City Council (View All)
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
March 15, 2011
1175 E. Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Silbiger, and Chapman were present. Councilor Slattery was absent.
Mayor Stromberg noted a request from the Ashland Gun Club to move the agenda item to a later meeting.
Councilor Chapman/Lemhouse m/s to extend three month contract and continue item until the May 3, 2011 meeting. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Chapman, YES; Councilor Voisin and Silbiger, NO. Motion passed 3-2.
SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS?
The minutes of the Study Session of February 28, 2011, Regular Meeting of March 1, 2011 and Executive Session of March 4 and 5, 2011 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Does Council have any questions regarding the annual RVCOG presentation by Michael Cavallaro?
Michael Cavallaro provided a financial overview of the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG), steps taken to remain cost effective and specific projects RVCOG was doing for the Ashland.
1. Does Council wish to approve the minutes of the Boards, Commissions, and Committees?
3. Does Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Ken Khosroabadi dba Siskiyou Shell at 1515 Siskiyou Blvd.?
4. Does Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Carolyn Kennedy dba Mongo Grill at 1662 Siskiyou Blvd.?
5. Does Council wish to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for a regional Fire Prevention & Safety grant to install fire sprinklers in foster homes in Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas Counties?
6. Does Council wish to accept a grant in the amount of $34,079 from the Department of Homeland Security/ Oregon Emergency Management for the purchase of radio equipment?
7. Does Council wish to approve the application and matching funds for a Fire Prevention & Safety Grant for the Fire Inspection Program for $85,700 of which $8.750 is required as matching funds from the City?
8. Does Council have questions or input regarding the direction and progress of the Water Conservation and Reuse Study and Comprehensive Water Master Plan?
9. Should Council authorize staff to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Oregon Department of Energy for continued participation in the Energy Star program?
Councilor Lemhouse requested that Consent Agenda item #7 be pulled for discussion.
Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1 through #9 with the exception of Consent Agenda item #7. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Division Chief - Fire Marshal Margueritte Hickman explained the training provided to the Fire Inspectors allowed them to inspect two occupancy classifications in the area. The grant would fund a higher inspection level that included all businesses and classifications. The intent was combining the funding for the half time inspector with the income from fire inspection fees to pay for a full time inspector. The grant would cover a half time inspector and .3 full time equivalent clerical position, electronic tablets for inspections and other components for the program. Ideally, the Fire and Rescue Department wanted to bring someone on half time for inspections to augment what the Fire Fighters were currently doing. Fire Chief John Karns added the long-term financial implication was the position would generate half of its compensation costs from the fees generated by inspections and the remainder would come from the department’s budget.
Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #7. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse wanted information on how the position would be funded going forward after the grant.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Voisin, Silbiger and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.
1. Will Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in an 8.5 food wide parcel of land referred to as tax lot 391E4CA-3300?
Engineering Services Manager Jim Olson explained Jackson County quitclaimed an 8.5-foot wide parcel of land to Ashland in 1990. Jackson County acquired the parcel in 1987 through a foreclosure action. Staff thought the action had three errors. One the County erred in the interpretation of Survey #9266 that showed the parcels with two boundaries that were description calls recorded on two separate deeds. The County interpreted it as a deed gap when it was actually an effort by the surveyor to show discrepancies in the description calls. Secondly, Jackson County erred establishing the deed gap as a separate tax lot. The third issue occurred in the notification process. The result was the deed was in error and the parcel should be restored to the original owner.
Public Hearing Open: 7:32 p.m.
Will Hershman/500 Helman Street/Explained he was the property owner, the error reduced his lot size and was a perpetuated injustice. He appreciated staff’s supporting the quitclaim and encouraged Council to approve it as well.
Rick Landt/468 Helman Street/Submitted a petition into the record supporting the quitclaim. He noted in 2000, Garfield Park relinquished a 30–foot wide strip of land to the adjacent property owner to correct the discrepancy. Helman Street property owners were paying taxes on 8.5-feet of property they lacked. Another issue was property owners owning 8.5-feet of their neighbors land. Now that the City was aware they did not have rights to the property, it was their ethical duty to quitclaim the property back to its rightful owner.
