TIlE CITY OF ASHLAND'S vVEB SITE AT\VvV\V .ASHLAND.OR.US IX. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. Speakers are limited to 5 minutes or less, depending on the number of individuals wishing to speak.) [15 minutes maximum] X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Will the Council approve a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station? [15 Minutes] XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Should the Council accept the recommendations of the Downtown Task Force relating to employee parking restrictions in the downtown area, proposed changes to the City's sign code and permissible use of public sidewalk area, and direct City staff to prepare ordinance language for review and adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council, as necessary? [30 Minutes] 2. Will the Council direct staff to prepare and transmit a written communication opposing RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications significantly limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop? [15 Minutes] 3. Does the Council approve the proposed contract with the Chamber of Commerce for FY 2008-2009 in the amount of $305,OOO? [30 Minutes] 4. Does the Council wish to make an appointment to the Audit Committee of a Budget Committee member and Council Member/Mayor member for a term to expire April 30, 2009? [15 Minutes] XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance relating to criminal records information, requiring review of criminal record information for applicants of employment, volunteers, personal service contractors of the City, and declaring emergency" and move the ordinance to be passed by emergency? [5 Minutes] 2. Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance relating to parking regulations, allowing use of immobilizing device, authorizing towing, removing downtown parking limitations, updating and correcting parking processes and procedures, amending AMC Sections 11.08.080, 11.28.060, 11.28.080, 11.28.090, and 11.28.110, and repealing AMC chapter 11.30 AMC Section 2.28.215" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? [5 Minutes] XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERSIREPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS None XW. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (ITY phone number 1-800-735- 2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35. 102-35. 104 ADA Title I). COUNCILJ\1EETINGS ARE BROADCAS'T LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S \\TEB SITE AI' \VvVW.ASHLAND.OR.US CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 4,2008 Page 1 of3 MINUTES FOR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Monday, August 4, 2008 Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. Councilors Hardesty, Hartzell, Navickas, Jackson, and Silbiger were present. Councilor Chapman was absent. 1. Does Council have any questions about the status of the Regional Problem Solving (RPS) Process or any specific concerns about the draft participant's agreement? Director of Community Development Bill Molnar provided a general overview of the Participant's Agreement and its key components. He introduced John Renz, the Southern Oregon Representative of the DLCD and Michael Quilty, the Chair for the RVMPO. The overview included: . Participants' Agreement . Implementation Techniques . RPS & Participants' Agreement - Approval Process . Regional Problem Solving - Next Steps It was explained that the County will probably not make an exception to increase the standard 50 acres to 100 acres in the Minor Plan Amendment because the 50 acres is a threshold between the Minor and Major Plan Amendments in the County's Land Use Plan. City Attorney Richard Appicello explained that the Participants' Agreement is not adopting the plan, only agreeing to run it through the appropriate Land Use course. It is a perspective Land Use decision that the County will analyze during their review process. City Administrator Martha Bennett explained that Council would most likely take the initial action of resolution and commit to send the agreement through the process. The next step would be to adopt the Participants' Agreement. Council discussed and questioned how the population allocation was determined. Mr. Renz explained that the County has complete discretion on population allocation. Mr. Quilty noted that one of the statements in the Participants' Agreement is that the County will abide by the proportional allocation of population within the RPS plan and would make corrections with the next updated population element. Mr. Quilty further explained that the County would adopt the entire regional plan. Cities would have to comply with the County Comprehensive Plan that would involve the ongoing monitoring process and mechanisms that are in place for the appeal process. Monitoring and compliance was kept general for feasibility. Mr. Quilty said that land use and transportation would take place at the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) level because they meet on a regular basis and update the Regional Transportation Plan every three years. The technical and policy committees from the RPS will meet as needed. 2. Does the Council wish to endorse the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project Preferred Alternative? Fire Chief Keith Woodley provided an overview on the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project explaining the Federal Environmental Impact Study (FEIS) chapter review was a special government-to-government review period. He introduced Tony Kerwin, the Chair of the Ashland Forest Lands Commission, Marty Main, Ashland City Consulting Forester, Darren Borgias, Staff Ecologist for the Nature Conservancy and Linda Duffy, District Ranger for the Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District. ---m---r --- CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 4, 2008 Page 2 of3 Mr. Kerwin provided an overview of the Ashland Forest Lands Commission Recommendations for Modification of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project Preferred Alternative. The six recommendations are as follows: 1. Silvicultural Treatments within the Research Natural Area Explanation on the significant difference of proposed treated acres. 2. Addition of Roadside Treatments Adjacent to US Forest Road 2060 Three options were made available to the City. (1): to endorse the Forest Service Alternative, (2): endorse the Preferred Alternative with modifications recommended by the Ashland Forest Lands Commission and (3): endorse the unchanged Community Alternative. A fourth option was proposed that Council be able to suggest modifications at the August 5, 2008 meeting based on other input that does not reflect the original compromises. 3. Removal of Diameter Limits in the Roadless Area It was clarified that the Nature conservancy does not have an official stance on commercial extractions in roadless areas. 4. Locations and Types of Treatments in Roadless Area It was explained that fuel breaks on the ridge in roadless areas will not look like regular fuel breaks. The project allowed the Forest Service to prepare for the maintenance in the original prescription and to design prescriptions to minimize the amount of maintenance required. There are currently 9.5 miles of fuel breaks existing above the city. There are approximately 23 miles being treated within the entire area along the ridgeline. Concern was voiced regarding the Forest Service's long-term objective in the watershed. It was explained that the project falls under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act and that the community is highly prone to large-scale catastrophic wild fire. 5. Addition of Strategic Ridgeline Treatments & Canopy Closure It was explained the plan was to cut fewer trees on the strategic ridgelines, and employ the Community treatments on other areas and monitor the effect. 6. Sedimentation Issue and DEQ TMDL Standards An extensive monitoring plan was developed for the whole forum covering each treatment area. A detailed implementation strategy and monitoring plan will be developed one the project is approved. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Terrence Stenson/172 Alida/Spoke about the toxic effect of large woody debris rotting in the water. That over time, it will break down into a lethal toxic growth and form bacteria requiring harmful chemicals and water cannons to correct. He noted the Forest Services concerns regarding catastrophic fire but added they had not restored water tables in the watershed. 3. Update on status of Reeder Reservoir Public Works Director Mike Faught and Dr. Jacob Kann from the Aquatic Ecosystem Sciences, LLC. provided an overview on the current Reeder Reservoir algae bloom. The overview included: . Algae type: Blue-green or Cyanobacterial algal species: Anabaena flos-aquae . Geosmin and 2-methylisobomeiol or MIB . Chemical Treatment Staff stated they would provide an update on the algae problem when test results are received. ----nr- T -- CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 4, 2008 Page 3 of3 4. Review of regular meeting agenda for August 5, 2008 Consent Agenda Item #2 regarding the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City of Medford, Oregon, for the transfer of ownership of surplus mesh (public safety) communications equipment. Information Technology Director Joe Franell explained the moving costs would not exceed $5,000.00, and they could use in-house labor and the staff Electrician with installation occurring as needed without affecting the current budget. New and Miscellaneous Business Item #4 regarding the contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Stations. Public Works Director Mike Faught explained the next steps required in purchasing and setting up a new a booster station. 5. Look Ahead Review moved to end of agenda City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the items on the Council Look Ahead. Meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder ~~ ~__~u_______ -~ nr ~ T- ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL lHEETlNG August 5,2008 PAGE J oI8 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 5, 2008 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7 :00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES (None) SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes of the Executive Session of July 15, 2008 and Regular Council of July 15,2008 were approved as presented. Councilor Jackson abstained, as she was not in attendance at these meetings. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS The Mayor's Proclamation of August 6 and 9 as Hiroshima and Nagasaki Days were read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Does the Council wish to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement (lGA) with the City of Medford, Oregon, for the transfer of ownership of surplus mesh (public safety) communications equipment? 3. Will Council approve an agreement between ODOT and the City of Ashland to fund the improvement of Plaza Avenue under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program? 4. Will Council approve an agreement between Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad, Inc. (CORP) and the City of Ashland authorizing construction within the railroad right of way at the East Main Street railroad crossing? 5. Will the City Council approve Amendment 2, Additional Services for Siskiyou Boulevard Pedestrian Safety Review to be added as a part of the HDR Contract for the Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update? 6. Will Council approve a contract amendment with Copeland Construction, LLC to expand the scope of work and increase the contract amount by $43,346.00 or 860/0 over the original contract for the 2007 Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project No. 2006-34? 7. Will the Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, consent to entering in to a public contract for $81,066.45 with Pathways Enterprises, a Qualified Rehabilitation Facility (QRF), to provide Citywide janitorial services for the fiscal year 2008-2009? 8. Should Council approve a resolution adjusting the FY 2008-2009 Budget to create appropriations and authorize expenditure of asset forfeiture revenues received in conjunction with the City's participation in the regional drug enforcement program and a grant for firefighter protective clothing? 9. Should Council approve a resolution to adjust budget appropriations for changes in operational expenses to remain in compliance with Oregon Budget Law? 10. Will the Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve a Special Procurement for a class of services - WTP, EP A Mandated Water Quality Testing and WWTP, DEQ Mandated Waste Water Effluent Testing - for a period of three (3) years beginning July 1,2008 to June 30, 2012? ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l\4EETlNG August 5, 2008 PAGE 2 of8 Councilor Hartzell requested that Consent Agenda item #8 be pulled for discussion. Councilors Chapman/Jackson mls to approve Consent Agenda items #1-#7 and #9 and #10. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg clarified the memo regarding appropriations for the Regional Drug Enforcement Program that referred to protective clothing and not the CER T Grant. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to approve Consent Agenda item #8. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Will Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish a public pedestrian walkway easement at 99 Granite Street? City Engineer Jim Olson presented the staff report that included the background on the pedestrian walkway easement. He explained that the lots were created in 1993 and he presented the findings that explained the creation of the easement and the supporting evidence in favor of the request to terminate it. Public Hearing Open: 7:14 p.m. Mark Knox/485 W NevadalExplained he was there to answer questions and reaffirmed the staff report and the Council Communication. Public Hearing Closed: 7:15 p.m. Councilor Jackson/Chapman mls to approve quitclaim deed. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Hardesty and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. 2. Will the Council approve increases to the Miscellaneous Fees and Charges and approve a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Adopting Miscellaneous Fees for Service Where Necessary"? Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report and explained the proposed fees. It was clarified that the fees presented by the City Recorder's Office were not an increase, but reflected current fees. Public Hearing Open: 7:19 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:19 p.m. Councilor Chapman/Silbiger mls to approve Resolution #2008-29. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Chapman, Hardesty, Navickas, Jackson, Hartzell and Silbiger YES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM Ambuja Rosen/Spoke regarding tethering laws and the time limits associated with them. She made suggestions on how dog owners can obtain affordable fencing. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Does the Council wish to approve an order authorizing a lease of real property to the Ashland Gun Club? Councilor Chapman/Silbiger mls to approve an order to City Council authorizing a lease of property to the Ashland Gun Club. DISCUSSION: City Attorney Richard Appicello clarified that the Environmental Professional hired by the ASHLAND CiTY COUNCiL lUEETlNG August 5, 2008 PAGE 30[8 , City will conduct the assessment and will create the Management Plan for the property. He further explained that the City would produce a Request for Proposal (RFP) and define contract criteria for the Environmental Consultant. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas mls to amend motion by adding the following to Section 4.5(4): "for clean up to residential standards" following sentence "developing feasible remediation options." DISCUSSION: It was suggested that the lease be more specific regarding clean up and that it should meet residential standards. It was considered unrealistic to require residential clean up standards throughout the life of the lease but feasible at termination. Councilor Hartzell withdrew the motion with consent by Councilor Navickas. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas mls to amend motion by adding into Section 12.3(1) the following: "for residential properties" in first sentence following "in excess of permissible levels." DISCUSSION: It was discussed whether requiring residential clean up standards at termination was feasible. There was concern that Council was turning the lease into an environmental assessment document while others thought it was reasonable to have clean up expectations at the termination of the lease. City Attorney Richard Appicello explained that the property zoning was part forest and open space reserve. Tl).e CitY has not sought a zone change to residential property and the current language stating permissible levels were based on other restrictions on the property. Changing the zone to residential would allow one house on the 66-acre property. He stated that it would be legal to require the residential clean up standard at the termination of the lease. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Navickas, Hardesty and Silbiger, YES: Councilors Chapman and Jackson, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Continued discussion on amended motion: It was suggested to add "financial necessity" to Article 1, Definitions, under item 6, Emergency. City Attorney Richard Appicello explained that using the word "necessity" would be hard to define and offered examples of when the emergency clause could be used and joined with Financial Loss. Financial loss would apply if the City were fined. The word "contamination" in the lease would cover circumstances where the City incurred total clean up costs. It was suggested to add "and complete within a maximum time period of 5 years with specific time frame to be defined by the Environmental Assessment," to the sentence, "Lessee shall begin an initial lead removal operation on the Premises within the first eighteen (18) months of lease signing" in Section 4.3. Councilor Navickas/Jackson m/s to amend motion to include into Section 4.3 the following: "complete within a maximum time period of five years with a specified time frame to be defined by the Environmental Assessment" under Section 4.5. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Jackson, Hardesty and Silbiger YES. Motion passed. Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s to amend motion to move "as approved by Council" from the end of the sentence to follow "timelines of the management plan." Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Jackson, Hardesty and Silbiger YES. Motion passed. Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s to amend motion to include the following: "including 3-5 year clean up intervals." Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Navickas and Hardesty YES, Councilors Chapman, Jackson and Silbiger NO. Mayor Morrison, NO. Motion fails 4-3. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l'vlEETlNG August 5, 2008 PAGE 4 oI8 Councilor Hardesty/ mls to amend motion to include into Section 4.3 the following: "3-5 year clean up intervals as a minimum." DISCUSSION: City Attorney Richard Appicello explained that the language in the motion was similar to what was currently in the lease. City Administrator Martha Bennett offered the following alternative language: "at intervals of at least every five years." Councilor Hardesty withdrew motion. Councilor Hardesty/Navickas mls to amend motion to include into Section 4.3 the following: After EP A's Best Practices, "including clean up at intervals of at least every five years." DISCUSSION: It was suggested to add "including clean up" prior to "at intervals of at least every five years." Councilor Hardesty agreed to add "including clean up" to the motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Jackson, Hardesty and Silbiger YES. Motion passed. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to amend motion to include into Section 4.5, #4 the following: "a . management plan" between developing and feasible and add "prevention" between remediation and options. DISCUSSION: Councilor Chapman noted that the four points in Section 4.5 are the minimal points to consider when doing an environmental assessment and that the management plan follows the environmental assessment and is separate from the plan. Councilor Hartzell agreed to withdraw the motion if language was added that specifically stated that the City would be responsible for developing a management plan. Councilor Jackson voiced concern that Council was over defining the terms and that it might make the lease harder to enforce. Councilor Hartzell withdrew the motion with consent by Councilor Jackson. Councilor Hartzell motioned to amend motion to include into Section 4.5, #3 the following: Add a period after "notifying Lessor and the appropriate regulatory body as required." New sentence to read: "The City will develop and adopt a management plan with feasible remediation and prevention options that includes timeframes, costs, ongoing monitoring and removal from entire property." Strike the following language: "The management plan must be approved by Council." Motion dies for lack of second. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to amend motion to include into Section 4.3, paragraph 2, line 5, the following: "The City will develop and adopt a management plan that at a minimum identifies remediation, prevention and control strategies." DISCUSSION: It was suggested to add "at a minimum," following, "management plan". Councilor Hartzell agreed to add the language to the motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Jackson, Hardesty and Silbiger YES. Motion passed. Councilor Chapman/Hartzell mls to adopt the revised legal property description of August 4, 2008. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell suggested adding that the Gun Club is accountable for any contamination ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 5, 2008 PAGE 5 of8 that may have occurred in the Riparian Corridor due to Club activity and exclude the Riparian Corridor from the lease after the clean up, if needed, occurred. Assistant City Attorney Megan Thornton said that adding the Riparian Corridor in Exhibit D to Article 1. Definitions, 11) Premises, would allow the City to maintain control over those areas. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Navickas, Jackson, Silbiger, Chapman and Hardesty YES: Councilor Hartzell NO. Motion passed 5-1. City Attorney Richard Appicello suggested adding the following to Section 4.5 at the end of the paragraph: "After clean up of the Riparian area or earlier, upon written request of the City, the Riparian area will be removed from the lease premises by formal amendment." Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to amend motion and add the following: "After clean up of the Riparian area or earlier, upon written request of the City, the Riparian area will be removed from the lease premises by formal amendment." Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman YES. Motion passed. Councilor JacksonlNavickas m/s to amend motion and change the location of the following sentence: "If lead is discovered in the Riparian zones, then a plan will be developed to be approved by the Community Development Department Director that will address lead removal, disposal, and restoration of the Riparian zones," to the next to the last sentence in the paragraph under Section 4.5. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman YES. Motion passed. Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to amend motion and add the following sentence: "a maximum to four times per year," to "The Ashland Police Department may utilize the shooting ranges outside of the standard hours of operation for specialized training." Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Silbiger and Chapman YES: Councilors Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman NO. Mayor Morrison broke the tie vote with a NO. Motion fails 4-3. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s to amend motion and change the last sentence in Section 4.3 as follows: "It is the intention of the Lessor and Lessee that compliance with the management plan during the term of the agreement will make posting of financial security unnecessary." DISCUSSION: City Attorney Richard Appicello explained that the original sentence was a summary of the paragraph and not necessary. Council Hartzell withdrew the motion with consent by Councilor Jackson. Councilor ChapmanlSilbiger m/s to approve an order to City Council authorizing a lease of property to the Ashland Gun Club as amended. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Chapman, Navickas, Jackson, Hardesty and Silbiger YES: Councilor Hartzell NO. Motion passed 5-1. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Will the Council reject the initiated measure which requires food establishments post grade based on health services and submit the initiated measure to the voters on November 4, 2008? City Recorder Barbara Christensen presented the staff report on the proposed initiated measure and explained that the measure had met all the required election laws and that the Chief Petitioner had presented the required number of signatures to place it before the Council for their consideration. She stated that the Council options were to either accept or reject the initiated measure. That accepting the measure would mean adoption of the first reading of an ordinance and by rejecting it, would place it before the voters at the next election which is the November 2008 General Election. She stated that staff was not making a recommendation as this was a ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 5, 2008 PAGE 6 oI8 decision that needed to be made by the Council. PUBLIC TESTIMONY John Jory/188 Sunnyview/Explained that administration costs would be minimal after the inspection with fewer than 250 grade cards distributed per year. He suggested passive enforcement and explained that only 10% of Ashland restaurants receive low grades. He spoke of a daily fine that the City could act on when financially feasible. Restaurants could request a new inspection within a couple of weeks for $250-$350 to change the grade sooner than waiting for the next scheduled inspection. Drew Bailey/455 N Laurel/Explained he was the Regional Representative for the Restaurant Association. He reminded Council that they had previously opposed a similar proposal two years ago. He affirmed that the restaurant community strongly opposed the initiative. He concluded that as an Ashland taxpayer, he would rather see his money go to hiring more police officers or fund a fire station. He requested the initiative go to the voters. Michelle Glass/212 E Main Street/Explained that she was the Food and Beverage Director at the Ashland Springs Hotel. She stated one issue with the initiative was the cost to the City of Ashland and Ashland taxpayers to duplicate an already existing, fully transparent and funded system. Another issue was that the grading system would not protect the public from food born illness. A low score may not pertain to food born related illnesses and a high score facility could have significant food handling problems. Ashland's restaurant community would support a system that ensures food safety but the proposed measure did not provide that. She requested that the initiative go to the voters. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to reject the citizens measure in order to place it before the voters. DISCUSSION: Council shared support for the measure to go to the voters. Mayor voiced his opposition to the measure as having logistical drawbacks. It would cost the City money in materials, ensuring correct grades were posted, and might require hiring additional staff. It would also put the City between Jackson County Food Inspectors and restaurant owners with the City having little control over County rules. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Silbiger, Hardesty, Jackson and Chapman YES: Councilors Hartzel and Navickas NO. Motion passed 4-2. 2. Which four legislative priorities would the City Council select as the top priorities for the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) during the 2009 session of the Oregon Legislature? Mayor Morrison explained that Council needed to prioritize four items from a list of 24 issues for the Oregon League of Cities to address in the upcoming Legislative session. Councilor m/s to select Item E, Item G, Item Q, and Item U as top priorities for the LOC during the 2009 legislature. No action was taken on the motion due to time constraints. 3. Does the Council wish to endorse the Ashland Forest Resiliency (AFR) Project Preferred Alternative? PUBLIC TESTIMONY Tony Kerwin/350 W Nevada/Explained he was the Chair of the Ashland Forest Lands Commission and provided an overview on the six differences doucmented in the Ashland Forest Lands Commission Recommedations for the Modification of the AFR Project Preferred Alternative. Darren Borgias/503 Strawberry Lane/Explained he was the Staff Ecologist for the Nature Conservancy. He ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l\4EETlNG August 5, 2008 PAGE 70f8 said the watershed is threatened by potentially large fires because it has not had a fire for a century. The APR Project would reduce the imminent threat of severe fire and help protect the natural values of the watershed functions by carefully removing young trees in strategic sites. He encouraged Council to endorse the plan. Chris Chambers/590 Elizabeth Ave/Explained he was a member of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Community Alternative Technical (APRCA T) team. He noted that the Community Alternative focuses more on forest health than forest services. He added there was no road building associated with the project even though there would be treatments in roadless areas and possible commercial extraction. He clarified that the number of helipads would be far less than the 31 discussed at the Study Session. He encouraged Council to endorse the plan. Marty Main/2779 Camp Baker, Medford/Commented on the collaborative effort that had gone into the project and how they had tried to adhere to the Community Alternatives as much as possible and did not feel the original intent had been changed in a significant way. Terrence Stenson/172 Alida/Noted that the report did not include water table restoration in the drought stricken watershed. The restoration of riparian water tables in the tributary streams of the watershed should be the primary goal of the Forest Services response to the danger of catastrophic fire in the watershed. He explained the toxic hazards that occur when wood is put into streams and noted that 4 times in Chapter 8 ofthe APRCA report; there is mention of putting woody materials into streams. He stressed that the entire watershed will turn anaerobic if the report is implemented. Councilor Chapman/Jackson m/s to endorse the US Forest Service Preferred Alternative for the AFR project and encourage the Forest Service to consider the modifications proposed by the Ashland Forest Lands Commission and to continue to engage our community members as the plan moves forward. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s to amend the motion with the recommendations of the Forest Lands Commission to retain the Community Alternatives recommendation for non-commercial under story treatment in the roadless area with 7-inch diameter base limit. In recommendation #3, to hold the Community Alternatives recommendation for diameter limits in the roadless area. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty expressed concern regarding the time frame to make a decision when Council still had questions they wanted to discuss. Councilor Jackson suggested moving the motion forward with the knowledge that Council could come back with comments and questions later. Councilor Silbiger said he did not want to second-guess the Forest Land Commissions recommendations. Councilor Chapman stated he would not support the amendment. Councilor Navickas urged the Council to table the amendment and motion for further discussion. Councilor Hartzell/N avickas m/s to table the amendment. No action was taken on the motion due to time constraints. 4. Will the Council approve a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station? No action due to time constraints. ORDINANCES~ RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 10.46, Prohibiting Camping, Revising Penalties, Clarifying and Amending Timeframes and Procedures, and Other Requirements" and move the ordinance on to second ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l1,lEETlNG August 5, 2008 PAGE 8 0.f8 reading? No action due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERSIREPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:28 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor ----------- /--" '-;J /"/ ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION July 1,2008 MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: RICHARD HENDRICKSON, RUSS SILBIGER, LINCOLN ZEVE, DAVID WOLSKE, ALAN DEBOER, TOM BRADLEY, BILL SKILLMAN, GOA LOBAUGH STAFF: SCOTT FLEURY MEMBERS ABSENT: BRITTANY WISE, BOB SKINNER Visitors: Larry Graves 1. CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 AM 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 6, 2008, minutes approved as written. 3. Public Forum: No Public Forum comments 4. OLD BUSINESS: A. Fuel Flowage Surcharge: Commission still interested in raising fuel flowage surcharge in order to help pay of fuel tank debt. Fleury to check on remaining balance for fuel tanks along with a history of the monthly fuel consumption at the Airport. B. Noise Sensitive Area Map: No known problems or issues came up to Council regarding the map and newspaper article in the Tidings. Fleury reports the map is ready to be printed and will work with Lea Light from the City G.I.S. Department to print map out to correct size and folding pattern. After printing is complete Fleury to work on getting .pdf version of map uploaded onto City Commission webpage for downloading. Commission would also like Skinner to add blurb into monthly bill when new map is available. C. West Jackson St.: No new complaint issues have developed and Commission considers this issue over. D. AlP Project List: Commission has a concern over Grant application deadlines for projects and would like Fleury to research dates and monies available for Airport improvements. The previous parking lot reconstruction and SuperAwos project is complete and The City of Ashland has received money for the project. The next set of projects for AlP include runway overlay, new taxiway and PAPI's to replace existing V ASI lights. Also Commission would like to have a yellow taxi-way stripe laid down: Fleury to research and work with street crew to stripe taxi-ways. E. Tregg Scott commission application: Scott had interview with Mayor and is awaiting Council approval to become newest member of Airport Commission. 5. NEW BUSINESS: A. Lease Development Update: Lindner Lease was written by Legal and reviewed by Lindner. Airport Commission to receive and review Lease Documents at next meeting. Legal is currently working on the Burl Brim Lease and will then move onto the Skinner Lease. B. Airport Day Review: Airport Day was a success but safety is a concern due to a taxi-way incursion between a parked aircraft and a moving aircraft. Commission agreed that safety is a priority and needs to be addressed before the next Airport Appreciation Day. Hendrickson would like the Commission to put together a subcommittee to outline safety precautions for the next Airport Day. Wolske mentions that each aircraft with a spinning prop should have a marshal watching it and controlling the crowd in the vicinity. C. Meteorlogix Weather System: Final bill of 318.00 has been paid and service with Meteorlogix has been terminated. D. Stand Alone Computer System: Commission members who have used the new system for C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\July 1 2008.doc 1 ---nr--T- weather reports state that it works fine and are pleased with it. Icons are set on desktop for various weather related sites. 6. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION: A. Status of Airport. Financial Report. Review of Safety Reports B. Maintenance Updates - Peters installed first hanger number on DeBoer Hanger. Commission to review initial number sign and approve or recommend changes at next meeting. 7. OTHER: The meeting of the JC airport commission is the third Monday of the month at 12:00 PM. 8. NEXT MEETING DATE: August 5, 2008, 9:30 AM ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 10:45 AM C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\July 1 2008.doc 2 Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission June 19th, 2008 Regular Minutes Roll Call: Chair David Young, Vice Chair Julia Sommer, Secretary Jim Olney, Steve Ryan, Tom Burnham (absent) Council Liaison: Kate Jackson and David Chapman Staff: Rachel Teige, Parks Department Recreation Superintendent Steve McLennan, Police Officer Derek Severson, Associate Planner RVTD liaisons: Paige Townsend, RVTD Senior Planner (absent) High school liaison: Vacant SOU liaison: Eve Woods Call to Order Chair Young called the meeting to order at 5: 16 p.m. Approval of Minutes - Mav 15th, 2008 The minutes were approved as presented. Introductions City Councilor Kate Jackson, the new City Council liaison to the Commission was introduced. Jenna Stanke, Jackson County's new Special Projects Coordinator, was also introduced. It was noted that Stanke replaces Karen Smith, and is staffing the County's Bicycle Advisory Committee. Stanke explained that she was formerly with the Rogue Valley Council of Governments and worked extensively on the extension of the Greenway from Central Point to Grants Pass. Stanke briefly discussed the Bicycle Advisory Committee, her work on the Greenway to extend the trail along the Rogue River, the status of the Barnett Road crossing, and her hope to work more closely with the Commission in the future. Public Forum Dr. Gary McGraw/423 Lit Way discussed his recent accident on the Greenway and noted his concern with the use ofbollards as a way to restrict motor vehicle access. He emphasized that he wanted to bring awareness to this topic as a risk management issue, and added that it is even more of a concern for night commuters due to lack of lighting on the bikepath. He noted that in Chico, California, an experienced rider hit a bollard and is now paralyzed. He added that he hopes this will be considered in future Greenway work, including that associated with Verde Village. He urged the Commission to consider a safer bollard design, other means to restrict motor vehicle access, and better signage. He suggested that bollard could be removed and signage could have the same effect. Stanke suggested considering some form of rumble strip in advance of the bollards. 2008-0619 Bike & Ped minutes Page 1 of3 Subcommittee & Liaison Reports Woods discussed her efforts tabling at the University's Raider Day, where she spoke to more than 100 students about bicycle and pedestrian safety. She noted that the Traffic Safety Commission staff had generously provided great brochures to assist with this effort, and she discussed the Ad Hoc Siskiyou Safety Committee. She indicated that she was working to have an orientation program on campus safety. Severson provided a staff update on the Ad Hoc Siskiyou Safety Commission, the Transit Open House, and the Wheeldon Memorial. Sommer discussed the effectiveness of the rumble strips on Siskiyou Boulevard and suggested that more might be useful. Ryan discussed pedestrian behavior and the need to increase bus service to address evenings and weekends. Severson noted that Egon Dubois of the BT A had made a request that the Commission express its support to the Parks Foundation to reimburse "Kidical Mass" printing costs. It was explained that the Kidical Mass event is an extension of the bicycle safety education program in local schools that gives children and their parents and opportunity to ride together in traffic, and that Dubois has been paying the printing cost for promotional materials out of his own pocket since the event began in April. After consideration, members expressed their support for reimbursing this expense out of Bike Swap bicycle safety education funds through the Parks Foundation. Ryan discussed Car Free Day planning, noting that the planning at this stage included a two week-long bike commute challenge, with an Oak Street event and street closure from 4:00 to 7:00 on Monday and street cafe by Standing Stone. He noted that there would be live music, and that the event planning was moving ahead. Severson noted that the City Administrator had approved the recommendation that the City be the sponsor for this event, and that Ryan's role was as Commission liaison. Severson added that the event planning would not be a regular agenda item, but that Ryan could provide updates as liaison or bring requests back to the Commission as needed. Rachel Teige, Parks Department Recreation Superintendent and Tracy Harding, Bike Swap Coordinator, gave a debriefing of this year's Bike Swap event. Teige noted that Harding had coordinated this year's event, and noted that the event was the most successful in the four years that the Parks Department has been involved, with 207 pieces of equipment sold and sales of approximately $18,000. Attendance was up by more than 100, there were twice as many vendors, and 75 volunteers. This generated roughly $3,100 to the Bike Swap fund for bicycle safety education, and Teige noted that with carryover the fund balance was approximately $11,000. Severson noted that there would be a request for payment coming shortly from the BT A for this year's bicycle safety education classes which would significantly reduce that balance. Teige stated that they will be ordering more lights, helmets and pedometers as all sold well at the event. It was noted that there may be a minimum charge per bike next year as there were a lot of lower quality bikes sold this year, and the event may be shortened by one hour. Teige and Harding discussed the promotion, noting that a new staff person in Parks and the Coordinator position helped with outreach efforts. It was noted that the Safety Chicken had been on hand for the event, as at Earth Day. Harding explained that left-over bikes went to Goodwill, 2008-0619 Bike & Ped minutes Page 2 of3 ---nr~--. the Ashland Community Bike Program, Migrant HeadStart, or were sold as scrap metal depending on their type and condition. Teige concluded with a recommendation that at least $2,000 be retained in the Bike Swap fund to cover the coordinator salary, promotion, and the cost of helmets, lights and pedometers. Transportation Commission Members discussed the possible creation of a Transportation Commission, noting that the details of the transition from two Commissions (Bicycle & Pedestrian and Traffic Safety) to one (Transportation) needed to be clearly addressed. Chapman emphasized the need to clearly address transit as a priority, and suggested that the Commission's relationship to the Planning Commission and planning process needed to be clear. He also suggested formalizing a liaison relationship with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Severson explained that it was staff s intent to have the Commission involved in the planning process at the pre-application level - this would provide advanced notice of actions which the Commission might have concerns with and provide opportunity to comment while not tying up each meeting with land use hearings. Jackson noted that the 120-day rule, which requires a final decision from the city within 120-days of the submission of a complete land use application, drives the planning process and dictates the timeframe allowed for commission participation in decisions. She added that after considering this, the Housing Commission recently determined that the pre-application process was the most appropriate place to be involved in the process. Members expressed unanimous support for the creation of a Transportation Commission, noting the importance to maintain support for the established bicycle safety education program and partnership with the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BT A). New Business None. Aaenda Items for Next Month Members noted the need to further discuss bollards on the Greenway. Adiournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. 2008-0619 Bike & Ped minutes Page 3 of3 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES June 10, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Commissioner Dotterrer called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E Main Street. Commissioners Present: John Stromberg Dave Dotterrer Michael Church Staff Present: Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Absent Members: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Hearings Board Minutes of May 13, 2008 will be approved at June 10, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS A. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00741 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 135 Susan Lane APPLICANT: Milo Shubat DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 21 % square foot addition to an existing residence located at 135 Susan Lane and to exceed the Maximum Permitted Floor Area for a single-family dwelling in the Historic District by approximately 20 percent. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single- Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E 05 DO; TAX LOT: 8102 No discussion. Action stands as approved. B. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00731 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 358 High Street/60 Wimer Street APPLICANT: Mark and Elizabeth Schoenleber DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a three-unit (includes owner's quarters) Traveler's Accommodation for the property located at 358 High Street and 60 Wimer Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2 ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 1 E 05 DO; TAX LOTS: 3700 & 3800 No discussion. Action stands as approved. C. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00594 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 954 Siskiyou Blvd. APPLICANT: Gregory Adams DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review approval for an office use in and R-2 zone, with an apartment upstairs for the property located at 954 Siskiyou Blvd. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2 ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E 09 DO; TAX LOT: 100 No discussion. Action stands as approved. Page 1 of 2 D. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00813 SUBJECT PROPERTY: Water Street Bridge/Overpass APPLICANT: City of Ashland DESCRIPTION: Request for a Governmental Sign Conditional Use Permit for the installation of artwork on the underside of the Oregon Dept of Transportation bridge/overpass located within the right of way between the properties addressed as 51 Water St and 96 North Main St. