Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP051310Central Point City Hall 664321 City Council Mayor Hank Williams Ward I Bruce Dingler Ward II Mike Quilry Watd III Matthew Stephenson Ward N Allen Broderick At Large Carol Fischer Kay Harrison Administration Phil Messina, City Administrator Community Development Department Tom Humphrey, Director Finance Depamnent B ev Adams, Director Parks and Public Works Department Matt Samitore, Interim Director Police Department Jon Zeliff, Chief CITY OF CENTRAL POINT City Council Meeting Agenda May 13, 2010 Next Res.1255 Next Ord. No.1937 I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of April 8, 2010, City Council Minutes B. Approval of OLCC Permit for Torero's Mexican Restaurant VI. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA VII. PUBLIC HEARING, ORDINANCES, AND RESOLUTIONS Pgs 1 - 30 A. Public Hearing to Consider the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan Dated November 2009 {Humphrey} 31 - 49 B. First Reading; An Ordinance Adding Chapter 8.40 to the Central Point Municipal Code for the Purpose ofRequiring Registration of Vacant Residential Properties {Clayton) VIII. BUSINESS SO A. Parks Commission and Foundation Report and Recommendation {Samitore) S 1 ~ S2 B. Don Jones Memorial Park Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing ~ Vilas Waterline {Samitore} IX. MAYOR'S REPORT X. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'SREPORT XI. COUNCIL REPORTS XII. DEPARTMENT REPORTS XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City Council may adjourn to executive session under the provisions of ORS 192.660. Under the provisions of the Oregon Public Meetings Law, the proceedings of an executive session are not for publication or broadcast. XIV. ADJOURNMENT Consent Agenda CITY OF CENTRAL POINT City Council Meeting Minutes April 8, 2010 I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Williams called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL: Mayor: Hank Williams Council Members: Allen Broderick, Bruce Dingler, Carol Fischer, Kay Harrison, Matthew Stephenson, and Mike Quiity were present. City Administrator Phil Messina; City Attorney Daug Engle; Community Development Director Tom Humphrey; Police Chief Jon Zeliff; Interim Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore; and Planning Secretary Didi Thomas were also present. IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES Gary Miller, Executive Director of Access, Inc., made a presentation to Council with regard to the types and number of services that are offered by their organization to the community of Central Point, as well as other cities around the Rogue Valley. Mr. Miller stated that the primary services offered are food and shelter. Other services include assistance with affordable housing, weatherization, family and senior services, rental assistance, energy assistance and nutrition. In addition, Access administers a medical equipment loan program whereby citizens can borrow medical equipment (crutches, wheelchairs, etc.) for a six (6) month period. V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of March 25, 2010 City Council Minutes B. Approval of Bid Award for Don Jones Pedestrian Crossing Project to H2 Construction Kay Harrison made a motion #o approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Bruce Dingler seconded. Roll call: Allen Broderick, yes; Bruce Dingler, yes; Carol Fischer, yes; Kay Harrison, yes; Mike Quilty, yes; and Matt Stephenson, yes. Motion approved. VI. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA -None VI1. PUBLIC HEARINGS, RESOLUTION5 AND ORDINANCES A. Second Reading, Ordinance No. , Vacating a Portion of Oak Street Between Amy Street and South Haskell Street City of Central Paint City Council Minutes April 8, 2010 Page 2 Community Development Director Tom Humphrey stated that this was a second recording of an ordinance to vacate a portion of Oak Street between Amy Street and South Haskell Street. Mr. Humphrey reviewed the exhibits attached to the ordinance and recommended adoption of the proposed ordinance. Afl property owners have agreed to the vacation and once completed, wilt be added to the tax rolls, Bruce Dinger made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 1935, vacating a portion of Oak Street Between Amy Street and South Haskell Street. Matt Stephenson seconded the motion. Roll call; Bruce Dingier, yes; Carol Fischer, yes; Kay Harrison, yes; Mike Quilty, yes; Matt Stephenson, yes; and Allen Broderick, yes. Motion approved. B, Second Reading, Ordinance No. , Vacating a Portion of Alley Right-of-Way Located in a Subdivision Known as the "Oak Park Addition" Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director, presented Council members with a second reading of an ordinance vacating a portion of an alley right-of-way located in Oak Park Addi#ion (Jackson County Assessor's map 372W03DC, tax lots 2400 and 2500). There is a condition on this vacation that a public utility maintenance easement be recorded prior to conveyance of the property, allowing for continued maintenance of the utilities. Mr. Humphrey recommended adop#ion of this ordinance as well. Matt Stephenson made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 1936, vacating a portion of alley right-of--way located in a subdivision known as the Oak Park Addition. Carol Fischer seconded the motion. Roll call: Carol Fischer, yes; Kay Harrison, yes; Mike Quilty, yes; Matt Stephenson, yes; Allen Broderick, yes; and Bruce Dingier, yes. Motion approved. VIII. BUSINESS A. Arts Commission Appointment Council reviewed an application for appointment to the Arts Commission which had been submitted by Kent Brawn, a city resident and the owner of Visual Impact Photography. Matt Stephenson made a motion to appoint Kent Brown to the Centrai Point Arts Commission with a term ending December 31, 2012. Carol Fisher seconded the motion. Roll tail: Kay Harrison, yes; Mike Quilty, yes; Matt Stephenson, yes; Allen Broderick, yes; Bruce Dingier, yes; and Carol Fisher, yes. Motion approved. City of Centro[ Point City Council Minutes April 8, 201 D Page 3 B. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Tom Humphrey presented the Planning Commission report for April 6, 2010: • Approval of a resolution forwarding a favorable recommendation to the City Council regarding the adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan. The resolution incorporates proposed changes following a public hearing on the matter before the Planning Commission, adding a property adjacent to the Boes subdivision and clarifying the classification of designated lands in CP-6B for institutional use (Boy Scout headquarters and Little I-eague fields). • Granting approval of a request for extension for the submission of a final development plan #or a mixed use commercial shopping facility known as North Valley Center until April 1, 2011. Bank of the Cascades received this property in a foreclosure proceeding and wants to be able to market it with City approvals. • Receipt of a Final Order from ODOT Rail Division authorizing the City to proceed with construction of a new rail crossing for Twin Creeks. • With regard to Mon Desir's rehabilitation, rezoning would be necessary to continue the commercial restaurant use of the property. Architect David Strauss is putting together a package of options to be presented to the owner of the property. • Commission members would like to see the blighted house at the corner of Taylor and ,Haskell Streets abated. The plan is to assemble as much information as possible and send a written request to the owner, requesting that he clean up the property. Mike Quilty made a motion to approve the Plannin8 Commission report for April 6, 2a'I Q. Matt Stephenson seconded the motion. Roll call: Mike Quilty, .yes; Matt Stephenson, yes; Alien Broderick, yes; Bruce Dingier, yes; Carol Fisciler, yes; and Kay Harrison, yes. Motion approved. IX. COUNCIL BUSINESS -None X. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Williams reported that he had attended the Jackson County Planning Commission meeting. XI. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT City Administrator Phil Messina reminded Council members of the budget meeting to be held an Monday, April 12, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Messina stated that the budget is in good shape and there had been a good cash carryover from the previous budget year. No cutbacks in staff are anticipa#ed; a new employee will be added to the IT department. In addition, Mr. Messina said that he had been to the WashingtonlOregon City Administrators Con#erence on Economic Development. City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 8, 2010 Page 4 XII. COUNCIL REPORTS Council member Matt Stephenson reported on the SOREDI board meeting. Council member Carol Fisher reported that she: • Attended a water commission meeting Council member Kay Harrison reported that she: • Attended an RVTD board meeting • Attended a SOREDI meeting • Attended a water commission meeting • Attended Chris Borovansky's farewell party Council member Allen Broderick reported that he was working with a builder who is looking to purchase property with infrastructure improvements in place to construct several homes in the 1400 -- 2300 square foot, $160,000 to $200,000 range. Council member Mike Quilty reported that he: • Had met with Chris Clayton, Deanna Casey and Bruce Dingier to review the City's Charter • Attended RPS and MPO meetings • Was headed back to Salem for a State Transportation Improvement Project XIII. DEPARTMENT REPORTS Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director, reported that a Downtown Revitalization meeting had been held on Monday, April 5, 2010 and he had enlisted the services of John Galbraith, Galbraith and Associates, to came up vpith some designs to dress up the interchange. Mr. Humphrey added that Mr. Galbraith had some ideas for improving the interchange and making it more attractive. Landscaping would be included as part of making improvements, as well as possibly restriping the lanes on the overpass for bicycle safety. Mr. Humphrey men#ioned that he anticipated bringing changes in the C-4 zoning district to Council at the May 17, 2010 study session. Mr. Humphrey stated that the City was very fortunate to have Don Burt on staff. Mr. Burt is an incredible mentor and works well beyond his part-time status without any credit. Mike Quilty added that he was glad that Mr. Burt was on our team. XIV. EXECUTIVE SESSION -None City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 8, 2010 Page S XV. ADJOURNMENT Mike Quilty moved to adjourn. Kay Harrison seconded. All said "aye" and the Council Meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the April 8, 2010, Council meeting were approved by the City Council at its meeting of , 2010. Dated: ATTEST: Mayor Hank Williams City Representative fitvof _... ...... _ _.....