John Zaller/757 Oak Street/Owned two pieces of property across Ashland Creek from Tax Lot 3300. The City already had access for the creek trail around one of the properties and he was bequeathing access to the other part in his Will. He thought the City should broaden their review of the situation for potential public value.
Shawn Kampmann/1520 Pinecrest Terrace/Conducted the survey of the property in question and explained there was never a gap of ownership in the block. The error most likely started in the late 1800s and propagated over the years. It was an error by the Tax Assessor’s office and the owner lost 8.5 feet of property that he paid taxes on for years.
Ian Couchman/396 Helman Street/The approval of the petitions request would provide clarification of several property lines including his.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:44 p.m.
Councilor Voisin/Silbiger m/s to approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in Tax Lot 391E4CA-3300. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought it was the ethical action to take and the petition with 15 signatures from surrounding neighbors adequately supported the quitclaim. Councilor Chapman agreed with the quitclaim, added it was important to have a connection through the park, and hoped the neighbors would come up with an alternate solution. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Voisin, Lemhouse and Morris, YES. Motion passed.
2. Does Council approve a request to annex a 3.72 acre parcel consisting of three lots located at 590 Clover Lane and change the Zoning Map designation from Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland E-1 (Employment)?
Mayor Stromberg added “…and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire District 5,” to the question, opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. and read aloud the statement and procedure for Public Land Use Hearings.
ABSTENTIONS, CONFLICTS, EX PARTE CONTACTS
Councilor Chapman had no ex parte communication, conflicts of interest, or bias. Councilor Silbiger had no ex parte contact, bias, or conflict of interest. Councilor Voisin had nothing to declare. Councilor Lemhouse disclosed no ex parte contact but noted he lived near the area and could remain unbiased. Councilor Morris declared no bias or conflict of interest and disclosed a prior conversation with Steve Morjig regarding the property before the planning action existed. Mayor Stromberg declared no ex parte, bias or conflict of interest.
CHALLENGES - None
Associate Planner Derek Severson explained the annexation would allow Caldera Brewing to construct a 28,000-square feet (sf) brewing building and provided a presentation that included:
· Aerial View and Vicinity Map Detail
· Section 18.106.040 Boundaries (ORD 2792): When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City of Ashland. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Commission and Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Planning Commission and Council to make annexations extending the City’s boundaries more logical and orderly.
· Subject Property & Existing City Limits Layout and Staff Recommendation Layout
· Existing Site Conditions and Existing Fill on Subject Properties
Mr. Severson explained the existing fill was significant and posed constraints for the proposed development.
· Aerials and Photos of the Existing Structures and the Pedestrian Connection to Spring Creek Neighborhood Aerial & Photo
· Approved Site Plan and Proposed Revisions
· Approved Landscape Plan and Proposed Revisions
· North Elevation Facing Clover Lane
· Hops as Landscaping Independence Public Library Photo
· East Elevation Facing Spring Creek neighbors
· Down slope Properties
· Looking up from Spring Creek Neighborhood Photo
· South Elevation Facing Truck Turn-Around
· West Elevation Facing the Freeway
· Spring Creek Corridor
· Floor Plan
· Issues Raised by Staff at Planning Commission Hearing:
A. Stronger Sense of Entry – Color rendering provided at hearing was satisfactory
B. The Amount & Extent of Paving – Paving is to be minimized
C. Placement of Parking Circulation Between Building & Street AND Resultant Challenges to Pedestrian Access – Pedestrian crossings from both Clover sidewalks, in scored concrete.
D. Buffering of Property Line to Mitigate Paving & Visual Impacts of Building Mass at a Gateway – Variance granted; stronger landscaping to North and South of driveway area required.
· Modification of PA #2003-112 – Condition #17: “That a ‘Development Agreement’ be prepared by the applicant and recorded on the properties limiting the uses to those which generate total vehicle trips of not more than 100 vehicle trips per parcel or a combined total of approximately 200 vehicle trips, as determined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The final agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the partition plat, issuance of a building permit or final adoption of a resolution annexing the property.”