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial ZONING: C-1 ASSESSOR'S MAP#: TAX LOT: N/A - Located within ODOT Public right of way No discussion. Action stands as approved. Permit Center Manager Adam Hanks reminded the commissioners that this was the last Hearings Board Meeting prior to the amended Land Use Ordinance taking effect. He clarified the Hearings Board would be convened only as needed from this point forward. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 1 :35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES JULY 8, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Commissioner Dotterrer called the meeting to order at 1 :30 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E Main Street. Commissioners Present: John Stromberg Michael Dawkins Michael Church Staff Present: Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager Amy Anderson, Assistant Planner Angela Barry, Assistant Planner April Lucas, Administrative Assistant APPROVAL OF MINUTES Stromberg announced the June 10, 2008 Hearings Board minu~es would be approved at tonight's Planning Commission meeting. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS A. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00762 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 146 & 156 Clear Creek OWNER/APPLICANT: BSR LLC DESCRIPTION: Site Review approval for two, attached wall 3-story mixed-use commercial and residential buildings. The two buildings comprise approximately 5,500 square feet. The ground floor of each building will be office and the upper two floors residential space. Two residential units are proposed in the development. The site is located in the Detail Site Review Zone, and is subject to the Detail Site Review Standards. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 1 E 09BA; TAX LOTS: 14704 & 14705 No discussion. Action stands as approved. B. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00654 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 508 Tucker APPLICANT: David Oas & Lyn Owens DESCRIPTION: Request for a two-lot Minor Land Partition approval for the property located at 508 Tucker. The new parcel will front on Thornton Way. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 1 E 05BD; TAX LOTS: 1801 No discussion. Action stands as approved. C. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00596 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 165 W Fork Street APPLICANT: Ashley Jensen DESCRIPTION: Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the development of hillside lands including severe constraints land. The proposal is to construct a new single-family residential home, the associated excavation for utility installations and driveway construction. The application also includes an Administrative Variance for the height of the retaining wall along the north property line to exceed the allowed five-foot height limit. Property is located at 165 W. Fork. Page 1 of 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 1E 09BC; TAX LOTS: 3600 Assistant Planner Amy Anderson requested the Board review the Historic Commission recommendations. She explained applying these recommendations could cause significant changes to the application and therefore affect staff's approval. Ms. Anderson noted the applicant's planner and architect have not had the opportunity to review the recommendations submitted by the Historic Commission. Church noted he has questions regarding the retaining wall issue and commented that this lot is almost un-developable. He suggested this item come back before the Hearings Board as a Type II application, which would allow the applicant and their architect time to review the Historic Commission's recommendations and work with staff. Stromberg noted this lot was grandfathered in and voiced support for having the applicant go back and work with staff. Commissioners Church/Dawkins m1s for this application come back to the Hearings Board as a Type II application on the next. available agenda. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Church and Stromberg, YES. Motion passed 3-0. D. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00925 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 872 B Street APPLICANT: Dan Heller and Mary Beth Burton DESCRIPTION: Site Review approval for a 390 square foot addition to the second story of an existing residence that is part of a multi-family development located at 872 B Street. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low- Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2 ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E 09AC; TAX LOTS: 200' No discussion. Action stands as approved. E. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00907 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 33 Morse Street APPLICANT: Polly Hodges DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit intensification of use of an existing non-conforming garage located at 33 Morse. The proposal is to convert the garage into an addition to the existing home. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 1 E 09AD; TAX LOTS: 5800 Assistant Planner Amy Anderson noted the Historic Commission's recommendations for this application should not be difficult for the applicant to meet and would not affect any other code requirements. She clarified the applicant was present at the Historic Commission meeting and is aware of the recommendations. Action stands as approved. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00910 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 303 & 323 Oak Street APPLICANT: Barry Peckham DESCRIPTION: Minor land partition to divide the property at 303 Oak Street into two lots with one lot being a flag lot. The flag lot would share a driveway with the property at 323 Oak Street. The application includes a Variance request to reduce the required setback from 20 feet to 13 feet, a Variance request to reduce the required parking from 5 spaces to 3 spaces, and a Variance request to not pave the flag driveway. The applicant includes a request for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit for one parking space to encroach into the area designated as Flood Plain Corridor by the Land Use Ordinance. The application also includes a Tree Removal Permit for the removal of 3 trees, a 15-inch diameter-at-breast-height walnut tree, a 6-inch diameter-at- breast-height cherry tree, and a 6-inch diameter-at-breast-height mimosa tree. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E 04CC; TAX LOTS: 5900 & 6000 Church read aloud the public hearing procedure for land use hearings. Page 2 of 3 Declaration of Ex Parte Contact Stromberg indicated he performed a site visit, but had no ex parte contact. Church stated he went past the site, but has not been on the property. Dawkins stated he is familiar with the site. Staff Report Assistant Planner Angela Barry presented the staff report. She stated the property is approximately 12,000 sq. ft in size, it is zoned R-2, and is located in the Railroad Historic District and the Riparian Protection Zone. Ms. Barry explained the applicant is requesting a minor land partition to divide the property into two lots, with one being a flag lot. She stated the flag lot would share a driveway with the property at 323 Oak Street and the application includes the following variance requests: 1) Reduce the required setback from 20 ft. to 13 ft. in order to shift the building envelope away from the riparian area at the back of the property and maintain the historic property in the front. 2) Reduce the required parking from 5 spaces to 3 spaces. Ms. Barry clarified the proposal would still be an improvement over the current parking situation. 3) A variance request to not pave the flag driveway, which would allow them to preserve the tree. Ms. Barry noted the applicant is also requesting a Physical and Environmental Constraints permit to remove three trees on the lot. She indicated staff is recommending approval with the proposed conditions. Applicants Presentation Mark Knox/700 Mistletoe Rd, Suite 204lStated this application is not as complex as it sounds. He explained the applicant does not want to damage the historic integrity of the site and commented on a few of the elements of the application. Mr. Knox spoke to the current parking situation and stated this proposal would solve that problem. He also commented on the paving variance for the flag driveway, and explained this would save the Cedar tree located between the two houses. Barry Peckham/303 Oak Street/Stated that he is the applicant and has owned this property for 30 years. Mr. Peckham noted that he has collaborated with his neighbor on this project and stated he intends to build his last home on this property. He clarified it would be a one-story home and would be as energy efficient as possible. Public Testimonv None Deliberations and Decision Commissioners Church/Dawkins m/s to approve PA 2008-00910 with the conditions proposed by staff. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Church, Dawkins, and Stromberg, YES. Motion passed 3-0. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 2:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES July 8, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Commission Chair John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: John Stromberg, Chair Michael Dawkins Mike Morris Debbie Miller Michael Church Pam Marsh Melanie Mindlin Tom Dimitre Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Assistant Planner Angela Barry April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Absent Members: Dave Dotterrer, excused Council Liaison: Cate Hartzell, arrived at 8:20 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioners Miller/Dimitre m/s to approve agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 8-0. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. June 10, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes. 2. June 24, 2008 Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes. Commissioners Church/Dimitre m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 8-0. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00359 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 265 North Main Street APPLICANT: Lithia Arts Guild DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a portion of the former Briscoe Elementary School building and the surrounding grounds to be used for individual artists' workspaces and community events. The application requests permanent approval for a yearly event that was previously approved on a temporary basis. The applicant is requesting to host 11 additional events per year in addition to the previously approved event. The application also includes a Type II Variance to parking to allow the parking for events to be off-site in the adjacent neighborhood. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E 05 DO; TAX LOT: 2500 Stromberg read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Page 1 of 4 Declaration of Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Miller, Morris, Marsh, Dimitre, Church, Mindlin, Dawkins and Stromberg all reported no ex parte contact. Staff Report Assistant Planner Angela Barry provided a brief overview of the application and clarified the applicant has requested the public hearing be re-opened in order to submit new conditions that respond to the concerns expressed at the last hearing. The new conditions submitted by the applicant were summarized as the following: 1) The annual outdoor events would be limited to the Midsummers Dream event, the First Nations Day event, and a maximum of two other one-day events. 2) The Midsummers Dream event would be permitted between the hours of 10 a.m. and 8 p.m. on Saturday, and 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Sunday. Sound amplification at this event will not exceed 95 decibels between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m., and 75 decibels between 6 p.m. and 8 p.m. A sound technician will be required to be present to ensure the event complies with these requirements. 3) Sound amplification at the First Nations Day will be limited to single speakers and will not be audible more than 250 ft. from the site. There will be no amplification of music or drumming. 4) The two, one-cfay events will be limited to a maximum of 350 attendees, the events will conclude at 6 p.m., and there will be no sound amplification or drumming permitted. 5) Indoor events open to the public will be limited to a maximum of 5 weekend events and 12 evening events per year. 6) The Guild will deliver notice to each residence within two blocks of the site 60 days prior to the Midsummer s Dream and First Nations Day events, along with notice that the Guild will provide traffic barricades, upon request, to those residents who wish to protect the parking spaces in front of their homes. 7) The Guild will arrange for traffic and parking direction during the Midsummers Dream and First Nations Day events. Ms. Barry recommended Condition 6 proposed by the applicant be amended to read "The Guild will provide traffic barricades, upon request, to residents who wish to protect their driveway entrances. Barricades shall not be used to block on-street parking." She also recommended the following language be added to Condition 7, "The applicant shall submit a traffic control plan for review and approval by the Ashland Engineering Department prior to implementing any traffic control measures on City of Ashland public right-of-ways. All traffic control measures are subject to City of Ashland standards and must be according to the approved traffic control plan." Ms. Barry noted the applicant has requested permanent approval, and if the Commission feels this is appropriate, they should strike Condition 9. Mr. Molnar clarified if they are granted permanent approval, and the applicant wished to add an event, that would be considered a modification to the CUP and it would have to come back before the Planning Commission. . Applicants Presentation Jim Young/1102 Holton Rd, Talent/Chair of the Lithia Arts Guild/Commented on the work that was done following the public hearing to reach an agreement with the concerned neighbors. He commented on their relationship with the Methodist Church and clarified the church has not expressed any concerns with them starting at 11 a.m. on Sundays. Mr. Young noted the condition regulating decibel levels and explained these were determined after observing the levels at this year's Midsummers Dream event. He commented briefly on possible traffic control measures and gave an example of how fencing is used at the Saturday markets in Eugene. Mr. Young noted their request for permanent approval and stated they would prefer to not have to come back annually. He reminded the Commission of the Guild's relationships with the School Board and the Methodist Church, and recommended they not be required to draw up a formal parking agreement with the church. Public Testimonv Bev Thurston/103 S. Laurel/Noted she lives directly across the street from the site and stated they have worked very hard to reach this agreement and find solutions that will work for the whole neighborhood. She noted they were able to gather decibel measurements at the recent Midsummers Dream event and explained the sound technician used a meter to gather this information. Ms. Thurston commented on the 60 day noticing requirement and stated this would provide neighbors adequate notice if they wished to go out of town. She stated a traffic control plan is a wonderful idea and voiced her support for granting permanent approval, so long as the applicant complies with the conditions. Rebuttal bv the Applicant Jim Young/Stated they are willing to develop the traffic control plan recommended by staff, and thanked the Briscoe neighborhood for hosting these events. Page 2 of 4 Stromberg announced the public hearing and the record were now closed. Deliberations and Decision Commissioners Church/Dawkins m/s to approve PA 2008-00359, 265 North Main Street, with the staff recommended condition corrections. DISCUSSION: Dawkins suggested modifying Condition 10 to state if the church issues a complaint about the parking situation, this would trigger a violation of the CUP. Stromberg questioned to how to structure the condition to make this enforceable. Marsh noted there is letter of cooperation in the record from the church, and suggested the condition state "should the church rescind their letter of cooperation, it will trigger a review of the application" or something similar. Mindlin recommended they eliminate Condition 9 regarding periodic review of the CUP. Marsh suggested they strike Condition 13 and rewrite Condition 6 to read, IThe Guild will deliver a notice to each residence within the parking impact area, at least 30 days prior to the Midsummers Dream event and at least 30 days prior to the First Nations Day event. . ." Morris asked if the Guild could distribute an annual events calendar to the neighborhood to satisfy this condition. Comment was made voicing support for the 60 day notification timeline brought forward by the applicant. The Commission briefly discussed the remainder of Condition 6 which addresses traffic barricades. Suggestion was made to amend this language to read, II.. . the Guild will provide traffic barricades, upon request, to residents within 2 blocks of the site..." Dawkins questioned Condition 11 regarding the placement of temporary fencing. Staff clarified the Commission could eliminate the language addressing the placement of the fencing and rely on the traffic control plan listed in Condition 7. Ms. Barry summarized the changes recommended by the Commission and clarified the conditions would be amended as follows: 1) Condition 6 will read, liThe Guild will deliver a notice to each residence within the parking impact area, at least 30 days prior to the Midsummers Dream event and at least 30 days prior to the First Nations Day event, of the days and hours of such event, together with a notice that the Guild will provide traffic barricades, upon request, to residents within 2 block of the site who wish to protect their driveway entrances. Barricades shall not be used to block on-street parking. " 2) Condition 9 will be eliminated. 3) Condition 10 will read, IIlfthe Methodists Church revokes its agreement to cooperate with The Guild to share its parking area, the application will be subject to review. " 4) Condition 11 will read, "If the temporary fencing proposed by the applicant as a pedestrian safety measure is used, it shall be installed not more than 24 hours prior to the event and be removed within 24 hours of the end of the event." 5) Condition 13 will be eliminated. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Mindlin, Church, Miller, Morris, Dimitre, Stromberg and Marsh, all AYES. Motion passed 8-0. OTHER BUSINESS A. Update on Water Resources Ordinance: Field Trips and Responses to Issues. Stromberg noted some of the commissioners attended the field trip organized by staff and stated the group visited several sites that would be impacted by the Water Resources Ordinance. He asked those that attended the field trip to share their thoughts and observations. Dawkins commented that a building envelope as close 10 ft. could be problematic, and observed that the TID was responsible for the creeks at the Peachy Street and Tolman Creek properties they visited. He expressed concern with not allowing people to mechanically weed their property and voiced his appreciation to owners who have enhanced their creekside areas. Mindlin noted that some of the improvements they observed would not be allowed under the proposed ordinance. She commented on the plants at the Helman and Paradise properties and noted these owners tried to work with native plants for a long time before switching to other plants. Church stated he received conflicting data on whether native plants would work. He commented that a 10ft. setback from the bank was too small and stated there are conflicting standards between what private parties can do compared to public agencies. He stated the public agencies will have to live by the same rules or no one will take this ordinance seriously. Miller commented on the need to educate people on what the problem is and why the ordinance is necessary. Council Liaison Hartzell arrived at 8:20 p.m. Page 3 of 4 Stromberg noted one of the property owner's suggestion to measure from the center of the stream, rather than top of bank. He questioned how this ordinance would be enforced and how to apply the regulations to everyone. He added the Commission will need to consider how this ordinance will affect properties such as the Water Street Inn and Lithia Parle B. Sustainability Planning: Initial Steps Stromberg noted Mindlin, Dawkins, Dimitre and himself have been talking about formulating an agenda item for the next Study Session. He recommended they start this process by establishing an inventory of what is going on with sustainability in the community. Marsh recommended they check with the League of Cities to see if they have some of this information. Stromberg requested the commissioners submit any ideas or information they have to him. C. Update on Water Resources Ordinance: Field Trips and Responses to Issues. (Continued) Comment was made questioning where the Commission was in this process and what the next steps are. Mr. Molnar stated the Water Resources Ordinance would likely come back to the Commission at the July Study Session. He noted the Commission has not had the opportunity to really discuss the proposed ordinance and stated staff would like the Commission to move into more formal deliberations. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES July 22,2008 CALL TO ORDER Commission Chair John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E Main Street. Commissioners Present:: John Stromberg, Chair Michael Dawkins Mike Morris Michael Church Pam Marsh Melanie Mindlin Tom Dimitre Dave Dotterrer Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Maria Harris, Planning Manager Richard Appicello, City Attorney Angela Barry, Assistant Planner April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Absent Members: Debbie Miller, excused Council Liaison: Cate Hartzell APPROVAL OF AGENDA Stromberg added Public Forum to the agenda and moved adoption of the Lithia Arts Guild findings to the top of the agenda. ANNOUNCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar announced a joint meeting between the City Council and the Planning Commission has been tentatively scheduled for August 27, 2008. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the Croman Mill Redevelopment Plan, review the options, and identify a preferred alternative. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Adoption of Findings - PA 2008-00359, Lithia Arts Guild. . No ex parte contact was reported by any of the commissioners. Mr. Molnar noted revised Findings had been passed out to the Commission and noted the correction to Condition #10. Commissioners Marsh/Dawkins m/s to approve the Findings as presented. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Church, Dawkins, Mindlin, Dimitre, Morris, Stromberg and Marsh, YES. Commissioner Dotterrer abstained. Motion passed 7-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Water Resources Protection Zones Ordinance. Stromberg commented on the best way to proceed with this item and recommended they take public comment and keep the public hearing open until the end of their discussions in case they want to ask questions. Support was voiced by the Commission for this process. Terrence Stenson/172 Alida/Commented on the early civilization that occupied this valley and explained how the stream beds were altered. Mr. Stenson noted the materials he had previously submitted to the Commission and requested they include language in the ordinance that addresses the preservation and protection of the water tables. Page 1 of 4 Staff Presentation Senior Planner Maria Harris provided a presentation on the draft ordinance. She reviewed the public hearings the Planning Commission has had to date, and provided a timeline and project schedule. Stromberg noted the email submitted by Royce Duncan and summarized his comments. Stromberg clarified this correspondence would be included in the record. Ms. Harris continued her presentation and reviewed why this ordinance is necessary. She noted the Ashland Comprehensive Plan goals, as well as the City Council goals. Harris provided an explanation of State Planning Goal 5 and clarified the City is required to identify significant wetland and riparian corridors and adopt provisions protecting these lands. Comment was made questioning the level of requirement imposed by the State. Harris commented on the safe harbor approach and clarified the City would need to create findings and make their argument to the State if they deviate from the prescribed path. Hartzell commented briefly on tree canopies and how shade could assist in meeting the DEQ water temperature requirements. Ms. Harris continued with her presentation and provided explanations of the following key issues: 1) Local native plant species requirement. · Allow 15% to be planted in non-native vegetation. · Allow outdoor use area of up to 150 sq. ft. 2) Landscape maintenance in water resource protection zones. · Exempt removing non-native, noxious and invasive vegetation with hand-held equipment. · Prohibit removing native vegetation, trees greater than 6"dbh or soil disturbance. · Define hand-held equipment (100 Ibs or less). 3) Nonconforming structures and activities. · Exempt replacement of primary structures destroyed by fire or natural hazard. · Planning approval required to replace non-exempt structures. · Primary structure definition. 4) Nonconforming driveways and building envelopes. · Exempt construction of new driveways if approved prior to the ordinance. · Exempt construction of new structures on vacant lots in building envelopes if approved prior to ordinance. 5) Top of bank definition. · Amend definition to make more measurable. Ms. Harris noted the staff recommendation listed in the packet materials and requested the Commission move into deliberations and provide specific feedback on what their issues and concerns are. She clarified staff is scheduled to provide an update to Council in August and they need to know if they are on the right track. Top of Bank Definition Harris clarified this language was pulled from Portland's ordinance and asked if the Commission was comfortable with this definition. Mindlin noted Rick Landt's recommendation to measure top of bank from the center of the stream. Comment was made suggesting they compromise and keep the proposed method for fish bearing streams, but consider using the center line measurement for intermittent and local streams. Several commissioners voiced support for having separate measurements for small and large streams. Stromberg voiced concern with making the ordinance too complex and questioned if they should hear from a knowledgeable scientist on the possible risks before going with separate measurements. Dimitre agreed and stated he would like more information from a specialist to help them get a handle on this issue. Outdoor Use Area Marsh questioned the 150 sq. ft. figure and asked if they should consider using a percentage instead. Staff confirmed that a percentage could be used, but cautioned this could allow for some significant sized areas on larger lots. Several comments were made voicing support for the 150 sq. ft. limitation. Local Native Plant Species Hartzell commented that streams transfer seeds and roots into other areas and stated this is where the non-native plant requirement stems from. Dotterrer expressed concern with the 15% figure and felt this was too small. He voiced support for allowing some non-native species and questioned if this would have an impact on the water quality. Church clarified these Page 2 of 4 requirements would only apply to something new or if the owner needed to replace it. Stromberg stated he would like a scientist to verify that using all native plants achieves something. Dawkins commented that different scientists will give different opinions and feels they are making this more complex than it needs to be. He recommended they use a list of locally identified plants (both native and non-native) that are compatible with what they are trying to achieve. He added that he is also in favor of allowing food production within the protection zone. Mindlin agreed with Dawkins and voiced support for a list of plants, but questioned who would put the list together. She agreed that food production should be permitted, but questioned how they would address the fencing requirement. Dotterrer questioned how staff would measure the 15% limitation and felt using a percentage might make this too complicated. Dimitre commented that the ordinance needs to be enforceable and agreed that the 15% figure would be difficult to measure and hard to enforce. He stated he is not in favor of non-native species in the protection zone, but is open to hearing more from someone who is knowledgeable on this subject. Hartzell commented that native plants attract native species and feels this needs to be maintained. She added if they allow gardens there is a possibility people will clear the space to allow for more sunlight, rather than maintaining the shade. Morris voiced his opposition to allowing gardens and agreed that native plants were preferred. He also voiced concern with making the ordinance too complicated and stated it has to be clear and enforceable. Stromberg requested the commissioners share their final thoughts on this issue. Dimitre voiced opposition to non-native species within the protection zone and felt the 15% figure was unenforceable. Dotterrer stated he does not have any issues with allowing both native and non-native species and felt property owners should be allowed to landscape to a certain extent. He added he does not think gardens are a good idea in the riparian zone. Church stated he does not think they should allow a mix of native and non-native plants and felt they should get these areas back to a natural state. Dawkins restated his support for a list of allowable native and non-native species. Mindlin stated she is not in favor of the all native approach and would like to see a list of suitable plants. Marsh noted the staff report provides a convincing argument for requiring all native plants, but stated she is supportive of vegetable gardens. Commissioners Dotterrer/Church m/s to extend meeting to 10:00 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Landscape Maintenance Stromberg voiced support for the proposed parameters regarding landscape maintenance. Church commented on a situation where equipment had to be brought in to remove a large amount of blackberries. Staff clarified the proposed ordinance would not prohibit this type of removal, but it would trigger a review. The commission voiced general consensus for the proposed landscape maintenance requirements. Nonconforming Structures Comment was made questioning how this would affect the Plaza businesses. Staff clarified these areas could be rebuilt, but the ordinance would trigger a review before this is allowed. It was questioned if the ordinance could distinguish between commercial and residential. Morris commented if they wanted to take this approach, they would have to break it out by zone. Staff clarified the ordinance states the primary structure can be rebuilt, what would require planning approval are other structures, such as decks. City Attorney Richard Appicello commented that for commercial businesses there are other things that are required, such as parking areas, and suggested they include language that allows for the replacement of all structures that are essential for the continuation of the business. Comment was made questioning how this provision would affect Lithia Park. Mr. Molnar explained if Lithia Park were damaged by a flood, the Parks Department would be required to obtain a city permit to replace any structures. He clarified bridges are allowed to be constructed; however they are required to withstand a 1 DO-year flood. Dimitre commented that they should require structures to be built outside the riparian zone if this is available. Church agreed and stated they should make it possible to remove the nonconformities over time. Dawkins stated he is not in favor of replacing nonconforming structures and made a distinction between structures and houses. Morris expressed concern with how this would affect the Water Street Inn. Marsh voiced support for staffs recommendation and felt it was a good compromise. She noted it would only be a Type I permit process to replace the nonconforming structures. Stromberg expressed concern with how this provision might affect the downtown businesses and stated there is a difference between placing a burden on a residential owner and placing a burden on a business that is part of the City's economic process. Church questioned if it would be possible to make the downtown zone exempt. Mindlin stated if there is room to move the structure out of the protected area it should be moved, but if not, people should be allowed to have the same amount of use as before. Page 3 of 4 ---rTrI Nonconforming Driveways & Building Envelopes Morris commented on the Bud's Dairy project and questioned how this would be affected by the ordinance. It was clarified this site it located within the protection zone and the affordable housing has not been built yet. City Attorney Richard Appicello suggested they include language that establishes a "drop dead date." Commissioners Dawkins/Mindlin m/s to extend to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Dimitre voiced support for a time limit as suggested by Mr. Appicello. Mr. Molnar commented on the Bud's Dairy issue and clarified this is a unique situation and staff would have to look into how this ordinance would affect th?t project and the conditions of the planning approval. Several comments were made voicing support for including a timeline in this provision. Ms. Harris stated staff would need direction on how much time they would want to specify. She clarified there is a very limited set of properties that would be affected by a time limit. Dawkins voiced hesitation over whether this was necessary. Stromberg recommended they not make a decision at this time and come back to it. Stromberg recommended the commissioners submit any additional comments or concerns they may have. Stromberg announced the hearing would be continued to September 9, 2008. No objection was voiced by the commission. OTHER BUSINESS 1. Factoring Sustainability into the Comprehensive Plan. Stromberg commented on whether the Planning Commission should begin a process to incorporate sustainability into the planning process. He suggested they take an inventory of what is currently being done in the community and then bring a proposal before the Council for their approval. He stated they would need to incorporate all those who have some ownership of this issue and would need to make this a joint process. Stromberg asked the commissioners whether they should proceed with this task. Dotterrer expressed concern with how this project would affect staff and stated he does not think staff has enough time to work on this. Morris questioned how they would merge sustainability into the Comprehensive Plan and questioned if it was appropriate for the Commission to be undertaking this action. Marsh voiced support for getting the conversation started and noted there are other entities who may also want to get involved. Dawkins voiced his support for this item and stated it was appropriate for the Commission to do this. Hartzell voiced her support for the Commission moving forward. She stated the Council has expressed consistent interest in this topic and felt there were a lot of things the Commission could do with this issue. Commission reached a general consensus to take this proposal before the Council. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Liquor License Application September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: City Recorder E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Barbara Christensen christeb@ashland.or.us None Consent Agenda Question: Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Paul Maurer dba Harper's at 36 S. 2nd Street? Staff Recommendation: Endorse the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city council recommends that the OLCC proceed with the processing of this application. Background: Application is for a change in ownership. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Attachments: None r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Measure 49 Claim: 27.25 acres off Hitt Road September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Martha Bennett City Administrator E-Mail: bennettm@ashland.or.us Administration Secondary Contact: Richard Appicello Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Question: Should the City Council tentatively deny the Measure 49 claim for approximately 27.25 acres ofW-R zoned land located at the end ofHitt Road (Tax Map/Lot T39SRIE, Section 8DB, Lot 200) and notify DLCD and the claimants of the tentative decision? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council tentatively deny the Measure 49 claim as presented. Background: A claim under Section 9 and 10 of Measure 49 was filed with the City on February 20,2008. This claim is based on a previously file Measure 37 claim dating back to November 2006. Measure 49 requires the City to make a tentative decision within 120 days of submission of the claim as to whether the claim meets the standards of Section 9 for relief (up to ten single family residential units). Under the Measure, the claimants are notified of the tentative decision and given 15 days to submit argument or evidence in response. The City must consider the argument and evidence and make a final decision on the claim within 180 days of the filing (approximately November 20,2008). Proposed findings are attached for review by the Council. The complete Record of this proceeding is available for review in the City Administrator's office. In short, the tentative decision finds the claim is disqualified from relief under Section 9, Measure 49 because the claimants did not submit a qualifying appraisal under the Act within the time provided. On the merits, the failure to submit the required appraisal also makes it impossible to determine if the claimants are eligible for relief under the Act. Related City Policies: Measure 49, W-R Zoning District, Physical/Environmental Constraints Overlay for Hillside Lands Council Options: (1) Tentatively deny the Measure 49 claim and notify claimants and DLCD. (2) Postpone consideration to September 16, 2008 City Council meeting. Potential Motions: Motion to tentatively deny Measure 49 claim and notify claimants and DLCD of the tentative decision. Attachments: Proposed Findings Maps 09-02-08 M 49 claim Page 1 of 1 r~' BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON September 2, 2008 In the Matter of Tentative Decision on a Ballot Measure 49 Claim, ) pursuant to Section 9 of the Act, requesting the right to permit, ) without limitation, the creation, division, development, and/or ) FINDINGS OF FACT subsequent sale of 10 (two acre) legal lots with a single family ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW dwelling on each lot, located on real property within the city limits) AND ORDER of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon more particularly) described as Tax Map/Lot T39SRIE, Section 8DB, Lot 200, ) a/k/a 766 Strawberry Lane, consisting of approximately 27.25 ) acres of land. ) ) ) ) Applicant: George Harshman, Virginia Wilt, Wilt Family and Tri- W Group L.P. I. NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS This matter comes before the City Council for the City of Ashland for a tentative decision on a Ballot Measure 49 claim, under Section 9 and 10 of the Act. The applicants will be advised of the tentative decision and given 15 calendar days to submit evidence and arguments in response to this tentative decision. Thereafter the City shall issue a final determination on or before November 20, 2008. On November 29,2006 a Measure 37 claim was submitted by Attorney William Cox on behalf of "George and Patsy Harshman". On February 16,2007 City Administrator Martha Bennett mailed a letter to Attorney Cox indicating the application was incomplete, including failure to include all owners, (noting the omission of an application from "Tri- W Group" listed as owner of 50% undivided interest of the parcel). Mr. Cox responded on February 29,2006 by submitting evidence that the City Planning Department signed for receipt of the Tri- W Group application on November 29,2006. The City received another copy of the Tri-W claim on March 12,2007 as well as materials to address the completeness of the Harshman claim. On July 5, 2007 City Administrator Martha Bennett sent a letter to Attorney Cox notifying him of the extension of time granted by the Oregon Legislature for consideration of Measure 37 claims; the letter also notified Attorney Cox that the application for Tri- W Group was also incomplete. Oregon Voters enacted Ballot Measure 49 in November 2007, effective December 2007. The Act essentially abolished Measure 37; however, it provided a process for applicants with pending Measure 37 claims to determine if they had rights under Measure 49. COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -1- Section 10(2) of the Act provides that if a City has not made a decision on a Measure 37 claim before December 2007, the City must notify the applicant within 90 days after the effective date of Measure 49 that the applicant is entitled to seek relief under Section 9. On February 27,2008, the City Administrator notified Attorney Cox of the right to apply for relief under Measure 49 within 120 days; the notice complied with the statutory notice requirements and included a claim form developed expressly for the purpose of directing the claimant to submit necessary information for the Section 9 claim. The notice also reserved the right to question the eligibility of the claimants (due to incomplete M37 applications). Attorney Cox filed a claim for "George Harshman, Virginia Wilt, Wilt Family and Tri- W Group" on May 20, 2008. The City claim form developed for this single City M49 claim was completed only by stating "see attached" in numerous places referencing the M37 claim materials attached. No qualifying appraisal complying with Section 9, subsection 6 of the Act was submitted with the claim. The Attorney's cover letter indicates "claimants have been unable to retain a certified appraiser. . ." As discussed more fully below, failure to follow the guidance of the claim form to submit the required information has resulted in fatal errors in the application. Specifically, Section 1 0 (3) of the Act provides that failure to file the notice and required information with the public entity within 120 days after the date the public entity mails the notice, essentially disqualifies the claim and the claimant is not entitled to relief under Section 9 of Measure 49. Pursuant to Section 10(4) of the Act the City has until approximately September 20,2008 to make a tentative decision. (Note: A tentative decision is scheduled for September 2, 2008 but can be postponed to September 16, 2008 if necessary.) The claimants and DLCD will be provided notice of the tentative decision and will have 15 calendar days to submit written evidence or arguments in response to the tentative decision. The City must make a final determination on or before November 20, 2008. Based upon the evidence in the Record, said Record being specifically incorporated herein by this reference, the Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: II. FINDINGS OF FACT 1) The Nature of Proceedings findings set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2) The applicant [claimant] is listed on the application as George Harshman, Virginia Wilt, Wilt Family, and Tri-W Group LP. Claimants are represented by Attorney William C. Cox 0244 S.W. California Street, Portland, Oregon 97219 [phone (503) 246-5499]. 3) The subject of this Measure 49 claim is real property located within the City of Ashland ("City"), and described in Jackson County Tax Assessor's maps as Tax Map/Lot T39SRIE, Section 8DB, Lot 200, consisting of approximately 27.25 acres of land. (hereinafter "Property"). COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -2- 4) The same claimants apparently own or owned adjacent property Tax Map/Lot T39SRIE, Section 8DB, Lot 600, outside the City of Ashland. This adjacent parcel was the subject of a May 3,2007 Jackson County Order # 280-07, regarding a Measure 37 claim. 5) The property is vacant and is accessed off the end ofHitt Road, which at this point is an undeveloped right-of-way. 6) The property is entirely located within the City limits of the City of Ashland and is within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary. 7) The property has an Ashland Comprehensive Plan map designation of Woodland Residential. The property is also zoned WR - Woodland Residential. 8) Woodland Residential Zoning (W-R), adopted in 1982, provides for the following: 18.14 W-R Woodland Residential District 18.14.010 Purpose The purpose of the W-R district is to stabilize and protect the steep and forested areas within the City. Application of the zone will ensure that the forest, environmental erosion control and scenic values of these areas are protected from incompatible development which could result in a degradation of their values. 18.14.020 Permitted uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: A. Single family dwellings. B. Agriculture and farm uses, except animal sales yards and feed yards, hog farms and any animal fed garbage. C. Parks and recreation facilities. D. Home occupations. 18.14.030 Conditional Uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with Chapter 18.104, Conditional Use Permits: A. Churches and similar religious institutions. B. Public and public utility buildings, structures and uses, but not including corporation, storage or repair yards, warehouses and similar uses. C. Private recreational uses and facilities, provided that the forested character of the area is not disturbed. D. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. E. Schools, both public and private. F. Daycare centers. G. Homes for the elderly and nursing homes. H. Disc antenna for commercial use. I. Nonconforming use or structure changes required by Section 18.68.090. J. Temporary uses. K. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existing structures and authorized pursuant to Section 18.72.180. 18.14.040 General Regulations A. Minimum lot area. The minimum lot area in the W-R zone is determined by the chart below: COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -3- Slope Less than 40% 40 to 50% 50 to 600/,0 Over 60% Outside UGB Min. Lot Size 2.0 2.5 5.0 10.0 20.0 DU/Acre .5 .4 .2 .1 .05 B. Maximum lot coverage. The maximum lot coverage shall be seven (7%) percent. C. Minimum lot width. All lots shall be at least one hundred (100) feet in width. D. Minimum lot depth. All lots shall be at least one hundred-fifty (150) feet in depth. E. Standard yard requirements. 