text:
City Council (View All)
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
1175 E. Main Street
Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
Councilor Voisin, Navickas, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. Councilor Lemhouse arrived late.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mayor Stromberg announced the passing of past City Councilor Steve Hauck, noted the extraordinary service he provided to the community and held a moment of silence in his honor.
Mayor Stromberg went on to announce vacancies on the Housing Commission, Planning Commission, Public Arts Commission, Tree Commission and the annual appointment process for the Citizen Budget Committee. The deadline for applications for the Citizen Budget Committee was November 5, 2010.
Consent Agenda item "3. Will the Council Confirm the Mayor's committee member selection for the Ashland Stormwater Advisory Committee (SWAC) and the Ashland Wastewater Advisory Committee (WWAC) for each of the respective Master Plan updates?" was moved to the October 19, 2010 Council meeting.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Mayor's Proclamation titles of October 1 - 16 as Mayors United Helping Feed Our Communities, October 4 - 10 as Welcome SOU Students Week, October 7 - 10 as Ashland Elk's Building Centennial Weekend, October as Community Planning Month, October 3 – 9 as Mental Illness Awareness Week and October 1 – 8 as Oregon Days of Culture titles were read aloud.
1. Does the City Council wish to affirm, reverse, modify or remand back to the Planning Commission the decision to approve a wireless communication facility installation on the Ashland Street Cinema building at 1644 Ashland Street?
Special legal counsel for City of Ashland Chris Crean was introduced.
Mayor Stromberg called the Public Hearing to order at 7:10 p.m. and proceeded to explain the conduct of the hearing. Mr. Crean read the following four issues identified in the appeal:
1. Failure to meet Conditional Use Permit Criteria pertaining to adverse material effects on livability within the impact area when compared to the target use;
2. Failure to provide collocation study and meet design standards criteria for collocation and to comply with the general provisions of the Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance;
3. Failure to Provide a Lease with Application; and
4. Failure to meet criteria for Administrative Variance.
Councilor Chapman/Voisin m/s to extend Public Hearing until 9:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
ABSTENTIONS, CONFLICTS, EX PARTE CONTACTS
Councilor Chapman stated that he had read news articles and emails from citizens. He had discussions with citizens in regards to the appeal process, but not the content of the appeal. He viewed a small part of the Planning Commission's video regarding the final decision, announced a site visit and declared no bias or conflict of interest.
Councilor Silbiger declared a potential conflict of interest in that he lives within 1,000 feet of the proposed application and was in the second group of mail notifications. He is familiar with the proposed site and surroundings and has general familiarity with impacts to traffic and general knowledge of previous cell tower applications. He did not believe this biased him and was confident he could make a fair decision. In terms of ex parte contact, he received emails and general media information, nothing applicable to the appeal. He had also done general site visits on a regular basis.
Councilor Jackson had minimal exposure to newspapers articles. She did not attend any meetings relating to the cell tower, had frequented the area when attending the movie theater but did not make a specific site visit. She declared no conflict of interest and could serve in the proceeding without bias.
Councilor Navickas noted interactions with citizens regarding the appeal and was consistently clear this was a judicial decision and he remained impartial and did not express bias. He had no conflicts of interest, did make a site visit, was familiar with site, used adjacent businesses regularly and could make an unbiased decision.
Councilor Voisin ignored newspaper articles regarding the subject and emails received. She did not do a site visit and had no conversations with citizens on the matter. She was without bias and could make an unbiased judgment.
Mayor Stromberg explained he had ignored the subject, refused to speak to anyone about the appeal, and had no ex parte, bias or conflict of interest to declare.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the request was a Land Use application to install a rooftop wireless communication facility (WCF) at the Ashland Cinema site. It involved 12 architecturally integrated panel antennas into a new front façade element. The Planning Commission approved the application with a 5-1 vote after two Planning Commissioners stepped down and could not participate in an impartial manner. This was the first appeal filed to the Council on record. He reiterated no new evidence could be presented, the public notice sent identified the four issues raised on the appeal and speakers qualified to speak were limited to address those issues only. He introduced Associate Planner Derek Severson who provided an overview of the application previously presented and in the record that included:
Telecommunications Act of 1996
No discrimination among providers.
No passing laws or taking actions that prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting wireless service.
No regulating of wireless based on environmental concerns about radio frequency emissions if the facility will operate within FCC standards.
Must act on siting requests in a reasonable period of time.
Mist issue zoning denials in writing, supported by substantial evidence and findings contained in the a written record.
Mr. Severson confirmed State Law considered a reasonable period as 120-days with another 120-day requirement under Federal Law for wireless facility starting the day the application was complete. The deadline was October 29, 2010 and the City had received two 30-day extensions from the applicant during the application process.
Ashland's Ordinance
Regulates the placement, appearance and visual impacts of WCF's while providing residents the ability to utilize wireless services.
Indentifies preferred designs:
collocation,
pre-existng structures,
alternative structures,
mono-pole.
· Lattice towers are prohibited.
· Mitigate visual impacts through architectural integration; placement in the area of site with least visual impact while allowing functionality; non-reflective finish & color.
· Setback from residential zones at least twice the height of the installation.
· Limits exterior lighting and signage.
· Requires landscape buffer for primary and accessory equipment located on the ground & visible from a residential use or public right-of-way. Drought resistant plantings, security fence or wall at least six feet high, ten-foot landscape buffer, canopy trees.
Photos of Existing Installations in Ashland and contrasts
Vicinity Map
Zoning in the Vicinity Map
Site Plan Map
Proposed Installation Photos
Elevations – Front & Side
Elevations – Side & Rear
Administrative Variance Photo
Proposed Accessory Building Photos
Aerial Vicinity Map
Mr. Severson confirmed the new accessory shed behind the building would not interfere with the loading dock. There must be a 12-foot clearance access and a 16-foot clear width for fire access consistent with City alley standards.
Grounds for Appeal
Failure to meet Conditional Use Permit Criteria pertaining to adverse material effects on livability within the impact area when compared to the target use;
Failure to provide collocation study and meet design standards criteria for collocation and to comply with the general provisions of the municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance;
Failure to Provide a Lease with Application; and
Failure to meet criteria for Administrative Variance to the landscape buffer for the ground mounted WCF equipment structure.
Mr. Severson clarified only two applications had gone through the approval process as wireless communications facilities (WCFs) and the narrow definition in terms of the presentation represented that fact. Mr. Crean provided further clarification and read the definition of Wireless Communication Facilities in the code under 18.72.020(H) as "The site, structures, equipment and appurtenances used to transmit, receive, distribute, provide or offer wireless telecommunications services. This includes, but is not limited to antennas, poles, towers, cables, wires, conduits, ducts, pedestals, vaults, buildings, electronics and switching equipment."
Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 7:42 p.m.
ABSTENTIONS, CONFLICTS, EX PARTE CONTACTS Cont'd.
Councilor Lemhouse declared no ex parte contacts, no biases or conflicts of interest, any site visits were related to attending the movie theater.
Council and staff discussed the appropriate method for biased challenges. Staff explained the procedure restricted individuals to testifying only on written testimony already submitted into the record and limited the people who could be involved. Mr. Crean added in regards to written versus oral in the cause of judicial context was a distinction without a difference. Once it was made in oral testimony, the biased challenge became part of the record. If the decision was appealed, the biased challenge could be raised on appeal.
Mr. Severson confirmed the height at the peak of the tower on the building would be 40 feet.
Appellant – Chris Hearn/515 East Main Street/Represented Rod Newton and noted dissatisfaction on behalf of Mr. Newton and other citizens regarding how the Planning Commission hearing was conducted. There was uncertainty on the interpretation of parts of the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) provisions that caused some individuals to question the purpose and meaning of the code. He provided the following presentation:
AMC 18.108.110. Appeal to Council (E) states: "The Council may affirm, reverse, modify or remand the decision and may approve or deny the requests, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action."
Council May Modify Planning Commission Interpretation: "The Council has the authority to modify any interpretation of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance made by the Planning Commission."
AMC 18.108.160(B)
· LUBA Defers to Council's Interpretation of City's Land Use Provisions: "This Board (LUBA) is required to defer to a local government's interpretation of its own ordinances, unless that interpretation is contrary to the express words, policy or context of the local enactment. Clark v. Jackson County, 313 Or 508, 514-15, 836 P2d 710 (1992).
· Council Interpretation Rules Unless "Clearly Wrong": This means we (LUBA) must defer to a local government's interpretation of its own enactments, unless that interpretation is 'clearly wrong'." Goose Hollow Foothills League v. City of Portland, 117 Or App 211, 217, 843 P2d 992 (1992); West v. Clackamas County, 116 Or App 89,93,840 P2d 1354 (1992)."
· Issues for Appeal:
o No adequate feasibility study as required by AMC 18.72.180.B.6.
o Feasibility of collocation not adequately addressed.
o No signed lease agreement as required by AMC 18.72.180.B.7.
o Approval renders nonconforming (off-street parking inadequate and far).
o Livability standards under AMC 18.104.050.C.
Mr. Hearn explained Mr. Newton and others believed there was not an adequate feasibility study regarding collocations submitted with the application. A feasibility study and signed lease agreement were required at the time of submitting the application. The feasibility study should also address other sites where a WCF could pair with existing WCFs.
In this case, the WCF within the search range that AT&T was proposing was at the Holiday Inn Express Hotel. The appellant did not believe the collocation study was submitted or adequate collocation efforts were made by the applicant. Feasibility was not addressed nor was a signed lease agreement with the property owner submitted. This applied to the failure to meet conditional use permit criteria pertaining to adverse material affects on livability within the impact area when compared to the target zone. It was non-conforming to the target use of the zone in both floor area ratio and in the number of off street parking spaces.
The information submitted by the applicant, in connection with their March 17, 2010 letter, included a parking study that the shopping center is required under the code formulas for parking spaces to provide. It indicated 440 spaces when it only has 338 spaces. Floor area ratios also did not meet code requirements of the target use of the zone.
Mr. Crean noted the appeal filed July 28, 2010 Exhibit A, incorporated Sub-Exhibit 7, from Sub-Exhibits 1-9, by reference and was not listed among the first 4 highlighted issues. The code stated appeal issues have to be clear and distinct in the appeal and questioned whether this section should be considered clear and distinct. Mr. Hearn responded the appellant raised all specific issues reflected in attached Sub-Exhibits 1-9 as additional grounds for the appeal and incorporated the sub-exhibits as if fully set for verbatim. The Planning Commission Findings show it incorporates by reference a number of documents in the Planning Commission Findings as well. Mr. Crean clarified Council will have to determine if the reference was clear, distinct and sufficient to meet the criteria in the code and make that decision during deliberation.
Mr. Hearn continued his presentation with the following:
Feasible Location: "We (LUBA) agree with petitioners that 'feasible location,'…does not mean 'ideal location.' 'Feasible' is defined as 'capable of being done, executed or effected: possible of realization.' Webster's Third New International Dictionary 831 (1981)." Simmons v. Marion County, 22 Or. LUBA 759 (1992).
Difficult Does Not Mean "Infeasible:" "In interpreting a county ordinance provision requiring that 'no feasible alternative site in the area exists,' we have stated a county cannot deem alternative sites 'infeasible' simply because it would be difficult for the applicant to make use of those sites. Weist v. Jackson County, 18 Or LUBA 627, 632 (1990)." Simmons v. Marion County 22 Or LUBA 759 (1992)
Reasonable Solutions for Identified Problems: "Additionally, we (LUBA) have frequently stated that a site or project is 'feasible' if there are reasonable solutions available for the identified problems. Southwood Homeowners Assoc. v. City of Philomath, 21 Or LUBA 260, 272 (1991); Bartels v. City of Portland, 20 Or LUBA 303, 310 (1990); Meyer v. Portland, 7 Or LUBA 184, 196 (1983), aff'd 67 Or App 274, rev den 297 Or 82 (1984)." Simmons v. Marion County, 22 Or, LUBA 759 (1992).