· Traffic Impact Analysis
o The presently stop-controlled I-5 northbound intersection with Ashland Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio greater than 2.0 under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions.
o 95th percentile queue lengths are shown to exceed link distances and create potential safety concerns on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections and the off ramps themselves under existing year 2010, design year 2011 and future year 2030 conditions.
o Planned mitigation detailed in the analysis includes the ODOT I-5 Exit 14 interchange redesign project which includes traffic signals at both ramp intersections, widening of Ashland Street, and extended right turn lanes on both I-5 off-ramps. This redesign is underway, to be completed in April of 2012.
o With these improvements in place, the TIA concludes that study area intersections are shown to be adequately mitigated throughout the future year planning horizon.
· The Left Turn Issue…
o Planned traffic signal at Exit 14NB may cause back up past intersection making left turns difficult.
o ODOT encourages the City to amend their TSP and identify a planned median improvement or some equivalent mitigation measure that restricts left turn movements at the Ashland Street/Clover Lane intersection. (ODOT 1/10/11/ letter)
o TSP Update is underway and will consider both the left turn restriction and how vehicles are to return to their original direction of travel.
o Planning Commission required an LID agreement from the applicants to participate in these future improvements.
Staff explained there was non-vehicle fire access to Spring Creek and all disturbances from the proposed building were 100-feet from the creek’s centerline. Additionally, the two residential parcels in the annexation did not have street access. The Planning Commission did not include a green road requirement due to applicant concerns with cost and durability. Instead, it required the pavement not to exceed minimum width requirements for truck access.
Council suggested adding fire resistant landscaping to the annexation and possibly asking the applicants to install a fire sprinkler system.
Councilor Chapman/Lemhouse m/s to extend the Public Hearings until 9:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed
Mark Knox/45 West Nevada Street/Urban Development Services/Applicant’s Representative/Jim Mills/540 Clover Lane/CEO Caldera Brewing Company/Mr. Knox explained Caldera Brewery had an existing 6,000sf manufacturing facility but the company was outgrowing the space. The proposed new building was 28,000sf with a small tasting room. The expansion would allow the company to explore new product development, create efficiencies and qualities in products, and improve the working environment for the employees. The site plan was triangular with steep slopes on the east, west and south sides, and Spring Creek towards the south. The existing street dead ends onto the property and that created a situation where the building was manipulated. The building design was utilitarian with resources to make the façade presentable. The applicant agreed with the Planning Commission to extend the sidewalks and create a unique surface element that would recognize the transition from the public street to Caldera Brewery.
They conducted two meetings with the neighborhood and met with two neighbors separately who had not received notice due to the Oak Knoll fire and developed a Letter of Understanding that was included in the packet. Additional funds were set aside for landscaping to fill gaps neighbors might notice. He clarified that item #6 in the Letter of Understanding stated the compressor/cooler would be relocated was incorrect and would remain where it was originally placed. Mr. Mills further clarified the coolers did not make noise but the compressors did and had agreed to remote the coolers under the slab to the I-5 side of the building to reduce the noise.
Mr. Knox referenced pages 17-19 in the Findings of Fact and explained the application met the annexation, the Comprehensive Plan change, and the Map change. At one point, Clover Lane extended to Washington Street and in the late 1990s, was bent to better utilize some of those parcels. In 2000, the decision not to connect Clover Lane with Spring Creek severed the ability and rationality to have it zoned residential. One policy in the Comprehensive Plan actually stated residential development along I-5 was inappropriate. The applicant was relying on those policies and the multiple changes that occurred over time to justify the proposal for the zone and Comprehensive Plan change.
The fill on the property would be removed. The applicant attempted to add trees to the landscape buffer along I-5 but the Oregon Department of Transportation’s (ODOT) policy allows shrubs only on the freeway side and no trees. The applicant was looking into shrubbery and fencing.