1. Minimum front yard - There shall be a front yard of at least twenty (20) feet. 2. Minimum side yard - There shall be a minimum side yard of six (6) feet, except ten (10) feet along a side yard facing the street on a comer lot. 3. Minimum rear yard - There shall be a minimum rear yard of ten (10) feet plus ten (10) feet for each story in excess of one (1) story. 4. In addition, the setbacks must comply with Section 18.70 of this Title which provides for solar access. F. Maximum building height. No structure shall be over thirty-five (35) feet or two and one-half (2 1/2) stories in height, whichever is less. G. Aggregate removal prohibited. There shall be no mining of granite for aggregate, quarry rock or other open pit mining in this zone. H. Limits on density transfer. All developments, with the exception of partitioning, must be developed under the Performance Standards, Chapter 18.88. No more than twenty-five (25%) percent of the density allowed in a Woodland Residential zone may be transferred to a higher density zone in a Performance Standard development. 9) The vast majority of the property contains slopes over 35%, these areas are denominated as "severe constraints" on the maps in the Record (see Attachments B & C). Only a small portion of the total site contains 0%-15% slopes and 16% -250/0 slopes. 10) The Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter, AMC 18.62 (adopted May 19, 1987, and replaced with Ordinance 2528 on July 7, 1989) established regulations by land classification. Hillside Lands, identified on the Physical Constraints Overlay map are those areas which have a slope of 25 percent or greater, are subject to additional public safety regulations. Such lands are identified as subject to damage from erosion and slope failure. The AMC 18.62.080 Hillside regulations are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment A. III. FINDINGS APPLYING APPLICABLE CRITERIA 11) The Council finds and determines that the relevant approval criteria are found in or referenced in Section 9 and 10 of Measure 49. Also implicated in this decision are ALUO criteria for W-R Zoning and Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit Requirements, specifically Hillside Lands. 12) The Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a tentative decision. 13) The Council finds and determines that this proposal to develop 10 unit single-family residential subdivision pursuant to Section 9 and 10 of Measure 49, does not meet all applicable COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -4- criteria for approval of a Measure 49 claim. This finding is supported by the detailed findings set forth herein as well as by competent substantial evidence in the whole Record. 14) Criterion: [Section 9(1)] (1) A claimant thatfiled a claim under ORS 197.352 on or before the date of adjournment sine die of the 2007 regular session of the Seventy-Fourth Legislative Assembly for property located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary may establish one to 10 single-family dwellings on the portion of the property located within the urban growth boundary. Adjournment sine die of the 2007 Oregon legislature occurred on June 28, 2007. A Measure 37 claim was filed with the Community Development Department on November 29,2008 for George and Patsy Harshman. (The claim should have been directed to the City Administrator per City Ordinance). The application was deemed incomplete on February 16, 2007 when City Administrator Martha Bennett mailed a letter to Attorney Cox, notifying him, among other things, of a failure to include all owners, (noting the omission of an application from Tri- W Group owner of 50% of the parcel). Mr. Cox responded by submitting evidence that the City Planning Department signed for receipt of the Tri-W Group application on November 29,2006. The City received a copy of the Tri- W claim on March 12,2007 with additional information on the Harshman claim. This claim application was also deemed incomplete by the City Administrator on July 5, 2007. The City of Ashland Measure 37 claims procedure ordinance, then in effect, provided as follows: B. Demands for just compensation shall be submitted to the City Administrator. No demand for just compensation shall be deemed submitted until all materials required by this section have been provided to the City Administrator by the current owner. A notice of submission shall be sent to the current owner at the time the City Administrator determines the current owner's demand for just compensation has been deemed submitted. c. Notwithstanding a claimant's failure to provide all of the information and/or the application processing fee required by subsection (A) of this section, the city may review and act on a claim. The claimant wrote N/ A next to "deemed complete" on the M49 application. The code language above indicates that a claim is not deemed submitted until all materials are provided. The City Administrator requested in her February 16, 2007 letter to Attorney Cox if the applicant intended to supplement the submittal or whether the applicant intended to have the submittal deemed complete (i.e. no intention to supplement). In the subsequent March submittal by Attorney Cox, the Attorney submitted missing material (including the Tri-W materials) and it is apparent that the Attorney contemplated the claim would be processed, as is, unless the City would notify the attorney if additional materials were required. The Administrator did not make a determination on the resubmission until after the adjournment of the legislative session. Council finds and determines that a claim by both Harshman and Tri- W was filed with the City prior to 2007 adjournment, despite the fact that the applications were not deemed submitted under the City COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -5- ordinance because they were found to be incomplete. Under Measure 37, the applicant arguably had the right to proceed with the claim in Court despite the local determination of whether the materials submitted were sufficient to process the claim. The actual timing of the second application (Tri-W Group) is also important. Section 10(5) of the Act states that if a Measure 37 claim is submitted after December 4,2006, it must include a denial of a final land use decision or it is ineligible for relief under Section 9 of the Act. The Council finds and determines that the proof of mailing and receipt by the Planning Department on November 29,2006 is enough to satisfy the requirement to submit the claim prior to December 4,2006. The City has no evidence to refute the Attorney's claim and postal receipt that the materials were signed for at the Planning Department and later misplaced. Accordingly, this first threshold requirement (eligibility to file) is met. Note: The omission of Mrs. Harshman on the paperwork for the M49 claim is not seen as significant. 15) Criterion: [Section 9(2)] (2) The number of single-family dwellings that may be established on the portion of the property located within the urban growth boundary under this section may not exceed the lesser of: (a) The number ... described in the claim filed with ... a city...; The original claim was for $3,750,000 to $8,902,000 based on development of: "as many lots as could be serviced by on site sewer. with community water each lot could have been 20,000 square feet." The property is 27.25 acres. Accordingly, the number of single family residential lots in the claim far exceeds 10. (b) 10, .... ; or As noted below, the claim is amended to claim ten (10) single family lots and units. (c) The number of single family dwelling that total value of which represents just compensation for the reduction in fair market value caused by the enactment I of one or more land use regulations that were the basis for the claim, set forth in subsection (6) of this section. NOTE: Section 9, Subsection 6 of the Act provides: 6. The reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that were the basis of the claim is equal to the decrease, if any, in the fair market value of the property from the date that is one year before the enactment of the land use regulation to the date that is one year COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -6- after the enactment, plus interest. If the claim is based on the enactment of more than one land use regulation enacted on different dates, the reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by each regulation shall be determined separately and the values added together to calculate the total reduction in fair market value. The reduction in fair market value shall be adjusted by any ad valorem property taxes not paid as a result of any special assessment of the property under ORS 308A.050 to 308.A.128, 321.257 to 321.390, 321.700 to 321.754 or 321.805 to 321.855, plus interest, offset by any severance taxes paid by the claimant and by any recapture of potential additional tax liability that the claimant has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disqualified from special assessment under ORS 308A. 703. Interest shall be computed under this subsection using the average interest rate for a one-year United States Government Treasury Bill on December 31 of each year of the period between the date the land use regulation was enacted and the date the claim was filed, compounded annually on January 1 of each year of the period. The City's M49 application form clearly states: "Applicant must complete the following and submit supporting documentation concerning ( a) (b) and (c) below and note the lesser of ( a) (b) and (c) here: " The claimant only wrote "See attached - 10 now requested" No analysis on the form and no supporting documentation or information concerning the required analysis under subsection (c) "reduction of fair market value" meeting the standards established in Section 9, subsection (6) was provided with the application. The Applicant appears to assume ten (10) single family dwelling lots and units can be applied for under Section 9; however, it is clear that the applicant must demonstrate eligibility of the lesser of: (a) the claim (b) 10 or (c) the number of units equal to the value of the reduction in fair market value as calculated by Section 9, Subsection (6) of the Act. Accordingly, as a consequence of the failure to submit an appraisal under Subsection (6), the Council further finds and determines that application is fatally flawed and disqualified from relief under Section 9 of Measure 49. As noted above, Section 10 (3) of the Act provides that failure to file the notice and required information with the public entity within 120 days after the date the public entity mails the notice, precludes relief under Section 9 of Measure 49. As a practical matter, in addition to the disqualification, this failure makes it impossible for the claimant to demonstrate that ten (10) lots/units is the appropriate number of lots/units (i.e. the lesser of) to be awarded under section 9 as the reduction in value calculation has not been and cannot be performed. As discussed more fully below, if the reduction in value calculation had actually been performed, it is not inconceivable that the reduction in value calculation would result in a value equal to less than ten units. This is because the majority of the land development regulations the claimant identifies (e.g. W-R Zoning) are likely "exempt" land development regulations as they are essentially "restricting or prohibiting activities for the COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -7- protection of public health and safety" including specifically "landslides" "pollution control regulations" as well as nuisance regulation - e.g. erosion control). (3) if the number of single-family dwellings described in ... a claim filed with ... a city ... is more than 10, the claimant may amend the claim to reduce the number to no more than 10 by filing a notice of the amendment with the information required by Section 10 of this Act. The May 20, 2008 filing indicates: "Claimants elect to amend their Measure 37 claims. Claimants seek relief pursuant to Measure 49, Section 9 and 10. Claimants seek the right to permit, without limitation, the creation, division, development, and/or subsequent sale of 10 (two acre) legal lots with a single family dwelling on each lot." (4) If multiple claims were filed for the same property, the number of single family dwellings that may be established for purposes of subsection (2)(a) of this section is The number in the most recent claim filed with... a city... but not more than lOin any case. The multiple claims (by different ownership interests) have now been consolidated into one joint application requesting ten (10) residential lots and units. 16) Criterion: [Section 9(5)] (5) To qualify for relief provided by this section, the claimant must have filed a claim for the property with the city or county in which the property is located. In addition, regardless of whether a waiver was issued by Metro, a city or a county before the effective date of this 2007 Act, to qualify for relief under this section, the claimant must establish that: (a) The claimant is an owner of the property; Claimants George Harshman and Tri-W Group L.P are the legal owners of the property as tenants in common. (b) All owners of the property have consented in writing to the claim; The Record reflects Attorney William Cox is authorized to file the application on behalf of all owners. (c) The property is located, in whole or in part, within an urban growth boundary; COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -8- The property is located entirely within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary. (d) On claimant's acquisition date, the claimant lawfully was permitted to establish at least the number of dwellings on the property that are authorized under this section; The current owners have different acquisition dates, although as members of different legal entities their involvement in the property can be traced to 1965. George Harshman formally acquired a 50% undivided interest in the property by deed in 1979. Tri-W Group L.P. formally acquired an undivided interest in the property in 1998. While the claimant George Harshman argues for a 1965 acquisition date based on "confirmation" of an undivided 500/0 interest in the property in 1970 from then owner Continental Construction Company Inc., this is not supported by deed records. Similarly, although Virginia Wilt may have been involved in a corporation acquiring ownership in 1965, the property was owned by a corporate entity, and was subsequently conveyed, several times. For purposes of this joint M 49 application the earliest formal date of acquisition by a current owner, (May 3, 1979 acquisition date of George Harshman) is used. The City Council expressly rejects the implication by the claimants that it must find a 1965 acquisition date because Jackson County, in an M 37 Order now voided by Measure 49, concerning an adjacent parcel owned by the same claimants was found by the County to have a 1965 acquisition date. ( e) The property is zoned for residential use; The property is zoned W-R, a residential zone. Single family residential use is a permitted use in the zone, subject to lot size requirements. (f) One or more land use regulations prohibit establishing the single-family dwellings; Under this criterion, the application only notes, "see M37 claim file." The City's M49 claim form notes the revised definition of land development regulations, as follows: (14) "Land use regulation" means: (a) A statute that establishes a minimum lot or parcel size; (b) A provision in ORS 227.030 to 227.300, 227.350, 227.400, 227.450 or 227.500 or in ORS chapter 215 that restricts the residential use of private real property; (c) A provision of a city comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance or land division ordinance that restricts the residential use of private real property zoned for residential use; (d) A provision of a county comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance or land division ordinance that restricts the residential use of private real property; (e) A provision of the Oregon Forest Practices Act or an administrative rule of the State Board of Forestry that regulates a forest practice COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -9- and that implements the Oregon Forest Practices Act; (f) ORS 561.191, a provision ofORS 568.900 to 568.933 or an administrative rule of the State Department of Agriculture that implements ORS 561.191 or 568.900 to 568.933; (g) An administrative rule or goal of the Land Conservation and Development Commission; or (h) A provision of a Metro functional plan that restricts the residential use of private real property. (22) "Zoned for residential use" means zoning that has as its primary purpose single- family residential use The text of Section 9, Measure 49, calls for identification of "land use regulations" which "prohibit" establishment of residential dwellings; this prohibition (if pursuant to a non- exempt regulation) and the associated reduction in value per Section (9)(2)(c) and subsection( 6) is "compensated" with an award of single family residential lots and units in an amount which is the lesser of (a) the number set forth in the M37 claim (b) 10 or (c) the number of units represented by the reduction in value due to non-exempt regulations prohibiting the residential use. By contrast, the text of Measure 37 more generally concerned land use regulations that restrict uses permitted on the real property; and the restriction imposed by the land use regulation has the effect of causing a reduction in the fair market value of the real property. The standard is different and thus claimant's reference to "see M37 claim file" is inadequate. The November 2006 M37 claim itself was extremely generic in regard to identification of regulations. While the "Woodland Residential District" was specifically mentioned, otherwise the claim simply referenced the Ashland Community Development Code as well as "each and every" land development regulation which restricts the use of the claimants property. The W-R Zoning District does not prohibit residential uses; the District only restricts residential uses based on an increasing minimum parcel size that corresponds with increases in property slope. For example, the W-R Zone's general regulations provide: A. Minimum lot area. The minimum lot area in the W-R zone is determined by the chart below: Slope Less than 40% 40 to 50% 50 to 60% Over 60% Outside UGB Min. Lot Size 2.0 2.5 5.0 10.0 20.0 DU/Acre .5 .4 .2 .1 .05 The subject property would have a minimum lot size of 2.0 to 1 0.0 acres depending upon the exact determination of slope on the subject 27.25 acres. While the applicant has not prepared an application, the City staff estimates up to eight (8) units might be permitted based on zoning alone. Unlike the W-R District, the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter, specifically the overlay for Hillside Lands, land classification does prohibit residential uses on severe slopes, with an exemption allowing one residential unit on a lot of record. This overlay is COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -10- however, clearly within the exempt regulation definition of 197.352(3) (now renumbered). (g) The establishment of the single -family dwellings is not permitted by a land use regulation described in ORS 197.352(3) [i.e. an exempt regulation]; Under this criterion, the application also notes, "see M37 claim file." The application makes no attempt to address the clarified definition of exempt regulations under Measure 49, as opposed to Measure 37. The City's M49 claim form notes the clarification of exempt regulations: (3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to land use regulations that were enacted prior to the claimant's acquisition date or to land use regulations: (a) Restricting or prohibiting activities commonly and historically recognized as public nuisances under common law; (b) Restricting or prohibiting activities for the protection of public health and safety; [( 18) "Protection of public health and safety" means a law, rule, ordinance, order, policy, permit or other governmental authorization that restricts a use of property in order to reduce the risk or consequence of fire, earthquake, landslide, flood, storm, pollution, disease, crime or other natural or human disaster or threat to persons or property including, but not limited to, building and fire codes, health and sanitation regulations, solid or hazardous waste regulations and pollution control regulations.] (c) To the extent the land use regulation is required to comply with federal law; or [ (6) "Federal law" means: (a) A statute, regulation, order, decree or policy enacted by a federal entity or by a state entity acting under authority delegated by the federal government; (b) A requirement contained in a plan or rule enacted by a compact entity; or (c) A requirement contained in a permit issued by a federal or state agency pursuant to a federal statute or regulation.] (d) Restricting or prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography or performing nude dancing. The regulations identified above are clearly exempt land development regulations. The W-R Zone is established as a public safety regulation, specifically the district recognizes landslides and erosion control are primary purposes of the regulation (to a lesser degree aesthetics is also implicated). The W-R Zone's purposes statement states: The purpose of the W-R district is to stabilize and protect the steep and forested areas within the City. Application of the zone will ensure that the forest, environmental erosion control and scenic values of these areas are protected from incompatible development which could result in a degradation of their values. COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -11- III .."------ Similarly, the regulations contained in the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter Overlay, specifically regulations for Hillside Lands (set forth in Attachment A) are clearly exempt regulations. Damage to adjacent properties by uncontrolled runoff and erosion concerns a commonly and historically recognized public nuisance. Similarly, the overlay's regulations to control erosion of property and to minimize risks or minimize consequences of landslides and wildfires are clearly contemplated within Measure 49's definition of exempt regulations. Accordingly, reduction in value calculations - had they been performed, cannot include reduction based on these exempt regulations. (h) The land use regulation described in paragraph (f) of this subsection was enacted after the date the property, or any portion of the property, was brought into the urban growth boundary; The property has been part of the City and the urban growth boundary since the UGB was established. Accordingly, the regulations were enacted after inclusion in the UGB. (i) [applicable only to Metro] (j) If the property is within a City, the land use regulation that is the basis for the claim was enacted after the date the property was annexed to the city; and The property has been part of the City limits for several decades. Accordingly, the regulations were enacted after inclusion in the City limits. (k) The enactment of one or more land use regulations, other than land use re2ulations described in ORS 197.352(3), that are the basis for the claim caused a reduction in the fair market value of the property, as determined under subsection (6) of this section, that is equal to or greater than the fair market value of the single family dwellings that may be established on the property under subsection (2) of this section. (emphasis added) See findings located elsewhere in this document concerning claimant's failure to submit a qualifying appraisal, and the exempt status of the identified regulations, said findings ,being incorporated herein by this reference. (6) The reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by the enactment of one or more land use regulations that were the basis of the claim is equal to the decrease, if any, in the fair market value of the property from the date that is one year before the enactment of the land use regulation to the date that is one year after the enactment, plus interest. If the claim is based on the enactment of more than one land use regulation enacted on different dates, the reduction in the fair market value of the property caused by each regulation shall be determined separately and the values added together to calculate the total reduction in fair market value. The COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -12- reduction in fair market value shall be adjusted by any ad valorem property taxes not paid as a result of any special assessment of the property under ORS 308A.050 to 308.A.128, 321.257 to 321.390, 321.700 to 321.754 or 321.805 to 321.855, plus interest, offsetby any severance taxes paid by the claimant and by any recapture of potential additional tax liability that the claimant has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disqualified from special assessment under ORS 308A.703. Interest shall be computed under this subsection using the average interest rate for a one-year United States Government Treasury Bill on December 31 of each year of the period between the date the land use regulation was enacted and the date the claim was filed, compounded annually on January 1 of each year of the period. (7) For purposes of subsection (6) of this section, a claimant must provide an appraisal showing the fair market value of the property one year before the enactment of the land use regulation that was the basis for the claim and the fair market value of the property one year after the enactment. The appraisal also must show the fair market value of each single-family dwelling to which the claimant is entitled under subsection (2) of this section, along with evidence of any ad valorem property taxes not paid, any severance taxes paid and any recapture of additional tax liability that the owner has paid or will pay for the property if the property is disquialified from special assessment under ORS 308A.703. The actual and reasonable cost of preparing the claim, including the cost of the appraisal, not to exceed $5000, may be added to the calculation of the reduction in fair market valuwe under Section 7 (6) of this 2007 Act. The appraisal must: (a) Be prepared by a person certified under ORS chapter 674 or a person registered under ORS chapter 308; (b) Comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, as authorized by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989; and (c) Expressly determine the highest and best use of the property at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (8) Relief may not be granted under this section if the highest and best use of the property was not residential use at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (9) When Metro, a city or county has issued a final decision authorizing one or more single family dwellings under this section on the portion of the property located within the urban growth boundary, the claimant may seek other governmental authorizations required by law for that use, and the land use regulation enacted by a public entity that has the effect of prohibiting the use does not apply to the review of the authorizations, except as provided in section 11 of this 2007 Act. If Metro is reviewing ... [N/A] COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -13- (10) The only types of land use that are authorized by this section are the subdivisions or partition of land for one or more single-family dwellings, or the establishment of one or more single-family dwellings on land on which the dwellings would not otherwise be allowed. As noted above, no qualifying appraisal complying with Section 9, subsection 6 - 8 of the Act was submitted with the claim. The Attorney's cover letter indicates "claimants have been unable to retain a certified appraiser..." Failure to follow the guidance of the City M 49 claim form to submit the required information within the time provided by the Act has resulted in disqualification of the claim. Specifically, Section 10 (3) of the Act provides specifically that if the claimant fails to file the notice and required information with the public entity within 120 days after the date the public entity mails the notice, the claimant is not entitled to relief under Section 9 of Measure 49. In addition, the failure to file the required information (appraisal) makes determination of compliance with the standards for relief, impossible. Finally, the primary regulations controlling development of this property are exempt regulations under Measure 49. Accordingly, the claimant is not entitled to relief under Measure 49. IV. ORDER Accordingly, based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and based upon the evidence in the whole Record, the City Council hereby TENA TIVEL Y DENIES the claim by George Harshman and Tri-W Group, et. al., under Section 9 and 10 of Measure 49 requesting "ten (10) (two acre) legal lots with a single family dwelling on each lot" and concerning 27.25 acres of land located at Tax Map/Lot T39SRIE, Section 8DB, Lot 200. The claim is tentatively denied for the reasons set forth above, included but not limited to the fact that the claim is disqualified for failure to submit required information (specifically a qualifying appraisal) within 120 days of the City's notice and for failure to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Section 9 of the Act, specifically failure to demonstrate a reduction in value caused by non- exempt regulations prohibiting residential use. Ashland City Council Mayor John W. Morrison Signature authorized and approved by the full Council this _ day of September, 2008 Approved as to form: Date: Ashland City Attorney COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -14- ----rrr-r"--- - Attachment A. 18.62.080 Development Standardsfor Hillside Lands It is the purpose of the Development Standards for Hillside Lands to provide supplementary development regulations to underlying zones to ensure that development occurs in such a manner as to protect the natural and topographic character and identity of these areas, environmental resources, the aesthetic qualities and restorative value of lands, and the public health, safety, and general welfare by insuring that development does not create soil erosion, sedimentation of lower slopes, slide damage, jlooding problems, and severe cutting or scarring. It is the intent of these development standards to encourage a sensitive form of development and to allow for a reasonable use that complements the natural and visual character of the city. A. General Requirements. The following general requirements shall apply in Hillside Lands: 1. All development shall occur on lands defined as having buildable area. Slopes greater than 35% shall be considered unbuildable except as allowed below. Variances may be granted to this requirement only as provided in section 18.62.080.H. a. Existing parcels without adequate buildable area less than or equal to 35% shall be considered buildable for one unit. b. Existing parcels without adequate buildable area less than or equal to 35% cannot be subdivided or partitioned. 2. All newly created lots either by subdivision or partition shall contain a building envelope with a slope of 35% or less. 3. New streets, flag drives, and driveways shall be constructed on lands of less than or equal to 35% slope with the following exceptions: a. The street is indicated on the City's Transportation Plan Map - Street Dedications. b. The portion of the street,jlag drive, or driveway on land greater than 35% slope does not exceed a length of 1 00 feet. 4. Geotechnical Studies. For all applications on Hillside Lands involving subdivisions or partitions, the following additional information is required: A geotechnical study prepared by a geotechnical expert indicating that the site is stable for the proposed use and development. The study shall include the following information: a. Index map. b. Project description to include location, topography, drainage, vegetation, discussion of previous work and discussion of field exploration methods. c. Site geology, based on a surficial survey, to include site geologic maps, description of bedrock and surficial materials, including artificial fill, locations of any faults, folds, etc..., and structural data including bedding, jointing and shear zones, soil depth and soil structure. d. Discussion of any off-site geologic conditions that may pose a potential hazard to the site, or that may be affected by on-site development. e. Suitability of site for proposed development from a geologic standpoint. f Specific recommendations for cut and fill slope stability, seepage and drainage control or other design criteria to mitigate geologic hazards. g. If deemed necessary by the engineer or geologist to establish whether an area to be affected by the proposed development is stable, additional studies and supportive data shall include cross-sections showing subsurface structure, graphic logs with subsurface exploration, results of laboratory test and references. h. Signature and registration number of the engineer and/or geologist. i. Additional information or analyses as necessary to evaluate the site. j. Inspection schedule for the project as required in 18. 62. 080.B.9. k. Location of all irrigation canals and major irrigation pipelines. B. Hillside Grading and Erosion Control. All development on lands classified as hillside shall provide plans conforming with the following items: J. All grading, retaining wall design, drainage, and erosion control plans for development on Hillside Lands shall be designed by a geotechnical expert. All cuts, grading or fills shall conform to the International Building Code_and be consistent with the provisions of this Title. Erosion control measures on the development site shall be required to minimize the solids in runoff from disturbed areas. COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -15- 2. For development other than single family homes on individual lots, all grading, drainage improvements, or other land disturbances shall only occur from May 1 to October 31. Excavation shall not occur during the remaining wet months of the year. Erosion control measures shall be installed and Junctional by October 31. Up to 30 day modifications to the October 31 date, and 45 day modification to the May 1 date may be made by the Planning Director, based upon weather conditions and in consultation with the project geotechnical expert. The modification of dates shall be the minimum necessary, based upon evidence provided by the applicant, to accomplish the necessary project goals. 3. Retention in natural state. On all projects on Hillside Lands involving partitions and subdivisions, and existing lots with an area greater than one-half acre, an area equal to 25% oJthe total project area, plus the percentage figure oj the average slope of the total project area, shall be retained in a natural state. Lands to be retained in a natural state shall be protected from damage through the use of temporary construction fencing or the Junctional equivalent. For example, on a 25,000 sq. ft. lot with an average slope of29%, 25%+29%=54% of the total lot area shall be retained in a natural state. The retention in a natural state oj areas greater than the minimum percentage required here is encouraged. 4. Grading - cuts. On all cut slopes on areas classified as Hillside lands, the Jollowing standards shall apply: a. Cut slope angles shall be determined in relationship to the type oj materials oj which they are composed. Where the soil permits, limit the total area exposed to precipitation and erosion. Steep cut slopes shall be retained with stacked rock, retaining walls, or functional equivalent to control erosion and provide slope stability when necessary. Where cut slopes are required to be laid back (1: 1 or less steep), the slope shall be protected with erosion control getting or structural equivalent installed per manuJacturers specifications, and revegetated. b. Exposed cut slopes, such as those Jor streets, driveway accesses, or yard areas, greater than seven feet in height shall be terraced. Cut faces on a terraced section shall not exceed a maximum height of five feet. Terrace widths shall be a minimum oj three Jeet to allow Jor the introduction oj vegetation for erosion control. Total cut slopes shall not exceed a maximum vertical height oj 15 feet. (See Graphic) Cut 5 10 pea n d F ill 5 10 P e Requirements 1 20' Maxi............ Fill SloOpe H_i.ht ~71 -...",..,~~ - Not t 0 Sea Ie For IlIu 5 t rat io nOn Iy COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -16- Reduce Effective Visua Bulk by Utilizing Stepped Foundations The top of cut slopes not utilizing structural retaining walls shall be located a minimum setback of one- half the height of the cut slope from the nearest property line. Cut slopes for structure foundations encouraging the reduction of effective visual bulk, such as split pad or steppedfootings shall be exempted from the height limitations of this section. (See Graphic) c. Revegetation of cut slope terraces shall include the provision of a planting plan, introduction of top soil where necessary, and the use of irrigation if necessary. The vegetation used for these areas shall be native or species similar in resource value which will survive, help reduce the visual impact of the cut slope, and assist in providing long term slope stabilization. Trees, bush-type plantings and cascading vine-type plantings may be appropriate. 5. Grading - fills. On all fill slopes on lands classified as Hillside Lands, the following standards shall apply: a. Fill slopes shall not exceed a total vertical height of 20 feet. The toe of the fill slope area not utilizing structural retaining shall be a minimum of six feet from the nearest property line. (Ord 2834 S6, 1998) b. Fill slopes shall be protected with an erosion control netting, blanket or functional equivalent. Netting or blankets shall only be used in conjunction with an organic mulch such as straw or wood fiber. The blanket must be applied so that it is in complete contact with the soil so that erosion does not occur beneath it. Erosion netting or blankets shall be securely anchored to the slope in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. c. Utilities. Whenever possible, utilities shall not be located or installed on or in fill slopes. When determined that it necessary to install utilities on fill slopes, all plans shall be designed by a geotechnical expert. d. Revegetation of fill slopes shall utilize native vegetation or vegetation similar in resource value and which will survive and stabilize the surface. Irrigation may be provided to ensure growth if necessary. Evidence shall be required indicating long-term viability of the proposed vegetation for the purposes of erosion control on disturbed areas. 6. Revegetation requirements. Where required by this chapter, all required revegetation of cut and fill slopes shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, signature oj a required survey plat, or other time as determined by the hearing authority. Vegetation shall be installed in such a manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation. 7. Maintenance, Security, and Penalties for Erosion Control Measures. a. Maintenance. All measures installed Jor the purposes of long-term erosion control, including but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls, and landscaping, shall be maintained in perpetuity on all COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -17- III areas which have been disturbed, including public rights-ofway. The applicant shall provide evidence indicating the mechanisms in place to ensure maintenance of measures. b. Security. Except for individual lots existing prior to January 1, 1998, after an Erosion Control Plan is approved by the hearing authority and prior to construction, the applicant shall provide a performance bond or other financial guarantees in the amount of 120% of the value of the erosion control measures necessary to stabilize the site. Any financial guarantee instrument proposed other than a performance bond shall be approved by the City Attorney. The financial guarantee instrument shall be in effect for a period of at least one year, and shall be released when the Planning Director and Public Works Director determine, jointly, that the site has been stabilized. All or a portion of the security retained by the City may be withheld for a period up to five years beyond the one year maintenance period if it has been determined by the City that the site has not been sufficiently stabilized against erosion. 8. Site Grading. The grading of a site on Hillside Lands shall be reviewed considering the following factors: a. No terracing shall be allowed except for the purposes of developing a level building pad and for providing vehicular access to the pad. b. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site. (Ord 2834,S2 1998) c. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site. d. Building pads should be of minimum size to accommodate the structure and a reasonable amount of yard space. Pads for tennis courts, swimming pools and large lawns are discouraged. As much of the remaining lot area as possible should be kept in the natural state of the original slope. 9. Inspections and Final Report. Prior to the acceptance of a subdivision by the City, signature of the final survey plat on partitions, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy for individual structures, the project geotechnical expert shall provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage, and erosion control measures were installed as per the approved plans, and that all scheduled inspections, as per 1 8. 62.080.A.4j were conducted by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project. C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage. All development on Hillside Lands shall conform to the following standards: 1. All facilities for the collection of stormwater runoff shall be required to be constructed on the site and according to the following requirements: a. Stormwater facilities shall include storm drain systems associated with street construction, facilities for accommodating drainage from driveways, parking areas and other impervious surfaces, and roof drainage systems. b. Stormwater facilities, when part of the overall site improvements, shall be, to the greatest extent feasible, the first improvements constructed on the development site. c. Stormwater facilities shall be designed to divert surface water away from cut faces or sloping surfaces of a fill. d. Existing natural drainage systems shall be utilized, as much as possible, in their natural state, recognizing the erosion potential from increased storm drainage.. e. Flow-retarding devices, such as detention ponds and recharge berms, shall be used where practical to minimize increases in runoff volume and peak flow rate due to development. Each facility shall consider the needs for an emergency overflow system to safely carry any overflow water to an acceptable disposal point. f Stormwater facilities shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that will avoid erosion on-site and to adjacent and downstream properties. g. Alternate stormwater systems, such as dry well systems, detention ponds, and leach fields, shall be designed by a registered engineer or geotechnical expert and approved by the City' s Public Works Department or City Building Official. COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -18- D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands shall conform to the following requirements: 1. Inventory of Existing Trees. A tree survey at the same scale as the project site plan shall be prepared, which locates all trees greater than six inches d.b.h., identified by d.b.h., species, approximate extent of tree canopy. In addition, for areas proposed to be disturbed, existing tree base elevations shall be provided. Dead or diseased trees shall be identified. Groups of trees in close proximity (i. e. those within five feet of each other) may be designated as a clump of trees, with the predominant species, estimated number and average diameter indicated. All tree surveys shall have an accuracy of plus or minus two feet. The name, signature, and address of the site surveyor responsible for the accuracy of the survey shall be provided on the tree survey. Portions of the lot or project area not proposed to be disturbed by development need not be included in the inventory. 2. Evaluation of Suitability for Conservation. All trees indicated on the inventory of existing trees shall also be identified as to their suitability for conservation. When required by the hearing authority, the evaluation shall be conducted by a landscape professional. Factors included in this determination shall include: a. Tree health. Healthy trees can better withstand the rigors of development than non-vigorous trees. b. Tree Structure. Trees with severe decay or substantial defects are more likely to result in damage to people and property. c. Species. Species vary in their ability to tolerate impacts and damage to their environment. d. Potential longevity. e. Variety. A variety of native tree species and ages. f Size. Large trees provide a greater protection for erosion and shade than smaller trees. 3. Tree Conservation in Project Design. Significant trees (2' d.b.h. or greater conifers and l' d.b.h. or greater broadleaf) shall be protected and incorporated into the project design whenever possible. a. Streets, driveways, buildings, utilities, parking areas, and other site disturbances shall be located such that the maximum number of existing trees on the site are preserved, while recognizing and following the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. Sit e Planning ..-:~....:~. ~ Responsive. t 0 i.... ,'..:: <". Tree Locat Ions . ~, " Existing Site \ ~;. . wit h significant . : . . trees L_~~':."~.:J S ensit ive develoment opt ion for propert y b. Building envelopes shall be located and sized to preserve the maximum number of trees on site while recognizing and following the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. c. Layout of the project site utility and grading plan shall avoid disturbance of tree protection areas. 