Evidence Submitted by Applicant must be Adequate to meet all Approval Criteria: "Simply stated, a permit applicant may submit a complete application, in the sense it includes all of the information that relevant land use regulations require a permit applicant to submit, but that information and other evidence that is submitted during the evidentiary phase of a land use permit review may nevertheless be inadequate to demonstrate that all relevant approval criteria are met." Caster v. City of Silverton, 54, Or. LUBA 441 452 (2007).
Collocation AMC 18.72.180: Applicant failed to meet its burden of proof under AMC 18.72.180. Applicant neither submitted an adequate collocation feasibility study, nor provided adequate evidence to meet its burden of proof to demonstrate that collocation with existing facilities at Holiday Inn Express or SOU was "not feasible".
AMC 18.72.180 Development Standards for WCFs: "B. Submittals – In addition to the submittals required in section 18.72.060, the following items shall be provided as part of the application for a wireless communication facility." "6. A collocation feasibility study that adequately indicates collocation efforts were made and states the reasons collocation can or cannot occur."
Mr. Hearn stated that the feasibility studies were submitted in four parts by the applicant through various letters whenever staff required more information. Letters from February, May and June of 2010 stated different and conflicting information that included that the Holiday Inn site was the only existing wireless collocation site. AT&T stated a longer coaxial cable may be needed but did not explain why that was a problem or why it was a problem that the site was a few feet lower in elevation. The letters were in the guise of a feasibility study, had generalities and did not meet the standard of what the Planning Commission should have expected from a feasibility study.
AMC 1.04.04: "The provisions of this code and all proceedings under them are to be construed with a view to effect their objects and to promote justice."
AMC 18.72.180(C)(2): "a. Where possible, the use of existing WCF sites for new installations shall be encouraged. Collocation of new facilities on existing facilities shall be the preferred option.
'b. If (a) above is not feasible, WCF shall be attached to pre-existing structures, when feasible."
Mr. Hearn determined that whether it was feasible to collocate required adequate data and an explanation as to why it was not feasible. The four letters submitted by the applicant was expected to constitute a feasibility study but did not meet the ordinance provision that addressed it. He stated that staff had concerns and repeatedly requested more information.
He went to state the issues for appeal were based on:
Failure to meet conditional use permit criteria targeted the parking floor area ratio issue.
Failure to provide the collocation study and meet the standards of the ordinance – the feasibility study was not provided and the criteria for the collocation was not met nor was there demonstration that it was to feasible to collocate with existing facilities.
Failure to provide a lease.
Administrative Variance
The main issue being the collocation criteria was not met.
Richard Busch/22525 SE 64th Place, Issaquah, WA/Represented AT&T and agreed with the Planning Commissions decision and staff's recommendation that AT&T's application met all the criteria of the code for the proposed site. He addressed the substantial evidence standard and explained it was evidence a reasonable person would use to make a decision. It was the Council's duty to review the record and see if there was substantial evidence in the record supporting the approval. If there was evidence in the record supporting the entire application criterion then Council needed to approve the application. He stated that Council needed to review all other evidence submitted to balance the applicant's substantial evidence with the contrary substantial evidence. There are two baskets of substantial evidence and the Council needed to approve the decision.
Mr. Busch explained that the only time Council could review the record and overturn or modify the decision was if one of the following applied:
1. The applicant failed to provide substantial evidence in support.
2. The opponent's substantial evidence negates the applicant's evidence.
He went on to address each of the four issues:
1. Failure to meet Conditional Use Permit Criteria pertaining to adverse material effects on livability within the impact area when compared to the target use.
Mr. Busch was surprised when he read the comments submitted prior to the hearing and saw the element of non-conforming use because it was not in the appeal documents. The opponent was trying to attach non-conforming use to the livability standard. In the code, the livability standard did not include non-conforming use. It addressed parking, traffic, and nothing regarding non-conforming use. The applicant looked at the impact the proposed application would have on the site. Having AT&T come out once a month to adjust the equipment behind the building would not have a significant impact on parking or traffic. The livability standard would not affect the proposed use.
2. Failure to provide collocation study and meet design standards criteria for collocation and to comply with the general provisions of the Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance.
There are two different issues regarding collocation. The first is if it was mandatory, discretionary or optional that the applicant collocates if feasible. Code language indicated it was optional as opposed to mandatory, encouraged instead of required. Collocation analysis was not required, even if an analysis was conducted and found deficient. Failure to provide a collocation study was not sufficient to overturn the Planning Commission's decision.
The second was if collocation analysis only involved other sites that were wireless communication facilities. They do not include AM/FM, Police, Fire or TV broadcasting stations. The only site in the vicinity with an existing WCF was the Holiday Inn. AT&T submitted four batches of documents dealing with the collocation analysis for the Holiday Inn. There was substantial evidence in the record presented by AT&T on the collocation analysis that a reasonable person could make a decision based on it. The purpose of a collocation analysis was to identify existing potential sites and analyze whether they would work or not. Mr. Busch agreed there was conflicting information in the record on whether the coverage would meet AT&T's objectives. The last statement submitted by Mr. Seymour was that it would not provide the coverage objectives they had with Mt. Baldy, call hand off service and indoor coverage by the Southern Oregon University campus. The site was not feasible for ground equipment. The Holiday Inn indicated that the equipment could be installed in a crawl space above the driveway in front of the hotel. AT&T immediately said that this would not work because of concerns regarding worker safety, access and guest safety. The day the record closed, information was submitted that it might be installed elsewhere in the form of third hand testimony from Mr. Wilkinson who had talked to Mr. Warren the owner of the Holiday Inn. Mr. Wilkinson was not authorized and had no legal authority to speak on behalf of the Holiday Inn. Additionally the information Mr. Wilkinson provided was not credible.
If the Council found both sets of information submitted were reasonable under the substantial evidence review on appeal standard, they would have no choice but to approve the application.
3. Failure to Provide a Lease with the Application.
The lease was filed in the record prior to the time of the hearing. Mr. Busch noted there was not a law or ordinance that stated the failure to submit a lease at the time of the application invalidated the application and made it void. The comment about the copy of the lease not being provided at the time of the application was void and contrary to established law in the state of Oregon and the City of Ashland.
The aerial photo above the back of the cinema showed it was screened by trees and the commercial property. The west side housed a trailer park zoned for commercial and the east side had residential offset, which did not feed into alley.
Mr. Busch noted miss-statements of fact in the appellant's brief including a statement that Mr. Warren denied ever requiring that AT&T put the equipment in the attic. Statements in the appellant's brief indicate Mr. Warren changed his mind, inferred he actually suggested the attic and then changed his mind. The second miss-statement was that cellular communication facilities existed on the Southern Oregon University (SOU) Campus. This statement was not in the record and SOU did not provide a collocation opportunity as defined in the code.
Mr. Busch responded to an inquiry on whether the area was defined as a dead zone where access was not available. He was unaware if there were code criteria that set a minimum size for a dead zone or whether it existed in the code. He clarified AT&T was aware of their strengths and weaknesses in their network and intended to improve the quality of service.
Councilor Navickas read from Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.72.180 A. Purpose and Intent and B. Submittals and thought B. implied the need to show feasibility and questioned Mr. Busch's interpretation of the code. Mr. Busch disagreed with the definition of feasibility made by the appellant. He sited the definition under the Oregon court of appeals as opposed to Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) in the case of Gold v. Deschutes County, citation 216 Oregon appellant 150, from 2007. The standard was whether it was reasonably certain to be successful, not if it were possible. It was not a mandatory standard and feasibility fell under the reasonably certain standard and when applied to the Holiday Inn offering a crawl space above the driveway to house the equipment was not feasible. If Council intended to make it a mandatory standard, preferred and encourage would not have been put in the code.
Mr. Crean asked for clarification regarding AT&T coverage objectives. Mr. Busch explained AT&T wanted to off load the traffic from the Mt. Baldy site to provide indoor coverage on the university campus and provide call hand off with the hotel site. Additionally the purpose of the site would provide coverage where it does not exist presently.
Mr. Busch clarified if Council found an error of law or the Planning Commission misapplied the law, they could reverse or modify the decision. The issue was whether collocation was mandatory or optional. If Council found it mandatory where the Planning Commission found it discretionary, that would require an interpretation of the law.
Those in support of the Appeal
Joyce Fong/759 Leonard Street/Mrs. Fong's husband read from a statement that this was not a case of pro-business or pro-government faction versus an anti-business or anti-government faction. People were concerned about the City's ability to apply the laws equally to Ashland residents and multinational corporations. The statement supported co-locating new cell towers at the existing Holiday Inn site. It was their opinion this was an out-of-the-ordinary case where the Planning Commission's decision was wrong. There was not substantial evidence to support the findings and the Planning Commission committed errors in law. This error was a by-product of the following: AT&T kept changing its story about collocation feasibility and the Planning Commission defined feasibility incorrectly; the Planning Commission received questionable legal advice regarding enforcement of the City's collocation ordinance; and confusion and misrepresentation generated by health concerns that are prohibited by federal law from being considered in cell tower siting. The statement encouraged Council to listen to their constituents and reverse the Commission's decision.
Colin Swales/143 8th Street/Spoke in regards to his bias challenge noting that several people who spoke in favor of the cell towers experienced poor cell phone coverage. He thought Council members deliberating should declare whether they had experienced the same in that neighborhood and if they had a contract with AT&T for cell phone use.
Mr. Swales went on to state that both the appellant and applicant mentioned non-conforming use concerning the site. Nothing was addressed at the Planning Commission level about the required parking for the penthouse on the roof and the accessory structure in the back. The code required parking for any kind of development. The area had a 22% deficit in parking and the cell tower would add more use and was a contradiction of non-conforming use. In regard to the conditional use permit (CUP), during the Planning Commission hearing, City Attorney Richard Appicello informed the Commission that the CUP standard was a comparative standard and must be compared with all the permit uses in the zone and went on to site uses that were actually incorrect. He felt that the Findings of the Planning Commission were based on false information provided by the City Attorney.
Vitaly Geyman/1172 North Main/Provided his background as an electrical engineer and supported overturning the Planning Commission's decision. Verizon currently had an installation at the Holiday Inn and shared installations with AT&T at other locations. He addressed the four reasons AT&T gave on why the Holiday Inn site was not feasible. The problem regarding the topography and installing a longer run coaxial cable could be accommodated and were not technical problems. As for the dangerous access to the required location for ground equipment, the space was only suggested by the owner of the Holiday Inn and not required. On February 12, 2010 AT&T stated the Holiday Inn was a reasonable location and on May 19, 2010, it could work. Finally, AT&T determined the Holiday Inn site would not meet the goal of in building coverage at SOU while Verizon currently provided the same coverage to SOU from the installation at Holiday Inn. AT&T did not provide any documentation substantiating that claim. As an Engineer, he saw no substantial evidence to support AT&T claim that collocation was not feasible.