- ~EN'T~/~1L ...._.. _.... Admin.istration..Department Staff Report POI I V I Phil Messina, City Administrator _ Chris Clayton, Assistant Gty Administrator Chi ~~'`Y'i~ Deanna Casey, City Retarder Barb Robson, Human Resource Manager TO: Mayor Williams and City Council FROM: Deanna Casey, City Recoxder DATE: May 13, 2010 SUBJECT: OLCC Application far Torero's Mexican Restaurant PROPOSAL: The City has received a new business application for Torerds Mexican Restaurant which will be located on Pine Street. The owners are applying for an OLCC Permit. The Central Point Police Department have run a background check on the applicants and found no information pertinent to the request. Recommendation: Approve the Consent Agenda which includes the OLCC Application for Torero's Mexican Restaurant 155 South Second Street • Centra! Point, OR 97502 Jon D. Zeliff Ph: (541) 664-5578 • Fax: {541) 664-2705 • www.cp-pd.com Chief Date: 0412b/10 1~rom: Chief Jon Zeliff To: Honorable Mayor Williams Subject: Request for OLCC License RE: Torero's Mexican ftestaurant./Persons associated therewith Central Point Police Department n r}P.Gi/GR~ /0 ~2/`!h/Ger {~01X/A'/GGe~ /0 ~X~GeP~~I~G~ rr ~• , ~: OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIG~UC)R LICENSE APPLICATIQN PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE LICENSE TYPES ~ ACTIONS QrFull On-Premises Sales ($4D2.6DIyr) ®Change Ownership ^ Commercial Estabilshment ^ New Outlet ^ Caterer ^ Greater Privilege ^ Passenger Carrier ^ Additional Privilege ^ Other Public Location O Other ^ Private Club ^ Limited On-Premises Sales ($202.6D1yr} ^ Off-Premises Sales ($1001yr} ^ with Fuel Pumps ^ Brewery Pub11c Haase ($252.60) ^ Winery ($2501yr) ^ Other: ~ yy~~-q~ ^ Limited ~ Corporation ^ Limited Liability ~ Individuals Partnership Company FOR CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY The city council or county commission: {name of city or county) recommends that this tic®nse be: Granted D Dented ^ ey: (signature) (date) Name: Tithe: ol.cc usE aNLY Application Recd by. Date:~~-mod ~l 90-day authority: ,Yes ^ No 1. entiky or Individuals applying #or the license: [See SECTION 1 of the Guide] 'O 4 C 2. Trade Name (dba): ®~'N ~~1~~ ~ ,~o V r ~ ~~. `t ~ 3. Business Location; 3~,7:.~ (numtsar, ~ttre~ 4. Business Mailing Addres~~ (county) • r P code) (PO tfox, nwnbar, street, rural route (city). state) iP code) 5. easiness Numbers: / (v 7 (phone) (tax) 6. !s the business at this location currently licensed by OLCC?~ Yes ONo 7. if yes to whom:.., ' z°JirL . ~•• • ~ . ~ Type of License: 8. Farmer Business Name: ~ACS`'1~'~_~` 9. Wiii, you have a manager? ~ft3s ~QNo Name: is ~ (manager must fill out an 'ideal history form) ' 10. What is the local governing body where your business is located? (na e o c or county 11. Contact person Tor this appiicatlon: ~ ~~C1~ct. _ C9~t[1 ~q Q-`7CF ~-, q .~ I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license appiicatlon. App cant(s~ S . tute(e) and Date: Date~~Z~® Date ®~ Dat ~-- ~~ ® Date- 1-800-452-OLCC. 46522) www.oregan.gov/o cc (rev, 12107) Public Hearing Regional Plan STAFF REPORT CENTRAL POINT STAFF REPORT May 13, 2010 Planning Department Tom Wumphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator AGENDA ITEM: File No. 09017 A Public Hearing to consider the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "Plan"), dated November 2009. Applicant: Jackson County STAFF SOURCE: Tom Humphrey AICP, Community Development Director BACKGROUND: On March 16, 2010 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to gather public input regarding the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan. After taking testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and moved to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council subject to the following modifications: 1. Add tax lot 362W34D 230 to CP-4D; and 2. Clarify the intended use of the Little League Fields and the Boy Scout property in CP-6B. The Commission decided NOT to make other changes recommended by Duane and Katy Mallams during the hearing (refer to Attachment A). A written record of the public hearing is provided in the minutes from the Planning Convnission's meeting in Attachment B. At the conclusion of the public hearing the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a final resolution for consideration and at their regular meeting on Apri16, 2010, the Commission unanimously approved the attached resolution with exhibits (Attachment C}. This is now the City Council's opportunity to conduct a hearing on this matter and to forward their recommendation to the Jackson County Planning Commission. FINDINGS: Exhibit "B" of the resolution contains the findings supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation. It should be noted that the City's consideration of the Plan at this time is limited to consistency with the Participant's Agreement. As a land use decision the County is responsible for preparing findings addressing consistency with all applicable state land use laws. DISCUSSION POINTS: The only additional point worth noting is staff s inclusion in the Resolution- (Exhibit E) of a modification to Figure 2.10 of the Plan as it applies to the average household size within the urban reserve areas. ~~ °`' ~ Page 1 of 2 V J ..J Figure 2.10 uses a figure of 2.69. This figure should read 2.5, which was previously approved. The County Planning Department has been notified and acknowledges the error. Exhibits "C - E" address the changes to the Plan as discussed at the March 16~' meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A" -Planning Commission Staff Report, dated March 1 b, 2010 Attachment "B" -Planning Commission Minutes from meeting of March 1 b, 2010 Attachment "C" -Planning Commission Staff Report and Resolution No. 771, dated Apri16, 2010 ACTION: Consideration and discussion of the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan as presented in the Attachments. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the public hearing continents and general discussion the City Council has the following options: 1. Close the public hearing and direct Planning Staff to prepare a resolution for consideration by the Council at its next regularly scheduled meeting; or 2. Continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting. i~v t` ~ , Page 2 of 2 .8, ', t:. ATTACHMENT " ~ Planning Department STAFF REPORT ~~ CENTRAL ~ ~ ~ rom Humphrey,AICP, ~~NT Community Development Dkector/ Assistant City Administrator STAFF REPORT March 16, 2010 AGENDA ITEM: File No. 09017 Consideration of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "Plan"), dated November 2009. Applicant: Jackson County STAFF SOURCE: Don Burt, AICP, EDFP Planning Manager BACKGROUND: On December 22, 200$, by Ordinance No. 1923, the City Council approved the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Participation Agreement ("RPSPA"). Approval of the RPSPA memorialized the participating cities commitment to proceed with comprehensive plan and land use regulation amendments based on a draft Regional Plan. The RPSPA states that the draft Plan shall become the "adapted Plari" upon conclusion of Jackson County's comprehensive plan and land use regulation amendment process'. Jackson County is currently in the process of conducting a series of public hearings to consider approval of comprehensive plan and land use regulations necessary to adopt and implement the Plan. As part of the County's review process the participating cities are reviewing the draft Plan, and will forward a recommendation to the County planning commission regarding the Plan. Participating cities will also be given an opportunity for oral comment before the County planning commission prior to the County's final decision, Once the Plan is adopted by the County, each participating city, per the RPSPA, will be required to amend their comprehensive plans and land use ordinances as necessary to adopt and implement the Plan at the Iocal level. Not until all participating cities have received acknowledgement by LCDC for their implementing comprehensive plan amendments and land use regulations will the Plan be considered acknowledged and in effect. FINDINGS: Attachment "B" is a draft set of findings prepared for the Planning Commission. These findings are in draft farm only and will be appropria#ely modified at the Planning Commission's direction and testimony received at the March kith public hearing. ~ RPSPA, Section II General Agreement Page 1 of 3 ~ J :~ ~, ~ DISCUSSION POINTS: The primary consideration of the planning Commission is to make a determination of consistency of the Plan as presented in Attachment "A" with the RPSPA draft plan. Aside from general editing of the text the following represent changes that should be noted; 1, Population. Over the course of the planning period the population increase presented in the Plan is 21,499 vs. 22,898 shown in the RPSPA draft Plan. 2. Land Needs Determination. The Plan now includes a comprehensive explanation of the methodology used to identify lands and land needs for the urban reserve areasZ. 3. Land Use Classifications. In the prior draft future land needs were categorized as; Residential, Parks, Institutional, Commercial, and industrial. The Plan as presented has redefined the urban categories to be: Residential, Open Space/Parks, and Employment. The previous categories Civic, Commercial, and Industrial have been consolidated under Employment. 4. Acreage Deficiency. Based on the methodology used to determine needed land and land qualification there is an overall real acreage deficiency far Central Point of approximately 292 acres of suitabie urban reserve lands. It has been agreed, given the long-term nature of the Plan, and the density ranges provided in the Plan, that a deficit of 292 acres is acceptable margin of error over afifty-year planning period. 