4. Tree Protection. On all properties where trees are required to be preserved during the course of development, the developer shall follow the following tree protection standards: a. All trees designated for conservation shall be clearly marked on the project site. Prior to the start of any clearing, stripping, stockpiling, trenching, grading, compaction, paving or change in ground elevation, the applicant shall install fencing at the drip line of all trees to be preserved adjacent to or in the area to be altered. Temporary fencing shall be established at the perimeter of the dripline. Prior to grading or issuance of any permits, the fences may be inspected and their location approved by the Staff Advisor. (see 18.61.200) COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -19- b. Construction site activities, including but not limited to parking, material storage, soil compaction and concrete washout, shall be arranged so as to prevent disturbances within tree protection areas. c. No grading, stripping, compaction, or significant change in ground elevation shall be permitted within the drip line of trees designated for conservation unless indicated on the grading plans, as approved by the City, and landscape professional. If grading or construction is approved within the dripline, a landscape professional may be required to be present during grading operations, and shall have authority to require protective measures to protect the roots. d. Changes in soil hydrology and site drainage within tree protection areas shall be minimized. Excessive site run-off shall be directed to appropriate storm drain facilities and away from trees designated for conservation. e. Should encroachment into a tree protection area occur which causes irreparable damage, as determined by a landscape professional, to trees, the project plan shall be revised to compensate for the loss. Under no circumstances shall the developer be relieved of responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this chapter. 5. Tree Removal. Development shall be designed to preserve the maximum number of trees on a site. The development shall follow the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands. When justified by findings of fact, the hearing authority may approve the removal of trees for one or more of the following conditions: (Ord 2834 S3, 1998) a. The tree is located within the building envelope. b. The tree is located within a proposed street, driveway, or parking area. c. The tree is located within a water, sewer, or other public utility easement. d. The tree is determined by a landscape professional to be dead or diseased, or it constitutes an unacceptable hazard to life or property when evaluated by the standards in 18. 62. 080.D.2. e. The tree is located within or adjacent to areas of cuts or fills that are deemed threatening to the life of the tree, as determined by a landscape professional. 6. Tree Replacement. Trees approved for removal, with the exception of trees removed because they were determined to be diseased, dead, or a hazard, shall be replaced in compliance with the following standards: a. Replacement trees shall be indicated on a tree replanting plan. The replanting plan shall include all locations for replacement trees, and shall also indicate tree planting details. (Ord 2834 S4, 1998) b. Replacement trees shall be planted such that the trees will in time result in canopy equal to or greater than the tree canopy present prior to development of the property. The canopy shall be designed to mitigate of the impact of paved and developed areas, reduce surface erosion and increase slope stability.. Replacement tree locations shall consider impact on the wildfire prevention and control plan. The hearing authority shall have the discretion to adjust the proposed replacement tree canopy based upon site-specific evidence and testimony. Tree Plant ing Guideline 3- mulch kept 6- from trunk 5t ake only if t,.. ts UMI bfe to stand on its awn. and st aka .. low n possible wit h . non-met .Iie st ak. Cultivated plenting .r.. should b.3-5 t im.. t he size of t h. root ban, and only natWe soil should ba uaed for f. Mound slightly to conhin ...ter s. top of root brill at ground In. Fr.. burlap from I funk, and keep beklw V' ad. Set Ir.. on sound ground COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -20- c. Maintenance of replacement trees shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Required replacement trees shall be continuously maintained in a healthy manner. Trees that die within the first five years after initial planting must be replaced in kind, after which a new five year replacement period shall begin. Replanting must occur within 30 days of notification unless otherwise noted. (Ord 2834 S5, 1998) 7. Enforcement. a. All tree removal shall be done in accord with the approved tree removal and replacement plan. No trees designated for conservation shall be removed without prior approval of the City of Ashland. b. Should the developer or developer's agent remove or destroy any tree that has been designated for conservation, the developer may be fined up to three times the current appraised value of the replacement trees and cost of replacement or up to three times the current market value, as established by a professional arborist, whichever is greater. c. Should the developer or developer's agent damage any tree that has been designated for protection and conservation, the developer shall be penalized $50.00 per scar. If necessary, a professional arborist's report, prepared at the developer's expense, may be required to determine the extent of the damage. Should the damage result in loss of appraised value greater than determined above, the higher of the two values shall be used. E. Building Location and Design Standards. All buildings and buildable areas proposed for Hillside Lands shall be designed and constructed in compliance with the following standards: 1. Building Envelopes. All newly created lots, either by subdivision or partition, shall contain building envelopes conforming to the following standards: a. The building envelope shall contain a buildable area with a slope of 35% or less. r? l~ LrNe~ -_.._~ -... · f.i<~:':;;-:l~-lc! IZ."'.....;;Z.. e.l)j"'l)",&l.~ I ..,......11:.0. 4i.:.. p.,1C.._ t- rc~UIJ/..'iOJ:> C......Te>iJ<.) I r ----l ti, '<Aft.D ~ ' ' l - - l,~ '" ,'" ~~~ &UIl.-DING. _ ~~f ~ ~.~ CbV<<~<< I r 6' -_._.)-1~~~ "/: F-It$:>r:-J',- I ~ ,~ y....oot.c> Y"'~D L.rN.~ r i C~6r~-"G"") . (~tl"~t<. L.J"'~) I ~~Ull:.e:D I I _ . I FI20NT v....lI-.r.> ~-.~-- L!..-:'_~_ ~ ~-:I-~ h_ . ST I<-E. E"T ~.O.\/v'. -----------...--- ------ b. Building envelopes and lot design shall address the retention of a percentage of the lot in a natural state as required in 18. 62. 080.B. 3. c. Building envelopes shall be designed and located to maximize tree conservation as required in 18. 62.080.D.3. while recognizing and following the standards for fuel reduction if the development is located in Wildfire Lands d. It is recommended that building envelope locations should be located to avoid ridgeline exposures, and designed such that the roofline of a building within the envelope does. not project above the ridgeline. Rtati01 d tillside chcrcd ET ad net lJ"a slq:e ~ 8\ddrYJ ridJ:jine locat icns COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -21- 2. Building Design. To reduce hillside disturbance through the use of slope responsive design techniques, buildings on Hillside Lands, excepting those lands within the designated Historic District, shall incorporate the following into the building design and indicate features on required building permits: a. Hillside Building Height. The height of all structures shall be measured vertically from the natural grade to the uppermost point of the roof edge or peak, wall, parapet, mansard, or other feature perpendicular to that grade. Maximum Hillside Building Height shall be 35 feet. (graphics available on original ordinance) b. Cut buildings into hillsides to reduce effective visual bulk. (1). Split pad or stepped footings shall be incorporated into building design to allow the structure to more closely follow the slope. (2). Reduce building mass by utilizing below grade rooms cut into the natural slope. c. A building stepback shall be required on all downhill building walls greater than 20 feet in height, as measured above natural grade. Stepbacks shall be a minimum of six feet. No vertical walls on the downhill elevations of new buildings shall exceed a maximum height of 20 feet above natural grade. (see graphic) d. Continuous horizontal building planes shall not exceed a maximum length of 36 feet. Planes longer than 36 feet shall include a minimum offset of six feet. (graphic available on original ordinance) e. It is recommended that roof forms and roof lines for new structures be broken into a series of smaller building components to reflect the irregular forms of the surrounding hillside. Long, linear unbroken roof lines are discouraged. Large gable ends on downhill elevations should be avoided, however smaller gables may be permitted. (graphic available on original ordinance) f It is recommended that roofs of lower floor levels be used to provide deck or outdoor space for upper floor levels. The use of overhanging decks with vertical supports in excess of 12 feet on downhill elevations should be avoided. g. It is recommended that color selection for new structures be coordinated with the predominant colors of the surrounding landscape to minimize contrast between the structure and the natural environment F. All structures on Hillside Lands shall have foundations which have been designed by an engineer or architect with demonstrable geotechnical design experience. A designer, as defined, shall not complete working drawings without having foundations designed by an engineer. G. All newly created lots or lots modified by a lot line adjustment must include a building envelope on all lots that contains a buildable area less than 35% slope of sufficient size to accommodate the uses permitted in the underlying zone, unless the division or lot line adjustment is for open space or conservation purposes. H. Administrative Variance From Development Standards for Hillside Lands - 18.62.080. A variance under this section is not subject to the variance requirements of section 18.100 and may be granted with respect to the development standards for Hillside Lands if all of the following circumstances are found to exist: 1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site; 2. The variance will result in equal or greater protection of the resources protected under this chapter; 3. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and 4. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter and section 18.62.080. Appeals of decisions involving administrative variances shall be processed as outlined in 18.108.070. COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -22- Attachment B. (Slope Map) COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -23- ----- -----------nr J Attachment C. (Topographic map) COUNCIL TENTATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER Page -24- ~ ~ - - CD rn rn "C "C a. c: c: en .!!! .!!! 0 CD G) G) '- a. "C "C D.. rn 0 '0 "0 ~ - :c :c U) CD ~ rn :J Q. - - - t) 10 10 0 0 0 10 >< :J CD ii) <r- N ('t') ('t') 10 J:; I I I ('t') ~ t! " I co co <r- en -- 0 <r- N ('t') ^ en 0:: - - I- -- %: ... Q) Q) LL 0 N N 0 ~ ~ LO LO ~ 0 o It) o \) . CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Staff Request to Delay Study Session to Discuss the Distribution of the Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Administrative Services E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Lee Tuneberg tuneberl@ashland.or.us None Consent Question: Should the City Council delay the discussion of the Transient Occupancy Tax revenue distribution to the October 6,2008, Study Session to allow the Finance Director to be in attendance? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approve the delay for the stated reason. Background: In July Council chose to delay distribution of future TOT revenue until a study session could be scheduled to allow sufficient time to consider options and implications from the distribution. Council chose to discuss this subject on September 15, 2008. The Administrative Services/Finance Director is scheduled to attend fiscal stability and financial projection training in Sacramento at that same time and would not be available to answer questions and provide support to Council. This is important training and cancelling it would be costly to the city. Staff feels the Finance Director should be in attendance when Council discusses this subject. Related City Policies: None Council Options: a. Choose to delay the TOT discussion as proposed. b. Choose to not delay and have the discussion on September 15. Potential Motions: I make a motion to delay the TOT revenue distribution discussion until October 6, 2008, so that the Finance Director can be in attendance. Attachments: None Page 1 of 1 090208 TOT delay.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Approval of a Contract for Engineering Services for the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16 September 2,2008 Primary Staff Contact: James Olson, 552-2412 Public Works / Engineering E-Mail: olsoniaV.ashland.or.us Finance Secondary Contact: Michael R. Faught Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Question: Will Council approve a personal services contract with Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. in the amount of$33,750.00 to design, develop and implement the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached personal services contract with Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. in the amount of$33,750.00 to design, develop and implement the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16. Background: Preface The Public Works Department recommends the reconstruction or rehabilitation of the aging Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer which runs along the west bank of Ashland Creek from Hersey Street northerly approximately 1,700 feet to the point where the sewer line enters the Helman Street right of way. The proposed sewer project offers a number of construction challenges: · Construction is adjacent to or within the Ashland Creek Riparian Corridor. · Access from adjacent streets is limited. · Access along the existing easement is limited. · The easement crosses through the backyards of 15 different residences along Helman Street, many of which are extensively landscaped. To help address these challenges, Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. (HEA) was hired to conduct a feasibility study to determine the least disruptive method of rehabilitating this sewer line. This study was recently completed at a cost of $19,000 and resulted in a recommendation to rehabilitate the existing pipeline using a new Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) that would be installed within the existing pipeline. The Public Works Department is now prepared to enter into the second or design phase of the project. HEA has proposed to complete this work for an additional $33,750 for a total project design cost of $52,750. As the second phase of this work is considered an integral part of the whole project, Council authorization of the contract is required as the total cost for engineering services exceeds $50,000. Page 1 of 4 090208 Hardey Eng Contract.CC.doc rj.' CITY OF ASHLAND Proiect Description The existing Ashland Creek Sanitary Sewer was constructed in 1905. This 21 inch clay pipeline was constructed parallel to the west bank of Ashland Creek and extends from Hersey Street northerly approximately 1,700 feet. Much of the easement for this pipeline was granted by Abel Helman, one of Ashland's original pioneers. This project offers a number of challenges which will require close cooperation between the City, the adjacent property owners and other regulatory agencies. One of the most difficult obstacles is the lack of access along the existing sewer line. Because of the age of the sewer line, numerous large trees have grown up along and in some cases over the sewer line. The sewer line crosses through the backyards of 15 different properties, most of which have established impressively landscaped yards over and along the sewer line. It is not possible to get a maintenance vehicle into many of the manholes along the sewer line and it is even difficult to walk along the entire course of the easement. The close proximity to Ashland Creek adds additional difficulty to refurbishing this old sewer line. An option to reconstruct the sewer using conventional methods of construction was briefly considered, but discarded due to the large scale disruption to landscaped areas, large numbers of tree removals and possible negative impacts to Ashland Creek. Hardey Engineering was charged with researching alternative, trenchless methods of reconstruction and recommending a viable solution which would meet the City's needs to limit disturbance along the area. The options considered included: 1. Relocating the pipeline within existing street rights-of-way; 2. Sliplining the existing pipe to provide additional structural strength; 3. Pipe bursting to increase the size of the pipe. 4. Insituform Cured-ln-~lace-~ipe (CIPP). Option #1 was discarded due to the necessity of installing two major pump stations plus the need to continually operate a pipeline in a similar location to receive the gravity sewer flow from the 15 residences along Helman Street. Option #2, slip lining, is a method of pulling a flexible HDPE pipeliner through the old pipeline. This process provides additional structural strength, but decreases the size of the pipe. It also requires that numerous "pull pits" be dug to accommodate the process. This option was discarded due to the excavation needed and the decrease in pipe size. Option #3, pipe bursting, is the process of internally enlarging the pipe by fracturing the old pipe while pulling a new pipe into place. This process will basically construct a new pipeline within the area of the old pipe. Unfortunately this process again requires multiple dig-ups and the cover over the pipe is not sufficient to effectively conduct that operation. This option was also discarded. The engineering staff, along with engineers from Hardey Engineering, has determined that a pipe rehabilitation technique referred to as "Insituform Cured In Place Pipe" (Option #4) offers the best alternative to standard open trench construction. It is a jointless, seamless pipe liner that is forced into the existing pipe using air or water. The liner is then cured in place using steam or hot water forming a strong water tight lining within the old pipe. The advantages of using the "Insituform CIPP" include: Page 2 of 4 090208 Hardey Eng Contract.CC.doc rA1 CITY OF ASHLAND . minimal disruption to the area . increase in the capacity of the existing sewer without increasing pipe size . complete elimination of pipe joints where leaks often occur . restoration of the structural integrity of the old pipe. The pipe lining is inserted within existing manholes so digging is not necessary, which allows for a quicker rehabilitation with less inconvenience to property owners and less effects on sensitive areas along the creek. Proi ect Funding This project is listed in the current CIP under "Wastewater Line Replacement: Ashland Creek Main Line" with an allocation in FY 09 of $100,000. It is anticipated that this amount will be for preliminary engineering and easement acquisition only, FY 10 has an allocation of $150,000 which is insufficient to fully fund the construction (Phase 4) of the project. It will be necessary to allocate a minimum of $300,000 in FY 10 to proceed with construction of this project. A more exact cost estimate is a required element of the proposed Hardey Engineering contract. The current $100,000 budget allocation contains a 25% SDC commitment to accommodate future growth. The account number for the SDC fund for this project is 675.08.39.00.704200. The reminder to be funded through the wastewater collections funds in the contracted projects category, Account No. 675.08.17.00.704200. Proi ect Goals The wastewater collection division has developed a very effective method of maintaining the City's 110 miles of sewer pipelines. The maintenance schedule includes inspection of all pipelines using video cameras and periodic cleaning using high pressure water jetting. To effectively complete this maintenance it is necessary that equipment be able to reach each manhole in the system. Many of the City's main trunk sewers are located, not within public street rights of ways, but on easements over private properties. The maintenance of these sewers offers special challenges and to facilitate this work the City has purchased a miniature maintenance machine. This machine is only three feet wide, but is capable of carrying 700 feet of high pressure water hose. This "easement machine" allows a maintenance crew to be able to reach manholes previously unavailable to a large truck. The goal of the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project is to establish six to eight foot wide access corridors along the length of the easement from access points off Helman Street. The creation of these narrow corridors would take into consideration existing trees and significant landscape features and would strive to limit the disruption to existing landscaped yards. Next Steps Within the next few months staffwill begin working with the property owners along the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer pipeline to define and reclaim the existing sewer easement. It may be necessary, in some instances, to acquire additional easements to provide access from Helman Street. Summary The Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer pipeline is over 100 years old and should be rehabilitated as soon as possible. This project is vital to the health of the citizens along Ashland Creek. The Public Works Page 3 of 4 090208 Hardey Eng Contract.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Department has committed to accomplishing this work with a minimum of disruption to effected properties. Although CIPP technology is not new, it has not previously been used in Ashland on larger pipelines. The technology has a proven track record and is in common use by Rogue Valley Sewer Services and numerous other sewer districts. This method of rehabilitation offers the least disruptive alternative to traditional open trench type construction. Related City Policies: Under current City of Ashland purchasing and contracting rules (AMC 2.52), the Council shall review all personal services contracts in excess of $50,000 and all contract amendments in excess of 250/0 above the current contract amount. Council Options: 1) The Council, acting as the local contract review board, may choose to approve this personal services contract with Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. to include design and development of the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16 (Phase 2); 2) Council may decline to approve the contract. Potential Motions: 1) Move to approve the Personal Services Contract with Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. in the amount of$33,750.00 for the design and development of the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16 (Phase 2); 2) Move to deny the Personal Services Contract with Hardey Engineering and Associates, Inc. in the amount of$33,750.00 for the design and development of the Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16 (Phase 2). Attachments: Vicinity Map Sewer System Map Photos Contract Page 4 of 4 090208 Hardey Eng Contract.CC.doc r~' - - ----nr T 000 "'z~ o<~ >-.J~ ... .,. > _.....t: UtJ)~ .q:s: ~z zo ;:>...... ~f-4\O f-4<C-' ~t:~ tIJ...J8 tIJQ:iN ~ <: . U::x:o ~~3 <C^""o ~~g: el)t.tJ <CeI) () c::> i~i. <:!So" si.. 1< "''''0::1\ <~;tC: ~~il> t:~~~ ui~i I S$UM U4Cn!LU Mf~ , & t j~~Jt . M)t$ Gl l C .T.... -0'. _mWNwww,m, ~~~~~ If"'_ - -.... ..-- 391E 04 CD i I I I i I I I I I I I ~! I I I ~ I -Wt I a-Q01 ~?m ,. I (;3 ,,' , -- ,~ , " " ~-IIH \. O.04CO"025 .. SO/OJ . . . , , cJtA~. I 411/02 f 0 { SS'IIH I I QM.~~ ! I I I I : I ~~j '*~/, 1/ I'I! l/ j. / II !..~.,' "j I SS-C~/I ,. 04CA- , I 50/12 · / ;' ~/ "r . / ~/ '~~ /!$ '--....., ''-J~! ''\ 01 / ~~~1J~ " 1/ /' 50/08 /1/ CITY O. ASHLAND SANITARY SEWER. F AcnnY MAP P vi:'J · f I _ - I I ' I~ 1: = = = : = - - - - - ~ ; /'~. .. : ~ ~ I.' i . _..~. . '--- ~~~2 : ....,~lEEPY --~~t'~.. ~ I: r -----~-- D ~~m r I ll~~ ) 'r~/ . ; ( b / ~i:' fi I / I / ~~~f'; / sore . . . I . / i: I I / ! i /1 I' ,I , I I ! -~'---'-;''1A~-cc-_-f--i ~~ .-:~- 50/1. I ~4~~__~"._,~ ,'. f( 0 i I $S-IIH i I 04CO'OJl I " I SO/llI I r '- '- /, / ~~/ 10../ , SO'" () "'I I. / . __-9 OR ss-v tl 04-CA- 0' $S- .~~O . . . . . . . . . : . . . . · SS-~ ~ MCA-Ola Q 50/ Z2 . . · O~A~7 o SO/Ol -.', l 55 -IIH .... 0408-02.3 62/1& ~ ~ --- 55-CO 04CtHOl SS.;.... 9-~ llVJ2 .,. M.c;,D,;V ,~IJII S1: ~ t-._ ,... :::::r: -- w-= .,..,.. ~........ .. ~ ......... ___ .1lIUIII .-...., 391E 04CA Ashland Creek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16 MANHOLE AT BEGINNING OF PROJECT AT HERSEY STREET G ;\pub-wrks'cog\dept-admifl\ENGIN EERPROJ Ecr'l00 1.07 -16 CC Approval of Hardey Eng Contract 9 02 08 Photos.doc LARGE COTIONWOOD GROWING OVER THE SEWER LINE . MANHOLE AT THE BASE OF LARGE COTTONWOOD G:\pub-wrks\-eng;dept-admin\ENGINEER\PROJEC1\20(n.o7-16 CC Approval of Hardey Eng Contract 90208 Photos.doc SEWER LINE THROUGH THE CREEK VIEW TERRACES PARKING LOT SEWER LINE THROUGH LANDSCAPING G:'pub-wrks\cog'dept-admin\ENGINEER\PROJECT2007'-07-16 CC Approval of Hardey Eng Contract 9 02 08 Photos.doc - ---- --nr T CONTRACT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES CITY Of ASHLAND 20 East Main Street Ashland. Oregon 97520 Telephone: 541/488-6002 Fax: 541/488-5311 DATE AGREEMENT PREPARED: 7/24/08 BEGINNING DATE: August 6.2008 COMPLETION DATE: June 30.2011 COMPENSATION: Not to exceed $33.750.00 per attached proposal dated June 23. 2008. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: Provide preliminary and construction engineering services to develop and implement the Ashland ereek Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Project No. 2007-16. This work will constitute the second phase of this project, the first having been completed on June 30,2008. Services to be provided shall be in accordance with the attached proposal. ADDITIONAL TERMS: FINDINGS: Pursuant to AMC 2.52.040E and AMC 2.52.060, after reasonable inquiry and evaluation, the undersigned Department Head finds and determines that: (1) the services to be acquired are personal services; (2) the City does not have adequate personnel nor resources to perform the services; (3) the statement of work represents the department's plan for utilization of such personal services; (4) the undersigned consultant has specialized experience, education, training and capability suffICient to perform the quality, quantity and type of work requested in the scope of work within the time and financial constraints prOVided; (5) the consultant's proposal will best serve the needs of the City; and (6) the compensation negotiated herein is fair and reasonable. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the CITY AND CONSULTANT AGREE as follows: 1. Finding. I Recitations. The findings and recitations set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2. All Coats by Conaultant: Consultant shall, at its own risk and expense, perform the personal services described above and, unless otherwise specified, furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the proper performance of such service. 3. Qualified Work: Consultant has represented, and by entering into this contract now represents, that all personnel assigned to the work required under this contract are fully qualified to perform the service to which they will be assigned in a skilled and worker4ike manner and, if required to be registered, licensed or bonded by the State of Oregon, are so registered, licensed and bonded. 4. Completion Date: Consultant shall start performing the service under this contract by the beginning date indicated above and complete the service by the completion date indicated above. 5. Compenaatlon: City shall pay Consultant for service performed, including costs and expenses, the sum specified above. Once work commences, invOices shalt be prepared and submitted by the tenth of the month for work completed in the prior month, Payments shall be made within 30 days of the date of the invoice. Should the contract be prematurely terminated, payments will be made for work completed and accepted to date of termination. 6. Own....hlp of Docum....ts: All documents prepared by Consultant pursuant to this contract shall be the property of City. 7. Statutory Requirements: ORS 279C.505, 279C.515, 279C.520 and 279C.53O are made part of this contract. 8. Living Wage Requirements: If the amount of this contract is $18,088 or more, eonsultant is required to comply with chapter 3.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code by paying a living wage, as defined in this chapter, to all employees . performing work under this contract and to any Subcontractor who performs 50% or more of the service work under this contract. Consultant is also required to post the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B predominantly in areas where it wilt be seen by all employees. 9. IndM'lntflcatlon: Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and save City. its OffICerS, empfoyees 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 out of or incident to the performance of this contract by Consultant (including but not limited to, Consultant's employees, agents. and others designated by Consultant to perform work or services attendant to this contract). Consultant shall not be hefd responsible for any losses. expenses, claims, subrogations, actions, costs, judgments, or other damages, directly, safely, and proximatety caused by the negligence of City. CONSULTANT: Hardey Engineering & Associates, Inc. CONTACT: Jim Higday ADDRESS: POBox 1625. Medford OR 97501 TELEPHONE: (541) 772-6880 FAX: (541) 772-9573 10. Termination: G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\ENGINEER\PROJECT\2007\07-16 Hardey Contract Ash Crk 55 trunk.doc, Page 1 of 9 10. Termination: a. Mutual Consent. This contract may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of both parties. b. Citv's Convenience. This contract may be terminated at any time by City upon 30 days' notice in writing and delivered by certified mail or in person. c. For Cause. City may terminate or modify this contract, in whole or in part. effective upon delivery of written notice to Consultant. or at such later date as may be established by City under any of the following conditions: i. If City funding from federal. state. county or other sources is not obtained and continued at levels suff"lCient to allow for the purchase of the indicated quantity of services; ii. If federal or state regulations or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way that the services are no longer allowable or appropriate for purchas~ under this contract or are no longer eligible for the funding proposed for payments authorized by this contract; or iii. If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be hefd by Consultant to provide the services required by this contract is for any reason denied. revoked. suspended. or not renewed. d. For Default or Breach. i. Either City or Consultant may terminate this contract in the event of a breach of the contract by the other. Prior to such termination the party seeking termination shall give to the other party written notice of the breach and intent to terminate. tf the party committing the breach has not entirely cured the breach within 15 days of the date of the notice. or within such other period as the party giving the notice may authorize or require. then the contract may be terminated at any time thereafter by a written notice of termination by the party giving notice. ii. Time is of the essence for ConsuItant.s performance of each and every obligation and duty under this contract. City by written notice to Consultant of default or breach may at any time terminate the whole or any part of this contract If Consultant fails to provide services caUed for by this contract within the time specified herein or in any extension thereof. iii. The rights and remedies of City provided in this subsection (d) are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. e. OblioationlLiablitv of Parties. Termination or modification of this contract pursuant to subsections a. b. or c above shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to such termination or modification. However. upon receiving a notice of termination (regardless whether such notice is given pursuant to subsections a, b. cord of this section, Consultant shall immediatefy cease all activities under this contract. unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further. upon termination. Consultant shall deliver to City aU contract documents, information. works-in-progress and other property that are or would be defiverables had the contract been completed. City shan pay Consultant for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract. 11. Independent Contractor Status: Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant shall have the complete responsibBity for the performance of this contract. Consultant shall provide workers. compensation coverage as required in ORS Ch 656 for all persons employed to perform work pursuant to this contract. Consultant is a subject employer that wll comply with ORS 656.017. 12. Assignment and Subcontracta: Consultant shaD not assign this contract or subcontract any portion of the work without the written consent of City. Any attempted assignment or subcontract without written consent of City shall be void. Consultant shaH be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any assigns or Subcontractors and of all persons employed by them. and the approval by City of any assignment or subcontract shall not create any contractual relation between the assignee or subcontractor and City. 13. Default. The Consultant shall be in default of this agreement if Consultant: commits any material breach or default of any covenant. warranty, certification. or obligation it owes under the Contract; its QRF status pursuant to the QRF Rules or loses any license. certificate or certification that is required to perform the Services or to qualify as a QRF if consultant has qualified as a QRF for this agreement; institutes an action for relief in bankruptcy or has instituted against it an action for insolvency; makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; or ceases doing business on a regular basis of the type identified in its obligations under the Contract; or attempts to assign rights in, or delegate duties under. the Contract. 14. Insurance. Consultarit shall at its own expense provide the following insurance: a. Worke(s Comoensation insurance in compliance with ORS 658.017. which requires subject employers to provide Oregon workers. compensation coverage for all their subject workers b. Professional Liabilitv insurance with a combined single limit., or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: $200,000, $500,000, 11.000.000, $2.000,000 or Not Applicable for each claim, incident or occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by error, omission or negligent acts related to the professional services to be provided under this contract. c. General Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: $200,000, $500.000, $1.000.000. $2,000.000 or Not Applicable for each occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Dam . It shall include contractualliabili cover for the indemn" ovided under this contract. ""'.\_...L.. ..-1...._,___'..__6 _~_t_,~. tr"l_,,..,-,,,...,t t__J__ " _ . d. Automobile Liabilitv insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: $200,000, $500,000, $1.000.000. or Not Applicable for each accident for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, induding coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable. e. Notice of cancellation or chanae. There shall be no cancellation, material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s) without 30 days' written notice from the Consultant or its insurer(s) to the City. f. AdditionallnsuredlCertifacates of Insurance. Consultant shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected offICials, officers and employees as Additional Insureds on any insurance policies required herein but only with respect to Consultant's services to be provided under this Contract. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Contract. the Consultant shall furnish acceptable insurance certifICates prior to commencing work under this contract The certificate will specify all of the parties who are Additional Insureds. Insuring companies or entities are subject to the City's acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies; trust agreements, etc. shaH be provided to the eity. The Consultant shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions and/or self-insurance. 15. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue: This contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules or doctrines. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, 'he claim.) between the City (and/or any other or department of the State of Oregon) and the Consultant that arises from or relates to this contract shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Jackson County for the State of Oregon. If, ho\vever, the claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States Disbict Court for the District of Oregon filed in Jackson County, Oregon. Consultant, by the signature herein of its authorized representative, hereby consents to the in personam jurisdiction of said courts. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by City of any form of defense or immunity. based on the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, or otherwise, from any claim or from the jurisdiction. 16. THIS CONTRACT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS CONSTITUTE THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BElWEEN THE PARTIES. NO WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT SHAlL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. SUCH WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE, IF MADE, SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS. AGREEMENTS, OR REPRESENTATIONS, ORAl.. OR WRITTEN, NOT SPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS CONTRACT. CONSULTANT, BY SIGNATURE OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE/SHE HAS READ THIS CONTRACT, UNDERSTANDS IT, AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 17. NonapproprlatJons Claus.. Funds Available and Authorized: City has sufficient funds currently available and authorized for expenditure to finance the costs of this contract within the City's fiscal year budget. Consultant understands and agrees that City's payment of amounts under this contract attributable to work perfonned after the last day of the current fiscal year is contingent on City appropriations, or other expenditure authority suffICient to allow City in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments under this contract. In the event City has Insufficient appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority, City may terminate this contract without penalty or liabHity to City. effective upon the delivery of written notice to Consultant, with no further liability to Consultant. Certification. Consultant shall s n the certifICation attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incor CONSULTANT CITY OF ASHLAND: ~c:~ .JAM. -SignaIIn ( Pm Name BY BY ANANCE DIRECTOR TITLE ~/Jtje~r DATE 7 - 2-r,t:::) 8 DATE CONTRACT AWAAD AND ANOINGS DETERMINED BY: By: Federal lOt r...l113/78~ City Department Head ~ed as to form by legal: ACCOUNT , Date: (For City purposes only) .CompIeted W9 form must be submitted with contract PURCHASE ORDER I d. Automobile Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent. of not less than Enter one: $200,000. $500.000, $1.000.000. or Not Applicable for each accident for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, induding coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles. as applicable. e. Notice of cancellation or chanae. There shall be no cancellation. material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s) without 30 days' written notice from the Consultant or its insurer(s) to the City. f. AdditionallnsuredlCertiflCates of Insurance. Consultant shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected offICials, offlCef'S and employees as Additional Insureds on any insurance policies required herein but only with respect to Consultant's services to be provided under this Contract. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Contrad, the Consultant shall furnish acceptable insurance certifICates prior to commencing work under this contract. The certificate will specify all of the parties who are Additional Insureds. Insuring companies or entities are subject to the City's acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies; trust agreements, etc. shan be provided to the eity. The Consultant shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions andlor self-insurance. 15. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue: This contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules or doctrines. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, ,he claim.) between the City (andlor any other or department of the State of Oregon) and the Consultant that arises from or relates to this contract shall be brought and conducted soleJy and exdusively within the Circuit Court of Jackson County for the State of Oregon. If, however, the claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon rded in Jackson County, Oregon. Consultant, by the signature herein of its authorized representative, hereby consents to the in personam jurisdiction of said courts. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by City of any form of defense or immunity, based on the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, or otherwise, from any claim or from the jurisdiction. 16. THIS CONTRACT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS CONSTITUTE THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BE1WEEN THE PARTIES. NO WAIVER. CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT SHALL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. SUCH WAIVER. CONSENT, MOOIFICA TION OR CHANGE, IF MADE. SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS. AGREEMENTS, OR REPRESENTATIONS. ORAL OR WRITTEN, NOT SPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS CONTRACT. CONSULTANT, BY SIGNATURE OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE/SHE HAS READ THIS CONTRACT, UNDERSTANDS IT, AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 17. NonapproprlatJons Clause. Funds AvaUable and Authorized: City has suffICient funds currently available and authorized for expenditure to finance the costs of this contract within the City's fiscal year budget Consultant understands and agrees that City's payment of amounts under this contract attributable to work performed after the last day of the current fiscal year is contingent on City appropriations, or other expenditure authority SuffICient to allow City in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments under this contract. In the event City has InsuffICient appropriations. limitations or other expenditure authority, City may terminate this contract without penalty or liabHity to City, effective upon the delivery of written notice to Consultant. with no further liability to Consultant. Certification. Consultant shall s n the certifICation attached hereto as Exhibit A and herein incor CONSULTANT CITY OF ASHLAND: BY ()~~~ ~ t=" ~ BY ~ Signatln ANANCE DIRECTOR .JAM. - . ( Pmt Name TIllE ~(/Je;4/r DATE DATE 7 - Z.S-,o B CONTRACT AWAAD AND ANDlNGS DETERMINED BY: By: FederallDl City Department Head ~OYed as to form by legal: ACCOUNT , Date: (Foe City purposes only) *Completed W9 form must be slbnitted with contract PURCHASE ORDER , EXHIBIT A CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATION: i. Contractor. under penalty of perjury, certifies that (a) the number shown on the attached W-Q form i~ its correct taxpayer 10 (or is waiting for the number to be issued to it and (b) Contractor is not subjt : t to backup withholding because (i) it is exempt from backup withholding or (ii) it has not been ! rtified by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that it is subject to backup withholding as a result · f a failure to report all interest or dividends, or (iii) the IRS has notified it that it is no longer subject te backup withholding. Contractor further represents and warrants to City that (a) it has the power Slid authority to enter into and perform the work, (b) the Contract. when executed and delivered. st all be a valid and binding obligation of Contractor enforceable in accordance with its terms, (t~) the \YOrk under the Contract shall be performed in accordance with the highest professional st andards. and (d) Contractor is qualified. professionally competent and duly licensed to perform the work. Contractor also certifies under penalty of perjury that its business is not in violation of any Or ~gon tax laws, and it is a corporation authorized to act on behalf of the entity designated above and a! rthorized to do business in Oregon or Is an independent Contractor as defined in the contract docurr 9nts. and has checked four or more of the following criteria: v v ............ , ./"" '-"""'" v" (1) I carry out the labor or services at a location separate from my residence or is in a specifIC portion of my residence. s ,t aside as the location of the business. (2) Commercial advertising or busi less cards or a trade associ~tion membership are purchased for the business. (3) Telephone listing is used for the business separate from the personal residence listing. (4) Labor or services are perfonne<. only pursuant to written contracts. (5) Labor or services are perfonnec f~r two or more different persons within a period of one year. (6) I assume financial responsibilit} for defective workmanship or for service not provided as evidenced by the ownership of p. rfonnance bonds. warranties, errors and omission insurance or liability insurance relatir 9 to the labor or services to be provided. Contractor ~ t ~. ? -U-D8 (Date) F_ W-g ~eor, 0c:klIw 2007) l~Mt"'''' (,of lht r,..-y ......'... ft~.~ se....~1' Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification 0IVit form to 1M ..quester. Do not ..net to the IRS. fIWM (M enown an '101 incaM tax tftmt WM.,t)C..'t €..t<b II'< U a..U( Cot ~ 1650e..l A TU , r( c.. SulWIeM NIM, l difJlWtnC 6'CIft abowe Check ~apria" boa: 0 ~ ptepIeear Cotpor_. 0 Pwtlwatip o L.maId 1abIity~. ENIr the _dlIMIIca1lon .,....egerd......,. C ~~Itiof" P~Itipt. ""_" o 0Ifw 11M ""~cnt; ~ ~ ......, ..... Mid IPl fII .. no.) P.O. ~ ox 1t,)..5 ~ 2970 ~~_f!._S f-tl J:>I2..,y L-. CIty. ..... IN ZF cOde Hte.~o~ it I.iet KCllUI'II ~ hire (cpIclNt ('II . r 5 !i iJi i J Identification tlImber I c &empt pIIy .. R.eque.w'. twne end lid.... (opti~ Enter yaw TIN In .... .pprOSlriata box, The TIN provided "... match 1M nMW given on Line 1 to aYOid bIdcup with,',oldno. For ind~. ... it your IOdII MCUrIty nuTIber (SSN). HoweWI'. kJr a ~ lien. .. propMtor. or -eoerdtd 1I'IIfty, 1M 1M PIft , InIfruc1i<lM on pagt 3. For oItw ..... It I. Y'O'6 ernpIO)W IdIrIIIftcatkln runbet (EJN). If JClU do not have . ~. ... How to g<<. TrN on ~ 3. NoIe. I the acca.n .. In m<<e than eM ........ ... 1M dwt en P9 4 .or ~ on ~ nunber to enter, ' I....~~ or Certllcation Under peneItiM or ptIjury. I <*lily that: 1 . TN runbar Ihown on 1M form It my carrec:t tup.,. idenIItlcdon runbIt (or 11m w8iIing for . nunber to be iaued to me}. 8nd 2. I am not ~ to a.cIcup wtUl."loIdIO becaM: (a) I.,. _~t from bec:Icup wIhhokIng. 01 (I)) I have not been notIted by the Ir1IemIII Re~ ~ IF'Elt..... 11m ~ to ~ ~ at . rMUIt or . ..... to report II Int.... cr cI~, or (0) thalRS hat notIfIecI me that 11m no Iongtr ~ to badoJp ~dng, 8nd 3. 