Deborah Gordon/276 Orange Street/Requested that the videos from this hearing and from the Planning Commission hearings are admitted into the record. She suggested the City was exercising discriminatory enforcement of AMC 18.108.110.3. She stated that legal counsel had advised Council to allow AT&T to present oral arguments and to accept its written argument into the record though it had failed to comply with AMC 18.108.110.3 Section C. No physical evidence was submitted to demonstrate why three separate letters to AT&T representatives and employees, mailed by the City, constituted inadequate notice or any basis for allowing oral or written argument. The goal was to achieve an equitable result and ensure the parties' due process rights were insured. The City Council was not provided with legal rationale that supported discriminatory enforcement to ensure an applicant's due process was protected while not also applying the same standards to the appellant. Legal Council's memo reinforced City staffs use of AMC 18.108.110.3 Section D. as a basis to insist that Council ignore legally enclosed and referenced issues for this appeal submitted by the appellant. No arguments about "substantive interest in the proceedings" or "fundamental unfairness" were made to encourage the acceptance of all the clear and distinct issues for this appeal by the appellant. She encouraged Council to deny the Planning Action.
Lauren Taylor/170 Ridge Road/Requested that Council reverse the Planning Commission's decision, as it was not based on substantial evidence and to deny AT&T's application for a conditional use permit. She felt AT&T had treated this application with arrogance, flouted city ordinances and assumed their application would be approved whether they met the local requirements or not. AT&T did not have a collocation feasibility study attached to their application and in the actual application, admitted collocation would be feasible at the Holiday Inn Express. They had since submitted letters why that location was no longer ideal but did not submit substantial evidence that it was not feasible. AT&T failed to include a signed lease in the application that showed collocation would not be precluded. When a lease was produced it explicitly precluded collocation. She expressed concern regarding AT&T's assumption they did not have to comply with the laws and strongly urged Council to reverse the decision.
Will Wilkinson/2940 Old Highway 99 South/Stated that the Planning Commission's decision was based on faulty, not substantial, evidence. In the letter of May 19, 2010, AT&T's only reason for rejecting collocation was that Holiday Inn required AT&T place their equipment in an accessible closet located above the drive through area. Because of the proposed dangerous location for the equipment cabinets, AT&T rejected the Holiday Inn as a potential location for this site. Mr. Wilkinson confirmed he spoke with Mr. Warren, the owner of Holiday Inn who disputed AT&T's claim. Mr. Warren never required them to locate their equipment in that location, it was a discussion point to him and he was willing to offer AT&T the same equipment location that Verizon uses. This was one example of the unsubstantiated claim that AT&T made, that the City Attorney and the Planning Commission used as evidence to base their recommendations on. If AT&T did not want to collocate, they should prove that collocation was not feasible. Simply require AT&T to submit a detailed study on collocation with reasonable evidence. Council is empowered to interpret this law and the intent of this law is clear, there was no substantive evidence to require Council to pass a conditional use permit.
Skip Andrew/103 Manzanita/Explained Council had the occasion to clarify, interpret and apply this ordinance regarding wireless communications. He thought the Planning Commission misunderstood, misinterpreted and misapplied Ashland's collocation law. The Commission attempted to reduce the collocation requirements to a preference and concluded the ordinance did not include mandatory terms. AT&T's interpretation was that it was optional. He agreed with AT&T's interpretation and read from the ordinance noting seven different instances of the word "shall."
James Haim/152 Orange Avenue/Spoke regarding livability and explained that within the C-1 Zoning District wireless facilities were not permitted and required a CUP. The approval criterion for the CUP is that the use was in conformance with all the standards within the zoning district. The Planning Commission made an error of law in its failure to comply with all ordinance requirements and to address parking requirements. There appeared to be no evidence in the record of applying parking requirements for this project after the AT&T study determined the shopping center did not meet the required number of parking spaces. The AMC chapter on street parking stated that all districts, except those specifically exempted whenever any building is erected, or the use is changed, that off-street parking is provided. WCFs would fall under public utilities or unspecified uses and noted the parking requirements for each. Failure to address the parking demand was not exempted from 18.72.180. He concluded that the project should be denied for inadequacies in the record.
Aaron Brian/307 North Main/Addressed points Mr. Busch discussed in his opening statement on the concept of substantial evidence and evidence provided by AT&T. The owner was not going to require AT&T to install equipment in the crawl space, which would make this issue not part of the substantial evidence. He stated that the first two times AT&T submitted information was that collocation would work from a radio frequency perspective and the last submission provided a series of reasons why collocation would not work. The predicted coverage from the Holiday Inn site may be less than coverage at the cinema site, it did not mean it was not feasible or that it would not work or was reasonably certain to be successful. AT&T did not have the right to get whatever location they wanted to meet their specific needs. If AT&T installed the cell tower on top of the cinema, will other cell companies have the same opportunity?
Applicant Rebuttal
Mr. Busch stated that the information Mr. Geyman provided was new, not part of the written record and therefore needed to be ignored. He confirmed that Verizon had coverage on the SOU campus from the Holiday Inn and that this had nothing to do with AT&T's application. Mr. Wilkinson's testimony regarding his discussion with the owner of the Holiday Inn should be ignored as well. Mr. Brian's testimony regarding availability of space at the Holiday Inn needed to be ignored as well because it was not in the record. Mr. Busch clarified that SOU was not a collocation site and the only collocation standard available, deals with other existing WCF sites.
Mr. Busch explained there was nothing in the record concerning a significant coverage gap; it was not code criteria but a standard under the Telecommunications Act. The code criteria under discussion did not include a significant gap component.
Appellant Rebuttal
Mr. Hearn explained the code required a feasibility study and that the three brief letters AT&T submitted did not constitute a study and was inadequate. He noted the Findings of the Planning Commission indicate that they struggled with legal interpretations.
HEARING CLOSED – Closed at 9:21 p.m.
Mr. Severson explained the original submittal lacked a signed lease demonstrating that collocation was not precluded. The collocation feasibility study was limited in that collocation was feasible but there were issues with topography and ability to run coax.
Parking was a non-conforming issue and non-conforming issues were not grounds for appeal. Mr. Hearn had suggested a review of parking in terms of the target use and impact to the target use. There was a determination made by the Planning Commission that the parking impacts from the proposed use were no greater than what would occur if the development were full retail standard.
Mr. Crean explained in Quasi Judicial decisions, Council reviews a request or application for permit and decides if compliance standards were met. For an appeal in Planning Commission decisions Council can determine whether there was substantial evidence to support the Planning Commissions findings or if there was an error of law. Additionally, state and federal law apply to this case. Section 332 C7 of the Telecommunications Act state local government cannot act to prohibit personal wireless services. The courts have interpreted this as applying unless there was a significant gap in coverage. In this situation, a gap in coverage was not the issue.
COUNCIL DELIBERATION
Council agreed the relevant issue of appeal was the collocation. Staff suggested Council also discuss the issue of submittal requirements for a complete application. Council had the right to decide what was needed in the final application and what could be modified during the course of the application. Council discussed whether the non-conforming parking issue was clear and distinct and agreed it was not articulated clearly.
Council went on to determine whether collation was mandatory or optional in the code. Councilor Chapman thought the sentence in 18.72.180 B-6: "Where possible the use of existing WCF sites for new installations shall be encouraged," was a preamble and collocation was mandatory. Other comments indicated the code was not clear enough to be mandatory and was optional.
Councilor Navickas motioned to reverse the Planning Commission's decision with regard to the fulfillment of the application requirement. Councilor Navickas withdrew the motion.
Councilor Lemhouse/Jackson m/s to affirm the decision of the Planning Commission, reject the appeal and direct staff to prepare findings for adoption by Council. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse stated the ordinance was not written to make it a mandatory requirement and it was the responsibility of Council to uphold the ordinance. The code would be clear if it was meant to be mandatory. The feasibility study was not a quality effort and since it was not required, quality took less importance. Councilor Navickas thought the ordinance in its entirety stated collocation of new facilities on existing facilities was the preferred option and created a dichotomist key from that point. The intent required a feasibility study and to look at collocation. Councilor Jackson interpreted the same language to support the Planning Commission's decision. Collocation was ideal. There was enough evidence in the record that the Planning Commission processed to make the decision that there were options and it was not mandatory. If the code meant to preclude anything else, it would have stated that. Councilor Silbiger noted the Planning Commission found the evidence from AT&T included a collocation feasibility study indicating an effort was made and the collocation could not occur. The focus was whether that ruling was faulty. Once that determination was made, Council could then argue if it was required. What AT&T submitted as a feasibility study met number 6 of Submittals. He was not convinced or had enough evidence to overturn the Planning Commission's decision.
Councilor Voisin thought the Planning Commission committed an error of law by interpreting the ordinance regarding the feasibility study. Council is responsible for the interpretation of the ordinance not the Planning Commission. Councilor Chapman would not support the motion because it was too early to make a decision. He did not think the Planning Commission made an error in law. Time permitting, he preferred to interpret the piece of code on preferred designs and remand it back to the Planning Commission and let them go through the process. Councilor Voisin clarified she did not think the Planning Commission addressed 18.72.180 B-6 regarding collocation efforts and reasons why collocation could not occur. Councilor Jackson responded Planning Commission decisions require interpretation and she expected the Commission to read, interpret and apply the code. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Silbiger and Jackson, YES; Councilor Voisin, Chapman and Navickas, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a NO vote. Motion failed 3-4.
Councilor Navickas/Voisin m/s to reverse decision of Planning Commission. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas explained the application was not substantial enough and mandatory collocation standards exist within the code. Councilor Chapman reiterated Council was not ready to make a decision. Councilor Silbiger agreed with Councilor Chapman and added the criteria from the appeal had not been discussed. Councilor Voisin questioned why Council was ready to affirm the Planning Commission's decision and not to reverse it. Councilor Navickas thought Council had exhausted the discussion. Councilor Chapman offered to make a motion that collocation was a preference then address other issues. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, and Navickas, YES; Councilor Lemhouse, Silbiger, Chapman and Jackson, NO. Motion failed 4-2.
Councilor Lemhouse/Jackson m/s to continue matter until October 19, 2010 meeting at 7 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES.
SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS?
The minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 21, 2010 were approved as presented.
1. Will Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, authorize a Competitive Sealed Proposal (Request for Proposal) be used as the sourcing method to procure Parking Enforcement and Administrative Services?
2. Will Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, authorize a Competitive Sealed Proposal (Request for Proposal) be used as the sourcing method to procure Workers' Compensation Third Party Administrative Services?
3. Will the Council Confirm the Mayor's committee member selection for the Ashland Stormwater Advisory Committee (SWAC) and the Ashland Wastewater Advisory Committee (WWAC) for each of the respective Master Plan updates?
4. Will Council approve a $12,020 amendment to the existing contract with KAS & Associates, Inc. for design and construction engineering services for the Jefferson Avenue project?
Consent agenda item #3 was moved to the October 19, 2010 Council meeting.
Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1, #2 and #4. Voice Vote: all AYES.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None)
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS (None)
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Will Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to Noise and Heat Pumps or Mechanical Devices and Amending AMC 9.08.170, 9.08.175, and 15.04.185"?
Item delayed due to time constraints.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
Meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John Stromberg, Mayor


ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the organization responsible for domain names.
You receive the ERRP (Expired Registration Recovery Policy) e-mail from ICANN as a reminder for renewing your domain name. You can ignore this e-mail: we also send reminder e-mails for your domain names.
If you have a payed version (Basic, Professional or Business) and this is your default domain name you don't have to do anything: we renew your domain name for you before the expiration date.
If you have extra domain names we send a reminder e-mail for each of your domain names 30 days and 7 days before the expiration date.
Read everything about domain names.


Onsite (401k service) will determine your needs.
It's simple really, our courteous professionals respect your investments, providing an attention to detail that ensures quality, and safe work. No matter what professional services you need, We have the power to make things better.
Our polite, Service Professionals treat your financial planning needs as if it were their own.
Our Professionals are fully background checked.


Recently we celebrated my Grandmother's 98th birthday–on Friday the 13th! I gave her a silk white rose to brighten her room, and used a very special "vase" I had been saving just for her….
Grandma sipped on her beer as she appreciated my park, and when she finished it, promptly tossed her empty can off to the side in the trees and strolled back into the house with the group. Appalled, I went back and fished out the trash she had left in my sacred ground.
Privately sharing my indignation with Mom, she encouraged me to let Grandma know how I felt. Too shy to directly confront the criminal, I wrote a note and taped it to the offending can, which I then presented to Grandma. As it was read aloud, the entire family got a tremendous and supportive laugh! There was lots of hugging, and Grandma graciously apologized. She good-naturedly took the can home with her, declaring that she'd give it back to me when I was a grownup.
…for another twenty years! And now, I am sharing the love by passing it back to Sweet Lucille. May it bring her joy, no matter what form, to add to her continued pluckiness and humor.
Oh Gina!!! Thank you for sharing! I LOVE the story and the sweet memories. Your pics beautifully illustrate the love shared between generations. Much love and blessings to you and your family as you share the beautiful truth of your love.
Thank you for sharing this beautiful story about Lucille! I love hearing about the memories that family members have of their loved ones. Lucille's tender heart and quick wit brighten my every day! Thank you for entrusting her to our care! She is a gem!