5. Proposed Modifications. During the course of the public hearings there may be requests to modify the Plan. Each such request must be considered by the Planning Commission based on the merits of the request and consistency with the Participant's Agreement and the land determination needs process set forth in Chapter 4 of the Plan. If the Planning Commission elects to modify the Plan they must direct staff review and report back at the next meeting with a recommendation and supporting findings. 6. Citizens Advisory Committee. On March 9, 2010 the Citizens Advisory Committee held an open house to discuss the Regional Plan. At the open house three considerations were raised: a. Consider the addition of one tax lot to CP-4D. The tax lot is approximately one acre in size, has a residence, and is classified as an exceptions property. b. Consider clarification of the land use designation for the Little League fields and the Bay Scout headquarters in CP-6B, Are these properties classified as Employment lands? c. Property owners in CP-5A do not want to be in the URA. Their property is approximately 1 acre in size and is their place of residence. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A" -Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, November 2009" Attachment "B" -Findings Attachment "C" -Planning Commission Resolution No. xxx z Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, Chapter 4 Page 2 of 3 1,1 ~ y ' 1, ~,,1 ACTION: Consideration and discussion of the Greater Bear Creek Regional flan as presented in Attachment "A". RECOMMENDATION: Based on the public hearing comments and general discussion the Planning Commission has the following options: 1. Close public hearing and direct Staff to prepare a resolution for consideration by the Commission at its next regularly scheduled meeting; or 2. Continue public hearing to the next regularly scheduled Commission meeting. Page 3 of 3 ,. Planning Commission City of Central Point City Hall Central Point, OR 97502 Dear Commissioners, .~ 3•i 6-2010 We would like to see the Planning Commission recoxnrnend to the Central Point City Council that they approve the Regional Plan as proposed by the Regional Problem Solving (RPS} Policy Committee. We believe the Regional Pl~.n will benefit Central Point as well as the other cities in the plan. One of tli~ main benefits of this plan, if finalized, will be the ability of the vaxious cities in conjunction with the MPO and the county to do some long~range comprehensive transportation planning far the region. We also think the proposed Urban Reserve Areas for Central Point have been well considered and are appropriate for the plan. Our property is currexitly in the proposed Urban Reserve Area CP~6A and we would like it to stay in. Thank you for your service to our community, ~. /Y ~. Larry .Martin S hia B ,Martin 2673 Taylor Rd. Central Point, OR 97502 ~ ~it. .; ~...,,. . ., ~~ ~,~ ~ . D, and K. Mallams 28SS Heritage Road Central Point, OR 97502 March l 6, 2010 Central Point Planning Commission 140 South Third Street Central Point, OR 97502 Dear Planning Commissioners, Thank you for the opportunity to present our concerns regarding the Urban Reserves Central Point is proposing as part of the Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Process. We find it hard to believe that Central Point's Key Elements of Community Identity has not one word about being surrounded by same of the best agricultural land in the Bear Creek Valley. The city-centric pattern and rapid population growth that Central Point has chosen to follow is directly contrary to the goals of RPS. One of the primary goals of RPS is to conserve resource lands. RPS provides the means to do this by allowing trade-offs in growth among cities. Central Point is the Paster child for cities in the valley that should base the location and amount of growth primarily on the goal of protecting high-value resource lands. CP-dA A significant portion of these high-value resource lands are contained in CP-6A. The statement on page 4-24 that one third oi' CP-6A is exception lands is misleading and based solely on how the boundaries were drawn. Atlas Map Page 29 presents a very misleading view of the cuc~rent land uses in the northern part of CP-6A. The labels for the residential land spread over huge areas, when in fact #hey apply to very small parcels compared to the large contiguous block of agricultural land. The map labels make it look litre the residential parcels cover a much larger area than they do. Almost all the exception lands in CP-5A are clustered in 140 acres at the south end. They are very different from the 300 acres of contiguous blocks of agricultural land that make up the majority of CP-6A. They should be addressed with the adjacent exception lands in CP-613. This'would clearly differentiate the two, and Shaw that although there are a handful of dwellings within the area of large agricultural parcels, they have not been compromised by development. The existing minimal development does not interfere with agricultural activity in the area. These large parcels should be preserved fox future agricultural use. At a Central Point City Council meeting on Apxi12S, 2002, Tom Humphrey and several city councilors expressed the importance of protecting the integrity and viability of agricultural land to the west of Grant Road that is now included in CP 6A. They agreed the City should not expand into that area. At an earlier meeting the City acknowledged #hat growth onto agricultural lands to the west of the City {now Twin Creeks) was a mistake they would not make again. What has changed? Nothing. The contention that the land is only used for grazing ar lying fallow is untrue. A commercial poultry and egg operation also exists along with a meat goat operation. Hay is being raised as well as strawberries -the strawberries an .~ ~r. expansion of a very successful operation an former orchard land on Hanley Road. This shows how new and unforeseen crops appear and become successful if land is available. It validates the Resource Lands Review Convnittee recommendation that this land remain part of the commercial agricultural land base. The pCIC seconded this recommendation when they recommended no new residential growth to the west of Grant Road. Central Point should abide by these recommendations. 4n page 3-6 the Draft Report states "...the farm land west of Central Point...is located within the region's highest capability soils.... Based on recommendations by the pCIC and RLRC, each of the participating jurisdictions agreed that farther urbanizing the interspersed exception lands in thane areas, or expanding municipal growth to the West Valley foothills (along the geographic pa#h of exception areas} would have severe negative consequences far farmland in the Interior valley. This speaks direc#ly to the consequences of urbanizing the exception areas in CP-6A on the agricultural land to the west and north. Similarly, urbanizing CP-6B would have negative consequences for prime agricultural land to the south such as the 320 acre J.Herbert Stone Nursery, and east such as Elk Farms, Inc. In our experience, agricultural buffers do not work--they are not strictly enforced and people still complain. These areas should rez7nain Rural Residential. We believe RFS deviated grievously from its original puxpose of protecting agricultural land from urbanization when it failed to place the RLRC identified land within agricultural reserves for long term protection. Glbbon/Forest Acres Urban Containment Area At RPS Poiicy Committee meetings on December 19, 2004 and January 9, 2007 Sohn Renz (DECD) stated that Central Point must include Gibbon Acres in an urban reserve because 1) it is an urban area within an urban containment area, 2) the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan states that it should be included within an urban growth boundary of an adjacent city, and 3) it is at least as high priority. as exception lands And probably higher. Including this area in an Urban Reserve for Central Point could take the place of commercial agricultural lands to the west of the City. Central Point argues that they do not have to include this area because it is nat adjacent to its existing urban growth boundary and does not promote a compact urban core. If that is the case, then how does the City justify including CP-1 B (Told)? That is no more adjacent or compact than Gibbon Acres. Gibbon Acres is adjacent to the well-developed transportation corridor along Table Rock Road. The water and sewage treatment plants are up Table Rack Road. In any case, the policy does not say that the area must be adjacent to the existing urban growth boundary. It says Gibbon Acres should be included within an adjacent city. Central Point is an adjacent city. It is more consistent with the goals of RPS to include Gibbon Acres than to urbanize large parcels of commercial agricultural land using the excuse that they can be master planned. CP-1B'pololSeven Oaks We are very concerned that urbanization of this area, even with industrial zoning, will lead to tremendous pressure for the type of ugly, sprawl and congestion-creating commercial and residential development there and along I-Iighway 99 that has occw~red at other freeway exits, In spite of all good intentions, once the infrastructui~ is there, development always wins. 2 •~ & ~ pY Continued emphasis an expansion at the fringes and constant growth wilt lead to more urban blight in downtown Central Paint. The struggles of Medfard`s central business district and a~ west Medford neighborhoods are an example of the consequences and should be a warning. Thank you for your consideration. We hope you will recommend significant changes to this draft plan that will better pibtect agricultural land before submitting it to the City Council. Sincerely, Duane and Katy Mallams 3 ATTACHMENT " ~ ': Ciity oI Central Point Planning Commission Minutes March !6, 2010 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Connie Moe~ygemba, Chuck Piland, Pat Beck, Mike Oliver, Tim 8chmeusser, Keith Wangle, and Justin Hurley were pxesent. Also in attendance were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director; Don Burt, Planning Manager; Connie Clune, Community Planner; Dave Jacob, Community Planner; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary. III. CORRESPONDENCE ~ None I'{~. MINUTES Keith Wangle made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 1, 2009 Planning Commission meeting as submit#ed. Tim Schmeusser seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, abstained; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; Wangle; yes. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. 'VI. BUSINESS A. File No., 09107. A public hearing to consider the proposed Jackson County Plan Amendment regarding the Greater Bear Creek Palley Regfonall°lan. Applicant: Jackson County Planning Manager Don Burt stated that the purpose of this evening's meeting was to take input on the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan, with the intent of forwarding a recommendation to the City Council regarding the Plan and its consistency with the draft Plan as referenced in the Participant's Agreement. The Regional Problem Solving Participants Agreenr:ent states that the draft Plan shall become the "adopted Flan" upon ~;~ 0 Planning Commtsstott Mt»utes Marcia 16.2UI0 Page a conclusion of Jackson County's comprehensive plan and land use regulation amendment process. - Mr. Burt stressed that this was not a land use decision. Jackson County is going through a land use decision and therefore, any comments made by concerned citizens will be farwardcd to the Council and to the Jackson County Planning Conunission by staff. In order to obtain "legal" standing in this matter, it is imperative that anyone with concerns ga before the Jackson County Planning Commission. Since the City initially reviewed the draft plan, them have been some minor changes made which we will discuss and consequently clear up any concerns that committee members might have. Mr. Burt pointed out that Jackson County would have the ultimate responsibility for finalizing the plan and once it is adapted by the Land Conservation and Development Cammisaian (LCl]C}, each city involved in the process would ba responsible for modifying its comprehensive plan, preparing amendments and forwarding the information along to LCDC who will conduct a review and take action. Mr. Burt stated that the reason for this process is to take a lank at long range land needs to accommodate projected increases in population and it is incumbent upon the participants in the process to forward any concerns expressed at the public hearing. Don Burt then presented a slide presentation, recapping the key considerations of the Plan, its goals, implementation of those goals, policies, gR+oss acreage needs and land use distribution in each of the proposed CJrban Reserve areas. Don Burt advised committee members that as a result of a Citizens Advisory Committee meeting that was held on March 9, 2010, specific concerms were raised for consideration...the addition of one tax lot to CP-4D. The tax lot is approximately one acre in size, has a residence on it, and is classified as an exception property; clarification of the land use designation for the Little League fields and the Boy Scout headquiarters in CP-5B; and a property owner in CP-6A does not wish to be included in the Urban Reserve Area. This property is also approximately one acre in size and has a residence an it. Community Development Director Tom Humphrey explained that this process has been going on for over ten years. Mr. I-Iu~aapbrey said that when a city adjusts i#s urban growth boundary EU'C~B), under current State iaw the addition of new lands would come from urban reserve areas. If there were no urban reserve areas to draw from, the city would then look to exception lands in order to acquire tha acreage needed for development. By creating urban reserve areas, we don't have to go into exception lands. It is harder to develop exception lands. Larger parcels can be master planned and the fiscal irnpac# of extending services to properties is minimized. The public portion of the hearing was opened. ., ~ ~. Planning Commission Minutes March 16, 20I D Page 3 The first citizen to come forward was Duane Mallams with questions to staff regarding the calculatian of densities. Don Burt stated that the Plan's proposed density for Central Point ranged between 6,00 and 7.30 units per acre and this would be reflected in the comprehensive plan. Mr. Hurt also pointed out the acreage for agricultural buffering would need to come out of the total acreage. Mr. ivlallams asked if the acreage calculation would be reduced by the number of existing residents on properties that will be brought in, and Mr. Burt explained to him how that would be calculated. Warren Horton, 2S2S Scenic Avenue, came forward in support of the Regional Plan and stated that he wanted t4 be included. Katie Mallams was the next person to come forward and expressed concerns about resource lands contained' in CP-6A, Gibbon/Forest Acres as an area of mutual concern and the proposed urbanization of the Tolo area (CP- l B), Sheri Sonncn, 2130 Boes Avenue, came forward and stated that she would like to have her property included in an urban'reserve area in order to get city water. Larry Martin, 2673 Taylor Road, came forward in support of the Regional Pian. Tim Higinbotham, 2744 Taylor Road, came forward in favor of the Regional Plan, stating that he thought it was remarkable that people had stayed with the process all #his time and that fact alone spoke to the integrity of the pEOple involved. Mr, hIiginbotham continued that he had an agricultural background in the Rogue Valley, and that it wasn't an area you would go to on purpose for farming because of the prevalence of hard pan in the soil, He felt that the term "open space" would be more appropriately used to describe a lot of the proposed urban reserve lands. The Planning Commission took a short break from 7:15 p.m. #0 7:25 p.m. June Brock, 2815 Taylor Road, came forward to say that she and her husband were very much in favor of the Plan, The public hearing was then closed. Tom Humphrey asked to address soma of the issues raised and explained that in the beginning of the process, different land use areas were looked at. The Tolo area was viewed as an area of mutual concern and was projected for future growth. As a result, a water line was extended to that employment base. The County has zoned the area for future development as the City would b$ better able to manage this axes and not the County. There are a lot of unique qualities to the Tolo area, mainly to be utilized as a juncture of transportation facilities. Gibbon Acrss is another area considered for expansion but is beyond one-half mile fram the existing UfIB, would require significant infrastructure improvemen#s, and has many environnyental concerns. In response to a question raised by Mike Oliver abaut the potential for future farming in the valley, Mr, Humphrey said that we will preserve some agriculture! land for this purpose but that the most productive areas were Seven Oaks and property along Bear Creek, J ~i / Planning Commission Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 4 Conx<ie Moczygemba asked staff what needed to be done to fix the designation of lands for Little League and Boy Scout use. Don Burt stated that staff would need to be directed to prepare a resolution to forward to the City Council, subject to any items of concern of the Planning Commission, The Planning Commission then discussed issues raised by residents and were sil in agreement about adding the property located at 2130 Boes Avenue to Urban Reserve Area (LIRA.} CP-4D and changing the land use designation of the Little League and Hoy Scout properties in URA CP~6B to reflect an institutional land use in order to protect the current use of the property fi~am future development. The Commission then discussed the Mallams property on Heritage Road (CP-6A) and all agreed that there was no juatiftcation for creating an island within that URA and all commissioners agreed that they were concerned with the bigger picture. Justin Hurley made a motion to direct staff to prepare a resolution For consideration by the Commission at its neat regularly scheduled meeting which reflec#s the Commission's recommendations on the issues raised. Tim Schtneusser seconded the motion. ROLL CALL; Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Wangle; yes. Motion passed. VII. DISCUSSION Tom Humphrey advised that the City had en#ered into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Rail Division and Iackaon County for the railroad crossing at Twin Creeks. Pending resolution of a few minor issues, we are waiting to hear on a final order fmm the railroad. The crossing is slated to be signalized, and construction would buildup the road at Highway 99. Mr. Humphrey said that there had been a slight increase in housing construction in the lower $200,000 range. The Cheese Festival is taking place this weekend at the Rogue Creamery. In addat'ton, the Creamery is talking about expanding its cold storage. VIXI. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MIBCELLArTEOUS X, ADJOURNMENT Mfke Oliver made a motion to ad3ourn the meeting. pat Beck seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at $: i 0 p.m, ~~1~ - ~.. Planning Cammi~sian Minutes March I d, 2010 Aage S Tine foregoing minu#es of thB Marsh 16, 2010 Planning Commission meeting wes~e approved by the Planning Comrnissxan at its meeting on the 6w day of April, 2010. i'1 ' g C i hair .l .i t. 1 'T ATTACHMENT " Planning Di~partm~nt STAFF REPORT Yom kiu~ripllrey,A1GP, Community DeVe}Qpment Rirector/ Assistant Clty Administrator STAFF REFORT April b, 2010 AGENDA ITEM: File No, 4901'1 Consideration of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "Plan"), dated November 2009. Applicant: Jackson County STAFF SOURCE; Don Burt, AICP, EDFP Planning Manager BACKGROUND: On March lb, 2010 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to gather public input regarding the Greater Bear Creak Regional Plan. After taking testimony the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and moved to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council subject to the following modifications: 1. Add tax.iot 3~2W34D 230 to CP-4D; and 2. Clarify the indented use of the Little League Fields and the Boy Scout property in CP-6B. The Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a final resolution for consideration at the April fi, 2010 meeting. FINDINGS: Exhibit "B" of the resolution contains the findings supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation. I# should be noted that the City's consideration of the Plan at #his time is limited to consistency with the Participant's Agreement. As a land use decision the County is responsible for preparing findings addressing consistency with all applicable state land use