11m. U.S. citizen or oIMr U.S. p.-.on (deIned btIow). C......Clft 1MIrucIone. You mJtl croll out itIm 2 Ibove If you have bMn noIifted by the IRS f1et you are ClJTWIIIy abjed to badcup wItthokIilg ~ you haw r.iItd to rtpClrt II Inter_ Ind d....... on your tax NlUn.. For I'MI .....t. ~. Itam 2 doee not appty. For rncwtgege Ir'hr_ plld. ecqUtIIIon or ...4..~.~ of lec:untd propw1y. caallda. of debt, CCll"l1J'tbuao to 1I'11nc1**-, retnment wrIIlgtfMnt ~.Ind ~. peyrnenta OCher' tNn lnI... Ind cI\4dendI. you .. naI raqUred to lign the Cel1Iftc:dor.. but you ....... provide ycu CClrTWCt TW. 8M the 6MtNdIona on p.ge 4. ~I =:~ R~ 1J~"., ~ 4- General Instructions Section r.f.--=- .. to tha Int.. Rev..... Code un... ottwwtM noted. Purpose of Form It. person who .. reqt.*8d to 118 an lrIarmation return 'Nth the IRS fB.IIt obtain ytM correct tupayw Id8ntIfCalIon ,..,.. (TIN) to report. fa ~. I1c<IrrW paid to you. r.' _.. t,.nsactlons, mortgage Irt.... you paid, acquldion Of abaudoll",_ of SlCU'ed property. canceIItIon of debt. or contrWIons you made to 1ft IRA. UM Form W-9 Of'ii/ if you .. I US. perllCln (including a r8lliden a_rt. to pew. yow CO'Tect TIN to Ihlt J*SOrt reqlMSting I (the request.) and. when applcabll. to: ,. Certify tNII the TIN you .. giving is correct (a you .. waiting for a number to be iSSUed). 2. Certify thai you .. not subject to backup wlhhdding. or 3. Claim .~ from backup wlhhokting r you are a U S. eX8f1'1)t payee. If appIeabIe. you... also certitytng that as a U,S. petSCln. '10(1 allocable".. of atrf partnership ilcom8 from a U.S. tra<>> a businns is not subject to the wlhholding tall on for.tgn pa'tIW1' snare of effecftvetf connected incOme, Not.. If a request. gjvft YOU. form other than Form W-9 to request ,/eu TIN. you n1dt use the request.', Jam If . IS substanttally slrnillf to ttis Form W-9. o.e... 0' ,~ ""oof 01...... of . u.& penan. For f..., tax PU-poseI. you .e COftItdered . U.S. peflOn r you .e: . AI1lndtvidual who is. U.S. clan or U.S. r8Sident alien. . It. partrwsNp. COI'pOf'ItIOn. COf'f1:I8"y. << aaoclatlon created << aganiud In the United Stat_ ar l.I'ld8r the laws of the UnA" Stat... . Nt _at. (dher' than a foreign estat.), Of . A dclmIStk: trust (as defned in Regulations section 301. n01-1). SpedaI ruin for 1NI't.....-'~ Pwtnerthtps that conduct a trade cr business in the United stat.. .. generaly requi'ed to pay a withholding t. on any foreign partners' share of Inc:ome from sud't ~, Fu1hIr. In certain cases where a Fam W~9 has not been received. a ~ is reqt.*ed to prtSUl1lllhat . paltner is a faelgn person. and pay the wlhhoktlng tax. Tlwefcn. r you ... a U.S, p<<son thalls a partJw In a plltrwshlp conducting a trade or bUstn8sS In the United Stat... provide Fam W-9 to the ~IWShlp to estabfilh yOtl U.S, sIaIus and avOId wlt'lhok2ing on YfU share d partnership incOmI. The person who gIVes F<<m W-9 to the partnerShip f<< PU-posM of establwq Is U.S. status and avoiding wlhholding on Is aIocabll shar. d net inc::omlt from the partnersNp conducting a trade or busanessin the Unled States is in the fCllowing cases: . The U,S. owner of a diS'eg..-ded entity and not the emly. Cat. No. 10231X fClllft W-8 ~. 11).2007) r".\_...... ......L.,.,\4I'"lo__,......._" _...._:_'~IID\ICVf"'\D\U__.._.. ~.._ __. ~__ ..:_.-:_\,..-vnft . ._~_. 4 ". ~_ ._. . ^ _ _.!... _ _ "" _ _. _ .. ^ A.... . ForM WoO ".,. 10-20(7) P92 . The U,S. ~or or ~her owner c:I a grartOf trust and not the trust. and . The U S. trust (dhlr than a graNa trust) and not the benlfteawieS of tn. trust. FONIon penon. If you .. a foreign pertcn. do not use Fam W-9. Insteed, u. the appropiat. Fam W-8 (see Publcatton 515, Wlt'mkJ1ng ~ Tax on Norresident AINU" and Fore6gn E~IM). NonN...... ..... who becomH . ,....... ...... Genera..,.. only a norr-'dent ,"n tndMdUII nwy UM the terms ~ a tax truty to reduce a eliTftM U.S. tax on certain typM ~ InCome, Howw.... mast tax treaties contain I proWion known as a .saving clause.. ~ spedied in tM saving claUM rT'IiIY per'" an ex<<f1)t1on tam tax to c:ontnue fa' certain typel of Inc::orrw even after tM par.. hD dherwiSe bec::onw a U.S. resident alien for tax pwpoM& If you are I U.S. rM6dent...., Who is ,...,.tng on an ucept60n contaJneclln the saving ctaUM d I tax treaty to clliTl ., ...,..xion from U.S. tax on certain typea of Income. you rruJt attach a stlll<<nant to Fam W-g that specIles the following fiv. lems: 1, The treaty ~. Gen8rdf. thls ITUIt be the IMW treaty W1der wNch you ellinld ~ from t. ., I norrnldent den. 2. The treaty article Iddr_ng the 1ncomI. 3. The 8ItidI number (ar lc:ICIiion) in the t. treIty tlwt contan the saving ctaUM and Its exceptions. ~. n. type and ~ of lr1cofM that quaIfiM for the e~ from tu. 5. &lnclllnt facts to justify the ~ from tax ooder the t.ma of the treBly ..lea EJrampI& .frtIde 20 d the U.S.-Ctina i1comt tax treaty aIows an ~ from t. for schoIarstlIp InccIfne receMcl bV a CN,.. stud<<C ~1Iy praenlln the UnIed States. Under U.S. taw. ttlll student d ~ a r...... IItn for tax pu'poeM I hII ar tw ..~ In the ~ Stat.. txCMdS 5 caMnc:t.- y.... HoweY..., J*vaph 2 ~ the firtt Protocol to the U.S.-Chna treaty (dated AprI30. '1984) aloft the prcw~ d Miele 20 to codI... to apply ~ after the ChIIwM lludefW becclmIe a r8lklent den ot the United st.... A C..... stucMnt who qudIM for this exception {under J*aIIJaph 2 ~ the ...st protocolt and Is ratjlng on thill exception to ctUn an eXlN'l1'tIon from tax on his ar her schollnhlp a ftlowshlp ~ W<:'dd attach to Farm W-O a statamtnt that Includes the infornWltton de8crlbed above to IUppcrt that ~Ion. If you .. I nonrtsldart 11M ar I fcnIgn ....ay not aJbfIct to bectwp wlhhoIdJng. give the req~<< the approprlat. canp.ted Form W.e. WIMII Is badwp ........." PerIonI nwIclng certai1 paynwa to you fft.IIt &RMr ~ c:ondIlcnI wItIhokt Ind pIrf to the IRS 28" ~ such ~.. Thill .. caIed .backup wlhhoading.- Paynwa thBt fNY be subIId to becIcUp wlhhoIdlng Include Int.... *...~ 1111.... cINIdends. bra. and berter exchange Irar..cUon.. rents. rC7f...... ~ pay. and c<<1aln paynwIts ..om ftINng boll operators. AMI ...... tl'1lm8dlons .. nee IUbjIct to bedwp wltlhoId. You wi' not be ~ to backup wlhhotd'ng on payments you recelv. r you gIYa the req&.Mtw 'f04I correct TlN. naka the proP'l' C<<tItcations. 1M repott d yOU' taxable irWeIl and dlVkMnds on Y046 talC 1''''''' .,......... you ...ceiw wII be ~ to e.dcup wlth."loIcII... It 1. You do not fil'nish YCAJI TlN to the request.. 2. You do nee e<<tify you TlN wt.1 required (see the Pert II lnstndions on page 3 far detais). 3, The IRS tels the requester that you flmlshed an Incar.a TIN. . The IRS tlls you that you are subj<<t to b8ckup wlhhc:llding because you did net report all 'leu Int... and dividends on you ta retll'ft (for reportable i~er_ and dividends ~. or 5. You do not etrtly to the reqUMter that YCIJ If. not subfec:t to backup wlhhokting under .. abot. (far reportable It.... and dividend accoura opened aft... 1983 ontt). c.tain pay... and pay""'" .. .xe"llt from backup wthhokIk1g. s.. the instructionS beloW and the MplJat. Instructions for the Requester of Form W-9. Also see SpecIIIJ fU_ for pll/fntII'sNps on page 1. Penalties F..... to turnIItt 11H. If you ra. to fwnbh yow correa llN to a requelW. you.e subjId to a perraly of $SO for each such faille unIMs yov faIu'. is du. to reasonable cawe and not to wWut ~ awl ......., tor .... Wormdan wilt ....ct to .....allll... If you mike a fa... stat...".,. wIh no reuonable basis that reIUIs ~ no backup wlth)tdlng. you are eubflct to a $500 pIRIIy. CirIrI*UII peAIlIfty for fII~ lnIonIIiIIIan. WilluIi falsfying certiftcallcn or aft~1ons may SUbject you to ~ penaIIIM ~ fines trdIor in1WIsonrnaN. MIluM of TIN&. If the request. dlsca. or ~ llNs In vIOlatIOn d feder'll taw. the req~. may be IUbject to cMI and ctt"*-l ~ Specific Instructions Name tf you .. an Indlvldlal. you rTUSt gerwdf ..... the ..me shawn on yaw IncomI tax retwn. ~. If you haVe ehlnged '1CU IaIt rwrw. for Instance. due to nwrlage without Infarmlng the Saclll SecU'Iy AdminlltJ'lltlon of the name change, n<< 'ICU firIIt ..me. the last name shown on yew 80dat secwly c.d, and ycu MW last name. If the IlCCOWC .. In joi" narr.. 1st tk'1l. .., then ~cte. the name d the penon Of entIy whoM rurtIer you ...arid in Pw11 d the fOrm. Sola ........ Enter "Icu IndIVidual naml as Ihown on y04I Income tax reUn on thl .NamI. ..... You may enter you buR-. tr8de. Of .doIng busNss as ~.. r\an. on the -euu.. ,.,.. line. unt.ed ....., compII\ly J,LQ. Check the .LiTited IiabIIly ~ box ~ and ...ar thl appropriate code for the tax cIaaIIcatIcn (.0- tor d.egarded .,tly. .C. fa corporation, .p- fa- partnIrsNp) In thl epece provided. For a 1Ing....1nIft'lber LLC ~ I foreign LLC wlh . dor'nMJc owner) thai .. dilngwded as an nay ...... from Is CMMr under Regulationl MCticn 301.7701-3. ....... the ownw's ,.,.,. on the .Name. line. E~. the UC'I I'IIIIN on the .~ ,.,.. line. For an LLC c:IIsshd as I f*tnersNp or I corporatiOn. ...<< the UCs namI on the .N.... line and IIfY ~, trade. Of C8A ,.,.,. on the .eusinal ".".. I... 0IIw........ Erhr 'f04I bUsinMs name IS shown on requred fecWal tax docWTWntl on thl .NamI- Int. ThtI r\an. IhouId matctI the ,... shOWn on the chart<< Of oCher legal documInt CNating the entIy. You rrtII1 ent. any bu:Wless, ~. or DBA name on the "BusIness ~. line. No... You.. requested to chick the apprOJrille box for ycu status (lndivkhaVsoCe proprietor. corporation. lite} Exempt Payee If you .. e~ from backup withholding. .,tew Yf:AI nama as des::rbtd abcwe and check the appropriate box far you st.us. then check thl .~ pay... bOk in the line folowtng tM business name. sign and date the tam ~'\ntlh-wrk~\Ann\t1Ant-=utminl~IIR~VnR\~~rrlAv ~lIn_v ~An""Ar\i:VnA L-J........._, ~....,,^.. ~"'...n,...,. f"__._... ~ no ~-- n___ ~ _I^ FOff'ft w.e f'w. 10-2007) P8g.3 Generatj. indlvlduaJs (Inch,ding 80M propletorst.. not utftl)t from backup wlhhOlding. COrpaatlOns .. .tmpt from backup wlhhokfing for certain paynwtta. such as n... and dividends. Nota. If you .. .~ from backup wlhhokting, you should st. ~. this form to IYOid possitM erraneous badcup wlhholdlng. The folowing pay.., .. .8f'I1)t from backup wlhhoIdlng: 1, An organillllian oxempt from tax lMld8' Mellon 501.. a~ IRA. 01 a custodial 8C::CQ,ft &nMf MCtion 403(b)(7) r the account .tlStlel the requlr......ws d lICtion 401(1)(2). 2. 1M Unled states a- I"f d Is ag.ndes or 1nstn.I'fWnta..... 3. A st... the Obtrtct of CokI1'i)ia. I p-:Tll1flOn 01 the United st.es. or any d theW poIlk:aJ subctMsi:lns or Instr\meN.a... .. A 'onlign oov-nnwnt or II'tf of Is pollical subdlYtskn. agencils. or lnstrurnlriallils. or 5. An ...ndonII organization or anv of as agenc_ 01 ntnmIntaIliM. 0Ihtr pay... thai rrey be .empt "om backup wlhholdlng Include: 6. A corpaatlon. 7. A fa. ~ bMk 01 .... 8. A __ In 1tC,,11eI or CCJnYI'1OdIIM ntq~ to reotst<< In the UnIed St8Iet, the CMstrlct of CoIu1i:Ha. or a II Olllstlon 01 the United Stat... 9. A hi". '-'oIt,.,1iMkIn merchant reg....ed wIh the ComnodIty F'*r_ Tradtng Cvt'.''''''1, 1 O. A r.. .... lrNesll'lWll trust. 11. "" eltlty r~<<ed at 1111 tlINS d"lng the tu 'I_ under the InYtttmInI CorI1*Yf M d 1940, 12. A common W... fund op.rated bV . bank LI1der Mellon 584(1). 13. A flnanclallNltllAlon, 14. A mlddlenwt Ienown In the inYestmIrt conY'f"Iftty as a nom".. 01 cUltodlan. or 15. A trutt MMI'1lt from tax under MCtJon 8&4 01' deecrlbed In sectiOn 4947. The chaft below shows typel of payments !Nt mB'/ be ~ from bIctCup wlhholdlng. The chlrt apples to the .~ pay.. listed abov., 1 ttwough 15. F the .-vmentla tor . . . THEN ChI pqmenals ....-..pC tor... Int__ Ind dvldlnd ~ M uempt .,.yeee excapI tort Brok. ~ Extmpt pay.-1 ~ 13. /It.o, . pereon ~ '"* .. hlllMlmenl Ad... N4 of 1140 who ~ IdS _ . brok. Extmpt payMe 1 hough 5 BarW uClhlnge IrW1I1dklne Ind pU'om.ge cltAdIndI PIyments O\W seoo reqlJr.cl to be reported Ind ciNc:t .... OWl $5,000' GInnIy. ~t~ 1ttYough7 '.. Fcrm 1011--MBC.'''; Rti~ Nlome,... -. ~ 'How... ... taIoMnt ~ ".. to. carpcntJon ~ .0. prcaede ... tit __ ......, .... ....... ~. .... . .. .ncm.y . . ccrparlllclnt... rtpGrtiItIte an FOIIII 1C>>I-MSC .. nat...... from baeIq) .~ ~ Ind.... C8M ~.IIIIDM/8' ..... ... pa~ far ..... p-'d bf ........ ..... ...,-cy. Part I. Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) Enter vow TIN In ... ......... box. If you .. . resideri alMtn and you do not have and ... not eIglbIe to get an SSH. 'fOAl T1N is yc:u IRS MNidual tupay.,.Identf'1C8tion nuni;)er (mH)o Ert.,. t In the IOCilI seewly I'UTt>er box. If '/CXI do not hay. In mH. SiN How to gat . TIN btiow. If you .. a SOle proprllta and you have 111 EIN. '/CXI tnIy ent...". you SSN a EIN. HcMev... tM IRS prefers that 'Iou use 'leu $$N. If you .. a ~ LlC thllt Is d.eg.ded as an entity MptnI. from Is own<< (see Umiled IabIIty 00ITJ*fY ..,.C) on page 2), n. the owner', SSH (a EIN. r the 01/,.. has 0Mt. 00 net en. the d.egarclecl enlly's EIN. If the LLC II clullied as a ccrporllion or .,..nershlp. ..... the entIy'. ElN. N.. See the dwt on P9 .. fOf fwttw cllrflcatkMl d ,..,. and T1N con1:HnMlons. How to get a 11M. If you do not h8M . l1N. appfy for one Imntdllltly. To apply for an SSN. g<< Fam 8$-6. AppIeatIon for a SocIal SecwIy c.d. from '/fU IocaJ Social Secwly AdninilhUon omc. cw get the form online at www.IM.QIO~. You Ny alto get this form by eallng 1-800-772-1213. U. Fam W-7, Appbdlan for IRS IndMdUIII Taxpay. ldentfleatlon N~. to apply for an ITlN. or Form SS-4. AppIcation for E~ IOtwlllltatian ~. to IppIy fOl' an EIN. You can apptf fer 1ft eN online by ~IQ the IRS websIe at \INW.n..p'''''''' and clcldng on E~ kMntnc.1on Nwrmer (fIN) ~ stilting a BusInta. You can sa<< Fa".. W-7 and SS.... from the IRS by viIIing www.n..gcw or by caIing 1-800- TAX-FORM (100800-829-3676). If you .. asMd to COf'I1MC. Fam W-9 bIA do not have . llN. wrle -ApplIed Fcw- In the tpaC8 '01' the llN. sfgn and date the form. and glv. . to the request.. Fa ...... and dividend payl'l'lllts. and oer18In paynwra n'8de wlh respect to I"MdIf hdabee ~., ~ you will have eo dap.to get a TIN and ew. It to the rtqUIII. before you .. subi8d to beckup wl~ on ~.. n. 8O-day rule does not apply to atlw types d ~mII'II.. You wll be IUbjrIct to backup wltIhoIc*tg on III'SUCh pay""". ....1 you prcwlde yow l1N to the requllt<<. NoIe. EnIerIna -ApplIed Fora mtanI that you r.ve ld'eady applld fa . llN a- thlll you InItnd to appty for one 100ft. CalIIIcft A .~d8d domeItk; ently th. ,.,. . inrVn ovtnII nut elM b ~ Fotm w-a. Part II. Certification To eGbIIt\ to the wlhholdlng agltrt that you ... . U.S. person. 01' r.... II"'" sign Form YJ-9. You may be requested to Sign by the WIhhoIdIng agent even If lema ,. .t. and 6 below Indlcllt. ~. Fa a joIrt account. ori/t the person whoM llH II shown In Part , .tIouId .. (When reqt*td). EMfY1lt pay.... see &enp Pa)W on pege 2- ........ .............. ~ the certl'lc3t1on as Indicaed In 1 through 5 below. 1. ........... dividend, ... ... _ctwage 8CCOUIItS opened bttoN ... ... ........ tICCGUIIb OCMIiIIdered ... ...... 1113. You ":..'/fU correct TlN. bIA you do not have to sign the cet1 2. ......... ct........ taraIr.ef, ... berW .x.cMnge ....... opened ..... 1t83 ... "ok<< IIOCOUIlts CGnIIdINd ........... 1tI3. You nut sign the certifICation 01' backup wlhhaIdIng w. apply. If you ...1Ubject to backup wlhhotding and you ... nw8tf prOliding you correct TIN to the requester. you nust cross ~ Iern 2 in the ec1ificaUon bcffae signing the form. n.\......... ,...&,....\^....,..,....^~. .....A......:...\~. IO\'C:Vr\O'U_~_.. r-. __ ._.. t' __ ~___''''~^ft I f__~_.. ^. .- -- ,... - . FGf'" w-e ft... t~71 3. ANI ...... ~ You I'1'USt sign the certification. You rrey crass ot.t Item 2 d the OIftifIcSton. 4. caw pavmIIIts. You ITI.ISt gtve Y04l cared TIN. W you do not have to sign the certlfic:8tlon u... you h8v. been nottfted thlt you hIVe prwtoustf gilt." ., Incorrect TIN. -other paynwnb- InctucIe plYnwU made In the CCUM of the request.'s trade ex buIIneIs for ra.. royaIttIs. goods (other than bIIs for "*dwId_~ medical and hNfth ear..vlces (indUding parl"ndS to caporatlc:lnst, payments to a nc::M-.~ for ..w:.. payn"lfts to certain fiItq bolt crfM ~ InCS ftshInnIn. and gross prOCMds patd to ~orneys (lndudlng paymn' to caporatlClnS). I. MoI1a. ........ p8Id by rou. lIoqul*. or .....lfIftIIII 0II1eC1UNd propertr. ~ It ---'1aft 01 cWIC. quailed tuition program ......... .... MCtIan &2tlt.1RA. Caw'" ESA. NcMr MIA 01' HSA CCII'IIdIuIoM or dl*blllans. and ....... dIatrIbuIIanL You mat fii. you' ccrrec:t TIN. W you do not have to sign the certIIcation. What Name MCI Nun. To CUVe the RequesW ,. .... ... ., ........e: ,. hIWIuII 2. 1Wo Gf .....e ....... fc*lI ~ (1M.... ~... et "Ihe ........... 'the ..... ~ cI ... -=orM'II 06. If ClCIIfttlInM .... .. ... ~_...~. .... IMw · J, cunodIIIn eGC:iOlft cI a IMw ~ QIft lit MIa. ~ ... .. The UNI r.caWa ..,. w.t .__ .. -.0 tlWIMt b. ao.c.IM hit ~ ... .. 'the ..... ~. not . ...., 01 vtId ~ ~ .... ... 5. .. pr+~........ fit .....dId .... ..... · .. CMnICI ~ an ~ ,..... .... .,......e: QM ~ ~.. III: e. ~... MIl..... ~ __ 'the ClIiMW' ~ 7, A-*'........ CII'..... NIt L.... .., . .. COIpcnte 06 u.e ...... "Ihe CllMpCnIon ~ __ an FOIftl_ .. AModdan. ... ....-. charItIt:lIe. ecIucaIIonII. . .. _....... 40_ lu r , 10, PInwINp fit ~ u.c "Ihe ,.".,.... 1,. A bralcer fit ........ .....,. 'the trcAr ar ,...... 12. Acccutt....... ~ f1I "Ihe ~ __ ~.In .. name cia P'bIc ...- tu:h _ a ... ar .... .,.....,..,.., __ dntct, ar ,.... ..,...... ....... pqIWft ~ '1.I. .. .., atda ... _ 01 .. I*UiIl wew:. 1UIt_ 'jIO.I........ r ~ one PIRO't on. jaint ar:COIIl"- ... SIH. ... ......... tUllfW Ill. be ......., · Cwt'- .. monar'l r_ ..., t.nnh N "'lftO""a $8N 'YOU ""-* ~ 'JCU ~ _...., ya.I mar -.0... ~ ~ ~ 'D8A" ntrM en "" ~ n.... 'M. You ~ .,.. ..... yo.s 88N Of EIfof IJ/ you ".,. lINt. bit .. IRa enecu.. yoau I) ~ 'JCU 6SN. · uac Ira, .., ordt N n... 01 fie .,.. ..... 01 1>eI'*OII'" \DO ftU __1ft .. nN r:J .. ~1Clnllf .lOilWlllllW a .,.... liIIIM ,. _ """ ,... is l'IO( ~ In .. 8tcQll'll '''1 JNo _ ~ Mw lOt ~ en r-oe 1 ..-. If no ..".. is Ci'ded when mae than one name is 1Ist4Mt. the nutTH' w. be conSider" to tie that 01 the tnI nam. 1st... 'the p.-...... . -n. Of'....... P.ge4 Secure YOW' Tax Records from Identity Theft Iderily theft cc<:... when someone u.s yov ~ Wornwtlon such 3S yow name, 9OC8I ~Iy rurt>>tr (SSN). ex ather idenrv~ lr'tcrmttlon, wlhoUt 'f04I J*rmstcn. to cornn1t fr8Ud or othIr c:rirTws. An ldeltly ttW may use yaw SSN to get a job ex ~ fie . tax retll'n using yov SSN to r80lNe a rlllM. To reduce yov rtstc . Protect yo&I' SSN. . eran yov ~ Is protecting yov SSN. and . Be c:arefli when choosing . tax preP8'_. ca. the IRS . 1-800-829-1040 W you tf*1k yo46 IcMrCIy has been used il"lllPPopiat~ for tax JM.I~. VIctims 0I1dM1ty thCIft who .. expertencIng economc harm ex a system probltm, or are tMIdng ~ In rMOMng tM probttnW thlt haw not been rMOlVed ttl'ough I'lOI'mIt chaMlll. n'8Y be tllgtble for Taxp8'/. Mvoc:8te Setva (TAS) ~. You can r.-ch TAB ~ cdIng the TAS tol-fr.. CUI traM line at 1-877-777-.778 or TTYITOD 1-aoo-829...cosg. ProIeclI ,..... hm "nr1c1ow ...... 01' phIsNno Ic:IIeInH. PhIshIng is the cr..1an and use d ..,..1 .-.d wet*t.. deltgned to rrUric ~ bull,.. emaII and w.beI_ ,... mDIt ccrnnon Kt Ie Mt"lding an emd to . UMr fa"'" clUring to be an _lbIlshed ~.,.. ....prtM In an att.".,. to scam the Wet' no SI61'endertng private Inforrration that wi! be u.d for Id4ttdy t~. "T'he IRS dole net 1nI.... cantads wlh taxpay.. va 1HT1lII. AIIo. the IRS dole not reqUMt ,...... detailed Wamltlcn through..,... Clf' .. ~ for the PIN 1U1t>erS. paswads. ex slmIIIr -=ret IlCCISI WorrT1lllon far ther ad card. bank. or ather fNncilll ac:courU. If you receive an ..-otIcled ..,..1 claJmlng to be from the IRS, forward this ,..... to philhttgO#rl.gov. You mIY also report rRIUM d the IRS name. logo. or othlr IRS penonal property to the Treuwy Insp<<tex Generat for Tax Adn'intIIratlon . 1-aoo.366-44&4. You can forwa-d IUIpk::ious ..,.... to the FederII Trade CQ~.~lIMIcln a: ~go" cr conIact them at WWW.c:cnawneI..fIO.IlldtheIt ex 1-877 -IOlliEFT{~4338). VIsIt the IRS webslte at www.n.gov to ...n mere abocA IcIenUty theft and how to reduce '1041 risk. Privacy Act Nota 8ecIan etot cI h ~ ~ Code ...... yaa lit PAM. 'fGII caract lW lit ...-- who I\'lUIIt . InIanna*ln ,tUN .tth h AI to,.port........ dMdenda. ... c.-..n aIw NclMe JMIid 11:1 YeN. "."..... '*'-' you .... ... ~ 01 ~~ cI HOnd praperty. ~ cI cMbt. 01 ~ 'ICU made. __ RA. or ,... MIA fit ~ 1ha AS __ .......... tor kM ..~..~ . ~ and 11:1 MIp .." .. accuacy cI 'fOV .. ,.un. n. .. IMW -.0 plOlriIM tiI ........... . ... ~ of ~ .. chi ... ainWIIltigIIIon. ..... lit dtIat. ......, hi 0IMrid 01 CcUnIIIa. ..... U.I, po....rCIN.1CMf'/ NthIir......, Wa~ .-ocladoMtiI rtbwl~1It oIMr~"" am.... .,..,.......... egenciMtD ....ce-..,., nantIIX c:riniNt ..... ar. ......... ....__ ... ~ ~ to ant.! tImlriML Ycu ,.. prcMde 'f06 ~ wNIw Gf nat you .. '......1It . a _ ,4IUr\ ~ I\'lUIIt ~ .....,... 21" cI tIllIitH ,.,.... cfiwid4ncl. Ind c.wn Cllfw ~ to. peyee who ~ nGt ... ~ to. JMIW.. Cer1J6n...... ~ ~~. .... _..___\~-._. _..I_~_\'""t.r-t"P-'\J"P"\'I'__"_...."'.._._~."'__.t___'t-\.,^^..__~_._^.._._. ",,__.!___ ""__A___&^"'^ -'__ "___ n _1ft CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON EXHIBIT B City of Ashland LIVING ,., I!IJIp.r hour effective June 30. 2008 (IReNa.... annually every June 30 b, the Consumer PrIce Index) Employees must be paid a living wage: > For an hours worked lIlder a service contract between their employer and the City of Ashland if the contract exceeds $18,088 or more. > For all hours worked in a mon1h if the employee spends 50% or more of the employee's time in that month working on a project or portion of business of their employer, if the employer has ten or more employees, and has received financial assistance for the project or business from the City of Ashland in excess of $18,088. > If their employer is the City of Ashland including the Parks and Recreation Department. ~ In calculating the living wage, employers may add the value of health care, retirement, 401K and IRS eligible cafeteria plans (inclucfmg childcare) benefits to the amooot of wages received by the employee. > Note: -Employee- does not include temporary or part-time employees hired lor less than 1040 hours in any twelve- mon1h period. For more details on appIicabiUty of this policy, please see Ashland Municipal Code Section 3.12.020. For additional information: Call the Ashland City Administrator's offICe at 541-488-6002 or write to the City Administrator, City Hall, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520 or visit the city's website at www.ashland.or.us. Notice to Employers: This notice must be posted predominantty in areas where it can be seen by aU employees. C I T Y 0 f ASHLAND G:\pub-WI1<s\eng\dept-admin\SURVEYOR\Hardey Survey Services\FY08 Hardey Survey Services Contract 6 08.doc . Page 9 0'9 Hardey Engineering and Assoclat IS, Inc. . t'ROPOSALFOR PROFE SSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FO t SERVICES P.O. .. 182 Medford. OR 9750 541.772.888CJ..t4 541.m.8&13-fa ~ Ine.cor June 23. 2001 Jim Olson City Surveyorl Project Manager 20 E. Main St. Ashland. OR 97520 Phone: 541-488-5347 Fax: 541-488-6006 Afta: Mr. JI. OIIoa Sabjed: As....Dd Creek TnaDk Sewer Reeoutn. tioa PUle 1 PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK: We at Hardey Engil1et ring would like to thank you for the opportunity to submit this Proposal for Services. The scope of work as we see it at this time is to provide civil engineering services for the above mentioned project. fhe work is more specifICally as follows: SURVEY t. Provide legal descriptions for easement requisitio s for three properties. Total allQ 1. Provide all necessary construction staking and ref.. 'tReing of existing property markers. Total $16.000 S.rvey Total Sll..7SO CIVIL I. Attend two design meetings with city staff. %. Provide 60 and 90 percent plants for review byeit) J. Provide complete plans. specifICations and bid docu nents. 4. Attend pre-bid conference. 5. Respond to requests for clarifICations and interpretat ens from prospective bidders. 6. Provide limited project inspection to suppl~nt cit} inspections. 7. Provide proj~t submittal reviews and respond to cor tractors request for interpretations of plans and specifaarions. 8. Provide as-built dbCumentation including mylar plan: showing any changed conditions. Civil Total 512.000 Graad Total SJJ.7SO This proposal does not include any structural design for retaining walls. If deemed necessary. survey crew will tie-in needed properly pins for proposed easements on a hourly rate part of Phase II. The above mentioned work will be performed on a time and material basis, ...sI.... ad..ted ...0... ofW.7SO in accordance with our Standard Fee Schedule -A- and our Standard Contract Provisions attac~ which are normally associated with. project of this nature and does not include any fees for permit applications. tiling. etc. that may be required by government agencies. If we anticipate our fees to exceed the estimate, we will notify you with an explanation as to why the excess is anticipated. We will not exceed the budgeted amount without your prior approval. Upon acceptance of this contract and deciding on a constnaction method, a price for phase II will be negotiated with the City of Ashland. If this proposal meets with your approval, please have an authorized representative or owner sign, date and return one copy to this offICe along with a SO retainer. By signing, both Hardey Engineering cl Assoc~ and the owner will be bound to the other party to this agreement and to the partners, s~ executors, administrators and legal representatives of such other party in respect of all covenants. agreements and obligations of this agreement. We will proceed with work upon receipt of the signed Contract For Services and retainer. The estimated fees are subject to receiving written acceptance within 30 days and completion within one year. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this Proposal For Services. We are looking forward to the opportunity to serve you on this project. If you have any questions., please don't hesitate to call. ENGINEER ACCEPTED HARDEY ENGINEERING It ASSOCIATES, INC. By:r~ C~ipNIme By: AuthorUlcd SipMuIe Title: Proiect Mana2er Title: Date: ,-:1.~..0 , Date: WARRANTY OF AUTHORIZATION.. The person signing this authorization. accepting this proposal, warrants helshe has authority ~ or on behalf of, the Client, Owner. Partnenhip, or Corporation for whom or for whose benefit Hardey Engineering & Associates. Inc. Would render service. Said person agrees that he/she is personally liable for all breaches of the agreement and that in any action against himlher for breach of such warranty, a reasonable attorney's fee shall be included in any judgment rendered. Attachments: Standard Fee Schedule · A. cl Standard Contract Provisions. W :\PROPOSAL \AshlandCreekTrunkSewerReconphase2.doc CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of a Contract for Design and Engineering Services to Identify a Location for the Talent Booster Pump Station Meeting Date: September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught Department: PW/Engineering - Water E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Finance Secondary Contact: Lee Tuneberg Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: 15 Minutes Question: Will the City Council approve a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council approve a contract for $15,000 with Carollo Engineering for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station. Background: On May 6,2008 the City Council did not approve staffs recommendation to award a $699,299 contract to Carollo Engineers PC for the Talent Ashland Phoenix intertie (TAP) final design and engineering services. The question before the City Council is whether or not to continue other elements of the TAP project in order to connect to the TAP water source-sometime in the future. To that end, this council communication provides a history of the TAP project and provides a recommendation to proceed with engineering services that would locate the Talent Booster Pump Station previously discussed and approved by the Council on July 20, 1999 and January 15, 2008. Previous Council Actions (as represented in their respective City Council minutes): December 15, 1998 The City Council held a Public Hearing regarding the City's long-term water supply. Following the public hearing, the City Council approved staffs recommendation to participate in oversizing the intertie pipeline from 18" to 24" to Talent only, purchase 450 MG of Lost Creek water rights, and to pursue other short-term water supply options (i.e. Talent Co-op, TID Co-op, etc.). July 20, 1999 The City Council approved a motion to purchase property jointly with the Cities of Talent and Phoenix for the purpose of placing the regional pump station for the TAP Intertie Project and authorizing the City Administrator to negotiate the final purchase price, sign the purchase agreement and authorize payment of the earnest money for the property. Page 1 of6 090208 Pump Station.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND September 5,2000 The City Council approved a Talent, Ashland, and Phoenix (TAP) Intertie construction contract and authorized the City Administrator to sign the contract with James W. Fowler for $1,107,000. February 5, 2002 Public Works Director Paula Brown recommended that the City Council direct staff to bring back funding options to connect the City's water distribution system to TAP by 2008. The City Council then approved a motion to move ahead with a preliminary plan that included conservation, engineering, and funding. March 4, 2003 Following a TAP presentation by Paula Brown, the City Council discussed the project and noted the following issues as represented in the March 4,2003 Council minutes: . Timeline: The water need is 2016, but the line could be connected by 2008 . Continued and consistent water conservation is imperative . Brown should continue to bring updates to the council . Removing water rights from the Imperatrice property would devalue the property . An alternative emergency source of treated water is a need The Council then approved a motion to accept staff recommendations to do the preliminary engineering study. February 17,2004 The City Council reviewed draft Council goals that included the following: . Develop a citywide focus: "the right water for the right use" . Explore and potentially develop a three-year plan to improve and extend out the current TID system . Negotiate for other water supply options . Support effluent reuse for the WWTP . Complete pre-design plan for future extension of TAP water line including priority for conservation February 21,2006 The City Council approved a motion to direct the Public Works Director to complete preliminary design and cost estimates for the shortened TAP line. January 15, 2008 The City Council approved a motion to approve the current TAP schedule and direct staff to proceed with Step #1: Booster Pump Station Site Acquisition, and Step #2: Final Design and Cost Benefit Analysis. Page 2 of6 090208 Pump Station.CC.doc r., III CITY OF- ASHLAND May 6,2008 The City Council denied staff s recommendation to approve a contract with Carollo Engineers PC for final design and engineering of the Talent, Ashland and Phoenix (TAP) water line. In 1998, the City hired Carollo Engineers to update Ashland's Comprehensive Water Supply Study. The scope of work evaluated current water usage and demand patterns to determine future water needs through 2050 or projected build out. The scope of work also included an update of available water supply options to augment the City's existing water sources. The Water Advisory Group (WAG) was formed to participate in the evaluation of potential long term water supply recommendations. The WAG group members included: Jim Moore Debbie Whit all (Hydrologist) Ashley Henry Cate Hartzell JoAnne Eggers John Fields Ron Roth Ken Hagen Paula Brown Dick Wanderscheid Greg Scoles Wetland Coalition US Forest Service Oregon Trout Citizen / Ashland Watershed Stewardship Alliance Citizen / Ashland Watershed Stewardship Alliance Planning Commission Citizen /Agriculture User Council Liaison Public Works Director Conservation Director Assistant City Administrator Carollo identified several areas of concern related to Ashland's ability to provide drinking water during severe drought conditions and projected water demands to meet 2050 growth demands. The following table (*) represents projected population (1.4 % annual growth rate based on the Comprehensive Plan) and water demand through 2050: Year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2050 Population 19,350 20,743 22,237 23,838 25,554 35,065 Yearly Water Demand (MG) 1,069 1,178 1,263 1,353 1,451 1,991 * (Carollo Technical memo/Oct 1998) The study indicated that the yearly water demand for the City of Ashland ranged from 1451 million gallons by 2020 to 1991 million gallons by 2050. The demand estimates incorporated an adjustment for a proposed conservation plan that included a 20% reduction during summer months and an additional 10% voluntary curtailment during drought years. The WAG group reviewed the initial Carollo water supply report and ultimately developed seven feasible water supply options: They included: Page 3 of6 090208 Pump Station.CC.doc r~' -----nr.- .-- CITY OF ASHLAND . Wastewater reclamation . Ground Water from wells and springs . Pipeline supply from Talent Irrigation District in lieu of existing canal . Connection to the Talent, Ashland, and Phoenix (TAP) Pipeline . Additional reservoir storage . Cooperative water supply projects with TID . Increased snow pack in Ashland Creek Watershed Each of these alternatives was then thoroughly evaluated by Carollo who ultimately identified the TAP project as the only "stand alone" option that would meet the community water supply needs through 2050. The final Carollo Technical Report #3 (January 1999) recommended the following plan of action: . Buy-in to the TAP project but do not extend the pipeline to Ashland . Purchase 450 mg or 1380 acre-feet water rights from Lost Creek Lake . Pursue water supply by reclamation or co-op projects Based on the findings outlined in the Carollo Technical Report #3 (January 1999), the City expended $2,456,000 on the TAP intertie as its solution to future growth/drought related water supply demand needs to the year 2050. The first phase of the project extended the TAP pipeline to Talent by constructing a 24-inch pipeline from Medford to Talent, constructing a regional pump station at Belknap and Highway 99 and purchasing 920 acre-feet of Lost Creek water rights. It is important to note that, with the exception of purchasing land for the Talent Booster Pump Station and purchasing the remaining 250/0 of Lost Creek Water Rights, the first phase of the TAP (extending the TAP project from Medford to Talent) project is complete as recommended in the 1999 Water Supply Technical Memorandum; Carollo Engineers. The second phase of the project, extending the TAP pipeline from Talent to Ashland, was not slated to be completed until 2016 based on growth, drought, water storage and conservation. However, at the February 2,2002 City Council meeting former Public Works Director Paula Brown recommended that the final phase of the TAP project be completed by 2008. This recommendation was not based on growth, but was specifically meant to address the impacts of the 2001 drought. The Council supported Ms. Brown's suggestion and moved to authorize staff to proceed with a preliminary plan that included conservation, engineering and funding. The Council supported the 2008 construction date again at their March 4,2004 City Council meeting. At the February 2,2005 City Council meeting Ms. Brown adjusted the projected TAP pipeline project (Talent to Ashland) timeline as follows: . Design the remaining section of the TAP project in 2008-09 . Construct the new TAP pipeline in 2009-2010 In the 1998 Carollo Water Supply Study, population and annual water usage projections proved to be very accurate. The actual 2005 population was 20,880 as compared to the Carollo population projection of20,743. As you can see the Carollo population projections were lower than the actual Page 4 of6 090208 Pump Station.CC.doc r~' .11. .--.--- CITY OF ASHLAND population increases even with their projected 1.4% annual population increase estimates. As indicated by the chart below, the water usage was substantially higher than projected in 2000; however, the usage not only dropped in 2005 but has held constant through 2008 (1,218 MG). Year 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2050 Proj ected Population 19,350 20,743 22,237 23,838 25,554 35,065 Actual 19,610 20,880 Proj ected Water Demand (MG) 1,099 1,178 1,263 1,353 1,451 1,991 Actual Water Usage (MG) 1,301 1,220 While the study did not implicitly recommend a new water supply evaluation once the first phase of the TAP project was complete, a new water supply study is a reasonable next step given that 10 years have elapsed since the water study. A new water supply study is estimated to cost approximately $200,000 and would re-evaluate all potential raw water sources available based on the most current information. The study would also consider and include the "right water right use" data that was not available in 1998 and look at emergency raw water sources that meet Ashland's needs in the event ofa catastrophic incident (Watershed Wild Fire, Water Plant Failure, etc.). While a new water supply study is the appropriate next-step at this point, completing additional elements of the TAP project, purchasing land in Talent for the Talent Booster Pump Station and purchasing the final 25% of Lost Creek Water Rights, should continue to be a high priority. Related City Policies: Ashland Municipal Code Comprehensive Water Master Plan 1991; R. W. Beck and Associates Engineering Consultants Comprehensive Water Supply Plan Technical Memo No.1, Estimated Water Demand & Supply, 1998; Carollo Engineers Comprehensive Water Supply Plan Technical Memo No. 2, Water Supply Alternatives, 1998; Carollo Engineers Comprehensive Water Supply Plan Technical Memo No.3, Findings and Recommendations, 1999; Carollo Engineers Budget Documents including the CIP Council Options: 1. The City Council could approve staffs recommendation to award a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station. 2. The City Council could decide not to approve a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station. Page 5 of6 090208 Pump Station.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND 3. The City Council could decide to modify staffs recommendation. Potential Motions: 1. Move to approve a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station. 2. Move to deny staffs recommendation to approve a contract for $15,000 between Carollo Engineers PC and the City of Ashland for design and engineering services required to identify a location for the Talent Booster Pump Station. 3. Move to modify ( ) staff s recommendations. Attachments: Comprehensive Water Supply Plan Technical Memorandum No.3, January, 1999 Page 6 of6 090208 Pump Station.CC.doc r~' .11 -,---- ----- G:\W0\4676AOO\TM3COV.wpd r s CITY OF ASHlAND COMPREHENSIVE WATER SUPPLY PLAN TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO.3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS January 1999 III CITY OF ASHLAND TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NO.3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-1 WATER ADVISORY GROUP ............................................. 3-1 SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-1 FINDINGS ............................................................ 3-2 RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-2 WATER CONSERVATION AND CURTAILMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-3 G:\WO\4676AOO\TM3_FN-1.WPD TOC-1, Technical Memorandum No.3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS INTRODUCTION The City of Ashland has identified a need to augment its water supply to meet the projected future demands. The purpose of this study is to develop a master plan for water supply improvements which will provide for the City's future needs. The approach to work for this study is to develop planning concepts in a series of technical memorandums (TM). An evaluation of the projected future water demands and available supply was completed in TM 1. Potential water supply alternatives were identified in TM 2. These two memorandums provide the technical basis for this planning effort. The purpose of this document is to present the findings of this study, and recommend a project alternative that will serve as the basis of the City's long term water supply planning. WATER ADVISORY GROUP The City of Ashland has historically encouraged public participation in the planning process. Accordingly, the approach to work for this master RJan included a focused publiC participation and review of the planning concepts. The public participation was facilitated by the City's Water Advisory Group rNAG), which was comprised of several citizens and City staff. The primary objective of the WAG was to identify issues related to implementation of the City's long range water plan. Working jointly with Carollo Engineers, the WAG provided review and input throughout the development of the technical information developed in TMs 1 and 2. For example, for TM 1 the WAG helped to identify planning assumptions related to future conservation and usage curtailment, which helped set the basis for projecting the future demands. For TM 2, the WAG helped to identify possible water supply project alternatives. The WAG also developed several criteria which were used to evaluate and compare the supply alternatives, as discussed below. SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES The projected maximum annual deficit in the 2050 planning year is approximately 450 MG. This projected deficit includes demands from all account types in the City system, including the irrigation customers. Of the total projected drought year deficit up to 250 MG could be offset by providing an alternative irrigation supply. Depending on the amount of alternative irrigation supply, the amount of new supply for domestic use would range from 200 to 450 MG. G:\W0\4676AOO\TM3_FN-1.WPD 3-2 January 7, 1999 Four water supply project concepts were identified as potential alternative water supply sources for the City: · Reclamation · TAP Pipeline · TID Pipeline · Cooperative Water Supply with TID Of these four project concepts, the TAP pipeline is the only viable "stand alone" alternative that can provide all of the City's projected water supply needs. The remaining project concepts can, however, be combined to form other project alternatives that can meet the projected domestic and irrigation supply needs in 2050. The combined alternatives, which were developed after review and input from the City's WAG, are summarized below: .1) ,Reclamation with TlD Co-op. 2) TlD Pipeline with TID Co-op. 3) TlD Pipeline with TID Co-op and Reclamation. 4) TAP Pipeline: Buy-in and Use. 5) TAP Pipeline: Buy-in and Use with TID Co-op. 6) TAP Pipeline: Buy-in Only with TID Co-op. Of the six project alternatives, only two (Alternatives 5 and 5) would provide supply for domestic use only. The other four alternatives (Alternatives 1 , 2, 3, and 6) would provide both irrigation and domestic supply. The relative benefits and drawbacks of each alternative are broadly summarized in Table 1. Costs for these alternatives are summarized in Table 2. FINDINGS Each of the combined project alternatives can potentially solve the City's water supply needs. However, each alternative has a unique set of benefits and drawbacks that must be considered and addressed before a preferred alternative can be implemented. Ukewise, there is a range of costs for each project alternative which also may influence the City's ability to implement one or more of the alternatives. Several working meetings were held with the WAG to discuss the costs of the alternatives, benefrts and drawbacks, and other genera) issues related to long range planning and implementation. The relative merits of the water supply alternatives were compared against four primary criteria developed by the WAG: environmental bias, cost, risk/reliability of supply, and ease of implementation. Using these criteria as the basis for evaluation the WAG made the two general findings: 1) Projects including reclamation and/or co-operative supply are preferred with respect to environmental benefit. 