text:
Home/Business/Science of cycling explored in new book
Max Glaskin has written 'Cycling Science', a fascinating introduction to the complexities of what we do with the simple bicycle.
Science of cycling explored in new book
BikeBiz 16th June 2013	Business
'Cycling Science: How Rider and Machine Work Together' by tech journalist Max Glaskin guides readers through a wide variety of topics, from tyre rolling resistance and the difference between yield strength and ultimate strength, to the importance of aerodynamics and any impact on speed of smoothly shaved legs.
The book is organised around a series of questions: What is the ideal frame shape? What is the biggest source of drag? What keeps a bicycle from falling over? How much power can a cyclist produce? Which muscles does cycling use? How efficient is a bike and why is it easier to ride than walk? Glaskin has condensed a great deal of often tricky subject matters and dry research papers into an entertaining, informative coffee-table book. It guides readers through the complexities of fundamental physics, engineering principles, materials science, as well as human anatomy and physiology. There are also primers on statistics, sociology and the history of cycling. 'Cycling Science' is illustrated throughout by colourful, infographic-style line drawings, which aid understanding.
Glaskin describes the self-stabilising dynamic models of the moving bicycle, a controversial topic among some specialists. Speed freaks will enjoy the chapter on wattage and power measurement; physicists will enjoy the info on Newton's simplified second Law, moment of inertia and fundamental frequencies via harmonics.
Less academic than the classic Bicycling Science by David Gordon Wilson (and with more pictures), Glaskin's book is written for a general audience.
'Cycling Science' is billed as "the perfect way to analyse your own kit and technique by studying the techniques of the professionals, Cycling Science is the ultimate accessory for any cyclist wishing to understand their craft" and proposes that "cycling is the best way possible for humans to travel."
Glaskin adds: "Cycling occupies a unique niche in the world. It satisfies concerns about the environment, sustainability, health and fitness, competition – while giving millions the freedom to travel independently. Their horizons forever expanded. These benefits would be mere anecdotes if it wasn't for the fact that thousands of scientists have studied almost every aspect of this seemingly simple activity."
(Simple? The book counters that. Bear in mind, it was two bicycle enthusiasts who used the science of cycling to create powered flight. How a cyclist banks and turns was the missing link in aviation theory enabling the Wright Brothers, rich bicycle shop owners, to get the first powered airplane off the ground).
In 1988 Glaskin co-authored 'Mountain Biking', with Jeremy Torr, one of the first UK books on the growing sport. Along with Torr, Glaskin founded the Mountain Bike Club in the mid-1980s.
He has contributed to newspapers and to magazines such as MIT's Technology Review, Biophotonics International, The Engineer and New Scientist, through to Reader's Digest.
Glaskin's book contains a very detailed reference and further-reading list, with web links. Glaskin also posts relevant new research he finds – and which didn't make it into his book – via his Twitter account.
Previous Get in the Tour de France mood with The Cycling Anthology
Next How 'green' is the bike trade?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


NewPages Book Reviews: "The affectionate chronicle of a long marriage between two flawed but lovable characters. "
The bad news: if you have a less than comprehensive knowledge of British history and culture (as I do), you may have to run to Google periodically to understand all the acronyms and historical references in Gardam's novel. The good news: it won't matter. Gardam's book is primarily a character study, the affectionate chronicle of a long marriage between two flawed but lovable characters.
Edward Feathers, QC (Queen's Counsel) is a prominent lawyer working in Hong Kong, who falls in love with Elisabeth (Betty) Macintosh, a former captive of a Japanese Internment Camp in Shanghai; her British parents died in the camp. Edward was a Raj orphan (a term for British children whose parents, working in places such as India and Malaysia, sent their children back to England to be raised by relatives or boarding schools – thank you, Google). Edward proposes to Betty, who is torn; Edward's wealth and good looks are appealing, but she barely knows him, and feels no great passion for him. His greatest appeal to Betty: he needs her. Edward is still at heart an abandoned Raj orphan who is terrified at the idea of being left again.
Just an hour after Betty accepts Edward's proposal and swears to never leave him, she meets his arch courtroom rival Terry Veneering at a party. The instant she meets him, Betty muses: "And it is just one hour too late." She also meets his young son, Harry, and they form a quick bond, so quick that later that evening, when she hears of an airplane full of schoolchildren that has crashed, she panics (Harry was supposed to fly back to England that evening) and runs to see Veneering. Harry is fine – he missed the flight – but this encounter leads to a romantic tryst between Betty and Veneering, virtually on the eve of her marriage to Edward.
The rest of the book tells the story of Betty and Edward's long marriage. To Betty's surprise, she comes to truly love Edward, despite his inability to express his feelings, and her lack of passion for him. When she suffers a miscarriage, followed by a hysterectomy, Betty's attachment to Harry Veneering becomes stronger than ever; though she rarely sees him, she thinks of him as her son.
This is not a plot-driven book. Betty never leaves Edward for Veneering; Edward's career never falters. It is mainly Betty's story, the story of a woman who is torn between two men, between two cultures, between love and passion. Her search for identity is paralleled by the historical changes in her adopted country of Hong Kong, and the theme of British colonization figures prominently throughout the novel. Betty loves the East, but can't forget what happened to her parents there. In the end she becomes her mother, a proper British lady, cherishing her memory of her passion for Veneering and her bond with Harry.
Betty is a rich, complex character, a free spirit with an irreverent wit and a bit of a split personality, the legacy of her years in Shanghai and Hong Kong. Edward, too, is no stock Englishman, but a fragile and endearing soul. The reader gets the feeling that there is a lot of Edward's story left out of the book, probably due to the fact that Edward has his own book, Gardam's previous novel, titled Old Filth (Edward's nickname, an acronym for Failed In London Try Hong Kong).
Gardam's novel satisfies that ultimate test of character-driven works: when it's over, you will miss Betty. I do.


I created this blog to really help Adelaide brides who are planning their wedding. I've been been a professional photographer for 15 years. I split my time between Adelaide and Paris and my work has appeared in the New York Times, Style Me Pretty and brides.com. In 2015 Style Me Pretty interviewed me, I am represented by Getty Images and in 2016 Complete Wedding Magazine called me "One of the World's Best Wedding Photographers".
Kyla Helgeson is the florist behind The White Orchid Floral Design, a boutique wedding and event florist based in Adelaide. I spoke with her about her flowers, being a parent and her approach to weddings.
KH: My name is Kyla Helgeson and I own The White Orchid Floral Design, a boutique wedding and event florist based in Adelaide, successfully operating for nearly 10 years! Overall, I have been a florist for close to 14 years.
As a floral designer, I work with engaged couples and corporate clients who need high quality flowers for their wedding/event in Adelaide. I help them easily order their flowers through my online store or through personal consultation, so they can have their perfect, dream flowers for their wedding/event.
I am also a blogger, wife and mother of two, who naturally loves flowers, fashion, art, music, interior design and yoga.
NP: What's the first thing brides usually ask when they come and see you?
KH: "Are you available for my wedding/event date?" This is an important first question for sure as I can only accommodate a certain number of weddings/events at any one time, dependant on a variety of factors such as the size of the weddings/events and locations.
planned for an autumn wedding.
NP: What do couples need to know about ordering flowers for their wedding?
their very best to interpret and create a similar style using the best quality blooms available at the time of your wedding/event.
NP: Do couples need to book you early in their planning?
KH: Generally, yes, as I do take bookings up to 18 months in advance. So once a couple has set their wedding/event date and confirmed the venue, it is a good idea to start contacting preferred suppliers. March and November are very popular months in the wedding calendar.
NP: Can you share with us what a typical wedding looks like for you?
KH: Every wedding is different and a reflection of the couple's personality and style. But typically, a wedding comprises of bridal party flowers, bouquets and buttonholes, perhaps some flowers for family members. If budget allows, weddings often also include both ceremony and reception flowers.
NP: How do you like to work with clients?
KH: I try to be flexible and offer various ways of communicating to suit individual needs. My website offers a great starting point to see my portfolio of floral items. Couples can contact me through my website and then we can start a conversation either via email, phone or in person.
happy to work either way.
NP: Could you give our readers some indication of costs involved in ordering wedding flowers from you?
KH: Detailed pricing for individual items can be seen on my online store. Pricing for wedding flowers ranges depending on a client's personal choices. For example, the size of their chosen wedding bouquet and if they prefer seasonal flowers that are available locally or premium flowers that may need to be imported from interstate or overseas.
Weddings can start from as little as a few hundred dollars for just a few items for a small bridal party, up to ten of thousands for 'wow factor' weddings with floral installations and set ups at both the ceremony and reception. I always try to help couples find the balance between their wish list and their budget. I recommend focusing your budget on items that will be viewed and photographed the most throughout the day, like your bridal bouquet.
NP: What other services do you offer?
up all florals in the space.
NP: How can people get in contact with you?