laws. DISCUSSION POINTS: The only point worth noting is staff's inclusion in the Resolution to a modification (Exhibit E") of Figure 2.10 of the Plan as it applies to the average household size within the urban reserve areas. Figure 2.10 uses a figure of 2,69. This figure should read 2.5, which has been previously approved. The County Planning Department has been notified and acknowledges the error. Exhibits "C - E" address the changes to the Plan as discussed at the March 16a` meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A" -Planning Commission Resolution No, ~~ Pogo 1 of 2 ..,~., J ~~~ ~' ACTION: Consideration of Resolution, RECOMMENDATION: Appmve Resolution No, ~_ Page 2 of 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~ ~ A RESOLUTION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION FORWARDING A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ADOPTION OF THE GREATER BEAR CREEK VALLEY REGIONAL PLAN WHEREAS, pursuant to former ORS 197.654 (1) (2007), Jackson County and the cities of Medford, Ashland, Central Point, Eagle Paint, Phoenix and Talent, entered into a collaborative regional problem-solving (RPS}process; and WHEREAS, the City of Central Point (City}, as a participant in RPS, having signed a Participants' Agreement identifying a regional land use problem, establiahiug goals addressing the problem, creating mechanisms for achieving such goals, and a system for monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of the thane goals; and WHEREAS, the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "RPS Plan"} contemplated by the Participants' Agreement has been proposed under the provisions of former ORS 197.b54(1) and former 197.656(2), which remain applicable to this RPS process; and WHEREAS, Jackson County is the local government charged with adopting the final RPS Plan; and WHEREAS, the RPS process must include: (a) An opportunity for involvement by other stakeholders with an interest in the problem; and (b) Efforts among the collaborators to agree on goals, objectives and measures of success; and WHEREAS, the City has been requested to make recommendation(s) to Jackson County concerning the contents and adoption of the final RPS Plan, including associated maps and Findings; and WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission conducted hearings on the RPS Plan on March 16, 2010; and 'WHEREAS, all requirements for legal notices and advertisements have been fulfilled and public testimony accepted and recorded; now, therefore, THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: r~ ~ ~. Pege 1 of 14 1~ Section X; -- RPS Plan, The Planning Commission hereby forwards a favorable recommendation to the City Council regarding approval of the "Greater Bear Creek Valle Re i 1 ovember 2049". attached as xt~lE blt "A", including Findings attached as Exhibit "B", and subject to the following modifications: 1. Clarify the use of the Employment designated lands in CP~58 as described in Exhibit "C"; 2. Include tax lot 362W 34D 230 within CP-~4D as described in Exhibit "D", and 3. Correct Figure 2.10 per Exhibit "E" . PASSER by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this ds` day of April, 2010. Planning Commission C ATTEST: ~. ~ __ City Representative Approved by me this (a'~ day of 2410. P an»ilig Co issio Cll page 2 of 14 Jam.. ~ B ~~IBYT'~A" Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Pian Volumes 1- 3 Awe 3 of 14 1,~~ ++~ Rl ~ c EXHIBIT" ~ " FINDINGS OF FACT FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE GREATER BEAR CREEK REGIONAL PLAN Before the City of Central Point Consideration of the Greater Bear Greek Regional Plan Applicant: Jackson County Page 4 of 14 1 1 . ~.~r . a] ~1 I. INTRODUCTION On December 22, 2408 the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1923 adapting the Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement {the "Agreement"). The Agreement set forth the-terms and conditions agreed to by the City relative to implementation, of the draft Plan. as referenced in the Agreement. The Agreement further states that the gg~ P,~ lan shall be what is adopted as a result of Jackson County's comprehensive plan amendment process'. Jackson County is currently in the process of conducting a series of public hearings to consider approval of comprehensive plan and land use regulations necessary to approve and implement the Plan, which upon adoption will become the adopted Plan per the Agreement. As part of the County's review process the participating cities are provided an opportunity to review a final draft of the Plan, and will forward a recommendation to the County planning commission regarding the Plan. Participating cities will alao be given an opportunity for oral comment before the County planning conunission prior to the County's final decision. The purpase of these findings is to confum that the plan as presented in Exhibit "A" is substantially consistent with the draft Plan presented in the Agreement, and to forward a recommendation to the County to approve the Plan as presented in Exhibit "A", with changes. As used in these findings the following terms are used in referencing the Greater Beax Creek Valley Regional Ptan; "Regional Pisa" ~ A generic reference tQ the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan; "Agreement Plan" - Refers to the Regional Plan approved as part of the Participants Agreement; 'Pending Plan" -Refers to the Regional Plan dated November 2009 and the subject of these findings; and "Adapted Plan" -Refers to the Regional Plan adopted by the County per the current proceedings, subject to LCDC acknowledgement and appeals. It is the purpose of these flndings #o determine whether or not the Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan, and to recommend any changes, and supporting findings, that are revealed during the City's public hearing process. The following addresses the comparison between the Agreement Plan and the Pending Plan; 1 RPSPA, Section II Deneral Ag~reemerit 4 '~ ~ ~ ~ Page 5 of 14 II. Greater Bear Creek Va~tey Regional Problem Solving Agreement The Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement ("Agreement") has been approved by the City' and the Land Development and Conservation Commission on September 23, 2049 The Agreement is an agreement by all participating cities that that they will abide by the Plan adopted by the Implementing Signatories and acknowledged by the State of Oregon. The Agreement further stipulates that the adopted Plan shall be the Plan adopted as a result of Jackson County's comprehensive plan amendment process, Approval of the Agreement included approval of the Agreement Flan, subject to any modifications that may occur during the comprehensive plan and land use changes necessary to implement the Region Plan. liI. Statement of Problems to be Addressed Finding: The Agreement identifies three problems to tae addressed by the Regional Plan: Problem #1:Lack of a Mechanism for Coordinated Regional Growth; Problem #2: Loss of Valuable Farm and Forest Land Caused by Urban Expansion; and Problem #3: Loss of Community Identity. 'These three problems were addressed in the Agreement draft Plana. The pending draft of Plan restates these three problems verbatim4. Conelua~ion: The pending draft plan is consistent with the Agreement draft Pian. IV. Project Goats Finding: Tice Agreement sets forth three goals to be achieved by adoption of the Plan: Goal #1: Manage future regions! growth far the greater public good; Goal #2; Conserve resource and open space lands for their important economic, cultural, and livability benefits; and Baal #3: Recognize and emphasize the individual identity, unique features, and relative comparative advantages and disadvantages of each community within the Region. z City of C$ntral Point Ordinance No. 1923, December 22, 2008 ' Greater Hear Creek Valley Regional Plan, 3uly 2008, Chapter ] a Greater Hoar Creak Valley Regional Plan, November 2009, Chapter 1, Section 4.3.1. ~ ~ ~ page 6 of l4 These three, goals were incorporated in to the Agreement draft Plans. The pending draft Plan restates these goals verbatim, including all related guiding policies as previously presented in the Agreement Plan. Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan. V. Upttonal TechniquealStrategies for Implementation Finding: The Agreement Plan included ten (10} optional implementation techniques addressings, addressing the Problems and C3oals discussed in the Agreement Plan. The Fending Plan restates, verbatim, the implementation techniques set forth in the Agreement Plan. Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan. VI. Measurable Performance Indicators Finding: In the Agreement Plan there are ten {i4) Performance Indicators, which are essentially a restatement ofthe Implementation Techniques, The Pending Plana restates, verbatim, the Performance Indicators set forth in the Agreement Plan. Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan. VII. Incentives and Disincentives to Achieving Goals Finding: In the Agreement Plan there are six (6) incentives for participating cities to adhere to the Plan, and six (6} disincentives. The Pending Plan1° restates, verbatim, the Incentives and Disincentives set forth in the Agreement Plan. Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan. VIII. Progress Monitoring System & Amendment Process Finding: In the Agreement Plant t Section IV of the Agreement lists the standards by which progress in attaining the objectives of the Regional Plan will be measured, including minor and mgjar amendments to the Regional Plan. The languag8 in the Pending Pian~2 is verbatim from the Agreement Plan. ' Greater Boar Croak Vaitey Rogional Plan, July 2008, Chapter 1, Section 7 6 Ibid, Chapter 6, Sa~ction 1 ' Ibld, Chap~ter 6, Section 2 a Greater Hoar Croak Valley Regioaat Plan, November 2009, Chapter 5, Section 1 lbld, Chaffer 6, Section 3 16 Ciroator Bear Creole Valley Rogional Ptah, November 2009, Chapter 5, Section 2 t' Ibld, Chapter b, Section 4 is Greater Bear Creek Valley Rogional Plan, November 2009, Chapter 5, Section 2 Page 7 of t4 ;a ~J Conclusion; The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Flan. `. ~ Page B of l4 ~i i 4.