The applicant will provide a conservation easement as the condition requires. The improvement would provide a fire hydrant, fire apparatus equipment and multiple emergency service needs in the general area. Trucks would not hinder Fire Department access. The area was 80-feet and designed to accommodate large truck movement. Mr. Knox commented the applicant was asked every step of the process to add conditions and they had. They requested to continue meeting all the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission but were limited on conditions beyond that. They had separated parking areas, drained all impervious water-storm water into two bioswales built by civil workers and the proposed building would meet building code requirements. The building will be used to brew beer, distillation of spirits and non-alcoholic soda production.
Mr. Mills explained he currently had 20 employees at the Caldera Brewery and the Tap House. The first year of the expansion would create 15-18 new jobs and within 2-3 years, that number would total 30.
THOSE WISHING TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY
Bob Robertson/1175 East Main/Was involved in the Clover Lane project since inception, built the Holiday Inn Express, at that time a Denny’s Restaurant and still had properties on Clover Lane. He thought Caldera Brewing was a tremendous product and was delighted they were expanding on Clover Lane. He supported the project for the employment opportunities and added it was a great use of land that otherwise might not be developed. He liked the layout and thought there would be very little noise for the neighbors.
Steve Morjig/610 Chestnut/Supported the project. He was impressed with the detail of the plan, the consideration of the space, neighbors, and landscape. He appreciated how the Planning Commission resolved the issue of having a 5-foot buffer on the 40-foot road for the bigger trucks. He talked to Knife River regarding permeable surfaces and green streets would not work with the heavy trucks Caldera Brewing was expecting. Overall, he thought this was a clean industry and fit the mold.
Drew Bailey/455 North Laurel Street/Spoke in support of the plan and asked the Council to approve the annexation. He thought Caldera Brewing was a great model for economic development within Ashland. It was a good clean business providing numerous great products and will provide 30 new jobs. Additionally it will attract visitors to that end of town. There was a growing wine industry and now a growing brewing and non-alcoholic beverage industry. The project was a win-win for Ashland and the businesses around that area would benefit as well as the community regarding new jobs.
Larry Holzgang/673 Market Street, Medford/Explained he was the Business Development Officer for the State of Oregon’s Business Development Department and supported the action. The Department’s mission was to help strengthen the economy in Oregon and create jobs for residents and this project would go towards that endeavor.
Andrew Reinholz/ Harvey Reinholz at 795 Oak Knoll Drive/Linda and Richard Hood at 785 Oak Knoll Drive/City Recorder Barbara Christensen read into the record a statement opposing the proposed annexation zone change and site design for Caldera Brewery based on the following violations of city building codes: Section 18.40.040 (C), 18.68.030, 18.80.020 (9) and 18.76.060. They were currently in negotiation with Caldera Brewery and working with the building planner Mark Knox on an agreement to improve their exposure of the brewery. If the agreement were successful, they would remove these objections.
REBUTTAL BY APPLICANT
Mr. Knox clarified the coolers will remain as designed on the latest plans referenced in the agreement with the Letter of Understanding, only the compressors were relocating to the I-5 freeway side of the building.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED – 8:53 p.m.
3. Will Council increase Water Utility Rates 10% including the potable water irrigation surcharge during summer months and increase Wastewater Rates 6% with a combined, average monthly impact (excluding irrigation) on a single-family residence of $4.29 per month?
Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained that revenues from last year’s 8% increase in the Water Fund revenues were flat due to the wet season and how the increase to the Wastewater Fund resulted from the sewer increasing 6.7%. The sewer fund improved but the Water Fund had not.
Both funds included tremendous amounts of money spent on Debt Service, Capital Improvements, and general operations. The Water Fund rate structure required some fixed costs be paid through the variable rate water sales. Both funds were undergoing Master Plans to look at ongoing needs and implications on future rates. If water sales lacked in the Water Fund, revenue would not generate to pay for needed projects that help spend down the Ending Fund Balance. Extending the Food and Beverage Tax helped pay for most of the Debt Service in the Wastewater Fund. Additionally, refinancing the Wastewater DEQ loan improved conditions so tax revenues may pay for the Debt Service itself and possibly generate a surplus for the unfunded list of outstanding projects.