Photography is the most democratic of creative tools. I will help the student find their 'eye', develop a belief in themselves and the value of their unique perspective as an artist or journalist.
The first conversation I have is about what the student wants to do with photography, where they want to develop their skills and for what purpose. Motivation can range from artistic expression through to professional use, the lessons reflect the students starting point and destination. We will talk with the camera in and hand or at the computer to gain an understanding of the 'tools', then discuss assignments aimed at building the understanding.
I got my first camera 46 years ago, I've had time to practise. Capturing a moment in time fascinated me and continues to - sharing the way it looked to you, your perspective, your vision, your insight. Shooting on film was a fantastic learning curve, as a 14 year-old I could afford one roll a month from the proceeds of my newspaper round. That's 36 exposures. But I've never been so enthralled by a technology as I was by digital photography and the manipulation you can do on a computer. But the camera and computer are just tools to achieve an aesthetic goal, the sooner that using the camera becomes second nature, more a matter of muscle memory the better. That's what we'll work towards in theses sessions.
Lessons can be delivered at my Teddington base, at the student's home, or on location according to the student's assignment. There are no restrictions on timings other than previous diary commitments.
I have tutored adults and children successfully.
- Tutoring KS3 students in photographic principles, understanding and exploiting their camera and Photoshop.
- Teaching and mentoring adults in Photoshop and to use cameras for their profession.
- Extensive experience in commercial and family photography.
- Extensive training while employed at the BBC, further training in photography at London College of Communications.
Trevor Aston has tutored my son on a weekly in photography for over a year and has actively engaged him in the technical and practical aspects of the work. He's really supported Josh to develop an eye for capturing his own photographic style and interpretation of the world. Trevor is incredibly patient and goes beyond the norm, often helping Josh with tasks such as early morning or late evening shoots. He's willing to go that extra mile to inspire confidence.
I asked Trevor to help me with taking photographs for the cooking book I am writing. I have my own camera and Trevor came to help me set it up; what is the best place, setting of the camera etc. He was very helpful, patient and gave me some good ideas.
I love photography, not Photoshop. Luckily I know a man who not only likes it, he enjoys sharing his extensive knowledge. Trevor knows his business. If you need to learn the basics of Photoshop or develop your own abilities I'd strongly recommend Trevor as a tutor. He is also an extremely nice man who will encourage you and support you through your development with his excellent technical skills and gentle personable style . I could not recommend him highly enough.
Learning isn't a problem, portrait photography lessons for all!


ballast crusher process layout chart. ballast crusher process layout chart. Shanghai Shibang Machine Co., Ltd. is a high technology, engineering group.
According to the using situation and using stage of present crusher market, special crushing plants are needed in railroad ballast crushing process.
Ballast is the coarse crusher machine used in ballast coarse crushing and process plant. View more details > mobile quartzite production line - Machine.
Ballast Crushing Machine. zenith supplies all kinds crushing machines and design ballast crushing production line according to the requirements of customers.
Ballast crushing plant,used ballast screening machine for Mobile ballast crusher is the most convenient crushing machine used in ballast crushing plant.
Ballast Crusher Plant for Sale Crusher Stone for Ballast. Good quality crushed stone of good quality is quite generally regarded as having ... Ballast Crushing Process.
ballast stones crushing process diagram . Ballast Stones Crushing Process Diagram, process crusher, … Ballast Stones Crushing Process Diagram 49 Views.


text:
Exxon Mobil's Norway Sale Could be Substantial
Published in Oil Industry News on Wednesday, 26 June 2019
Exxon Mobil's potential sale of its Norway assets could be the country's biggest oil and gas transaction in more than a decade.
Exxon Mobil's interest in exiting the Norwegian side of the North Sea should attract multibillion-dollar offers and help Exxon exit a part of the world that isn't considered a key focus area, said the energy research firm Wood Mackenzie.
"While Norway is no longer core to the overall business, ExxonMobil's position is substantial enough to receive an attractive exit price, particularly as Norway remains one of the premium M&A markets in the world," said Neivan Boroujerdi, WoodMac's upstream Europe analyst.
Exxon is no longer an active player in Norway, but the largest U.S. energy company holds stakes in more than 20 operating fields and projects in the region, representing about 150,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day. Norway's Equinor is the operator on many of the assets.
"Exxon Mobil is testing market interest for its non-operated producing assets in Norway," said Exxon spokesman Todd Spitler. "We continually review our assets for contribution toward meeting the company's operating needs, financial objectives and potential value to others."
It's believed that a number of growing private and independent energy firms focused on the North Sea would be interested in the assets. Norway's Okea is growing and planning to go public, for instance, while London-based Chrysler is buying the United Kingdom-based North Sea assets of ConocoPhillips.
"In terms of buyers, the new wave of North Sea independents are likely to be the front runners," Boroujerdi said.
Source: www.chron.com
north Sea Oil and Gas News, Norwegian Oil and Gas News, Helicopters Oil and Gas, Oil and Gas News
Equinor Drills Dry Norwegian Well West of Johan Sverdrup


text:
Match Preview: HCAFC v Newtown
Club News 7 May, 2021 haverfordwestcounty
The Bluebirds welcome Newtown to the Bridge Meadow on Saturday (8th) for the penultimate game of the season.
The Bluebirds travelled to Aberystwyth midweek, where goals from Jack Wilson and Danny Williams secured a point for the Bluebirds. County had plenty of chances to win the game, namely Ben Fawcett who was inches away from meeting an Elliot Scotcher cross, but the Bluebirds were forced to settle for a draw.
Newtown suffered defeat at the hands of Cardiff Met in a 5-goal thriller. Newtown were ahead inside a minute as Ofori scored for the Robins, however it didn't last long as Lewis Rees equalized 4 minutes later. Ollie Hulbert gave Met the lead, before a Nick Rushton penalty levelled things again. Emlyn Lewis was sent off for a second yellow card offence for the Archers, but it was his side who secured all 3 points as Elliot Evans scored late on.
The Reverse Fixtures
The Robins visited Pembrokeshire all the way back in September, for what was the Bluebirds first home game. The Sgorio cameras visited the Bridge Meadow and the live game was a spectacle. Jordan Evans gave the visitors the lead in the 34th minute as he headed home at the back post from a long throw-in. The Bluebirds came out fighting in the second half and were awarded a penalty just before the hour mark, which Danny Williams confidently scored. The Bluebirds were behind again as Kieran Mills-Evans put the Robins back in front, but just 3 minutes later, Jack Wilson crossed to the far post and Danny Williams got his second of the game to draw the sides level. This would be the last goal of the game as the Bluebirds secured the point.
At the end of Phase 1, the Bluebirds travelled to Newtown where a commanding performance and goals from Kieran Lewis, Cameron Keetch and Marcus Griffiths secured a 3-0 win. The Bluebirds returned to Latham Park at the start of Phase 2 where two goals from Mwandwe and one from Ofori, Sutton and Evans secured a 5-1 win for the home side.
After the midweek results, the Bluebirds are in 3rd place in the Play-Off Conference, on 34 points with Newtown top, on 39 points.


Time traces obtained from a variety of biophysical experiments contain valuable information on underlying processes occurring at the molecular level. Accurate quantification of these data can help explain the details of the complex dynamics of biological systems. Here, we describe PLANT (Piecewise Linear Approximation of Noisy Trajectories), a segmentation algorithm that allows the reconstruction of time-trace data with constant noise as consecutive straight lines, from which changes of slopes and their respective durations can be extracted. We present a general description of the algorithm and perform extensive simulations to characterize its strengths and limitations, providing a rationale for the performance of the algorithm in the different conditions tested. We further apply the algorithm to experimental data obtained from tracking the centroid position of lymphocytes migrating under the effect of a laminar flow and from single myosin molecules interacting with actin in a dual-trap force-clamp configuration.
CitationSosa-Costa, A. [et al.]. PLANT: A Method for Detecting Changes of Slope in Noisy Trajectories. "Biophysical Journal", 8 Maig 2018, vol. 114, núm. 9, p. 2044-2051.