2) Projects including supply from the TAP pipeline are preferred with respect to cost, ease of implementation, and reliability. The WAG found that all of the projects all of the projects are viable, although there was no consensus on a single preferred alternative. G:\WO\4676AOO\TM3_FN-1.WPD 3-3 January 7, 1999 RECOMMENDATIONS If the City's water supply project alternatives were ranked only on basic engineering criteria of cost and reliability of supply, Carollo would recommend alternative 4, TAP pipeline buy-in and use (Le., extend the pipeline to Ashland and purchase enough water rights to meet the estimated deficit of 450 MG). However, it is clear from the input provided from the WAG during the planning process the there is a strong preference to implement an alternative that is environmentally beneficial in addition to providing the needed water supply. Environmental benefits can be measured in many ways. In the context of this planning effort, the WAG identified a primary environmental benefit (objective) as the ability to maximize the use of the existing water supply sources. Reclamation and the co--operative water supply projects both provide this benefit. As identified above, there are a number of alternatives that include reclamation, co-- operative supply or both. We agree with the WAG's finding that these projects are viable. Given the City's preference to provide environmental benefit through maximum use of the existing supplies, the following actions are recommended: . Buy-in to the TAP Project but do not extend to Ashland. This will require that the City pay to upsize the pipeline between Phoenix and Talent. The City will still have the option to extend the pipeline if needed in the future. . Purchase Water Rights to 450 MG from Lost Creek Lake. The amount of firm supply available from reclamation or co-operative projects has not yet been identified. Purchase of rights to 450 MG will ensure that, if needed, the City could eventually meet its projected deficit with water supplied from the TAP pipeline. . Pursue Water Supply by Reclamation or Co-op Projects. The City can only benefit in the long run if additional water supply can be provided by one or more of these project concepts. These projects can provide additional supply capacity for the future, and can provide "insurance" against future drought conditions that are more severe than identified in this study. The reclamation and co-operative water supply projects appear to have merit, but there are uncertainties regarding their overall feasibility. Issues related to cost, water supply capacity (i.e., available supply during drought) and use of the water under current water right constraints (i.e., limitations on point of use, restrictions on use for irrigation versus municipal supply, etc.) will need to be resolved before these alternatives can be implemented as long term water supply alternatives for the City. It is recommend that the City pursue the cooPerative supply projects with TID over the next several years, and continue to examine the details and limitations regarding implementation. .If the various implementation issues can be resolved, the City should further develop the projects, either alone or in combination with supply provided by the TAP pipeline. G:\WO\4676AOO\TM3_FN-1.WPD 3-4 January 7,1999 WATER CONSERVATION AND CURTAILMENT The success of this plan's recommendations in meeting the water supply needs of the City of Ashland is greatly dependent upon the City implementing additional conservation measures. The water demand projections presented in TM 1 assume the City will implement new conservation programs to achieve a 20 percent reduction of peak summertime demands. Therefore, it is recommended the City review their existing water conservation program and identify how best to achieve this aggressive goal. G:\W0\4676A00\TM3_FN-1.WPD 3-5 January 7, 1999 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Downtown Task Force - Summary Report September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar Community Development E-Mail: molnarb@ashland.or.us Administration Secondary Contact: Adam Hanks Martha Benn Estimated Time: 30 minutes Question: Should the City Council accept the recommendations of the Downtown Task Force relating to employee parking restrictions in the downtown, proposed changes to the City's sign code and permissible use of public sidewalk area, and direct City staff to prepare ordinance language for review and adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council as necessary? Staff Recommendation: The Downtown Task Force has developed a summary document of the discussions and recommendations that took place over a five week meeting period in July and August. The Summary Report is organized around nine issues, each accompanied by a recommendation and supporting reasoning. Some of the issues can stand alone and are independent of others, but many are indirectly connected and become more complicated when compared against each other. Staff recommends that the City Council accept the summary document and provide staff with any feedback with regards to the acceptable scope and prioritization of issues. Staff can then provide additional research and analysis and draft specific code language to achieve the desired results. Background: In early July 2008, Mayor Morrison appointed a Downtown Task Force made up of downtown merchants, members of the Planning and Public Arts Commission, Chamber of Commerce representatives, as well as citizens at large to review and make recommendations directed to address several concerns affecting downtown merchants. The issues included the existing restrictions on downtown employee parking, City sign code provisions and the use of public sidewalk space for private use, as well as for the placement of certain elements considered to be amenities or serve a utilitarian function. The meetings occurred each Monday afternoon beginning on July 14t\ with the last of the meetings concluding on August 11 tho Public testimony was taken at each meeting to provide the Task Force with input from merchants who were specifically impacted by current compliance activities being conducted by the Community Development Department. Throughout the process, City staff provided the Task Force background information in the form of memos that outlined issues and incorporated possible options for consideration. The attached document provides the Council with a summary of the issues and the recommendations of the Task Force on each issue. Additionally, the Task Force summary includes some more general Page 1 of2 090208 Downtown Taskforce Summary.CC.doc rA' CITY OF ASHLAND recommendations on items that produced significant discussion, but in the end were believed to fall outside the immediate charge of the group. Related City Policies: AMC 6.44 Sidewalk Cafe's AMC 10.64 Obstructing Sidewalks and Passageways AMC 11.30 Downtown Parking District AMC 13.02 Public Rights of Way AMC 18.96 Sign Code 1988 Downtown Plan Council Options: The Council can accept the recommendations of the Downtown Task Force and provide immediate direction to Staff to proceed with development of a work plan and time line for drafting code language that implement the recommendations of the Task Force. The Council can also accept the recommendations and schedule time on a future agenda to discuss the issues and recommendations prior to providing any specific direction to Staff for further action. Potential Motions: Accept the recommendations of the Downtown Task Force and direct staff to develop a work plan and time line for developing implanting ordinance language that addresses Task Force recommendations. Accept the recommendations of the Downtown Task Force and request Staff to create a future agenda item to discuss in more detail how the Council would like to proceed with the recommendations of the Task Force. Attachments: Downtown Task Force Summary Document Downtown Task Force Meeting Agendas and Minutes Page 2 of2 090208 Downtown Taskforce Summary.CC.doc rA' CITY OF ASHLAND Downtown Task Force Summary Report August21,2008 At the initiation of Mayor John Morrison and in conjunction with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce, a Downtown Task Force was created and charged with reviewing and providing remedies to address the following issues affecting downtown merchants: . The current policy on parking restrictions within the downtown area; . A review of the City sign provisions related to the requirements for temporary signs and the use of three-dimensional representations as sign structures and education of business merchants and community with respect to city sign code requirements; and . Permissible encroachment upon downtown public sidewalk. At the first of what turned into five consecutive Monday afternoon meetings in July and August, Mayor Morrison explained his view on the charge of the Task Force, and encouraged the members to focus on immediate concerns that can be addressed within a "fast track" timeline. At the request of Task Force members, City Staff presented a list of issues for discussion and potential options to consider that may resolve or at least alleviate impacts associated with each particular issue. Over the course of the five meetings, the Task Force solicited public input, received information and potential options from City staff, discussed the variety of options and ultimately voted on a recommendation for each issue. The following summary is divided into two pieces. The first piece includes immediate fixes to some of the most visible and controversial issues. This has been presented in the format of an issue statement, Task Force recommendation and supporting reasoning. In the second piece, the summary report identifies two issues that the Task Force recommended warranted additional review by City staff. These items were believed to be outside the initial charge of the Task Force, as well as beyond the expedited time table set for addressing the three immediate issues affecting downtown merchants. Suggested Immediate Solutions Downtown Task Force Summary Report Issue #1 Particularly in the Downtown area, the current limitation of two exempt signs per business, with each sign not exceeding a size of two square feet, does not seem to meet the needs of many local merchants. Recommendation: Increase the number of exempt signs from two to three in the Downtown Area. The allowable area of the third sign would be increased to three square feet, rather than the current two square feet allowed for the other two signs Reasoning: The additional exempt sign will permit businesses increased flexibility in how they allocate signage, providing an opportunity for a merchant to adapt when there are changes in services and/or merchandise offered. Additionally, the change would address specific concerns raised by restaurant owners regarding the need for increased flexibility with respect to posted "menu" signs. Issue #2 The Sign Code currently prohibits three dimensional statues, caricatures or representations of persons, animals or merchandise from being used as a sign or incorporated into a sign structure. Recommendation: For properties within the Downtown or one of Ashland's four Historic Districts, allow one of the three exempt signs to be three-dimensional. Accordingly, the 3-D sign would be limited to a maximum size or volume of 3 cubic feet. Recommendation: Allow an additional exempt 3-D sign for properties outside the Historic Districts with a volumetric maximum (for example, 20 cubic feet). This would create an additional sign category and sign area in addition to the total sign area allotment under the current code. The three-dimensional sign would be required to be setback from the public street, and standards would be established for sign placement, size, height, surface detailing, illumination, materials and construction methods to assure any such sign would be of durable materials and quality construction consistent with Ashland's existing sign standards. Reasoning: The removal of the prohibition of three dimensional objects for signage provides unique and creative options for Downtown Task Force 2 Summary Report businesses to connect with their customers and the community. Through the sign code amendment process, additional limitations could be placed upon the 3-D signs in order to ensure that the community is adequately protected from an emergence of 3-D objects that are out of scale with the building or that create too large of a visual distraction. Issue #3 Some businesses, by virtue of their physical location and entrances, such as smaller side streets and alleys, have limited signage opportunities along the main streets within the downtown area. Recommendation: Increase the maximum distance that a sign can project from the building face from the current 18 inches, to 24 inches from the building face. Existing State Building Code addresses the minimum height above grade (sidewalk level) needed for any structure or sign to project over the public right of way or sidewalk. Reasoning: Increasing the amount of projection may provide better angles of visibility for businesses located on side streets or public alleyways. The increased projection provides an opportunity for the sign to function as an architectural element of a building while still having a scale that is not disproportionate and overpowering to a business frontage. Issue #4 Sign Code compliance efforts have included enforcing the current prohibition on off-premise signs, generally consisting of the placement of temporary, movable signs (i.e. sandwich boards) upon the public sidewalk or other public property. Some merchants feel that due to specific characteristics associated with location of their business frontage they lack adequate exposure. Off-premise signage is one means of drawing attention to the business location. Recommendation: Create a set of policies and implementing guidelines for the placement of informational/directional signs by the City in the right of way or other publicly controlled property. The guidelines should specify standards for the signage, which may include maximum size, color, font, content (name, arrow, type of business, etc), materials and location. For example, an informational sign could be installed at the entrance to an alley with the words "more shops" or Downtown Task Force 3 Summary Report "restaurants" or "galleries". In situations where physical site constraints limit visibility from the primary public right of way, an option for integrating a specific business name as an element of the City informational signage could be included into the guidelines. Reasoning: This is in recognition of the fact that there exist unusual situations where, through no fault of a business owner, the location and exposure of a particular business frontage may be uniquely constrained. Issue #5 The use of the public right of way for private commercial use is limited by the Municipal Code to Sidewalk Cafe's (AMC 6.44), which may not be the most equitable method for allocation of our limited public resource, downtown public sidewalks. Recommendation: Amend the Sidewalk Cafe ordinance to allow any abutting property (within a commercial or employment district) the opportunity to obtain a permit for private use of a portion of the public sidewalk, as long as specific public safety and access standards have been met. The permit fee would consist of a base charge and an additional charge for each square foot of public sidewalk space being privately utilized. Reasoning: In the absence of some compelling issue related to the public interest, there should be an equitable allowance for use of public sidewalks for private use. The broader issue is one of fairness and, specifically, whether or not restaurants should be the only business with use of public sidewalk space. Issue #6 The business community has noted that there is inconsistency within the encroachment permit process, which does not have clear standards for what types of functional objects are encouraged, allowed or legal for placement upon a city sidewalk or within the public right of way Recommendation: Create an ordinance or other appropriate approval process by which specific functional items (planter boxes, benches, trash cans, safety items, etc) may be established upon the City sidewalk. This would be contingent upon the items meeting city specifications, as well as retaining minimum Downtown Task Force 4 Summary Report Reasoning: Issue #7 clearance, public safety and placement standards. Individual permits for items meeting such standards would not be required, while items that do not conform to the standards could be eligible for some sort of review and permit procedure. Additionally, the Task Force recommended that the City Council direct staff to explore an exemption to have free use of the shy zone, the area along the sidewalk within 12 to 18 inches of the building face, for placement of such amenities as flower boxes, door stops, spittoons, etc. The Task Force was very intent on solving this issue in a way that encouraged the "right stuff" to be able to be placed upon public sidewalks to help beautify the streetscape, increase pedestrian comfort and also allow some individual expression within the constraints of public safety and access considerations. Creating a list of the types of "functional objects" that would be permitted, accompanied by minimum standards and specifications to assure quality, would eliminate the need for individual permit requirements that could easily result in discouraging businesses from enhancing the streetscape. The proliferation of newspaper and other miscellaneous publication racks within the downtown is creating a variety of problems, both functional and aesthetic. Recommendation: Create an ordinance specific to installation of newspaper and other publication racks. Standards could be included related to rack placement, maximum size and dimensions, allowance for grouping of racks, distance between groupings, etc. The ordinance would also address aesthetic standards such as materials, maintenance and use to ensure durability and public safety, as well as to eliminate ongoing problems of litter, abandonment and use of racks for displaying materials not qualifying for placement upon the public right of way. Reasoning: It was unanimously agreed that the proliferation of newspaper racks in the downtown area has reached a point where regulation on use and placement is critical. The current lack of regulation and oversight has led to somewhat of an "anything goes" situation, and City staff has minimal ability to address the issue. Downtown Task Force Summary Report 5 Issue #8 Downtown business owner and employees are frustrated with the seemingly inconsistent enforcement of the do~ntown employee parking ban and also have expressed concern over its potential overreaching effect of limiting owner and employee access to the downtown area while not at work. Recommendation: Remove the existing seasonal ban on employee parking in the Downtown Area. Reasoning: The conclusion of the group was that the ordinance was put in place primarily at the request and benefit of the business community. If local merchants believe the employee parking ban is cumbersome and difficult to effectively enforce, it would be reasonable to remove it and leave the matter to the business owners to self regulate through informing their employees. Issue #9 The City has several parking management items that need to be resolved to more efficiently administer the downtown parking program. Recommendation: Create ordinance language that allows the City to tow vehicles that have either five unpaid parking tickets or a total unpaid parking ticket balance of $250. Additionally, the 'City should develop a final, very visible, warning placard to be placed upon a vehicle at least 24 hours prior to the vehicle being towed. The Task Force does not recommend the use of a booting/immobilization device over the option of towing the vehicle. Reasoning: While this aspect of the parking issues downtown wasn't specifically part of the charge of the Task Force, the recommendation for the removal of the employee parking boundary created the need to address related parking issues so the Task Force added their recommendations in these areas as well. The Task Force believes the City needs effective tools to assist with the collection of unpaid parking fines from flagrant parking violators. The use of a boot or other immobilization technique, however, is a very noticeable means of deterring violations and may not send the appropriate type of message to members of the community as well as visitors. Downtown Task Force Summary Report 6 Additionally, the boot/immobilization renders the parking space unusable until the operator contacts the City and pays the fine due or until it gets towed, which most likely results in a 12 to 24 hour time period. Additional Suggested Considerations Before concluding their charge, the Task Force identified two issues where additional follow-up work would be necessary. The following items for Council consideration were believed to be outside the initial charge of the Task Force, as well as beyond the expedited time table set for addressing the three issues immediately affecting downtown merchants. Nevertheless, the Task Force recommended that the Council allocate staff resources to conduct follow-up work in these areas. Recommendation for Two-Year Review of Sign Code Amendments The Task Force recommended that any amendments to the sign code be reviewed and evaluated after two years. This would provide an opportunity to assess the effectiveness and implications associated with the committee's proposed changes. Recommendation to Exempt Public Art from City Sign Code The Task Force recommended that the City sign code should be amended to include an exemption for Public Art once an appropriate process is adopted for reviewing and approving the installation of public art. The proposed change to the sign code would be completed simultaneously with the adoption of a public art ordinance, which establishes processes and criteria for the acquisition and location of public art within the city limits. Recommendation for Sign Code Review/Education While the Task Force supports the intent of the existing sign code and appreciates the positive impact it has had on downtown Ashland, there was general agreement that, as currently written, is difficult for the business community to understand, leading to unintentional non-compliance as "sign creep" over time. The Task Force recommended a possible review of the code to simplify its design and, at a minimum, consider developing illustrated educational materials. Additionally, city staff would be available at a merchant's request for on-site review in order to increase awareness and reduce future violations. Downtown Task Force Summary Report 7 DOWNTOVVN 7:LSK FORCE.. ,MEETING #/ JULY 14, 2008 PA GE I (~l4 DOWNTOWN TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES JULY 14, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Task Force Chair Pam Hammond called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way. Members Present: Pam Hammond, Paddington Station, Chair John Morrison, Mayor Renee Compton, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory Daniel Greenblatt, Greenleaf Restaurant Sandra Slattery, Chamber of Commerce Dana Bussell, Public Arts Commission Dave Dotterrer, Planning Commission John Stromberg, Planning Commission George Kramer, Citizen at Large Dale Shostrom, Citizen at Large Don Laws, Citizen at Large City Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Administrator Richard Appicello, City Attorney Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS Pam Hammond and Mayor Morrison welcomed the group and each member introduced themselves. PURPOSE & GOALS OF TASK FORCE Mayor Morrison commented briefly on what prompted the creation of this task force and noted issues have been raised regarding the City's sign code, use of the public right of way, and the downtown employee parking ban. He stated the Downtown Task Force would be meeting for three weeks and encouraged them to focus on addressing the immediate concerns. OVERVIEW OF TASK FORCE SCHEDULE Hammond briefly reviewed the meeting agenda. She indicated their second meeting would include a staff presentation of options and committee discussion; and hopes they can have deliberations and come to a recommendation by their third meeting. OVERVIEW OF THREE ISSUES Community Development Director Bill Molnar presented an overview of the City's sign code, use of public right-of-way, and downtown employee parking restrictions. Sign Code Mr. Molnar stated the 1966 Central Area Plan called for the development of a sign program and the City's sign ordinance was officially adopted in 1968. He stated there have been several updates to this section of the code over the years and noted the 1988 Downtown Plan acknowledged the success of the sign code. Mr. Molnar provided the definitions of "signs", "exempted signs", and "prohibited signs" and listed the main compliance issues the City deals with. Use of the Public Right of Way Mr. Molnar noted there are many competing interests within the sidewalks and stated the City has regulations regarding the outdoor display of merchandise. He explained the Ashland Municipal Code prohibits using the street or public sidewalk for selling, storing or displaying merchandise or equipment; DOWNTOH/N 1:.1SK FORCE ...... A4EETlNG #1 JULY 14,2008 PAGE 2 {~l4 and businesses within the City's commercial zones are required to obtain a conditional use permit (CUP) for the outdoor storage of merchandise on private property. Mr. Molnar noted the City has a sidewalk cafe ordinance and it is administered by the Public Works Department. Downtown Employee Parking Ban Mr. Molnar explained the ban was first adopted in 1985 at the request of the Chamber of Commerce and the seasonal restrictions were made permanent in 1986. He explained the ban restricts downtown employee parking in the downtown parking district between 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., May through September; and listed some of the issues that have been raised by the affected businesses and their employees. PUBLIC COMMENT Tom, Pasta Piatti & Tabu/Shared his concerns regarding the newspaper racks. Nola, Renaissance Rose/Noted she had been cited by the City and requested clarification on the ordinance governing the outdoor display of merchandise. She noted the sale of merchandise on Guanajuato Way and asked about the City's CUP process. Steve, Soundpeacel Asked if there was a way for current businesses to be "grandfathered in" and require anyone new to receive approval for the display of items. He agreed with the concerns expressed by the previous speaker regarding newspaper boxes and suggested there be a maintenance requirement for these. Steve noted the sign age in Boulder, Colorado and suggested the Task Force review the Boulder sign code for comparison. He also commented on the employee parking ban and noted employees are being issued tickets when visiting downtown businesses on their days off. Julie, Wiley's Pasta/Noted her business is not located downtown and stated they use their "Alfredo" statue to show customers that they are open for business. Lenny, CD or not CD/Stated there is a small space in front of his store that he would be interested in obtaining a CUP for. He commented on the height of his sign and suggested they allow businesses to sell merchandise outdoors on weekends only. He stated it is possible to have attractive sandwich signs, newspaper boxes, and neon signs; and suggested the City form a review board to determine what is aesthetically pleasing. Dave, Endless Massage/Noted that his is a newer business and commented on the use of sandwich boards to attract business. He stated his board did obstruct people walking and stated it made a big difference in bringing people into his business. Susan, Pilaf/Questioned why people dressed as the Statue of Liberty or dressed in sandwich boards does not go against the sign code. She stated that parking is one of her major stressors and explained that she often has to come and go several times a day from her business. Kate, Earth Friendly Kids/Stated being unable to put merchandise out in front of her store has made them struggle financially and believes the City is hurting the vitality of the town by making such strict rules. Ramona, B Ella/Noted her store has no back entrance and all of their supplies have to come through the front door. She questioned the fairness of the parking situation and asked if downtown employees who work at night are being ticketing as well. DOWNTOWN TASK FORCE...... MEET/NG #/ JULY J 4, 20()8 PAGE 3 (~l4 Jimmy, Blue Giraffe Spa/Noted their building is set back from Water Street, behind the parking lot and customers cannot see his sign from the street. He stated he receives a lot of complaints from clients because they cannot find his store. He suggested the City have some sort of hearings process to deal with unique situations like his own. He also questioned putting up a small sign similar to Pilaf s or Iris Inn's SIgnS. Don, Ashland Springs Hotel & Larks/Stated he was cited for placing the building's origina1.sandwich board in front of the hotel and noted the challenge of educating guests on what they offer. He stated that inadequate parking in Ashland is a big issue and noted the parking garage is consistently full. Mike Morris, Planning CommissionerlRecommended the sign ordinance be removed from the Land Use section of the Municipal Code and recommended they set criteria for a variance. He suggested different requirements be set for areas outside of downtown (at least until these areas become more populated be pedestrians) and recommended they establish maintenance requirements for newspaper boxes. Pam Turner, Ashland Municipal Judge/Noted that she handles the City's parking violations and stated the intention of the employee downtown parking ban is not to prohibit employees from visiting businesses on their time off. She encouraged everyone to read this section of the code (AMC 11.30.020). City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified 950/0 of the businesses have complied with the City's requirements and stated she would like to continue to work cooperatively with the businesses while this process IS gOIng on. City Attorney Richard Appicello commented briefly on the concept of grandfathering. He clarified the City is required to treat everyone equally and does not believe grandfathering is an option. Mayor Morrison clarified that public testimony will be included in this process and encouraged the businesses and members of the public to submit their information to the Task Force. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION City Administrator Martha Bennett indicated staff would be preparing white papers and submitting them to the group within the next few days. She recommended they inform staff if they are in need to additional information or if there are options they are leaning toward. She agreed that parking in Ashland was a valid concern, but recommended they limit their discussion to the employee parking issue. Clarification was requested on the process of obtaining a conditional use permit to display merchandise on private property. Permit Center Manager Adam Hanks stated this is a Type I land use action and the fee is currently $882. He stated the City has seen this type of CUP for larger scale uses, such as the hardware store, but noted the approval criteria are fairly general. Mr. Hanks clarified the Iris Inn's sign was obtained through ODOT, not the City. Sandra Slattery commented that these requirements were put in place for good reasons; however they need to ensure that Ashland businesses can be successful and stated it is time to look at these regulations with the current view of the community in mind. City Attorney Richard Appicello commented on the issue of placing 3-D objects in front of businesses and clarified they can only limit the time, place, manner and size of these objects, not the content. George Kramer added they could also control the materials they are made of and can require the object to be maintained. DOWNTOH/N lASK FORCE ...... A4EETlNG #/ JULY 14,2008 PAGE 4 (~l4 Ms. Bennett noted the City would be bringing forward options regarding sidewalk cafes, including options for permitting, regulating, and leasing public right of ways. She clarified the vendors along Calle Guanajuato lease this space from the City and stated the Task Force could consider creating a similar provision for individual business to display merchandise in front of their stores. Don Laws requested the City Attorney prepare a memo that cites the court cases and laws that deal with grandfathering and the equality of treatment. He stated he would like to know what is legal and whether the City could make changes. Mr. Laws provided some history of the sign code and stated its intent was to make Ashland businesses more appealing. He commented on how the sign code has contributed to the overall success of businesses in Ashland and recommended they be careful about making changes. Dave Dotterrer suggested the sign code differentiate between private property and public right of way. Ms. Bennett voiced her support for this suggestion. Mr. Appicello clarified the City could permit larger 3- D objects on private property than on public right of way. Dana Bussell commented on the Public Arts Commission's master plan and noted the plan did speak to some of these issues. She clarified one of the goals of the plan was to change the sign ordinance to allow for murals. She also commented briefly on the public art jury process the commission utilizes, and clarified people affected by the object are represented on the jury. Sandra Slattery noted that there are other communities, such as Carmel, California, that have very pleasing signage and suggested the group take a look at how other communities deal with this issue. Ms. Bennett requested the group clarify which cities' sign codes they are interested in. Staff was directed to look into the sign codes for Carmel, California and Boulder, Colorado, particularly for small, directional signs. Ms. Slattery noted she would also try to gather information and obtain samples from other communities that are attractive, high visitor destinations. Mayor Morrison requested information on newspaper boxes, including what governs their installation, maintenance, and removal. Additional request was made for how many spaces a publication can have and whether the boxes interfere with pedestrian and vehicle safety. It was also questioned if the City could designate certain areas where the boxes would be permitted. Ms. Bennett indicated staff would gather the information requested by the group and stated materials for the next meeting would be sent out later this week. She noted the next Downtown Task Force meeting is scheduled for next Monday, July 21 at 2 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant III DOfFNTOf+'N F4SK FORCEm MEETiNG #2 JUr Y 2/, ::008 PAGE! 0(4 DOWNTOWN TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES JULY 21, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Task Force Chair Pam Hammond called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way. Members Present: Pam Hammond, Paddington Station, Chair John Morrison, Mayor Renee Compton, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory Daniel Greenblatt, Greenleaf Restaurant Sandra Slattery, Chamber of Commerce Dave Dotterrer, Planning Commission John Stromberg, Planning Commission George Kramer, Citizen at Large Dale Shostrom, Citizen at Large Don Laws, Citizen at Large Absent Members: Dana Bussell, Public Arts Commission City Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Administrator Richard Appicello, City Attorney Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager STAFF PRESENTATION OF OPTIONS Permit Center Manager Adam Hanks briefly reviewed the nine key issues and options listed in the staff report. PUBLIC COMMENT Ron Roth, Geppetto's/Shared his concerns over what he felt was an overzealous Code Enforcement Officer and recommended more direct supervision of this City employee. Graham Lewis, United Methodist Church/Noted the church is located on the comer of Laurel and N. Main, but they are only allowed signage on one of the streets. He stated signage on both frontages would be helpful. Steve, Soundpeace/Questioned if he would be permitted to place a prayer flag in the garden in the . morning and take it in at night. Regarding the parking situation, he thought this was always voluntary and not necessarily enforced. Julie, Wiley's World/Stated she does not view her Alfredo statute as a sign, but rather a piece of art; and stated the statue needs to be able to come in at night to avoid potential theft or vandalism. She voiced her support for removing the 3D object prohibition from the Sign Code. Melissa Markell, Chair of the Public Arts CommissionN oiced her support for Option #4 regarding the three dimensional sign issue, which would create an exemption for 2D or 3D public art. Susan, Black Sheep/Submitted signature petitions supporting the placement of the lion statue in front of the Black Sheep's entrance. She stated if they remove the lion it would result in an unsafe doorway and stated this is a historical building and the entrance cannot be changed. .~----- DOfYNTOfFN T4SK FORCEu. MEE'7JNG #2 JUL Y .2/. .;008 PAGE:: 0(4 Lee, Downtown Employee/Stated she received a ticket a few years ago, without warning, after parking in the same block twice. She stated this is a silly rule and the City should at least put up a sign warning employees. Pam Turner, Ashland Municipal Judge/Noted all parking appeals come to her and voiced her support for repealing or revising the downtown employee parking ban. She stated the ban is very difficult to enforce and felt the language was over broad. Lance Pugh, Ashland ResidentIV oiced concern with what he felt was staff running the meeting and directing the focus. Brent Thompson, Ashland ResidentN oiced his support for the option permitting one additional exempt sign. Regarding the parking issue, he suggested diagonal parking could be used to create more spaces in certain downtown areas. Donna, Webster's/Stated if they change the sign code, they need to make sure it can be universally applied. She commented briefly on the sidewalk issue and noted they are heavily congested in the middle of the season. Mike Morris, Ashland Planning Commissioner/Asked how they would feel if every building had something out in front of it, and questioned where the limits are. Ramona, B Ella/Stated if they are going to enforce the parking ban, it needs to be applied to everyone. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION & DIRECTION TO STAFF Downtown Employee Parking Ban Hammond voiced support for Option #1, which would eliminate the employee parking ban from the Ashland Municipal Code. She stated the City could still send out a letter each year asking the downtown businesses to voluntarily comply with the seasonal parking limitations. The Task Force voiced unanimous consent for this option. Unpaid Parking Tickets City Administrator Martha Bennett explained how the City currently handles unpaid parking citations and stated the City's current enforcement tools are very weak. She stated booting or towing vehicles that have an excessive amount of unpaid parking violations is one option the group should consider. The group discussed the option presented by staff. Stromberg voiced his concerns with booting vehicles and felt towing was a better alternative. City Attorney Richard Appicello clarified due process would occur before anyone was booted and the individual would receive proper notice before this action occurred. Ms. Bennett listed the outstanding parking citation figures for the group. Laws voiced his support for booting, and stated this type of action is needed if they have people who simply do not care. Greenblatt agreed that this needs to have some "teeth." Kramer voiced his support for the towing option. Compton agreed, but questioned what the outstanding ticket amount would have to before this action was taken. Hammond recommended they move onto the next issue and look at this option further at their next meeting. III DOI'VNTOfFN T4SK FORCE ..... MEETiNG #2 JUL Y 2 J, ::f)08 PAGE 3 ol4 Amount of Signage Permitted Hammond listed the two options for Issue #1. She stated they could modify the Sign Code to allow for one additional exempt sign or they could choose to modify the Code to allow the existing exempt signs to be a maximum of 3 sq. ft. The group discussed the two options. Shostrom suggested modifying the requirement to allow for two signs at 2 sq. ft. or less, and one additional sign at 3 sq. ft or less. Kramer recommended they not limit this to the C-I-D zone, but permit the additional signage in the entire commercial district. Compton noted that being able to display menus is not only a benefit for the restaurants, but also the pedestrians. Kramer suggested they increase the total amount of signage permitted (based on the linear footage of the building's frontage) and allow businesses to allocate the space as they choose. Compton suggested they establish two different parameters; one for inside the downtown area and one for outside this area. Mr. Hanks clarified the current provision which allows businesses to use up to 20% of their window space for changeable copy. He also provided a brief explanation of how businesses with no windows or those located on second and third stories are accommodated. Staff was directed to return at the next meeting with information on the new options presented by Shostrom and Kramer. 3-Dimensional Signs/Representations of Merchandise Hammond listed the options for Issue #2 outlined in the staff report. Kramer and Compton voiced their support for Option 2, which would allow 3D representations as a sign type. Laws expressed concern with permitting 3D objects, though supported the ones we currently have. He questioned if there was a way to exempt those that exist today. Slattery voiced her confidence that businesses would do everything possible to make their business attractive and is not concerned that Option 2 would result in a surge of undesirable objects. Hammond conducted a straw vote and the majority of the group supported Option 2. The Task Force agreed to continue with the meeting until4:30 p.m. Limited Signage Access due to Location Hammond listed the options for Issue #3 outlined in the staff report. Kramer suggested businesses, such as the Blue Giraffe, with no frontage on a public street be allowed one offsite sign as part of their sign allocation; however include a provision that this sign could not be placed on public right of way. The group briefly discussed these options and agreed to come back to this issue at their next meeting. Use of Right-of-Way for Commercial Use Hammond listed the options in the staff report. Laws noted when the Sidewalk Cafe ordinance was passed, its intent was not to benefit the restaurant specifically, but to enhance the ambiance in town. He felt opening up the use of sidewalks for merchandise was unacceptable and would destroy the Ashland's appearance. City Attorney Richard Appicello briefly commented on the legal issues surrounding this matter. Slattery commented that sidewalk dining is something the public loves, and suggested they look at other communities and how they deal with this issue. Kramer noted that selling flowers, fruit or vegetables on the sidewalk could also add character. City Administrator Martha Bennett commented on Option 2, which would allow the City to lease sidewalk space to businesses, and questioned how much merchandise that business would need to sell to make this worthwhile to them. Comment was made that this would be for the individual business to decide. Greenblatt noted Greenleaf was the first restaurant to have outdoor seating on the Calle and DOf;fNTOf,VN T,45,'f{ FORCE uu MEETING #2 JUL Y 21. ]{j{)8 PAGE 4 0(4 voiced support for allowing the City to rent the public right of way, so long as the parameters are followed. Ms. Bennett clarified the sidewalk space would be only leased to the adjacent business. Hammond conducted a straw vote and the majority of the group were interested in a combination of Options 2 and 3. Ms. Bennett indicated staff would do more flushing out of the details on the input provided by the group. She noted they would pick up where they left off at the next meeting and encouraged interested citizens and business owners to submit their comments and cbncerns to staff. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant DorVNTOH/N D1SK FORCEHH ,A.1EETlNG #3 JULY 28, 2008 PAGE I (~l3 DOWNTOWN TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES JULY 28, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Task Force Chair Pam Hammond called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way. Hammond noted several of the members attended a tour of downtown sign issues, which was conducted prior to the meeting. Members Present: Pam Hammond, Paddington Station, Chair John Morrison, Mayor Renee Compton, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory Daniel Greenblatt, Greenleaf Restaurant Sandra Slattery, Chamber of Commerce Dave Dotterrer, Planning Commission John Stromberg, Planning Commission Dana Bussell, Public Arts Commission George Kramer, Citizen at Large Don Laws, Citizen at Large City Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Administrator Richard Appicello, City Attorney Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager Absent Members: Dale Shostrom, Citizen at Large PUBLIC COMMENT JudylShakespeare and Co. Bookstore/Stated she is in a difficult situation because her business is located down an alley. She explained sales have dropped 60% since the City has prohibited her from placing the wagon at the alley's entrance and explained that she is doing her best to keep the bookstore open. Jeff/ Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory/Commented that the proposed changes are insufficient and felt more change was needed. He stated businesses can't stay in business if they cannot have something that lets customers know they are there. He stated customers will not visit a store if that business does anything "too tacky" and he does not understand what the task force is afraid of. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS Issue #3 - Downtown Businesses with Limited Signage Opportunity. Hammond read and the issue and the options aloud. She voiced her support for Option 1, which would change the sign limitation to 24" from the wall and would provide greater visibility for businesses on side streets/alleys/pedestrian access ways. Mr. Hanks used Shakespeare and Co. as an example and explained how Option 1 would allow them to place a sign at the entrance to the alley that would project out from the comer. Greenblatt/Compton mls to accept Option 1 for Issue #3. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Issue #5 - Placing Signage in the Public Right-of-Way. Hammond read the issue and options aloud. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified if Option 2 were selected, the City would have to establish a program and identify the parameters for a temporary sign permit process. Slattery suggested they consider City owned signs that don't include business names, but III DOWNTOH'';V 1:1SK FORCEuu A4EET/NG #3 JULY 28, 2008 PAGE 2 (~l3 rather indicate "lodging" or "dining" and directional arrows. She stated these could be artistically done and may encourage people to walk. Ms. Bennett commented that another option would be for the City to install signs and allow businesses to purchase a spot on that sign. She stated this option would help with the Blue Giraffe's signage situation and noted a City sign could be placed in the Water Street parking lot. Comment was made voicing support for a combination that would allow for generic directional information signs as well as City signs that list specific business information. ComptonIDotterrer mls to accept Option 1 for Issue #5. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Laws/Kramer mls to reject Option 2 for Issue #5. DISCUSSION: Kramer stated he is interested in looking at encroachment opportunities that pertain to all businesses and voiced opposition to creating a separate authority in this area. Laws felt it would be a mistake to allow temporary signs in addition to directional signs. Compton commented that if the City decided not to place a directional sign, Option 2 would provide the business owner an opportunity to apply for a permit. It was questioned if the City could stipulate that this option would only be available if the City does not do Option 1. Ms. Bennett voiced her hesitations with Option 2. Suggestion was made for the group to table the motion and come back to this after they have dealt with the encroachment issue. Motion was tabled. Issue #7 - Encroachment Permit Process. Hammond read the issue and the options aloud. Kramer voiced support for a list of approved items that could be placed in the City right of way. He stated this list of allowable items should be separate from the items the City would require a permit for. City Attorney Richard Appicello commented on the legality of this issue and recommended a process where items would be donated and accepted by the City; and the City would then decide where the item is placed. He stated the City would only accept items that met generic durability standards and the individual would need to sign a maintenance and hold harmless agreement. Ms. Bennett questioned if the City already owned these items and she stated it was her understanding that if someone places an item in the City right of way, they are essentially donating it to the City. Laws commented that it would be difficult to come up with a list of approved items and stated the list would have to be regularly amended. He added that he does not feel a list of approved items would solve the problem and voiced his support for Option 1. Kramer voiced concern that requiring a permit and the donation process would stop these types of objects from being placed. Hammond noted that there are also safety measures to be considered, such as the Black Sheep's lion. Suggestion was made for a two part process that includes a list of general items that the City endorses and requiring the placement of all other items to go through a permit process. Ms. Bennett summarized the group's deliberation and stated they would like to allow for the placement of functional items and recognize that these will be owned by the City; they are willing to let staff evaluate whether to establish a donation process or include a general acceptance provision in the code. Ms. Bennett stated staff could also look into a 3D allowance for functional objects designed to address safety issues and noted there will need to be criteria established for how to decide on the placement of these objects. StromberglLaws mls to approve the staff direction as outlined by Ms. Bennett. DISCUSSION: It was clarified this is not a final decision and this issue would be returning to the group at their next meeting. Stromberg commented that he views this as enabling certain uses, not prohibiting everything else. Bussell noted that if someone wanted to donate art there is already an approval process for that. Mr. Appicello clarified the two processes would work together. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Issue #6 - Newspaper/Misc. Publication Racks. Hammond read the issue and the options aloud. Comment was made questioning if the City could completely remove the racks. Mr. Appicello clarified he does not believe completely banning them is appropriate. DOWNTOH/N 7ASK FORCE mm ,~IEETlNG #3 JULY 28, 2008 PAGE 3 ql'3 Kramer/Greenblatt m/s to combine Options 1 and 2 and direct staff to inventory all downtown newspaper/publication racks and prepare a recommendation. DISCUSSION: Recommendation was made for the inventory study to indicate their preferences and for it to be referred directly to the City Council. Kramer and Greenblatt agreed to include this amendment in the motion. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Issue #9 - Administering the Downtown Parking Program. Ms. Bennett noted the draft ordinance that was submitted to the group and indicated staff needs clarity on the towing vs. booting then towing options. She clarified the City is not proposing to boot the vehicle and leave it there until the owner pays, but rather boot the vehicle and have it towed after 24 hours if payment is not received. Support was voiced for towing and not booting vehicles. Hammond questioned the dollar amount owed before the City would take action and suggested raising it from $250 to $500. Ms. Bennett commented on why the $250 amount was chosen and cautioned them about raising this too high. Greenblatt noted the provision in the ordinance that states the individual will be noticed 10 days in advance before any action is taken. Stromberg supported the towing option and stated booted vehicles could take away from the City's ambiance. Mayor Morrison left the meeting at 4:00 p.m. Ashland Municipal Judge Pam Turner commented on the 10 day notice period and shared a few situations where individuals might not receive the notification. Comment was made suggesting the City affix a colored placard to the vehicle prior to it being towed. DotterrerlGreenblatt m/s to recommend the Ordinance as drafted with the exception of removing the booting provision. DISCUSSION: Mr. Appicello suggested the notification period be changed to 14 days. Consensus was voiced for including this modification. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. DISCUSS POSSIBLE AUGUST 4 MEETING Hammond stated it will be necessary for the group to meet again and asked for the members' preference on meeting dates. She noted the group could meet next Monday, or meet two weeks from today. Mr. Appicello indicated he would likely need more than one week to prepare the draft right-of-way ordinance. The Task Force reached consensus to meet on August 4th and August 11 tho Ms. Bennett clarified the Task Force's final report is scheduled to go before the City Council on September 2, 2008. She noted recommended changes to the Sign Code will have to go to the Planning Commission; however, the Council could enact the rest of their recommendations. She added the group will need to complete their work by August 19th in order to make the September packet deadline. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted April Lucas, Administrative Assistant DOWNTOWN 7>18/( FOf?CI.' ...... MEE"TlNG #-1 At/GUST 4, 2008 V4GE / qj'3 DOWNTOWN TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 4,2008 CALL TO ORDER Task Force Chair Pam Hammond called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way. Members Present: Pam Hammond, Paddington Station, Chair Renee Compton, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory Daniel Greenblatt, Greenleaf Restaurant Sandra Slattery, Chamber of Commerce John Stromberg, Planning Commission Dana Bussell, Public Arts Commission George Kramer, Citizen at Large Don Laws, Citizen at Large Dale Shostrom, Citizen at Large City Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Administrator Richard Appicello, City Attorney Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager Absent Members: Dave Dotterrer, Planning Commission John Morrison, Mayor Hammond clarified the group would be discussing Issues #1 and #2 today, which deal primarily with sign square footage and how it relates to 3D items on private property. She noted they would be addressing the right-of-way issues at their final meeting next week. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS Permit Center Manager Adam Hanks provided a presentation to group which reviewed current sign code allocation examples, exempt sign options, examples of 3D signs, and options for 3D objects and representations of merchandise. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified there are three types of signs: permanent, exempt, and temporary. Mr. Hank's clarified businesses are required to go through a permitting process for permanent signage and commented on how the allocation of signage is determined for business located on second and third stories. Comment was made questioning if the 200/0 temporary signage allocation was "on the table" for possible revision. Staff indicated yes, and clarified businesses have to change their signs once a week in order for them to qualify as temporary signage. Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the purpose of the exempt category is to provide businesses with additional flexibility. He noted they are unable to separate the display of menus from other signage and stated this starts to get into the content issue. Mr. Hanks noted most businesses can achieve their signage goals and still work within the City's sign code. He added a lot of this depends on how the business decides to divvy up their signage allotment. He clarified "dead space" does count towards the total sign square footage, and noted they would normally draw a rectangle around the wording/image and determine the square footage based on that. Mr. Hanks asked how the group would like to proceed with exempt signs. Compton questioned if they could remove the limitations from displaying signage in windows. Laws commented that this would drastically change the sign code. Mr. Molnar clarified this is an option; however, it would create conflicts with other sections of the Ashland Municipal Code and could cause a domino effect. Stromberg commented that it DOWNTOWN lAS'K FORCE ..... MEE'T/NG #--i AUGUST 4. 2008 P.4GE 2 (<13 seems they are drifting away from their original assignment, which was to recommend some common sense, minor adjustments to relieve some of the businesses current issues. Shostrom stated that it is difficult to picture what is legal and what it not, and stated a before and after picture would help determine which is preferred. Hammond suggested they come up with a blanket, square footage signage allotment, based on the size of the building, and allow businesses to use if for whatever they want. She stated removing the exempt and temporary categories would make things much simpler and easier to understand. Bussell suggested cutting the sign categories down to two: temporary and permanent. Stromberg commented that simplifying is an attractive option, but it presumes that the existing code was not created through a thoughtful process with lots of expertise. Hammond commented that what they have now is not very enforceable and causes confusion for the merchants. Stromberg recommended they make modest changes to the existing code and then recommend that the Council direct the Planning Commission to look into more extensive changes. Hammond reviewed Issue #1 and listed the four options for the group. She noted the Task Force tentatively selected Option 4 at their last meeting, which is to allow one of the exempt signs to be three dimensional, and asked if they would like to proceed with this recommendation. Kramer clarified Option 4 would create the opportunity for one, small 3D sign to be placed on private property. Laws questioned how businesses could create a meaningful 3D sign that fits into the Ixlx2 sign limitation and voiced concern with business owners trying to protect what they have instead of thinking of the streetscape as a whole. Comment was made questioning if this option would apply to just the downtown area or the entire City. Stromberg suggested staff refine the permitted size and scale of 3D objects to allow for more flexibility. He recommended a cubic dimension with minimums and maximums. Shostrom voiced his support for Option 4 with three exempt signs. Greenblatt noted this option would leave some of the cited merchants out of compliance and questioned if this would really solve the problem. PUBLIC COMMENT Susan, Black SheeplNoted the issues she has faced with signage and stated she has needed each sign that has been put up. She asked for examples of signage that is permitted and samples of what compliance looks like. Art Bullock, Ashland Resident/Stated there are two primary public interests that the group has not addressed: 1) the public does not want so much signage that windows look cluttered, and 2) the public does not want so much signage that you cannot see into the business. He stated he does not think the Task Force can make small tweaks and be able to address these public interests and stated a more fundamental rewrite is necessary. Garrett, Duex Chats/Asked for examples of approved signage and questioned the placement of signs on multiple entrances. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS (Continued) Hammond clarified this exempt sign discussion is in relation to the downtown area only. She aclmowledged that Option 4 is not much more than a band-aid and agreed that they should recommend to the Council that these issues be looked at in depth. Slattery commented that she did not realize the temporary signage allocation was as flexible as it is. Hammond commented on the possible formation of a group (either through the Chamber of Commerce or the City) that helps merchants deal with their signage. StromberglKramer mls to approve Option 4 with 3 exempt signs. DISCUSSION: Stromberg clarified this motion includes the understanding that they will recommend this be further evaluated by the Planning Commission. Laws commented on the point of this group coming together, and stated it was not to change the whole spirit of the sign code. Compton questioned if this option would provide enough relief to the DOWNTOlVN lASK PORCEu AfEET/NG #.f AUGUST 4, 2008 P,ilGE 3 of3 merchants. Ms. Bennett commented on the complexity of the entire issue and commented on who this specific option would address. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed unanimously. Kramer commented that the recommendation to the Planning Commission should be a global recommendation that comes at the end of their work. Hammond introduced Issue #2 and the related options. Bussell provided some background on Option 3 and stated Ashland is unique in that it considers art to be a sign. She noted any type of representational structure is not allowed and wall graphics are also not permitted. Bussell explained the Public Art Master Plan recommended modifying the sign code to allow for certain types of public art. Ms. Bennett commented on the rules that govern Oregon and stated Ashland is not the first community to experience problems in this area. City Attorney Richard Appicello clarified if art is owned (donated) to the City and properly place, it is exempt from the sign code. Ms. Bennett noted this issues still needs to go through the Public Arts Commission. Kramer clarified Issue #2 deals with issues like Wiley's Alfredo statue. Bussell questioned if they are talking about the entire City. She stated this won't be too much a concern for downtown, since there is not much space, but noted the areas outside downtown are most likely to have national chains. Kramer felt size and material limitations would address these concerns. Staff clarified they do not consider sandwich boards 3D signs. Ms. Bennett clarified Option 4 would not work for Wiley's Pasta because Alfredo comes in every night. Stromberg suggested they deal with sandwich boards and items like the Alfredo statue separately. Staff clarified the problems with sandwich boards is more of a right of way issue, which will be addressed next week. Kramer suggested creating an additional exempt sign opportunity outside the Downtown Design Overlay Zone that includes allowable material types and size limitations. The group briefly discussed possible objects this sugge~tion may open the door to. Bussell recommended they add a public art exemption for city owned facilities/city property. City Attorney Richard Appicello was asked to bring back options at the next meeting to address Bussell's concerns regarding public art. Stromberg/Compton mls to create a category for movable 3D signs, that 1) are not measured as part of the total sign allotment, 2) meet certain material and construction standards (to be determined by staft), 3) fit within a volumetric maximum, and 4) this category would apply to areas outside the Downtown Design Zone and the Historic Districts. Stromberg/Compton mls to amend motion to add a setback from the public right-of-way (for staff to determine). DISCUSSION: It was clarified this amendment would be added to the original motion. Voice Vote on motion as amended: Hammond, Compton, Greenblatt, Slattery, Kramer, Shostrom and Laws, YES. Shostrom and Bussell, NO. Motion passed 7-2. Staff clarified the Task Force would be dealing with Issue #4 and the remaining right-of-way issues at their final meeting next week. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Smith - 2008-0811 Downtown Task Force MIN.doc Pa DOWNTOFVN TASK FORCE ;\JEETlNCi #5 AUGUST 11.2008 PAGE 1 of 4- DOWNTOWN TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 11, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Task Force Chair Pam Hammond called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way. She announced this is the sixth and final meeting of the Downtown Task Force. Members Present: Pam Hammond, Paddington Station, Chair John Morrison, Mayor Renee Compton, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory Daniel Greenblatt, Greenleaf Restaurant Sandra Slattery, Chamber of Commerce John Stromberg, Planning Commission Dana Bussell, Public Arts Commission George Kramer, Citizen at Large Don Laws, Citizen at Large Dale Shostrom, Citizen at Large City Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Adam Hanks, Permit Center Manager Richard Appicello, City Attorney Absent Members: Dave Dotterrer, Planning Commission PUBLIC COMMENT Art Bullock/Submitted written comments to the group and draft sign code language he prepared. He commented on the public interests which he feels are not represented in the sign code and explained the two primary interests are: 1) overwhelming visual clutter, and 2) business window transparency. Melissa MarkelllPublic Arts Commission/Questioned if the Task Force would be addressing public art on private property. Hammond noted the staff memo distributed on July 17 by City Administrator Martha Bennett and stated the memo outlined the process for how this issue would be handled. City Attorney Richard Appicello noted they were going to recognize that art accepted by the City is not subject to the code, and the sign code would be amended to make this clear. Bussell expressed concern with the lack of discussion on this issue and felt this recommendation should be further debated by the Task Force. Kevin Christman/Expressed concern with the prohibitions against displaying art and stated the current sign code does not permit the display of art to any capacity. Mr. Appicello explained this issue would be included with the public art policies and procedures that will go before the City Council in September. Stromberg stated this issue would be debated by the Planning Commission and the Council, but not this Task Force. Lloyd Haines/Commented on public art and recommended any language that comes from this group include an expansive statement so that it does not get construed when it gets to the Planning Commission and City Council. J. Ellen Austin/Asked if she was in violation for having art displayed outside her gallery, which is located Dana Smith - 2008-0811 Downtown Task Force MIN.doc Pa e2 DO~VNT()l'VN T1SK FORCE /\JEETlNG #5 AUGUST J 1.2008 PAGE2of4 in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Appicello stated residential zones need to be addressed in the sign code; however he does not feel it is appropriate for the Task Force to handle this issue. Bussell/Stromberg m/s for the recommendations to the City Council to include a recommendation to exempt public art from the sign code and to have its own process developed at a future date. DISCUSSION: It was noted these two actions will need to be concurrently. Voice Vote: all A YES. Motion passed. RIGHT-OF-WAY DISCUSSION Mr. Appicello addressed the proposed ordinance amending regulations concerning use of City sidewalks. He explained the ordinance does not distinguish between residential and commercial use and would allow individuals to pay the designated rate for use of the sidewalk. He clarified he did not include a list of what items would be acceptable and stated he only addressed "who" can lease the space, not "what" can be placed there. Stromberg summarized the Task Force's previous discussions on this issue and stated there were three main points: 1) The City would have to broaden the sidewalk cafe restrictions in order to allow for other uses, and the City would apply a market rate charge for use of the sidewalk. 2) Some of the objects placed by merchants in front of their stores were in the public interest (planter boxes, etc.), and these objects would have to be donated to the City. The City would establish criteria for this, and there would be no charge. 3) They would allow certain 3D objects that fit within certain size parameters that had some functional use. Mr. Appicello stated the public arts ordinance would address the process on how to accept art and stated he did not see the need to write a regulation on how the City would regulate the placement of items. He stated there is no obligation on the part of the City to have to accept an item and stated the City can accept donations and place items where ever they feel is appropriate. Kramer commented that the intent of this was to allow merchants to beautify their areas. He expressed concern with the proposed ordinance and stated he does not know why they are creating more rigmarole. Hammond agreed and stated the ordinance does not accurately reflect the Task Force's desires. Mr. Appicello shared his concerns with designating "what" in the ordinance and noted a case that will be argued in front of the Supreme Court on this issue. Stromberg questioned if there was a way to apply market rates for part of the sidewalk, by low rates for the "shy zone." Mr. Appicello stated he understands the group wants free use of the shy zone for amenities and will try to incorporate this, however he is not certain this is permissible. Stromberg suggested they make a formal motion in include this piece as part of their recommendation and ask the Council to direct staff to keep working on this. Laws/Stromberg m/s to recommend that the City Council direct staff to explore an exemption to have free use of the shy zone for amenities (such as flower boxes, door stops, spittoons, etc.) Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ISSUES RECAP Permit Center Manager Adam Hanks asked the group to clarify their preferences on a few of their previous recommendations. The group issued the following clarifications: 1) The additional exempt sign would be applicable to the Downtown area or within one of the four Historic Districts. Smith - 2008-0811 Downtown Task Force MIN.doc p DOWNTO/'VN TiSK FORCE' /VfEETilVCi #5 AUGfiST j 1,2008 PAC/E 3 of .f. 2) The larger 3D sign would be in addition to the existing sign numbers for wall or ground signs. 3) The additional 3D sign would be allowed only in commercial zones outside Historic Districts. 4) The 3D sign will have a specific separate size in addition to the current total square footage. Kramer summarized within the "historic core," merchants are allowed 3 exempts signs, one of which can be a small 3D sign. Outside the historic core, merchants are allowed 3 exempt signs, plus one larger 3D sign that meets criteria yet to be developed. Mr. Hanks commented on a possible provision regulating the amount of flat surface permitted on 3D objects before it starts to count against the permitted signage amount. Kramer suggested a possible limit of2 sq. ft. Stromberg recommended they forward this provision back to staff for refining. Hammond noted the proposed ordinance still includes the booting provision and stated this is not what the Task Force wanted. Mr. Appicello clarified no changes were made to the ordinance since the group's last meeting and affirmed that he understands what their recommendations were. Kramer/Stromberg m/s that despite the language of the proposed ordinance, the Downtown Task Force recommends eliminating booting in favor or towing with adequate notice before hand. DISCUSSION: Laws suggested including language that notifies the vehicle owner that additional costs will be incurred by towing and storage. Municipal Judge Pam Turner expressed concern with the provision that requires vehicles to be moved to a different block in order to avoid a citation. Mr. Hanks agreed that the City needs better signage on this. Mr. Appicello clarified his staffhas met with the Judge and are working to flush out some of these practical problems. Slattery noted the importance of placing a large orange sign on the vehicles 24 hours in advance of the towing. Mr. Appicello clarified this was included in the ordinance. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mayor Morrison left the meeting at 3: 15 p.m. Kramer asked if they could discuss Issue 7, Encroachment Permit Process, and stated sandwich boards on public right of ways have not been addressed. Hammond stated sandwich boards should not be permitted on public right of way, only in alcoves which are private property. Mr. Hanks clarified sandwich boards are not addressed in the sign code and therefore are not currently permitted. Community Development Director Bill Molnar asked if the group had concerns about opening up the sidewalks for other uses besides sidewalk cafes. Mr. Appicello added he and Mr. Molnar have been working on trying to make a distinction to see if limiting the use of sidewalks to sidewalk dining was possible. Stromberg stated staff previously informed them they could not limit the use of sidewalks to just cafes and this is the premise they have been working under. He expressed concern that this option was not presented to the committee sooner. Kramer agreed and stated he did not know this was a possibility. He added he does not have concerns about rampant selling of merchandise on the sidewalk and stated the City could deal with that problem when and if it ever arises. Stromberg agreed and felt they should go with what they have for now. Laws disagreed and stated if they have a choice, they should only allow restaurant tables. He stated he does not think Ashland would have a desirable appearance if they start allowing these other uses. Mr. Appicello clarified the Council would likely ask about this option, and staff was merely doing their best to be prepared for the Council discussion. Laws noted the email submitted by Brent Thompson and asked why a building can't have signs on more than two sides. Mr. Molnar stated there are very few businesses in town that have four public streets bounding it and noted the elements that need to be considered when establishing a business frontage. He commented on the concerns behind this provision and gave the example of someone calling a loading doc a public entrance. -nr-T--- a Smith - 2008-0811 Downtown Task Force MIN.doc Pa e4 ~ DOWNTOl1/N riSK FORCE Ii/EETING #5 AUG{!Sr 11.2008 PAGE 4 of.f Compton expressed her concerns with whether this group has really solved the problems. Bussell noted they cannot solve every merchant's problems and stated these businesses are out of compliance for different reasons. She added this group has been successful in providing additional options to these businesses. Laws stated the purpose of this committee was not to bring everyone into compliance. Slattery suggested the Task Force include a detailed statement to the Council that describes the "whys" behind their recommendations. Hammond proposed forming a small subgroup of the Task Force to form this narrative. Greenblatt stated this statement needs to be understandable to lay people and stated the community has a misunderstanding about what these meeting are about. Stromberg noted they have not found a solution to the Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory bear, and stated the bear is symbolic of this whole process. Compton acknowledged that there is no way to allow the bear and not allow worse things elsewhere. She noted the bench and the bear are located in the shy zone and the only way to keep it would be to purchase an encroachment permit, which would cost $50-$100 a month. Mr. Appicello noted staff is attempting to create an exemption in the shy zone for public elements, which would include the bench, but not the bear. Laws stated he hopes staffwill continue to look at a way to grandfather in objects that were placed after the law went into effect. Comment was made from the audience suggesting the Task Force remove the minimum square footage provision and allow merchants free use of the shy space. Greenblatt questioned if the sign code could be revisited at a later date. Stromberg noted this would eventually come to the Planning Commission and perhaps they could build in some kind of review process. Stromberg voiced his support reducing the minimum square footage and stated they should include this as part of the package that goes to the Council. He noted if the Council has misgivings, they can request additional information from staff and make a final determination. Kramer/Laws m/s to revise the Si~ewalk Cafe Ordinance to have no minimum rental provision, but rather a processing fee and a per square foot charge. V oice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Bussell/Stromberg m/s for the alterations in the sign code to be reviewed after it has been in effect for 2 years. Voice Vote: Hammond, Compton, Greenblatt, Slattery, Bussell, Stromberg, Kramer, and \ Shostrom, YES. Laws, NO. Motion passed. WRAP UP DISCUSSION Slattery commented that there is a huge education element that goes along with this and they need to find a way to let people know their options. Hammond suggested a statement in the City Source newsletter that identifies someone in the City that could assist businesses with their signage questions. Greenblatt questioned if the Task Force would be given the opportunity to tweak the final report before it goes to Council. Mr. Appicello clarified staff would send out the report to the Task Force members and they will be given the opportunity to submit comments to staff. He cited Oregon's Public Meeting Law and stated the members must avoid back and forth dialogue through email and should not be submitting their comments to each other. Stromberg asked about forming a small subcommittee to prepare a statement to the Council that captures the reasoning behind their recommendations. It was agreed that Hammond would be able to form a subcommittee if she feels it is necessary and staff would ensure this was properly noticed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted April Lucas, Administrative Assistant .11 . CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Rogue Valley Transit District (RVTD) Proposed Route 10 Modifications Meeting Date: September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught Department: Public Works Depa E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Administration Secondary Contact: Ann Seltzer Approval: Martha B Estimated Time: 15 minutes Question: Will the City Council direct staff to prepare and transmit a written communication opposing RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications significantly limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council direct staff to prepare and transmit a written communication to RVTD indicating the City's opposition to the proposed Route 10 modifications that would significantly limit the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. Background: On August 1, 2008 staff learned that R VTD was proposing to modify Route 10 by reducing the frequency of the East Main Loop. The East Main Loop incorporates lower Tolman Creek Road with a stop at Albertsons, a stop across from the residential neighborhood of Chautaugua Trace, turns right onto East Main, right onto Highway 66 with a stop at Ashland Hills Inn and eventually turns left up Tolman Creek from Ashland Street. (See attached map.) The proposed change eliminates that section of Route 10 and has the bus turning right onto Tolman Creek from Highway 66. The information came via an email from Councilor Silbiger who in turn learned of the proposed changes from a local resident. The proposed Route 10 modifications would limit service to the East Main loop area to the following times: 5:52 am to 8:56 am 2:22 pm to 12:56 pm 5:22 pm to 7:26 pm Staff immediately contacted Julie Brown, RVTD General Manager, to determine the rational for the proposed Route 10 modifications and to express the City's frustration that RVTD had not contacted the City of Ashland prior to proposing the modifications. Ms. Brown apologized for not notifYing the City of Ashland in advance, but explained that the action was proposed because of operational issues that prevented the Route 10 bus from meeting and keeping its designated schedule. Specifically, RVTD was not able to maintain the Route 10 two (2) hour route time line from the Medford Transfer Station to Ashland and back to Medford due to construction delays, additional wheel chair riders, etc. As a result, Ms. Brown indicated that people were/are missing their transfers at the Medford Transfer Station and then waiting an additional 30 minutes for the next bus. For these reasons and that fact that Page 1 of 3 090208 RVTD Proposed Route.CC.doc r~' -nr-. CITY OF ASHLAND the ridership was relatively low on the Route 10 East Main Loop, RVTD proposed reducing the frequency of service offered to the East Main Loop. Staff expressed the City's concerns that RVTD would consider reducing any part of Route 10 since Route 10 has the highest ridership of all the RVTD routes. Staff requested RVTD increase its outreach to current riders notifYing them of the proposed change and inviting their input. In addition, staff requested RVTD delay its decision until the City and Ashland riders had an opportunity to respond. To better understand the concerns expressed by Ms. Brown, on August 8, 2008 Mike Faught, Public Works Director, and Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, rode Route 10 from Ashland to the Medford Transfer Station and back again beginning at 12:00 pm. It took two (2) hours and seven (7) minutes for the Route lObus to make the complete route and staff was just barely able to make the transfer in Medford. Then on August 18,2008, Faught, Julie Brown, RVTD General Manager, and the RVTD's Operations Supervisor boarded the Route 10 bus at the Plaza at 2:30 pm. This time it took two (2) hours and 40 minutes to complete the route. Clearly construction, increased ridership (lots of boardings at most bus stops), congestion and emergency vehicles played a part in delaYing the bus. About 15 minutes of the delay was due to the fact that we missed the transfer in Medford - one of the stated reasons for RVTD to propose changing Route 10. The City of Ashland's goal is to encourage and increase ridership within the City. In order to meet that objective the City of Ashland has entered into an agreement with RVTD to pay down the fixed route fairs from $2.00 to $.50 and reduce the Valley Lift paratransit fares within the City from $4.00 to $1.00 (for an annual cost not to exceed $217,500). This objective can be compromised when routes are changed, service levels are reduced or the system becomes generally inconvenient to riders. It is easy to rationalize the proposed reduction of service in East Main Route because ridership is currently low in that area. However, if the City hopes to build ridership and encourage those in that area to ride the bus, it is important to leave the route in place. Therefore, staff is recommending that the City oppose the proposed changes to Route 10. On March 4,2008 the City Council authorized a contract change order to the Transportation System Plan (TSP) and subsequent Transportation Capital Improvement Project (CIP). The consultant, HDR, is studYing transit service and proposed transit alternatives with options to meet existing and future transit needs in Ashland. HDR hired Nelson-Nygaard as a sub-consultant to complete the transit portion of the work. While, the Nelson-Nygaard transit study work is substantially complete, further conversations and impacts of route modifications enacted by RVTD can be explored during the scheduled TSP, Transportation SDC and Transit Study Session on October 10, 2008. Council Options: 1) The City Council could direct staff to prepare and transmit a written communication opposing RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. Page 2 of3 090208 RVTD Proposed Route.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND 2) The City Council could decide to endorse RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications significantly limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. 3) The City Council could decide to modify staffs recommendation ( ) regarding RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. Potential Motions: 1) Move to direct staff to prepare and transmit a written communication opposing RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. 2) Move to direct staff to prepare and transmit a written communication endorsing RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. 3) Move to modify staff recommendation ( ) regarding RVTD's proposed Route 10 modifications limiting the hours that the bus will complete the East Main Loop. Attachments: R VTD Current Route 10 Ashland Map R VTD Current Entire Route 10 Map RVTD East Main Loop with stop activity depicted R VTD East Main Loop boarding and de-boarding statistics Page 3 of3 090208 RVTD Proposed Route.CC.doc r~' .... ~ N Route 10 Ashland To Ashland :00/:30 :061:36 :091:39 :121:42 :18/:48 :261:56 :351:05 :401:10 :55/:25 N -#1ft--=: ..;:_..-.."..J--....-.-. .-~~~.:.~~12~~~,~~_. " '. .;~\ J SUNCRE T RD .~ / ~ ----.. ._--'" '\~/-. /\ ,J \~ eOl VE.R RD < J "~" -"---'~;-'T. -'~J '\ '\\" ~')j.C.. ..W.J.tl.:_Er~'~ R~ ':'V&';~.~." . "" f' ''':~. roSs Rir"?<'m', '>/'..t . '\~ ). --'-- --t',::' ".~. ~/~ "'''''''' ;#.t-:..L ,y I /....".. ~ r4~-....-~~-t.'?"-<l .... . .,.. "< i I. ! '\,~ . Ijc ! I '.?O' ',. ....:'ft-- ......~1 } v.JJ I' m I ...-tJ .... .:J j <,a ~I ~I ~v':./., u, ~ . .~ ao.J~~"O ~ 10T.... ~ \'\.<J. 01-.. ---..----....- ",~ . a:! ~.:::~#2 Ra11110 ~..;<1'A .~...................r............... ..... "~ ~~,."... '.. / '\ ' , ,/ .. ---- ". '<~:~ l/ ,,~ "~ '~" --.~ a_...._.-.......~.~~.;-,;::.::...:-r. ~."EY.'."- _. .... Jr1 . "'\;;~~~~ E-~ ~~ "~ ...- r" ~ "'~ ( C'~ e'Jt- '\'~ +/ 0'9 ~~ ~ ,. ~ '\~'t- ',', '\~'" ~ N \ J . r \ I . . 'j ~t<' c.... \.~.... . 'V '~~V(J . r< '1._' ''-~\ ? /')''; 1 y. ______.1 r UJl r 1 "1- \ \';. V \~ \ i,.. I 1<6 I " ~ ! \~ Shown in this map is passenger data taken over the past 6 months. Each bus stop is represented by a yellow dot. The size of the dot represents the number of passengers using the stop per day. The results are based on random sampling, and therefore do not necessarily represent true ridership figures. '''', '" ,.'" East Ashland Loop Entire Route 1 0 (Includes East Ashland Loop) East Ashland Loop (Does NOllndude Albertson's) Stop Stop Desct1ptlon Acivtty 2350 Hwy 99 - Jackson Well Springs 21 2360 IHwy 99 - EI T apatio 18 2370 Hwv 99 - Spine & Pain Center 3 2380 N. Main - S. of Ashland Mine Rd. 7 2390 N. Main - N. of Grant 8 2400 N. Main - S. of Maple St 18 2410 N. Main - S. of Wimer St. 36 2420 N. Main - S. of Laurel St. 18 1210 Ashland Plaza 106 1220 E. Main - Ashland Springs Hotel 34 1230 E.. Main - library 55 1240 Siskiyou - Safeway 34 1250 Siskiyou - N. of liberty st. 8 1260 Siskiyou - Ashland High School 45 1270 Siskiyou - S. of University Way . 50 1280 Siskiyou - S. of Avery hwv 6Ei sign 36 2430 hWV 66 - E. of Sikiyou blvd 38 2440 hwy 66 - E. of Walker - Beanery 60 2450 hwy 66 - E. of Lit Way 16 2460 hWV 66 - E. of Park St. 26 2470 hwv 66 - Pizza Hut 47 2480 Tolman Creek Rd - Albertsons 90 2485 Tolman Crk Rd. School Bus Stop 13 2490 Tolman Crk Rd - SHELTER @ 4 2500 E. Main - Hwy 66 - FLAG STOP 4 2510 Windmill in @ Ashland Hills 13 2520 Hwv 66 - Wild Goose Resturaunt 12 2530 Tolman Crk Rd - Bi-mart 59 2540 Tolman Crk Rd. ' S. of Grizzly Dr. 7 2545 Tolman Crk Rd. - S. of Diane 8 2550 Tolman Crk Rd. - S. of Barbara 12 2560 Tolman Crk Rd. - Ashland Forge 15 2570 Siskiyou - N. of Bellview 34 2580 Siskiyou - S. of Glendale 39 2590 Siskiyou - N. of Faith 43 2600 Siskiyou - S. of Normal 15 2610 Siskiyou - N. of Harmony, 36 2620 Siskiyou - S. of 66, Omar's 53 1140 Siskiyou - N. of Bridge St. (SOU) 45 1145 Siskiyou - Pool @ Palm motel 46 1160 Siskiyou - Ashland High School 48 1170 Siskiyou - S. of Morton 12 1180 Siskiyou - Sateway 52 1190 Lithia Way - Ashland Physical Th. 65 1200 Litha Way - N. of Oak - SHEL TER 53 2630 N. Main - N of Central. (Big Tree) 24 2640 N. Main - S. at Glen, AI's Diner 25 2650 N. Main - N. of Maple (Hospital) 26 East Ashland Loop -+ 2350 2360 2370 2380 2390 2400 2410 2420 1210 1220 1230 1240 1250 1200 1270 1280 2430 2440 2450 2460 2470 2480 [ 2485 2490 2500 2510 2520 2530 2!j.4() 2545 2550 2560 2570 2sea 2590 2600 2610 2620 1140 1145 1160 1170 1190 1190 1200 2630 2640 2650 2660 -m'T CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication 2008-2009 Grant Agreement with the Chamber of Commerce Meeting Date: September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Martha J. Bennett Department: Administration E-Mail: bennettm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept. : Finance/Admin. Secondary Contact: Lee Tuneberg Approval: Martha J. Benn Estimated Time: 30 minutes Question: Does the Council approve the proposed contract with the Chamber of Commerce for FY 2008-2009 in the amount of $305,000? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached contract. Background: The City has relied on the Chamber of Commerce to provide visitor and convention bureau services and certain economic development services for many years. During discussions this spring related to the increase in the transient occupancy tax (TOT) rate adopted by Council, the Council has adjusted the amount awarded to the Chamber for economic development and visitors and convention bureau (VCB) services. The proposed contract outlines the specific tasks and outcomes that the City hopes to achieve. The City will be contracting for $225,000 for the promotion of tourism that meets the state definition and $80,000 for specific economic development activities. The contract has been adjusted to reflect this change in the funding. In particular, additional requirements are made for the increase in VCB funds. Staff recommends the following changes in the contract from last year. . Deleting the requirement that the Chamber assist the City with public involvement for a potential increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax rate. . Adding a requirement that the VCB develop specific marketing campaigns targeted at attracting visitors in the shoulder and winter season and at extending the length of stays of visitors in the summer months. . Adding a requirement that the VCB develop an electronic marketing campaign that encourages return visits and assists in developing a more accurate profile of the types of people who visit Ashland and of the types of activities, events, campaigns, or festivals that would encourage expansion and diversification of the visitor base. . Adding a request that the Chamber develop a method for tracking occupancy rates. The additions proposed by staff are all on page #3 of the contract and are highlighted. Staff recommends that the following items be maintained: . Including Chamber participation in the City's Economic Development Strategy development . Increasing VCB activities related to promoting outdoor recreation. 090208 Chamber contract.cC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND . Increasing VCB activities and events for shoulder season and for visits of families with school-age and young children. . Coordination with SOREDI, Job Council, State of Oregon, Thrive and other economic development agencies that work in the City of Ashland. . Including data reporting that will lead to Performance Measures to track progress, such as' o Job creation o Increased lodging visits (TOT revenues) in first and fourth quarters Staffhas gone over these changes with the Chamber of Commerce, and they agree that these are ta~ks that can and should be performed under the contract. This contract is for one year. Related City Policies: This contract implements part of the economic element (Chapter 7) of the comprehensive plan Council Options: Council can approve this grant agreement with the Chamber. Council can provide additional direction to staff for amendments to the grant agreement Potential Motions: . I move to approve the grant agreement for FY 2008-2009 with the Ashland Chamber of Commerce. . I move to approve the grant agreement with the following amendments (list them) . I move to direct staff to revise the agreement in the following ways (list them) and bring it back for consideration by the Council. As part of this motion, the Council is authorizing staff to continue to make monthly paYments to the Chamber until the contract is adopted. Attachments: Draft contract 090208 Chamber contract.cC.doc r~' .11 Proposed CITY OF ASHLAND Agreement for Services Between City of Ashland And Ashland Chamber of Commerce Agreement between the City of Ashland (City), the Ashland Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) and the Ashland Visitor and Convention bureau (VCB) for fiscal year 2008-09. Recitals A. The VCB shall receive $225,000 for promoting tourism in Ashland based upon Ashland City Council Resolution motion of June 16,2008 Expenditures of these funds must meet the requirement of ORS 320.300 through ORS 320.350. B. The Chamber shall receive $80,000 for the purpose of economic development in Ashland based upon Ashland City Council motion of June 16, 2008. C. The City, Chamber and VCB now enter into this Agreement. Purpose The City grants funds to the VCB to promote Ashland to visitors traveling from more than 50 miles to Ashland and to visitors who stay overnight in Ashland. Promotion includes advertising, publicizing, distribution of printed materials, marketing special events and festivals, conducting strategic planning, visitor center management and research necessary to stimulate tourism development. The City of Ashland shares responsibility with the Chamber to handle economic development functions. Currently the Chamber provides the following kinds of services with funds granted by the City: coordinated marketing, rapid response team to inquiries, relocation services, point-of-contact management and information services, general inquiries, training for local business and coordination with the Small Business Administration. The City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan is the guiding document for all development within the community. The plan incorporates ten specific elements related to development. The economic development element is identified in Chapter 7. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT In conducting the work under this grant, the Chamber will emphasize in its economic development activities: . The importance of maintaining Ashland's small-town feel . Ashland as a family friendly community that supports its schools and values high quality education. . Ashland's commitment to environmentally sustainable business practices . The high quality of Ashland's workforce and the community's desire for businesses that offer family-wage jobs. rA' -----rn-'T Proposed . The rich cultural, social, and intellectual traditions of the community. . The importance of Southern Oregon University. . The high value Ashland places on diversity ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TASKS 1. Work with the City of Ashland to create an economic development strategy and action plan for the community that includes establishing goals, strategies, objectives, and actions. This strategy will also clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the various agencies working on business retention, expansion, and recruitment in Ashland. 2. Assist the City in reaching out to a broad spectrum of the community in developing the economic development strategy. 3. Continue efforts to retain and expand existing businesses, particularly businesses that are non- tourism related, with an emphasis on additional family wage jobs. The strategies should be based on research on the needs and growth potential of existing businesses. 4. Continue efforts to recruit new businesses to Ashland. As with the business retention and expansion plan, the Chamber should focus on non-tourism related businesses that provide family wage jobs. 5. Develop and provide accurate and timely information to assist businesses interested in locating, expanding, or remaining in Ashland. 6. Provide advice and information to existing businesses that may wish to remain or expand in Ashland. Coordinate with appropriate other agencies, governments, and non profits to assist in business retention and expansion. 7. Provide advice, information, and technical assistance to businesses interested in relocating in Ashland. Coordinate with appropriate other agencies, governments, and non profits to assist in business location decisions. 