Water Debt Service was used for infrastructure and previously financed projects. Currently there was a $900,000 difference of what should be there and what actually was. If no action were taken, the City would continue to eat into reserves that did not exist. There was $700,000 in Debt Services as fixed costs that did not cover outstanding projects that were necessary. Waiting another year for the Master Plans would reduce funds to negative $800,000.
Public Hearing Open: 9:04 p.m.
Ron Corallo/805 Indiana Street/Explained residents paid more for water whether they conserved or consumed too much. Fuel costs and living expenses were going up for everyone. He went on to describe the affect on his lawn from not watering it the previous year to avoid a high water bill. There had to be a different solution and suggested individual allotments instead of tiers. The increase hurt citizens and most people did not receive annual 6%-10% salary increases.
Public Hearing Closed: 9:07 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - continued
Does Council approve a request to annex a 3.72 acre parcel consisting of three lots located at 590 Clover Lane and change the Zoning Map designation from Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland E-1 (Employment)?
ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF
Mr. Severson explained the applicants would submit the Letter of Understanding as a proposed condition on their action.
Councilor Lemhouse/Silbiger m/s to approve the request for Annexation and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately 3.72-acre parcel located at 590 Cover Lane and the adjacent ODOT right-of-way and tax lot #7100 as recommend by staff with the attached conditions outlined in the Letter of Understanding between the neighbors surrounding the proposed property and the applicant. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse requested that staff further clarify the issue brought up in point 6 in the Letter of Understanding regarding the coolers and compressors. The project provided jobs and economic growth and would allow better management of the land and safety to surrounding neighborhoods. Councilor Silbiger also supported the action. It was Council’s duty to look at the annexation portion and in this case, the proposed use matched what Council wanted for the property. Councilor Morris added with access closed on Clover Lane, this use was one of the few that would work on the property. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Chapman, Lemhouse, Silbiger and Morris, YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - continued
Will Council increase Water Utility Rates 10% including the potable water irrigation surcharge during summer months and increase Wastewater Rates 6% with a combined, average monthly impact (excluding irrigation) on a single-family residence of $4.29 per month?
Councilor Silbiger/Morris m/s to approve Resolution #2011-08. DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger acknowledged no one wanted to raise rates and staff had done everything possible to keep expenses low. If rates were not raised in the Water Fund and there were no interfund loans, the fund would go below zero. Restructuring rates in the future would not change the cost of the water system and staff would continue to work on lowering rates. Both funds had put off critical projects. Councilor Chapman was concerned about rates increasing annually, the burden it put on the citizens and would not support the rate increase. Councilor Voisin confirmed the rate increase was due to not selling enough water during the previous summer and rates could lower if the City sold enough water and remained in compliance with System Development Charges for ongoing operations. Councilor Lemhouse would regrettably support the increase but wanted the City to make changes on they managed funds and prioritized spending. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Morris and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Chapman and Voisin, NO. Motion passed 3-2.
Councilor Morris/Silbiger m/s to approve Resolution #2011-09 revising rates for Wastewater Service. DISCUSSION: Councilor Morris was concerned there would be curtailed usages by people from costs. He understood avoiding the long-term capital cost but eventually the City will be unable to generate revenues this way. Councilor Voisin questioned raising rates when the fund was in better shape. Mr. Tuneberg explained that in addition to restricted monies the City could not use, there was Debt Service payments and operational costs to cover as well as unfunded projects. If the Food and Beverage Tax revenue continues to grow there will be surpluses for Capital Improvements but that would not cover the other issues. Ms. Bennett added the Wastewater Fund had a negative $50,000 even with the rate increase. Waiting until the Wastewater Master Plan was complete would cause the City to use state restricted reserves for operating costs. Councilor Silbiger explained the Master Plans and rate studies would not change the numbers, only who paid for them. Ms. Bennett further explained the Water Master Plan will restructure rates but the Wastewater Master Plan will not change the concepts behind sewer rate structure. Mayor Stromberg added there were Capital Improvement projects for both systems deferred for at least two years and deferring them further would increase costs. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, Morris, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed.
Aaron Fletcher/ Mr. Fletcher shared that there are plants that do not use much water and provide benefits.