The Roman Catholic Church is one of the largest and the oldest religions in the world with 1.25 billion people around the world calling themselves members. The head of the church is the Pope, who considers himself (and who also is widely regarded by the faithful) as the successor of St. Peter. Roman Catholicism also has a special place for the Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus Christ, who through divine intervention gave birth to Christ while remaining a virgin, thus conceiving free of original sin (the Immaculate Conception).


text:
A short history of Jewish intermarriage
By	Ben Harris	 August 8, 2013 2:16 pm
JTA's Uriel Heilman reported this week on the continuing evolution of Jewish attitudes toward intermarriage. After the clarion call of the 1990 National Jewish Population Survey showed a 52 percent intermarriage rate among American Jews, Jewish groups poured millions into efforts to stem what was seen as a threat to the future of the community.
Intermarriage has long been an issue of concern to American Jews. In 1926, the marriage of "Miss Mina Kirstein" of Boston to a non-Jew was considered worthy of a news item in the Jewish Daily Bulletin, the precursor to the JTA Daily Briefing. But the degree of fear engendered by intermarriage, not to mention its frequency, has ebbed and flowed over the years.
In 1967, a study by the Reform movement's rabbinical group found that intermarriage rates were actually lower than they had been in the early days of North America's settlement by Europeans. Between 1654 and 1840, the study found, there were 942 Jewish marriages, only about 15 percent of which were between Jews and Christians. The low rate may have owed something to the fact that large majorities of Catholics and Protestants at the time opposed marriage to Jews.
Back in the 1960s, long before the NJPS, solid evidence of intermarriage rates was lacking. But the report from the Central Conference of American Rabbis found that, depending on whose data you looked at, the intermarriage rate was lower than it had been during the first two centuries after the Pilgrims arrived.
Two years after the Reform study, a woman identified only as Mrs. Moses Richler told a conference of Jewish women that if current trends persist, there would be no Jews in Canada in "four or five generations." Mrs. Richler said that in 1968, 18 percent of Jewish men and 12 percent of Jewish women married out.
Since then, the rates have increased dramatically (and, last we checked, there were still Jews in Canada). Jewish consternation over the issue has also risen. Following the 1990 survey, several academics concluded that Jewish engagement was far lower among intermarried couples and argued that the Jewish community should focus its resources on combating intermarriage and providing avenues of engagement for the in-married. Others argued that if effective outreach was made to intermarried families, they too could be drawn into the Jewish fold.
A similar debate has unfolded over the decades within the religious denominations. The Reform movement has wrestled with the issue most prominently, particularly over the question of whether rabbis should officiate at interfaith weddings, gradually coming to the view that rabbis should perform such weddings in the hope that a welcoming approach could increase the odds of future Jewish engagement. The Conservative movement considered itself less vulnerable to the threat of intermarriage, but got a wakeup call when the NJPS found that the intermarriage rate in the movement was not 5 percent, but 28 percent. Among the Orthodox, which maintain the most uncompromising stance toward intermarriage, the threat was recognized far earlier. in 1979, Rabbi Bernard Rosenzweig, the president of the Rabbinical Council of America, said intermarriage had reached "catastrophic levels" and formed a commission to fight it.
In recent years, the intermarriages of several high profile Jews have both driven home the reality of American Jewish nuptials and raised further questions. An essay by Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman in the New York Times in 2007 challenged the decision by his Orthodox alma mater in Boston to eliminate his Korean-American wife from a photograph. The 2010 marriage between Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mezvinsky prompted a debate over whether to celebrate the extent of Jewish inclusion in the corridors of American power or lament yet another soul lost to the community.
Meanwhile, the trend lines continue as they have for decades. This year, Naomi Schaefer Riley reported that intermarriage rates are rising among all American religions, but are highest among Jews.
By	Caleb Guedes-Reed	 January 19, 2022 5:50 pm
Netflix's 'Camp Confidential' tells the story of Nazis housed in an American compound — and the Jews who looked after them
By	Andrew Lapin	 January 19, 2022 12:03 pm
A Jewish guide to the 2022 Australian Open
By	Emily Burack	 January 14, 2022 11:08 am
33 years after classic bar mitzvah episode, revamped 'Wonder Years' revisits the ritual
By	Philissa Cramer	 January 13, 2022 3:19 pm


text:
Syltorp är en bebyggelse i Valbo socken i Gävle kommun i Gävleborgs län. Syltorp klassades av SCB som småort mellan 2010  och 2020.

Noter

Orter i Gävle kommun
Tidigare småorter i Sverige

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Real Estate Technology, Project Management, Cost Tracking
Managing Change Though Adaptability: How Parkway is Leading the Houston Market
It's been nearly a week since our conversation between Parkway's Chief Operations Officer, Mike Fransen and our Chief Product Officer, Geoff Lewis. The fireside chat-style webinar, Managing Change through Adaptability, was full of great information and learnings about Parkway, Honest Buildings, and the future of CRE.
Who is Mike Fransen?
A category 4 hurricane. Taking the company private. Adopting new technology. Mike Fransen builds value as Chief Operating Officer of Parkway, Inc. He led this thriving organization through all manner of turbulence, navigating major planned and unplanned shifts in Houston's vibrant commercial real estate market.
In the 12 years since joining, Fransen led Parkway's reinvention from publicly-traded to privately-held entity, including the repositioning of its portfolio of properties into the one of the largest urban, high-rise class A holdings in the region.
Fransen shared a fascinating narrative regarding the process of re-engineering Parkway's operations, including during a downturn in the local economy, and some of the rationale for investing in Honest Buildings as a partner in their business operations, and how that relationship has grown.
What Parkway Hoped For; What They Discovered
Fransen told Lewis about how the partnership between Honest Buildings and Parkway came to be, which began as a search for the right resource to support their repositioning of several properties. They'd dabbled in technology, mostly as a tactical tool to make operations more efficient, aimed at making better use of the team's time. There were looking for someone to "help us out," initially. Enter Honest Buildings.
Originally, Parkway shortlisted Honest Buildings' platform for project management for its capacity to save them time, given the scale of their holdings. What they discovered was Honest Buildings' ability to support Parkway in reshaping not only their operations but also their corporate culture through organizational adoption, offering a high degree of transparency and full visibility across teams and business units. Fransen reflected on the beginning of the relationship with Honest Buildings and thinking, "I still remember, after one of our early meetings, going, "I can't believe this hasn't been out there yet. This is so logical. I love solutions that meet a need."
What Parkway Learned
In organizations where spreadsheets are the primary tool for project management cost tracking and analysis, data, trends, and institutional knowledge may be isolated or unintentionally obscured from participants who could offer insight or recommendations. Fransen and his team experienced an elimination of the silos that minimize shared learning and continuous improvement. Honest Buildings has become more than a "bolt-on" to their workflow, growing into a fully integrated resource.
Want to hear more of the story? Listen to the full recording
Written by Rochelle A. Carter-Wilson
Rochelle is the Content Marketing Manager for Honest Buildings. She creates stories and other on-brand content to inform and engage owners and other members of the Commercial Real Estate industry.
Behind Our Series B: Creating Value Through Purpose-Built Tech for Owners
"I was born in North Idaho": A Conversation With Riggs Kubiak


Greater Minds is a program of Greater Spokane Incorporated focused on raising education attainment rates throughout the region.
Greater Minds, one of our initiatives, is a regional collaboration of the higher education and business communities, helping assist working adults to and through degree completion. The goal is to increase the proportion of residents in Spokane County with high-quality degrees or certificates from 40 percent to 60 percent by 2025.
Thank you to our Initiative Investors!