8. Develop and maintain strong working relationships with agencies and governments that provide financial and technical assistance or training to business. 9. Engage a cross-section of people and organizations in the work supported through this contract. VISITOR AND CONVENTION SERVICES In conducting the work under this grant, the Chamber will emphasize in its Visitor and Convention Bureau (VCB) activities: . Ashland as a high quality destination in the winter, spring, and fall as well as the summer. . Ashland as a destination for people of all ages, including families with young and school-aged children . Ashland as a center for cultural, social, and intellectual pursuits . Ashland as a center for high quality outdoor recreational opportunities VISITOR AND CONVENTION SERVICES TASKS: 1. The VCB will develop and implement a strategy to maintain current levels of tourism in the summer months and increase tourism in fall, winter, and spring. This strategy should rely on the best available research into visitor behavior and best practices in the VCB industry. 2. The VCB should help the City leverage its investment into cultural and economic development grants by promoting the events and performances of groups that receive small grants from the City. 2 r~' .11--.----.------ Proposed 3. The VCS should provide accurate and timely information to potential visitors and on-site information about the community to people who are vacationing. 4. The VCS should have an active marketing campaign to encourage and promote visits to Ashland that reinforce the strengths of the community. 5. The VCS should market and promote festivals and events in the fall and early spring, especially those provided bother re<;ipients of cultural and economic develo ment rants from the City. REQUIRED REPORTING The Chamber shall provide an annual report to the Ashland City Council no later than January 31 on its previous year's activities. The report should include: 1. A summary and analysis of the specific steps taken to perform the tasks in this contract for both economic development and VCS activities. Performance Measures. The Chamber shall include data that measures its success in both economic development and in tourism promotion in its report. At a minimum, the Chamber will include data that describes the total number of jobs within Ashland, by major sector (e.g., retail, wholesale, government, etc.) and data that measures the total collection of both transient occupancy tax and food and beverage tax, by quarter, in the grant year over the previous year. The City will assist in providing this data to the Chamber. The report should analyze and describe how tasks identified in this rant a reement affected total 'obs and TOT and F&S tax collections. 3. A summary report of Ashland businesses that received direct assistance from the Chamber for business retention or expansion. This report should include the total number of businesses that contacted the Chamber or that were contacted by the Chamber. 4. A summary report of prospective businesses the Chamber talked with about relocating or opening in Ashland. This report should include the total number of businesses that contacted the Chamber or that were contacted by the Chamber. 5. A report on the variety of specific promotion activities executed for the purpose of attracting visitors to Ashland. Include samples of advertising, which include family, quality of life and educational opportunities. The report should include a description of the specific promotion activities targeted at attracting visitors to Ashland during the fall, winter and spring. Include samples of advertising, which include family, quality of life and educational opportunities. 6. A report about the VCS's analysis of the viability of new festivals and events for supporting additional tourism in the fall and spring, including efforts the VCS made to coordinate with other recipients of cultural and economic grants from the City. 3 r~' . ----.-.r-r Proposed 7. A summary report of outreach efforts made by the Chamber to other organizations, businesses, and people to support the work of this contract. General Provisions 1. Amount of Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this agreement, the City agrees to provide funds in the amount specified above. 2. Use of Grant Funds. The use of grant funds is expressly limited to the objectives identified in this agreement. 3. Unexpended Funds. Any grant funds held by the Grantee remaining after the purpose for which the grant is awarded or this agreement is terminated shall be returned to the City within 30 days of completion or termination. 4. Financial Records and Inspection. Grantee includes in the annual report to the City a) copies of 501@ letter, IRS non-profit status and corporate bylaws; b) list of Board members, their occupations, and years on the Board; c) financial statements showing previous year expenses and revenues; d) current and projected budgets (total organization and individual program's funded by this grant). Grantee's report should show the relative share of City funds expended compared to overall project funds. 5. Living Wage Requirements. If the amount of this agreement is $17,342.00 or more, and if the Grantee has ten or more employees, then Grantee is required to pay a living wage, as defined in Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 3.12, to all employees and subcontractors who spend 500/0 or more of their time within a month performing work under this agreement. Grantees required to pay a living wage are also required to post the attached notice predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all employees. 6. Default. If Grantee fails to remedy any material breach of any of Grantee's obligations under the terms of this agreements within 30 days of receipt of written notice from the City of the breach, or if Grantee fails to expend the grant funds or enter into binding legal agreements to expend the grant funds within twelve months of the date of this agreement, the City, by written notice of default to the Grantee, may terminate the whole or any part of this agreement and may pursue any remedies available at law or in equity. Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, termination of the agreement, stop payment on or return of the grant funds, payment of interest earned on grant funds or declaration of ineligibility for the receipt of future grant awards. 7. Amendments. The terms of this agreement will not be waived, altered, modified, supplemented, or amended in any manner except by written instrument signed by the parties. Such written modification will be made a part of this agreement and subject to all other agreement provisions. 8. Indemnity. Grantee agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogation's, 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 out of or incident to the performance of this agreement by Grantee (including but not limited to, Grantee's employees, agents, and others designated by Grantee to perform work or services relating to Grantee's obligation under the terms of this agreement). Grantee shall not be held responsible for damages caused by the negligence of City or anyone acting in behalf of City. 4 r~' . ----- -I1IT - Proposed 9. Insurance. Grantee shall, at its own expense, at all times for twelve months from the date of this agreement, maintain in force a comprehensive general liability policy. The liability under such policy shall be a minimum of $500,000 per occurrence (combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage claims) or $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $100,000 per occurrence for property damage. Liability coverage shall be provided on an "occurrence" not "claims" basis. The City of Ashland, its officers, employees and agents shall be named as additional insures. Certificates of insurance acceptable to the City shall be filed with the City Risk Manager or Finance Director prior to the expenditure of any grant funds. 10. Merger. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified in this agreement regarding this agreement. Grantee, by the signature below of its authorized representative, acknowledges that it has read this agreement, understands it, and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions. 11. Dispute Resolution. In the event of any dispute between the parties relating to this agreement, the parties shall attempt alternative dispute resolution (mediation or arbitration) prior to filing any formal legal action. 12. Notices and Representatives. All notices, certificates, or communications shall be delivered or mailed postage prepaid to the parties at their respective places of business as set forth below or at a place designated hereafter in writing by the parties. City of Ashland Martha Bennett, City Administrator 20 East Main Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland Chamber of Commerce: Sandra Slattery, Executive Director 110 East Main Ashland, OR 97520 This Agreement constitutes the Entire Agreement between the parties. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this agreement. No amendment, consent, or waiver or terms of this agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by all parties. Any such amendment, consent or waiver shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The parties, by the signature below or their authorized representatives, acknowledge having read and understood the Agreement and the parties agree to be bound by its terms and conditions. City of Ashland By Title Date Ashland Chamber of Commerce and Visitor and Convention Bureau 5 ~~, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Criminal Record Information Ordinance Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: September 2, 2008 City Attorney's Office Ashland Police Martha Benne Primary Staff Contact: E- Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Richard Appicello Appicelr@ashland.or.us Megan Thornton 5 minutes Question: Should the City Council conduct and approve First and Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to Criminal Records Information, Requiring Review of Criminal Record Information for Applicants of EmploYment, Volunteers, Personal Service Contractors of the City, and Declaring Emergency" and move the ordinance on to be passed by emergency? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of First Reading in full and Second Reading by Title only to allow the ordinance to be passed as an emergency. Background: On May 28, 2008, the Oregon Department of State Police (OSP) completed an audit of the Police Department's Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS) use. LEDS is a program that allows the police department access to criminal record information for Oregon, other states, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Due to the confidential nature of the information that can be accessed through LEDS there are numerous policies and procedures that must be followed for users of LEDS to maintain access. After the audit was completed, the Police Department was notified that continued use of the LEDS system would require adoption of an ordinance meeting LEDS regulatory standards. In short, Oregon law requires the City Council to pass an ordinance providing the Police Department with the authority to conduct certain kinds of criminal history checks and restricting the use of the information received. The proposed ordinance clarifies that the Human Resources Department can request criminal history checks for potential employees, volunteers, and city contractors. The ordinance also specifies that the complete results of the criminal history check will not be released to the Human Resources Department, and it specifies how the information will be evaluated by staff. This ordinance has an emergency clause because the ordinance is necessary to satisfy LEDS requirements and will bring the Ashland Police Department fully into compliance with state laws and regulations. Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions Council Options: (1) Move to approve First and Second Reading and pass the ordinance by emergency. (2) Move to approve First Reading and continue the matter to September 16, 2008 for Second Reading. Page 1 09-02-08 Criminal Record Information Ordinance !'Al CITY OF ASHLAND Potential Motions: Staff: [Read ordinance in full, then by Title only.] Council: Motion to declare an emergency; Motion to approve First and Second Reading and adopt the ordinance as an emergency enactment. Attachments: Proposed ordinance Page 2 09-02-08 Criminal Record Information Ordinance !'Al ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO CRIMINAL RECORD INFORMATION, REQUIRING REVIEW OF CRIMINAL RECORD INFORMATION FOR APPLICANTS OF EMPLOYMENT, VOLUNTEERS, PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTORS OF THE CITY, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Annotated to show deletions and "additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold . and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, ORS 181.555(1) and OAR 257-010-0025 allow local agencies to access criminal offender information possessed by the Oregon State Police (OSP) through The Law Enforcement Data System (LEOS), and WHEREAS, OAR 257 -015-0060(2)(a) allows agencies authorized by OSP to access Computerized Criminal History records via LEOS, and WHEREAS, The Ashland City Council finds that it is in the public interest and safety that the City access criminal conviction records through the LEOS database for applicants of employment, volunteers, personal service contractors of the City, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that in order for city departments to have access to criminal offender information the City must adopt an Ordinance under OAR 257- 010-0025 that expressly refers to criminal conduct and contains requirements or exclusions expressly based on such conduct to allow access to criminal conviction records by local agencies. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Sections 2.42.010 [Purpose] through 2.42.020 [Procedure] are hereby added to read as follows: 2.42.010. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to authorize the City of Ashland Police Department to access Oreaon State Police (OSP) criminal offender information throuah the Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS) for potential employees. volunteers. and city contractors in accordance with applicable state laws. Criminal history information is necessary to make informed hirina decisions and to reduce the risk of claims aaainst the City of Ashland. for nealiaent hirina. amona other claims. 2.42.020. Procedure. A. All potential employees, volunteers, and city contractors shall be required to authorize the City to conduct a criminal offender information check throuah the OSP LEOS system. LEDS Ordinance No. _ 09-02-08 First Reading Page 1 of3 B. The Ashland Police Department will conduct the check on potential emplovees. volunteers. or city contractors and report to the Human Resources Department that the applicant either has a criminal history or does not have a criminal history. Use of the LEDS system shall be subiect to the City's aareement with the OSP for such use and such other purposes and in accordance with the terms and conditions imposed bv statutes. rules. or reaulations. Information obtained from the LEDS system shall be deemed personal and private information. which shall be kept confidential and destroyed at such time as the other application materials are destroyed in accordance with public records law. C. If the applicant has a criminal history. the Human Resources Department may request a written criminal history from the OSP Identification Services Section after pavina the applicable fee. The Human Resources Department shall make the written criminal history record available to the selectina official for his/her consideration when determinina whether to hire the applicant. For purposes of this ordinance the "selectina official" is the City officer or emplovee makina the hirina. contractina or volunteer use decision who is not disqualified from examinina confidential LEDS material. D. Potential emplovees. volunteers. or city contractors that have felonv convictions. or misdemeanor convictions for crimes of moral turpitude will be closelv examined bv the selectina department heads or other city officials to determine if the applicant possesses the required dearee of public trust and confidence. However. each selection will be made on an individual case bv case basis. takina into account the: 1) Applicant's Qualifications. 2) Requirements of the position. 3) Public sensitivity of the position under consideration. and 4) Results of the criminal history check. such as the applicant's aae at the time of the offense. date of the offense. type of offense. and any subsequent rehabilitation. E. The criminal history record of applicants that are hired or selected will become a part of the confidential personnel file of that person. Access to confidential personnel files is limited to authorized persons who have an official need to access such files as allowed bv law or reaulation. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Emergency. The City Council of the City of Ashland finds that the health, safety and welfare of the City of Ashland, including the need for the City to LEDS Ordinance No. _ 09-02-08 First Reading Page 2 of3 make informed hiring, volunteer and contracting decisions, requires this ordinance to have immediate effect. Therefore, an emergency is hereby declared to exist by unanimous vote of the Council, and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from the time of its passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. SECTION 5. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (Le. Sections 3-5) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read in full and then by title at a single meeting of the Ashland City Council in accordance with Article X, Section 2(8) and Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney LEDS Ordinance No. _ 09-02-08 First Reading Page 3 of3 .11 I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Appointment of Budget Committee Member and Council Member/Mayor as Liaison to Audit Committee September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: City Recorder E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Berm Estimated Time: Barbara Christensen christeb@ashland.or.us None 15 Minutes Question: Does the Council wish to make an appointment to the Audit Committee of a Budget Committee member and Council Member/Mayor member for a term to expire April 30, 2009? Staff Recommendation: None. Background: The Audit Committee consists of one member of the Budget Committee, one Council member or the Mayor and two citizens at-large. A request was sent out to the current Budget Committee members on July 24, 2008 asking if anyone was interested in volunteering for this appointment. The following members responded that they were willing to serve in this capacity: Dermis Slattery, Dee Anne Everson and Roberta Stebbins. The Audit Committee meets about twice a year to analyze and report to the Council on the annual audit of the City and Parks & Recreation. This committee also recommends to the council an independent firm of certified public accountants to perform the annual audit of the City. The committee is normally scheduled to meet in September 2008 as the Audit of the City has already begun and should be completed and ready for draft presentation to the committee at that time. Related City Policies: City Council approved Resolution #2008-24 clarifYing the duties of the Audit Committee. Council Options: Choose one of the following as the liaison to the Audit Committee for a term to expire April 30, 2009: Dennis Slattery, Dee Anne Everson or Roberta Stebbins. Potential Motions: Motion to approve appointment of 2009. to the Audit Committee for a term to expire April 30, Page 1 of2 090208 Appt of Audit comm.cC.doc r~' Motion to approve appointment of Council Member/Mayor term to expire April 30, 2009 Attachments: Resolution #2008-24 Page 2 of2 CITY OF ASHLAND to the Audit Committee for a 090208 Appt of Audit comm.cC.doc r~' I II r----- ---- RESOLUTION NO. .J.OOf.,11 A RESOLUTION CLARIFYING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE MUNICIPAL AUDIT COMMITTEE AND MAKING THE CITY RECORDER AN EX OFFICIO MEMBER AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2003-07. RECITALS: A. The role and responsibilities of the Municipal Audit Committee were established in June 1991 pursuant to Resolution 91-16. The committee was re-established in 1995 with modified objectives and responsibilities as set forth in Resolution 95-24, 98-06 and 2003-07. Recent changes in audit requirements and internal operations create a need to adjust the responsibilities of the committee and its members. B. The city council desires to reaffirm the expectations and composition of the committee, making the city recorder a non-voting member and allowing the mayor to serve as a voting member. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. Committee Established. The Municipal Audit Committee is established and' shall consist of four voting members. The committee may request the presence of any city official at its meetings. SECTION 2. Terms. Qualifications. Vacancies. A. Four voting members shall be appointed by the City Council and shall consist of one council member or mayor, one budget committee member, and two citizens at large. The fifth member shall be the city recorder, a non-voting member. The terms of the council member or mayor and budget committee member shall be for one year each expiring on April 30 of each year; and the terms for the citizens at large shall be for three-year terms, expiring on April 30, or until their respective successors are appointed and qualified. In such a case as both at large positions are filled simultaneously the terms shall be staggered for two and three years. B. In making the appointments, the council shall give preference to persons with accounting or auditing experience, background or expertise. C. Any committee member, other than the city recorder, who is absent, without prior permission from the chair, from two or more meetings in a one-year period shall be considered no longer active and the position vacant, and a new person shall be appointed to complete the term. SECTION 3. Quorum and Rules. Three voting members shall constitute a quorum. The committee shall establish rules for its meetings and shall meet at least semi-annually 111.-------- - (once prior to the onsite audit and once to receive the annual report) and at such other times as may be necessary. SECTION 4. ResDonsibilities. The committee shall be responsible to: A. Recommend to the council an independent firm of certified public accountants, qualified to perform the annual audit of the city. B. Analyze and report to the council significant findings in the annual audit report and make recommendations regarding such findings. C. Make recommendations, if any, to the council regarding the following financial documents: 1. Annual financial statements, 2. Management letter submitted by the independent auditor, 3. Response to management letter submitted by city staff, and 4. Financial Management Policies. D. Review component unit information as necessary in relation to the city's annual financial report and recommendation(s) to be made to council. E. Perform similar duties for the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission as authorized by the Commission. SECTION 5. ReDorts. The committee shall submit copies of minutes of its meetings to the council. Reports or recommendations of the committee shall be considered advisory in nature and shall not be binding on the mayor or city council or Parks Commission. SECTION 6. ReDeal. Resolution No. 2003-07 is repealed. This re lution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this --L day of ,200 and t kes effect signing by the Mayor. #7. arbara Christensen, City Recorder f ,2008. SIGNED and APPROVED this , ~ .11 .------- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Parking Ordinance Amendments September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Richard Appicello Appicelr({~ashland. or. us Megan Thornton 5 minutes Question: Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to Parking Regulations, Allowing Use of Immobilizing Device, Authorizing Towing, Removing Downtown Parking Limitations, Updating and Correcting Parking Processes and Procedures, Amending AMC Sections 11.08.080, 11.28.060, 11.28.080, 11.28.090, and 11.28.110, and Repealing AMC Chapter 11.30 and AMC Section 2.28.215" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of First Reading by title only and move the Ordinance on to Second Reading set for September 16,2008. Background: The finance department requested review of the parking ordinance to determine if the process of collecting parking fees was an efficient means of collecting paYments. While the ordinance was under review the City formed a Downtown Task Force to evaluate a number of concerns in the downtown district. During those meetings, employee parking was also discussed. Some of the changes which arose out of the legal department's review and the downtown task meetings include: · Both Ashland Municipal Court and Diamond Parking have authority to send past due fines to a collection agency (See 11.24.100), · Timelines for valid appeals are stated (See 11.24.100). · An exemption was added for vehicles of state agencies and vehicles with valid delivery or construction permits (See 11.24.090), · Use of an immobilization device and towing is authorized (See 11.24.110), and · Issuance of a warning letter is possible before a show cause order is issued (See 11.24.110). Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions Council Options: (1) Move to approve First Reading and continue the matter to September 16, 2008 for Second Reading. (2) Postpone consideration. Page 1: 09-02-08 Parking ordinance 1Ir.. .11 CITY OF ASHLAND Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct First Reading of Ordinance by Title only] Council: Motion to approve First Reading and set Second Reading for September 16, 2008. Attachments: 1) Proposed ordinance 2) Repealed sections Page 2: 09-02-08 Parking ordinance 1Ir~. CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Parking Ordinance Amendments September 2, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: None Secondary Contact: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Richard Appicello Appicelr((vashland. or .us Megan Thornton 5 minutes Question: Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to Parking Regulations, Allowing Use of Immobilizing Device, Authorizing Towing, Removing Downtown Parking Limitations, Updating and Correcting Parking Processes and Procedures, Amending AMC Sections 11.08.080, 11.28.060, 11.28.080, 11.28.090, and 11.28.110, and Repealing AMC Chapter 11.30 and AMC Section 2.28.215" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approval of First Reading by title only and move the Ordinance on to Second Reading set for September 16,2008. Background: The finance department requested review of the parking ordinance to determine if the process of collecting parking fees was an efficient means of collecting paYments. While the ordinance was under review the City formed a Downtown Task Force to evaluate a number of concerns in the downtown district. During those meetings, employee parking was also discussed. Some of the changes which arose out of the legal department's review and the downtown task meetings include: · Both Ashland Municipal Court and Diamond Parking have authority to send past due fines to a collection agency (See 11.24.100), · Timelines for valid appeals are stated (See 11.24.100). · An exemption was added for vehicles of state agencies and vehicles with valid delivery or construction permits (See 11.24.090), · Use of an immobilization device and towing is authorized (See 11.24.110), and · Issuance of a warning letter is possible before a show cause order is issued (See 11.24.110). Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions Council Options: (1) Move to approve First Reading and continue the matter to September 16,2008 for Second Reading. (2) Postpone consideration. Page 1: 09-02-08 Parking ordinance 1r~1I m T CITY OF ASHLAND Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct First Reading of Ordinance by Title only] Council: Motion to approve First Reading and set Second Readingfor September 16,2008. Attachments: 1) Proposed ordinance 2) Repealed sections Page 2: 09-02-08 Parking ordinance irA. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PARKING REGULATIONS, ALLOWING USE OF IMMOBILIZING DEVICE, AUTHORIZING TOWING, REMOVING DOWNTOWN PARKING LIMITATIONS, UPDATING AND CORRECTING PARKING PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES, AMENDING AMC SECTIONS 11.08.080, 11.28.060, 11.28.080, 11.28.090, AND 11.28.110, AND REPEALING AMC CHAPTER 11.30 AND AMC SECTION 2.28.215. Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold . and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, City processes and procedures concerning parking regulations are in need of clarification; and WHEREAS, the City would like to remove downtown employee parking restrictions in lieu of voluntary parking measures by downtown employers relative to their employees; and WHEREAS, the City would like to authorize the installation of an immobilizing device on vehicles and towing of vehicles in certain circumstances for persons with specified levels of unpaid parking violations, and WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide more process and procedures before resulting to issuance of a warrant in the case of parking violations. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. Section 2.28.215 [Municipal Judge - Parking Violations] is hereby repealed. SECTION 2. Chapter 11.30[Downtown Parking District] is hereby repealed. SECTION 3. Section 11.08.080 [Block] is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.08.080 Block A seament of a street bounded by consecutive cross streets or intersectina streets and includina its buildinas and inhabitants, The land surrounded by streets and other right of '/Jay other than an alley, or land which is designated as a block on any recorded subdivision map. SECTION 4. Section 11.24.100 [Collections; Enhanced Penalties; Appeals] is hereby added to read as follows: 11.24.100 Collections: Enhanced Penalties: Appeals. The Municipal Judae or City contracted parkina enforcement provider is authorized to assian any and all unpaid parkina violations to a collection aaency or aaencies for collection of the penalty provided for such violations. The penalties for parkina violations as provided in the Ashland Municipal Ordinance Amending AMC Parking Regulations: First Reading 09-02-08 Page 1 of6 Code shall be enhanced in each case when the defendant fails to appear or post bail within the time reauired by the citation as follows: A.When the defendant fails to appear or post bail within ten (10) days of the due date thereof. the penalty shall increase by Ten Dollars ($10.00l. B. When the defendant fails to appear or post bail within thirty (30) days of the due date thereof. the penalty shall increase by Thirty Dollars ($30.00l. C. When the defendant fails to appear or post bail within fifty (50) days of the due date thereof. the penalty shall increase by Fifty Dollars ($50.00). A defendant who fails to appear or post bail within the time reauired by the parkina citation or penalty enhancement waives any obiection. and cannot contest or appeal the initial parkina violation or penalty enhancement previously imposed. Any fines or penalty enhancements that have not been paid to the contracted parkina enforcement provider shall be deemed a debt owed by the defendant to the city. Any person that continues to owe money to the city for more than 50 days under the provisions of this chapter may be submitted to a collection aaency by the contracted parkina enforcement provider. Notwithstandina any other remedy provided in this code. includina immobilization. towina or warrant. a default iudament may be taken by the Court followina any failure to appear or penalty enhancement and the matter referred to a collection aaency. SECTION 5. Section 11.24.090 [Exemption] is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.24.090 Exemption The provisions of this chapter Chapters 11.24 and 11.28 regulating the parking or standing of vehicles shall not apply to a vehicle of a State Aaencv, City department or public utility necessarily in use for construction or repair work, or to a vehicle with a Special Permit for Delivery. Maintenance or Construction or to a vehicle owned by the United States while in use for the collection, transportation, or delivery of the United States mail. SECTION 6. Section 11.24.095 [Special Permit for Delivery, Maintenance or Construction] is hereby added to read as follows: 11.24.095 Special Permit for Delivery. Maintenance or Construction A. Loadina and unloadina of vehicles shall be permitted as provided in the Ashland Municipal Code. B. A Special Permit may be aranted by the City Administrator. or desianee. when substantial evidence is submitted that demonstrates that an exemption from the two or four hour time limits for parkina is necessary based on the size or complexity of a delivery or for the safe and convenient placement of construction. repair or maintenance vehicles adiacent to a construction. proiect or iob site. Ordinance Amending AMC Parking Regulations: First Reading 09-02-08 Page 2 of6 C. The Special Permit must be prominentlv displaved in the vehicle while parked in the restricted Darkina area. Vehicles disDlavina the SDecial Permit shall be exempt from the Drovisions of Section 11.24 and 11.28 concernina two or four hour parkina limitations. but must abide bv all other traffic and Darkina reaulations. includina loadina zone Darkina time limits. SECTION 7. Section 11.28.080 [Violation - Penalties] is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.28.080 Parkina Violation - Prohibition Penalties A Darkina infraction violation is a violation of any parkina prohibition. limitation or reaulation of the City of Ashland. A vehicle parked in violation of this chapter shall have a notice of violation attached to the vehicle and the owner or operator of the vehicle shall be subject to the penalties provided in Section 1.08.020 and this chapter, and may be subject to the impounding of such vehicle as provided in Chapter 11.36. A Derson who commits a parkina infraction violation may not suffer any disabilitv or leaal disadvantaae based upon conviction of a crime. SECTION 8. Section 11.28.110 [Fines for parking infractions and warrants of arrest] is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.28.110 FiRes Penalties for parking infractions violations: immobilization. towina. and show cause and warrants of arrest It. parking infraction is a violation of any parking prohibition, limitation or regulation of the City of Ashland. It.. person ...:ho commits a parking infraction may not suffer any disability or legal disad'Jantage based upon conviction of 3 crime, and, the penalty shall be limited to a fine not to exceed $150. Provided, hOlJ:e'Jer, a person '::ho commits three or four parking infractions in any calendar year shall pay an additional fine of $25 and a person v:ho commits five or more parking infractions in any calendar year shall pay an additional fine of $50. In the trial of a person charged '-'"lith a parking infraction, neither the defendant nor the City of J\shland shall be entitled to trial by jury. If a person cited for a parking infraction fails to appear any time fixed by the Court, a ,-"arrant for the arrest of such person may be issued. A. Fine. Fines shall include the oriainal ticketed amount as well as any enhanced penalties. In addition. a person who commits three or four parkina violations in any calendar year shall pav an additional fine of $25. and a person who commits five or more Darkina violations in any calendar year shall Dav an additional fine of $50 for each five Darkina violations they receive in that year. B. Immobilizer (boot) Installation and lor Towina. (1) When a driver. reaistered owner. or Derson in charae of a motor vehicle has either (1) five or more outstandina unpaid City of Ashland parkina violations on any number of motor vehicles. or (2) Ordinance Amending AMC Parking Regulations: First Reading 09-02-08 Page 3 of6 a City of Ashland parkino violation. or any number of such violations. with a total unpaid balance that exceeds $250. reQardless of the number of motor vehicles involved. then any police or parkino enforcement officer. or contracted parkinQ enforcement provider of the City is authorized. directed and empowered to immobilize such a motor vehicle or vehicles found upon a public street or city off-street parkino lot bv installino on or attachino to the motor vehicle a device desioned to restrict the normal movement of the vehicle. In the alternative. or in addition to immobilization. after 24 hours has elapsed. any police or Darkino enforcement officer or contracted Darkino enforcement provider of the City is authorized. directed and empowered to order such vehicle towed. bva licensed tow comDanv under contract with the City or the City's contracted Darkino enforcement service Drovider. as aDPlicable. (2) For Durposes of this section. bail or fine shall be outstandino on a citation when the citation is issued and shall remain outstandino until the bail is posted or the fine is paid. (3) Ten days before immobilizino or towino a vehicle accordino to the Drovisions of this section. the City. or the City's contracted Darkino enforcement service provider shall Dlace a notice on the vehicle or mail a notice bv certified mail. return receiDt reQuested. to the reQistered owner of such vehicle as shown bv the records of the Oreoon Motor Vehicles Division notifyinQ the owner that the motor vehicle or vehicles may be immobilized andlor towed ten days after the date of mailino the notice herein for failure to pav outstandinQ Darkino bail or fines. (4) If the vehicle is so immobilized. the person who installs or attaches the device shall consDicuouslv affix to the vehicle a written notice on a form approved bv the city. advisino the owner. driver. or Derson in charoe of the vehicle that it has been immobilized pursuant to this section and that release of the vehicle may be obtained upon full payment of the outstandino balance owed to the contracted parkino enforcement service Drovider. The notice shall also sDecify that the vehicle is subiect to tow. (5) In the event the vehicle is towed. the person who orders the tow. shall send bv certified mail. return receiDt reQuested. a notice advisino the reoistered owner of the vehicle that it has been towed Dursuant to this section and that release of the vehicle may be obtained upon receipt bv the towino comDanv of full payment of the outstandino balance owed. (6) A vehicle towed and impounded Dursuant to this section shall be held at the eXDense of the owner or person entitled to possession of the vehicle. Personnel. eQuipment and facilities of Drivate tow companies under contract with the City or the contracted Darkino enforcement service Drovider may be used for the removal and storaQe of the vehicle. C. Warnino Letter. Show Cause. and Warrants. Ordinance Amending AMC Parking Regulations: First Reading 09-02-08 Page 4 of6 ----nr-T (1) Warnino Letter. The Ashland Municipal Court may choose to send a warnino letter bv first class mail informina the defendant they have outstandinQ parkino tickets and that their attendance is necessary at a Dreliminary hearino before issuinQ a show cause order and warrant. (2) Show Cause. The Ashland MuniciDal Court may issue an order that reQuires the defendant to aPDear and show cause why the defendant should not be held in contemDt of court. includinQ contempt for failure to appear as ordered or failure to complv. The show cause order shall be mailed to the defendant bv certified mail. return receiDt reQuested. no less than ten days Drior to the aPDearance date: alternativelv service may be made bv any other recoQnized method. such as personal service accordino to the same timeframe.. (3) Warrant. If the defendant is served and fails to aDPear at the time specified in the show cause order. the court may issue an arrest warrant for the defendant for the DurDose of brinaino the defendant before the court. SECTION 9. Section 11.28.060 [City Parking Lot] is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.28.060 City Parking Lot Parking in the parking lot owned by the City immediately adjacent to the public library, which is on the southwest corner of Gresham Street and East Main Street, is limited to two hours except that employees of the public library may park for a longer period of time in the spaces presently designated as employee parking spaces. SECTION 10. Section 11.28.120 [Parking Fine Surcharge] is hereby added to read as follows: 11.28.120 Parkino Fine Surcharoe There shall be a surcharoe of four-dollars ($4.00) on all Darkino citations issued within the City of Ashland. All revenues received shall be seoreoated and used onlv for meetino debt service on bonds issued for Darkino imDrovements. leases. andlor future parkino imDrovements and studies. SECTION 11. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 12. Savinos. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions Ordinance Amending AMC Parking Regulations: First Reading 09-02-08 Page 5 of6 commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 13. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (Le. Sections 11-13) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Ordinance Amending AMC Parking Regulations: First Reading 09-02-08 Page 60f6 Sections Repealed By Parking Ordinance 2.28.215 Municipal Judge--Parking Violations The Municipal Judge is authorized to assign any and all parking violations issued to persons residing outside the City limits of Ashland to a collection agency or agencies for collection of the penalty provided for such violations. The penalties for parking violations as provided in the Ashland Municipal Code shall be enhanced in each case when the defendant fails to appear or post bail within the time required by the citation as follows: A. When the defendant fails to appear or post bail within seven (7) days of the due date thereof, the penalty shall increase by Ten Dollars ($10.00). B. When the defendant fails to appear or post bail within thirty (30) days of the due date thereof, the penalty shall increase by Thirty Dollars ($30.00). C. When the defendant fails to appear or post bail within. fifty (50) days of the due date thereof, the penalty shall increase by Fifty Dollars ($50.00). (Ord. 2047, 1979) 11.30 Downtown Parking District 11.30.010 Downtown Parking District - Established A Downtown Parking District which shall encompass the shaded areas depicted on the attached map marked Exhibit :A: and all on-street timed parking spaces and public timed parking facilities within the Downtown Commercial District, Zoned C-I-D. (Ord 2460 S4, 1988; Ord 2519 SI & S2, 1989; 2684, 1992) 11.30.020 Duration and Effect A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, no person shall, while at such person's place of employment, educational or non-profit institution, cause any motor vehicle owned, operated or controlled by that person to be parked in anyone or more parking spaces upon a public street or timed off-street parking facility within the Downtown Parking District, described in Section 11.30.010, between the dates of May 1 and September 30, and between the hours of8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on any day except Sunday and legal holidays. Motorcycles parked in designated parking spaces shall be exempted from this Title. B. Subsection A of this section shall not apply to any person parking in the Hargardine Parking Facility. 11.30.030 Special Permits for Loading, Unloading, and Delivery A. Loading and unloading of vehicles shall be permitted as provided in the Ashland Municipal Code. B. A Special Vehicle Permit may be granted by the City Administrator when substantial evidence is submitted that shows that the permit is necessary for frequent delivery and pick-up which is vital to the normal operation of the business, education, or non-profit institution. In the case of real estate offices, up to four (4) such permits may be issued to the office for use by the broker or the licensed 090208 Parking Ordinance.atchl.doc Page 1 of2 sales persons. In no case shall more permits than the number of sales persons on the largest shift be issued. C. The Special Vehicle Permit must be prominently displayed in the vehicle while parked in the Downtown Parking District. Vehicles displaying the Special Vehicle Permit shall be exempt from the provisions of Section 11.30.020, but must abide by all other traffic and parking regulations, including parking time limits. D. The Special Vehicle Permit shall not be valid on North Main Street or East Main Street in the Downtown Parking District. (Ord 2507 S2, 1989) 11.30.040 Downtown Parking Utility Fee A. There is hereby imposed a fee on all users of City electric utilities in the Downtown Parking District. Such fee shall be one dollar ($1.00) each month for each parking space required by the utility user, but not provided on private property. B. Uses shall not be considered vacant unless the electric service is disconnected. C. Estimates of parking requirements shall be determined by the data and procedures contained in the Off-Street Parking Chapter of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance, Section 18.92, regardless of whether the zoning of a particular lot requires off street parking be provided. D. In the case of private parking shared among several users, and in the absence of written agreements to the contrary, private parking shall be allocated on a pro-rata basis to the users of the parking. E. All revenues received from said fee shall be segregated and be used only for meeting debt service on bonds issued for parking improvements, leases, and/or future parking improvements and studies. (Ord 2496, 1989 - Effective June 1, 1989, Terminate Jan. 1,2000) 11.30.045 Parking Fine Surcharge There shall be a surcharge of two dollars ($2.00) on all parking citations issued within the Downtown Parking District. All revenues received shall be segregated and used only for meeting debt service on bonds issued for parking improvements, leases, and/or future parking improvements and studies. (Ord 2507 S3, 1989) 11.30.050 Violation - Penalties Any person parking in violation of the provisions of this Chapter shall receive a written warning for the first violation. Each violation and conviction thereafter, shall carry a fine of not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for the first conviction, nor more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for the second conviction, and not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00) for the third conviction and every conviction thereafter. Any person, business, or institution affected by this Chapter who fails to comply with the requirements herein, shall be guilty of an infraction and punished as provided in Chapter 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. (Ord 2377, 1986) 090208 Parking Ordinance.atchl.doc Page 2 of2