~, EXHIBIT "C" Note: Proposed changes identified in ~. Page 4-26 I r CP-bB' h "Central Point Little League operates a baseball field facility an a t4,5 acre parcel within one of the two Agricultural land inclusions in CP-bB. The baseball property consti#utes the ma,~arlty of the acrcage within this Agricultural land inclusion, Two BFU zoned parcels having . approximately five aggregate acres, exists between the baseball fields and the Rural Residential land to the north. These two percale are used by the Central Point Council, Boy Scouts of Arnerica for its facilities and activities, The Hay Scout properly is not nor~likeiy will be used for farming in the future (other than incidental no~for-pmfit farming by Boy Scouts). In Figure a~ubclassificat~pp~,l-it~~ lyps_Instituti~al. The second inclusion ofAgriculturai land is located near the g8agraphic center of CP-bB and is completely surrounded by Rural Residential exception lands. Together, these inclusions have approximately -1~F-~acras" Figure CP.11 Residential Aggregate Resource Open Space Emliloyment 1Parks Exiistia Plaa 77% 23% Pro osed Uses 94% 14% Pages 9 of la EXHIBIT ~fD" Note: Proposed changes identified in rem. Page 4-9 Fixure CP,3 ~ t. ~Q1~1 i ~ 1 f ` iy, . S ~ ~ ' '~~. ~ ~t: 104 103 544 82 21 441 ~~ :', "i~:~ ~:''~~' 72 82 325 25 19 282 '; :~`~~U~` 9 7 36 8 1 27 ` :.,G,~r~~A9x~ b7 Al $283 30 Al 52 • • v:, ' '~ ?.~ 9 11 31 10 2 19 '>• ~,~ ,:# lb5 163 444 2 Sb 385. •~ '~~'~ b:^ ~` 95 93 188 4 22 162 ' ,y° =x:~a'~~.4Y';.: 1 1 177 8 0 169 'f~j ~eff~~S~C~f T' 'i" T V T e ' . ,~ `~;~~ `;`fir : ~ 6 4 297 l l 1 286 ~~'` S ' ` ~'''` ``' 7 ~ si~iSiS.~` 4 87 0 1 86 ''• ~ tK~'•:••~'~':: 4 4 247 57 1 179 Tofals S3S 529 2,554 258 141 _ ~ ~ 2 264 Page 4-20 Area CP 4D: This Urban Reserve area exists as atriangular-shaped tract that runs along the northeastern side of Interstate 5. The area has approximately~~-8~acres, approximately two-thirds of which is currently designated Agrlcuitural and is owned by Jackson County. The southerly third of the area is designated as Rural Residential land and is owned by the City of Central Point. Bath tracts are part of the Boar Creek Greenway. None of the land is or has in recent history been in agricultural production and the soils are of law agricultural suitability (Class IV-Vii, where net built as roadway, or within the Bear Creek floodway). This area also has environmental page 10 of 14 ~~, .:., s w constraints. The eastern third of this ~$~,-acre area is within the 104-year flaodplain of Bear Creek and is also impacted by wetlands. The City expects to use this area for passive recreation, dedicated open space, or parks adjacent to and in connection with the Bear Creek C3reenway. s P- -a a ce do E Ciesidential (r,~R- .This property has an existing residence, end abuts the Cih+ limits an d residentiall y~iands to the east., The ~2pei•ty also abuts Ag~ ultural lands ~p #ltQ no rth As a~xeeptia n area it was deemed ap~pri ate to include the lZ9Pe~•tY , within this urban res erve as fir riority land. Howevgr, it is r~gni zed that the ~rope~y abuts Agricultuarl l~}~,, an d as s~e~i any fu ture dey~ot~ment Qf the_p~•oae _ ~+' Abe subject to com , pliance with the a8rlc ultural buffering st andar to_be im_plen,~nted ~ ~gart of this Plan Because of the existing, resid ential character of t ~e_p~}~y. and it proximi Wither developed re~i~g ntial lands. it was de emed gp~ropriate , to inolude this~arcel wi~~~~, C P-4D. Figure CP.8 I Residential Aggregate Resource open Space Employment /Parks Existl~n Plan 32% 68% Pro Deed Uses ]% ~AA~9% W~~e~e cc~ption of.t a single residential exception property,YT#i~-t ii area was found to be suitable for park and trail use duo to the following Goal i4 boundary location factors and resource land use impacts: 1. F.i,~'Icferit Accommodation of Ident~ed Land Needs - CP-4D will accommodate the City's identified park land needs and non-motorized transportation facility needs. The Bear Creek areenway Master Plan guides the city and county development which links native recreation nodes with abicycle/pedestrian trail system along the natural corridor of Bear Creek. The plan includes a land and easement acquisition strategy which seeks to eventually extend the greenway trail to the Rogue River. Although public ownership of the greenway is preferred, easements have also been employed as a viable alternative. Through the years aggregate has been mined from Bear Creek; sometimes leaving deep pits which have filled with water end provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Reclamation plans for aggregate sites which exist to the north provide extension of the greenway trail system. Construction ofthis trail linkage and including same within or linking to the larger Central Point urban area, will provide an alternative transportation mode for workers in the Talo employment area in addition to providing recreational access along the greenway for all, 'o th one ac id n ial roe reco a tions s t f property and avoids thgRQtgntial isolation anc~ ~Qng berm limitation of public service r~,8l~p$ians. 2. Orderly and Economic Provision of Publtc Facilities and Services -The area extends northerly from existing city Iimits over land assembled by public agencies for the purpose of providing the Hear Creek C3reenway in accordance with its adopted master plan. Access to urban facilities and services, to the limited extent needed for the Page l1 of lA r "v ~ y~ greenway use and tin rce , may be extended directly from Cld Upton Road on the south and the Boes subdivision to the east. Greenway improvements, policing, and management would be coordinated between the City and Jackson County. 3. ESEE Consequences -The overall comparative ESES consequences of an Urban Reserve boundary in this area is positive, based on the following; a. Ecortomlc -The provision of park and non-motorized transportation linkage will supply an attractive community amenity and have a positive affect on property values and tourism. It will also afford workers a more economical way to $ccess employment opportunities. The area has already been acquired by the public and inclusion into Central Point will help finance completion of this segment of the Bear Creek Greenway. The use of lands within the greenway'at+oa for economically viable agriculture is severly limited as discussed above, Land acquisition will be required in other areas to provide for park and trail needs. The inclusion of thg,_one acre ~cce~t~on parcel will allow fo~~ ~~lension of public utilitiea~~may bezeede~l to serve this,}Lroperty. The economic conclusion is neutral b. Social ~-Residents and victors will have the opportunity to view preserved natural habitat inclose proximity to urban populations and inclusion of this area will facilitate the development of facilities for the handicapped. This will positively affect the community's sense of identity and quality of life, and vvi11 promote opportunities for healthful exercise. Park land will need to be provided in some proportion for any future growth area. However, the greenway is a unique resource in this fixed location. ' I clusi n of th a lion ar el i 1 rave a c'al cone n s a result of the prop~~y being,~bJe to obtain public se ides and utilities similar to }he abutting residential subdivs~~ to the asst. c. EnvProrrmental -the area will serve as a natural area.proyiding open space and habitats for fish and wildlife. Inclusion as urban reserve will assure, through and urban reserve management agreement and the RPS agreement, further protection for the area to preserve the enumerated natural values. The epyirQnr~g to al coytseauence of including the exeeption.parcel within CPS is neutral Thg prop~is cw•rentiy zorted„gnd developed for residential use. ~1nv future tleyeEoprner~~ of the pro e}~rt~will be subject to cotnpl_ignce with the a~,rcultural buffering standards required of this Plan. d. Energy -inclusion of the area will facilitate completion ofa continuous trail along the length of the Bear Creek corridor and, specific to this segment, anon- motarized corridor between the Tolo employment area and residential population areas of Central Paint. The delivery ofnon-motorized transportation fhcilit:ies linking employment and residential areas can and is expected to result in significant energy savings. The inclusion of the exception_parcef,•,~ieeause pf it exi~~i~, d~pment nd proximi _~o_~vailshle public facilities. will not,~gve an, advers$,j~pact an he ram tsofta ~~.~~~ .. use of energy. 4. Compat#bility of the Proposed Urban Uses with Nearby Agricultural and Forest Activities Occurring on Farm acrd Forest Land Outside the Urban Growth Boundary There are na Herby forest lands or forest activities. Nearby agricultural uses on land that would remain outside the urban area (assuming inclusion of the greenway area) include an active fruit orchard having approximately 177 acres and located to the easrt of the corridor. Hay and livestock pasturing fltrther to the north exists along the east bank, and the cultivation of field crops also exists north of the subject area to the west of the creek corridor. The proposed urban use of the area will be far park and trail use. The Bear Creek Greenway routinely traverses Farm land throughout its roach. Fencing.is used to conhol and prevent trespass. The predominant wind directfon during the summer months is from the north, Consequently, care in.the routing of the trail and separation of recreational areas from farm activities should and will be taken in the planning of these park and trail facilities and the, same will occur under the jurisdiction of 3ackson County or the City of Central Point. The area has sufficient size to accommodate setbacks and screening of sensitive receptors from the nearby and sometimes adjacent agricultural land activities. The riparian carrldar along the creek is heavily vegetated and provides natural screening through a significant portion of the area. While the potential exists for noise from farm activities, Cite same are not anticipated to be a significant problem and can be mitigated. Irk addition, ambient noise from Interstate' S will serve to dampen noise from farm uses. ~Q,~g-acre residential exception parse! tl~ abets, A~rricultui~a~ lands to the north is occu~4g~_ lav one single-fa ' y detached residence wellinlt. The inclusion of this parcel. ' in the urban ~a will faci i ilabili of li tilities to serv e~~i ,, g residence. Because the parcel abuts A Bicultural lands env future develo men 9f the oronerty will be subiect to comaiiance with.the agricultural bufferinst standards to malemented as part ofthis Flan. •~~Oyy [~] Page 13 of 14 ~,tt~Y ~ ~ EXHIBIT "E" Note: Proposed correction is identified in ~. The use of urban reserve average .parsons per household of 2,5 has always been agreed to and noted in prior drafts, and is correctly noted in Volume 2 of the Greater Boar Croek Regional Plan. As a result of this correction it may be necessary to si~just developable land figures. Page 4-9 Figure 2.10 ~::~\ F ':.;', :~ Y}. 