NEW YORK (1010 WINS) -- The NYPD has made another arrest in connection to the June 20 killing of Lesandro "Junior" Guzman-Feliz.
Frederick Then, 20, turned himself into police Sunday night – making him the 14th person to be arrested in the brutal attack.
Police had released his identity Wednesday in an attempt to locate the alleged gang member. He is accused of playing a role in the stabbing of the 15-year-old Bronx boy, but it's unclear what part he had.
Authorities said Then and the 13 other suspects are all membered of the Trinitarios gang.
Feliz-Guzman was dragged out of a Bronx bodega and stabbed in the neck after the gang membered mistook him for a member of a rival gang.
Then is charged with murder, manslaughter, gang assault, conspiracy and criminal possession of a weapon.


text:
Open branches, cut fees and we'll believe you
Crikey's Sydney AGM man, Neal "Crullers" Woolrich recovered from wrist surgery to give Westpac a good spanking on Thursday at their AGM.
Crikey's Sydney AGM man, Neal "Crullers" Woolrich recovered from wrist surgery to give Westpac a good spanking on Thursday at their AGM.
Westpac recorded its 9th consecutive profit increase, it increased its dividend payout to customers and was generally in good financial health on all the key signposts. So the only real gripes shareholders might have had were the old favourites of "social responsibility" and the options package to be awarded to Dr David Morgan, also known to Crikey readers as Mr Ros Kelly. (I wonder if David objects to being called "Mr Ros Kelly" just like it got Fonzie's goat when a pesky journo asked him in an episode of Happy Days whether he was looking forward to being "Mr Pinky Tuscadero"? Heyyyyy.)
Chairman Leon Davis' first address to shareholders was as uncontroversial as you would expect given Westpac's relatively strong financial performance, noting in particular the bank's strong concern for its social obligations.
CEO David Morgan addressed shareholders for a tick under 20 minutes, a good 15 minutes of which was devoted to addressing these so-called "social responsibilities". Now this correspondent was a little cranky after being held up by the quack for more than an hour before the Westpac AGM and he's still in a bit of discomfort with the arm in a sling, so I'll admit to probably not being as attentive as usual.
But I'll be jiggered if I heard anything that would ameliorate any customer concerns about the reviled banking sector.
To this observer it's clear what the banks need to do to get the punters back on side open branches rather than close them, and stop charging fees for doing bugger all.
We heard plenty of waffle from the CEO and saw plenty of pretty pictures in the annual report about what the bank was doing, but this to my mind was just papering over the cracks.
Certainly some of the CEO's points were more than justified for instance, closing country branches and conducting bank services through the local newsagent or post office when dwindling rural populations simply won't support a bank in each town.
But the simple fact is that if you walk into a branch and at any time of the day are confronted with a queue 12 deep and at least a 5-minute wait, there are too few branches. That's certainly been this punter's experience on his quarterly visits to the branch.
Our old friend Jack Tilburn was up first at question time, and one could be forgiven at this time of the year for getting a little misty eyed at the twilight of the AGM season when viewing one of Jack's last appearances for the year. Jack had once again brought along his Christmas Carolers, who groaned on cue in ten-part harmony when the venerable Corporate Terminator was introduced to the meeting.
Perhaps Santa has delivered a healthy slice of Christmas pudding early, for our old mate was more subdued than ever and was unusually complimentary by his standards. Or more to the point, he was far less derogatory than we've become accustomed to in these cyber pages.
But his five questions (yes, only five!) did drag on for more than ten minutes and chairman Leon Davis' response was even longer. The points he raised included the $40 million the bank pissed up against the wall with AGC, why their dividend payout ratio (60%) was so low, why auditors' remuneration was so high and why the bank's new "Altitude" frequent flyer scheme was so dog-gone hard to understand.
Davis complimented Jack on his "interesting and pertinent points" which I immediately thought rendered as utterly meaningless any other compliment that the chairman might offer. On reflection, Jack's questions were more thoughtful and less hell-fire-and-brimstone hot gospelling than usual, and in particular I was most interested in the chairman's response to the AGC issue.
The annual report was particularly helpful in illuminating shareholders that the $40 million AGC write off relates to "collections systems issues". The chairman's report indicated that "appropriate action" had been taken to ensure this doesn't happen again.
Chairman Davis expanded that the loss related to "software problems" (got that?) and assured Jack that heads will roll and carcasses will be uncovered.
Given that the company has just committed $4 billion to IBM and Telstra for a ten year IT outsourcing agreement and a five-year communications outsourcing agreement respectively, let's hope these "software problems" don't pop up in the future.
I had about a dozen questions lined up for the board, but stupidly offered to ask half now and the rest later after other shareholders had their turn. This completely blew up in my face, as a combination of microphone attendant incompetence and undue haste on the part of the chairman to wind up question time left me unable to sink the slipper into the second tranche of questions.
Some selected tidbits from my questioning:
1. Internet banking
Given that the bank had "more than doubled our online customers to over one million" according to the CEO's report, I asked what was the bank doing as far as ameliorating online security concerns and concerns about stuff-ups which Crikey readers are all too familiar with at other banks' websites.
I also asked what was the bank doing to overcome difficulties with getting help internet banking is supposedly "24 and 7" yet human help is only available during normal business hours.
I'm pretty sure I've overcome the lingering effect of the general anaesthetic I had before surgery last Friday, but I could swear I heard David Morgan say that Westpac was concerned with its online banking helpdesk and would be bumping up staff numbers.
What, a bank increasing staff? I must have been delusional!
Davis mentioned that 90% of the bank's transactions were now conducted outside branches. Interestingly, Frank Cicutto wheeled out the same statistic at the NAB's contemporaneous AGM a thousand kilometres away in Melbourne. And who says there is no differentiating between the banks?!
I read from the chairman's report, which said ", 05our active credit risk and capital management practices, now firmly embedded across our business, position us well to deal with these times of economic uncertainty. It is this approach to risk management, and what lies behind it, that augurs well for Westpac and its prospects for the coming years."
Yet the "Statement of financial performance" showed that "Bad and doubtful debts" in 2001 was $433 million, more than double the 2000 figure of $202 million.
So much for risk management auguring well for the future!
Morgan, in responding to my query on what this said about the success of the bank's risk management policies, started off by saying something like "you're quite right in saying that our impaired asset ratio is around 32 basis points, 05"
Huh?!
Who mentioned anything about basis points, pal?! I certainly didn't you wouldn't hear this old schooler engage in such merchant spanker claptrap.
Anyway, Morgan noted that further increases in bad and doubtful debts are expected and this is normal for this stage of "the cycle". Plain English translation the economy's in the poo right now and even the banks aren't immune from it.
Morgan re-iterated that their 32 basis point whatever-it-was ratio ranked it second amongst the banks for risk management.
3. Social obligations Every man and his dog had hectored the chairman about all this touchy feely "social responsibilities" stuff, but that didn't stop Crikey's correspondent throwing in his two bobs' worth.
I particularly liked the CEO's report, which stated "we are seeking to cut through the prejudice and resentment surrounding banks, 05" Dr Morgan obviously has a PhD in sublimely delicious irony!
I suggested that despite all the commendable noises Westpac was making, the solution to the community's perceptions was simple start opening branches, stop slugging Joe and Josephine Public with fees for doing nothing, and reign in executive remuneration. I noted that it costs me $5 a pop to write out a cheque if they could show me the costings that justified that, well then in my humble opinion they are not running their bank efficiently. I also noted that David Morgan was lining the snout up to the trough again this year.
Chairman Davis corrected me it was the remuneration committee, in it's infinite wisdom, who was offering Morgan his latest options package. The CEO wasn't holding out the begging bowl just yet.
They once again prattled on about all their good work in giving low-cost accounts to the battlers yadda yadda yadda, but they just don't get it.
Until the banks stop slugging the punters $5 to draw a cheque, anywhere from a buck to $2 to use an ATM and don't make you wait more than 5 minutes to get served in their crowded branches, the banks will continue to be public enemy numero uno.
I cheekily suggested that I wouldn't mind seeing a show of hands as to how many directors had actually been in a Westpac branch as a customer in the last week or two. Surprise, surprise, the chairman didn't indulge my monkeyshine. Yes, a cheap stunt, but the shareholders I spoke to after the meeting enjoyed it!
Davis proudly referred to the bank's second placing in the much-discredited Age / SMH "Good Reputation" index. Enjoy it while it lasts, Leon we'll relish the back-peddle next year if you're given a lowly ranking!
Handing the microphone to the union
The chairman took the unusual step of inviting an FSU representative to address the meeting, which he did quite eloquently and passionately. But it seemed that this was agreed to at the cost of any other questioning by the FSU at the meeting, so we didn't have the situation as we did at the Commonwealth bank AGM where angry Trotsky's hijacked a substantial portion of question time. Fine by this testy observer, whose patience two hours into the meeting was beginning to wane.
Davis and Morgan both proudly gloated how only 5% of the bank's employees participated in the day's strike, which did not result in a Westpac branch closure.
They also noted how happy their employees are, yet they still have not been able to conclude a new enterprise agreement almost 12 months after the expiry of the agreement which covered most of their employees.
When it came to voting on the various resolutions, chairman Davis provided a bit of variety by eschewing the usual show of hands and instead calling for all those in favour to say "booyakasha". Or it might have been "aye" anyway, it was one of those expressions that Ali G uses.
Just to demonstrate what mindless creatures of habit some shareholders are, the silly duffers still waved their shareholder cards in the air a few times when the chairman had asked them to say "aye". West Staines in da house.
The most contentious item of official business was of course CEO Morgan's options package.
This observer was one of many to let rip with a hearty "nay", so Davis called for a show of hands. It still got up, with at least three quarters at the meeting in favour and the proxies voting about 602 million in favour and 38 million against, a resounding majority of around 94%.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Just as sure as we will see another CEO's options package up for dibs in a few years, we'll also see the banks claiming year after year that they hear community concerns and they're acting on them.
As Stan Zemanek says in his daytime tv ad for whatever bodgy wannabe-bank-but-don't-call-us-the-"b"-word it is that he's spruiking, "yeah right!"
Neal Woolrich can be reached at [email protected]