He continued by stating 10 reasons why Community Service was better than an Exclusionary Law.
1) Saves allocated budget funds, cleaning and maintaining restrooms, picking up litter, gardening;
2) Community members benefit directly by having a cleaner community;
3) Builds self-worth in the people performing Community Service and self-confidence;
4) Investing in Community Service builds a sense of ownership and future responsibility and results in less littering;
5) Those doing Community Service are a visual reminder to behave lawfully for the rest of the community;
6) Is a positive example for the rest of the community, picking up litter is contagious;
7) Is a reminder to those needing to complete their Community Service and due dates for fines are easy to forget;
8) Gives employers a preview of work ethic;
9) Keeps energy 100% local and
10) Inclusion is a more positive and peaceful term and would likely increase tourism than an exclusionary law.
Shahe Catranides/321 Clay Street/#26/Explained how the brain reacts to inclusion and exclusion regarding the inclusionary prospect and proposed exclusionary zone. Negative reinforcement and punishment stimulates the fear center of the brain and lower thinking in the cerebellum causing a fight or flight response. Punishment then becomes associated with common places and common behaviors. Positive reinforcement accesses the positive parts of the brain and releases pleasure neurotransmitters. Community Service is associated with the rewards of feeling good, the reward becomes implicit, and then people want to do things to feel good. Positive reinforcements have been proven more effective than negative reinforcement. An inclusion zone would develop sustainable community, be reward based, and provide a place for the homeless to eat, sleep, and use restrooms and possibly showers. The inclusion could include fire reduction by working in correlation with local forest restoration projects. She questioned if classist profiling was as bad as racial profiling and reiterated the mind reacts better to inclusion than exclusion.
Emery Way/Submitted into the record a Community Proposal on homelessness written by community members and students. The constituency wanted to influence the writing, approval, or disapproval of any ordinances pertaining to the homeless written for the April 5, 2011 meeting. They were confident in the Council and community to come up with positive and inclusive solutions to the homeless issues and create a solution that builds the community instead of divides them. Citizens could see this issue as an obstacle or an opportunity to build better community and must endeavor to pursue the latter.
1. Does Council wish to approve an order authorizing a lease of real property to the Ashland Gun Club?
Item delayed until the May 3, 2011 Council meeting.
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, “An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Physical and Environmental Constraints (Chapter 18.62), and incorporating necessary changes based on the adoption of the Flood Insurance Study for Jackson County Oregon and incorporated areas, and accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps” and approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, “An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Flood Damage Prevention Regulations (Chapter 15.10), adopting by reference the revised Flood Insurance Study for Jackson County Oregon and incorporated areas, and accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps”?
Senior Planner Brandon Goldman explained staff recommended striking one of the definitions in Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit Section Chapter 18.62.030 (H): “Any manmade change to improved or unimproved real estate within the area, a special flood hazard as defined within Chapter 15.10.” It was originally proposed to be included for consistency between Chapters 15 and 18 in terms of what constitutes development within the flood plain. The language could be misinterpreted to include improvements such as re-roofing or landscaping changes. Staff proposed adding a new Section 3 to Chapter 18.62.040 (Approval and Permit Required) (A) that would amend the paragraph and in the first sentence replace 19.62.030.E with 19.62.030.H for indexing and add the following sentence: “In addition all activities located within an area of special flood hazard are subject to the provisions for a Development Permit under 15.10 Flood Damage and Prevention Regulations.” A change to Section 3 Chapter 18.62.040 (Approval and Permit Required) (B) would replace 18.62.030.T with 18.62.030.Z.
Councilor Voisin/Silbiger m/s to approve Ordinance #3046 Amending Chapter 15.10.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Voisin, Lemhouse, Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-1.
Councilor Voisin/Silbiger m/s to approve Ordinance #3045 Amending Chapter 18.62 with revisions.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Voisin, Lemhouse, Morris, and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.
ITEM ADDED TO AGENDA
1. Does Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Christie Chiang dba Taroka at 62 E Main Street?
Councilor Morris/Silbiger m/s to approve the Liquor License application. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John Stromberg, Mayor