1 ~, is f~: ~ti'•.~,~d1r, S ~.. :~y ~1 ~; t~'...,, t J~ .4~ ~~• 'Y:':: F:"t i. ( '1~~; .) ~^~~•:'. f.i~i::',;;:f;: }: a /t tiE e ~ ~,C }~~~rY ~ t' ~t' .~'3~i ;{hS.:~i..., `~'i. ~ ~ .k. ~ y~~~q~,7~G~,X+~ .~°~1 f1~ i?'; Sr. 1tk ~ A ~, 1~ ~,7 i;~~~S 1: ~' ,;7 ~; ..~:•; 4 !~!~~~i (~ ~ ~i =1~} J'Ye }, a .'~.... a y:..~. •:g# ~'' y~ ~ ~~~ 1 b '~}~ r.; ~,,, 4 t` ,' ~' ~ .q... 4;. •y~t' ~f.:~ ~ < i) %ii~~ ~ ~ 4 ~, y ~ j `. :~ t {"[ _~~ ~f : ;{., ,a :•J ,f'..x`Sf~f' ta43"'~,'[ ~ fd;.Yr'r ~~:3 f.77 ~~~;,~"~ ~~ .. ~ . , ~~'r a .~ '~+}~.~ ~. .sS, : ?.t . .~ eP'•; .~ It .. R('h ~' rr' , <. ~ p•'• "~(:;s;•~,h.-". .. i.`.r.$ t (~.. ~. ~~:{::,. _~° ~ ~ •~~~~~ ~ 1^ Peo ~le Per p H seh ld 2,15 2.69 2.82 . -2.47 ~:30~~ 2.25 .. ~ ~ ~ ;: ou o ~~~~ ~ ~ i ~ ' !~j Density G , l ~ . , ~ ' ross (D[J/ 5.28 5.50 5.20 5.20 G.00 5.65 . ~•~.%~,=~ ':,:'~ .'~ Acre ~> r; srf:x,~~ ~ ~ ~ ~,;~ ,t>;~ . ~ ~,~:t~":; ~ ~:. P 1 P r eop e e nla X69 ~ 2.82 2.41 2 30 2 38 ;;~f• , , . . .,~ ;.:...: '~ ~a ~ Household . , l. 1 ~ ~;~ ,: ~~ y(• ~~ ~~ Lower ~ ~ ~ ~~ fi. '' ~~ :~~:5 Density n/a 6.00 40 6 b 50 6 20 G 20 . ~,~.. ~~~~y~• Acre . . . . .:.,.~ 1~ : ~ •- • Higher z. f~, ~ f:. R,:: ~,.;:.;~ `~~ n~,~1Jf~•~s~~ ~~~~t it f ~ Density D / n/a 7.26 7.74 7.87 7 50 . 7 50 1 !3si f }~i~. ~si,¢,Y d~ ` \I II~VVS ( ~i~;~~,r::~::;~,~s<, t~::..~ Acre Page 14 of 14 ~,.~ .. , ~~ 30 First Reading Ordinance Regarding Registration of Vacant Properties Staff Report T0: City Council Members FROM: Christopher Clayton AGENDA DATE: May 13~~ 2010 Ci€ynt CENTRAL ~o~NT t.)~~eac~ri SUB]ECT: Vacant Properly Registration Ordinance Administration Department Phil Messina, City Administrator Chris Clayton, Assistant City Administrator Deanna Casey, City Recorder Barb Robson, Muman Resources Manager BACKGROUND: The purpose of this vacant residential property registration and maintenance program is to protect neighborhoods from becoming blighted through the lack of adequate maintenance and security of vacant properties. Registering the property with the City after it is confirmed to be vacant, allows the City to monitor the condition of the property and notify the owner if repairs or maintenance are needed. [t also provides the location of vacant properties to the Police Department, which will then allow patrol officers and Police Department Volunteers to check on the property and ensure that unauthorized individuals have not entered and damaged or are illegally occupying the residence. It is believed that not only will registration of vacant properties assist in maintaining livability for the affected neighborhoods, but it will benefit the vacant property owners as well. The problem of increasing inventory of vacant residences is rising in communities throughout the region. Staff believes that this ordinance is an effort to deal with the problem in a preemptive manner and in a way that encourages cooperation and compliance from property owners. Enforcement of the code will be conducted by the Central Point Police Department through the Code Enforcement Unit. PROPOSAL: An ordinance amending the City of Central Point Municipal Code adding Chapter 8.40, Sections 8.40.10; 8.40.20; 8.40.30; 8.40.40; 8.40.50; 8.40.60; 8.40.70; 8.40.75; 8.40.80; 8.40.90. FISCAL IMPACT: This ordinance is not intended to generate revenue for the City; rather the intent is to create a mechanism for the City to ensure the vacant residences are maintained in a manner the does not negatively impact local residential property values. There would be no initial registration fee, however the Ordinance will allow and a maximum fine of $250.00 for failing to register a vacant property. Every day in which the violation is caused or permitted to exist will result in an additional fine of $250.00. After failing to register or maintain a property as required by the proposed ordinance, the City would contract the maintenance of the property. All costs far maintenance and penalties would become a lien against the property. , ~.a31 STRATEGIC PLAN: Goa12 Build Citv p~' a and positive image Strateg'eLs.: a) Create a brand and launch awareness campaign, articulate vision and mission, define values; b) Recognize the successes of Businesses, Citizens, and Government publicly; c) Communicate and celebrate events, honor our past and take pride in the future; d) Promote "healthy neighborhoods" by encouraging socioeconomic diversity. Design with health and safety in mind [i.e. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) when making infrastructure improvements [including parks and schools); e) Review current codes in use for development and improvement. Revise as necessary to create "healthy neighborhoods". lsnforce codes in older established neighborhoods. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council consideration and approval of the proposed Vacant Property Registration Ordinance (first reading). EXHIBITS: 1. Proposed Vacant Property Registration Ordinance, 2. Vacant Property Inventory (March 3t)th, 2010) ~,. ~` `3 ~ ~. i=oreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 1960 Blue Grass 2010 Blue Grass 1 1970 Aristona 1991 Blue Grass 2021 Blue Grass 2015 Rabun Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 2x50 Blue Grass 57S Bachand 2197 Jeremy 421 Silver Creek 570 Bachand 4r .. v `~ , ~; 3~ 1923 Walnut Grove ces ir- ~e~tra~ paint ~areclased ~e$~den ~~rch gyp` 2p~-Q ~~ 346 N stn .. wf t1tY1 ~2~N•~. 301 Haze 3 ~, -" 205 ViCto~ .a 102 princess Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 447 N. 5th 350 N. 7th 350 N. 1st 1150 Vista 250 N. 1st 4 + 4 369 N. znd Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 239 Manzanita 501 Hazel 281 Meadowbrook 625 Cherry 318 Brookhaven 859 White Oak ,. r ~ *'~ ~~ Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 8Z4 Ridgeway 336 Ridgeway 368 Live Oak Loop 347 Ridgeway 2894 Brookdale ,~ ~~`s ~~ J ~ s. 2324 Devonshire Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 564 Quail Court 150 Rosewood 208 Corcoran 7 606 Palo Verde 935 Amanda Way 450 N. Central Valley Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 496 W. Pine 4S3 W. Pine 177 Logan 8 465 W. Pine 167 Casey P 173b Tara Circle Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 131 Casey 1212 Wedgewood 9 1331 Farwest 1166 White Chapel y ~ '' J - ~1. 120 Shadow Wood Ct 1150 Glengro~e Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 994 Forest Glen 1240 Joshua Court 10 942 Hopkins 1251 Heather 657 Hemlock ~~ F.~ .~! . t , 119Q White Chapel Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 634 Hemlock 462 Grand 635 Shadow Way 11 770 S. 4th 574 Bush 606 Shadow Way ~t~J ~. l; Foreclosed Residences in Central Point March 30, 2010 600 Shadow Way 12 263 S. 2nd ~ ~ -. ~~4 Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 8.40 TO THE CENTRAL POINT MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REQUIRING REGISTRATION OF VACANT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES The people of the City of Central Point do ordain as follows: Section 1. The following chapter and sections are added to the Central Point Municipal Code: Chapter 8.40 Vacant Residential Property Registration Sections. 8.40.010 Title and Purpose 8.40.020 Definitions 8.40.030 Inspection 8.40.040 Registration 8.40.050 Maintenance Requirements 8.40.060 Security Requirements 8.40.070 ~ Additional Authority 8.40.075 Additional Remedies; Lien Against Property. 8.40.080 Violation; Penalty 8.40.090 Appeals. 8.40.010 Title and Purpose. This ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "Vacant Residential Property Registration Ordinance of the City of Central Point." The purpose of this vacant residential property registration program is to protect neighborhoods from becoming blighted through the lack of adequate maintenance and security of vacant properties. 8:40.020 Definitions. As used in this chapter: uBorrower" means any person who becomes obligated on a real estate loan agreement, either directly ar indirectly, and includes, but is not limited to, mortgagors, vendees under conditional land sales contracts and grantors under .trust deeds. "Evidence of vacancy" means any condition that on its own, or combined with other conditions present, would lead the Chief of Police or designee to believe that the property is vacant. Such. conditions include, but are not limited #o, overgrown or dead vegetation; accumulation of newspapers, circu}ors, flyers andlor mail; past due utility notices or disconnected utilities; accumulation of trash, junk and or debris; the absence of window coverings such as curtains, blinds and or shutters; the absence of furnishings or personal items consistent with residential habitation; evidence of trespass or criminal mischief; or Page 1 ordinance vacant prapertyregistry.docx i,. U A ~ statements by neighbors, passers-by, delivery persons, or government employees that the property is vacant. "Lender" means any person who makes, extends, or holds a real estate loan agreement and includes, but is not limited to, mortgagees; beneficiaries under trust deeds, vendors under conditional land sales contracts; trustees and a successor in in#erest to any morkgagee, beneficiary, vendor or trustee. The term also includes any mortgagee, beneficiary or trustee that accepts a deed in lieu of foreclosure. "Notice of default" means a written notice to a borrower stating that a default on a real estate loan agreement has occurred and that legal action may be taken. "Out of area" means outside of Jackson County. "Real Estate Loan Agreement" means any agreement providing for a loan on residential property, secured in whole or in part by real property located within the City of Central Point, or any interest therein, and includes, but is not limited to mortgages, trust deeds and conditional land sales contracts. "Vacant" means a subject property that is not legally occupied. 8.40.0301nspection. A. Immediately upon default of the borrower, but no later than prior to recording a notice of default with the Jackson County Clerk's Office, a lender shall perform an inspection of the property that is the security for the real estate loan agreement. B. if the property is found to be vacant or shows evidence of vacancy, the lender shall, within ten days of the inspection, register the property with the Chief of Police or designee. C. If the property is occupied but remains in default, the property shall be inspected by the lender on a monthly basis until the borrower remedies the default. If an inspection reveals that the property is vacant or shows evidence of vacancy, the lender shall, within ten days of the inspection, register the property with the Chief of Police or designee. D. This chapter also applies to properties that have been the subject of a foreclosure sale where title has transferred from one lender to another lender; and to a property transferred under a deed in lieu of foreclosure. 8.40.040 Registration. A. The registration shall contain the: following information: 1. The name of the lender; 2. The direct mailing address of the lender. Post office boxes are not acceptable; 3. The direct contact name and phone number for the lender; Page 2 ordinance vacant prapertyregistry.docx 4. The physical address #or the lender's agent authorized to receive service of process, if applicable; and ~. The direct contact information for the focal property management company responsible far security, maintenance and marketing of the property, if applicable. B. No registration fee shall be imposed. A lender that has registered a property under this chapter shall report any change of information contained in the registration within ten days of the change. Properties subject to this chapter shall remain under the registration requirement as long as the property remains vacant. C. Registration forms shall be available at the Central Point Police Department and online at the City's website. 8.40.050 Maintenance Requirements. A. A lender shall maintain properties subject to this chapter. Maintenance includes all of the following: 1. Ensuring that the condition of the subject property does not, in the opinion of the Chief of Police ar designee, constitute a public nuisance or a chronic public nuisance as described in Central Point Code Chapters 8.02, 8.03, 8.04, 8.08, 8.28 and 10.12; 2. Regular watering, irrigation, cuffing, pruning and mowing of the subject property and the removal of all trimmings, as applicable to the property; 3. Pools and spas shall be kept in working order, so that water remains clear and free of pollutants and debris; or drained and kept covered. In either case, subject properties with pools or spas shalt comply with the City's minimum security fencing requirements. B. If the property is owned by an out of area lender, a local property management company shall be contracted to perform weekly inspections to verify the requirements of this section, and to ensure any other applicable laws, are being met, The property management company shall post a direct contact name and 24Whour contact phone number for persons to report problems or concerns, and the posting shall be placed on the interior of a window #acing the street to the front of the property so it is visible from the street. If no such area exists, then the posting shall be placed an the exterior of the property in a location visible from the. street to the front of the property. An exterior pasting shall be constructed of and printed with weather resistant materials. C. Adherence to this section does not relieve a person subject to this chapter of any obligations set forth in any covenants, conditions and restrictions which may apply to the subject property. 8.40.064 Security Requirements. A. The fender shall maintain a subject property in a secure manner so as no# to be accessible to unauthorized persons, and includes the securing of windows, doors, Page 3 ordinance vacant propertyregistry.docx gates and any other opening of such size that may allow a child to access the interior of the property. Broken windows shall be boarded or related. B. If the property is owned by an out of area lender, a local property management company shall be contracted to perform weekly inspections to verify the requirements of this section, and to ensure any other applicable laws are being met. A property management company shall be subject to the same posting requirements as provided for in section 8.40.050.B. 8.40.070 Additional Authority. The Chief of Police or designee shat! have the authority to require the lender to implement any additional maintenance or security measures including, but not limited to: A. Installation of additional security lighting; B. Increasing on-site inspection frequency; C. Employment of an on-site security guard; and D. Any other measures as may be reasonably required to prevent the decline of the property. 8.40A75 Additional Remedies; Lien Against Property. to addition to other penalties or enforcement specified in this chapter, if a lender fails to maintain or secure the property as provided in sections 8.40.050, 8.40.060 and 8.40.070, the Chief of Police or designee may give notice of such failure by first class mail. A. The notice: 1. Shall be directed to the leader and all persons shown on the assessor's records or otherwise known to the city to be owners; 2. Shall refer to the premises involved with convenient certainty, the street address, if any, being sufficient; 3. Shall notify the addressees to comply with the maintenance and security requirements in sections 8.40.050, 8.40.060 and 8.40A70 within fifteen days from the date of mailing; and 4. Shall further inform the lender and owners that if the condition is not corrected within the fifteen days, the city may cause the property to be maintained and secured as provided in sections 8.40.050, 8.40.060 and 8.40.070 and will charge the costs to the lender and owners and make the same a lien against the property. B. A lender or any owner may, within fifteen days after mailing of the notice, appeal to the city council for relief by filing a petition with the city recorder seeking hearing before the council. The petition sha11 include the facts upon which the petitioner relies upon far relief from the obligations of this chapter in relation to the property. If the council Ends that it would work a real and unnecessary hardship upon the petitioner to comply with the terms of this chapter, then it may relieve the petitioner of the obligations of the chapter in relation to the particular property, but nothing therein shall be construed as obligating the city to remove or abate the nuisance without charging the Page 4 ordinance vacant propertyregistry.docx c! ;~ ~ ~g~~~, cost as a lien against the said property. C. ff the condition is not corrected within the time limit and no relief has been granted, such agent of the city as may be designated by the city administrator may provide the maintenance and security necessary to bring the property into compliance. The city administrator shall maintain an accurate record of the expenses incurred by the city in providing such maintenance and security and shall include an overhead charge for the cost of administration. The total cost, including overhead, shall thereafter be assessed as a Tien against the property. 8.40.080 Violation; Penalty. A. A lender that violates any provision of this chapter shall be subject to the general penalty in section 1.16.010. Every day in which the violation is caused or permitted to exist constitutes a separate infraction, B. Citations for violation of any provision of this chapter may be maiked by first class mail to the lender or lender's registered agent. 8.40.090 Appeals. A lender #hat is required to implement additional maintenance or security measures as provided for in section 8.40.070 shall have the righ# to appeal to the City Council. The appeal shall be filed in writing within ten business days of being notified of the requirement to implement additional maintenance or security measures under section 8.40.070. ATTEST: City Recorder Passed by the City Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of , 2010. Approved by me this Mayor Hank Williams day of , 2010 Mayor Hank Williams rage ~ ordinance vacant properiyregistry.docx A~ Business Parks Commission Recommendation parks & Public Works Department Ciryof .CENTRAL POINT C]i'~:~;c~~7 STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 7, 2010 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MATT SAMITORE, INTERIM DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PARKS COMMISSION AND FOUNDATION REPORT Matf Samitore, Interim Director Staff went over variety of issues and projects with the Parks Commission. The first of which is the upcoming renewal of the Major Maintenance Fund with the Bear Creek Greenway. There will be a few tweaks in the plan to allow for amendments if special projects of funding become available during the next three year cycle. Staff also addressed changes that were passed by the City Council in February regarding helmets and gatherings in the park. Staff gave updates on the Water Reservoir project that will be built adjacent to Don Jones Memorial Park, as well as gave information about the pedestrian crossing project. There were a few questions by the Commission on timing of the improvements in relationship to opening the water park. Staff addressed that the water park is still slated to open on the Memorial Day weekend if the weather cooperates and the major positions of construc#ion on the crossing should be completed by then. Staff also gave updates on 4~" of July, Discovery After School and Battle of the Bones. The Commission asked staff into the possibility of restricting dogs within certain portions of parks. Staff indicated that there have been some complaints by residents about dogs within the water park at Don Jones and within various playgrounds. Staff informed the Commission that they could make a recommends#ion to Ci#y Council to restrict dogs within the park, per the current ordinance. The Commission made the following recommendation to the City Council. The Parks Commission recommends that dogs be prohibited from the Fallen War Heroes Memorial and the Water Spray Park and Don Jones Memorial Park as well as all playgrounds within the Central Point Park System. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving of the parks report and implementing the recommendation from the Parks Commission on prohibiting dogs within the Fallen War Heroes Memorial and the Water Spray Park and Don Jones Memorial Park as well as all playgrounds within the Central Point Park System 140 S. Third Street • Central Point, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 ®Fax 549.664.6384 5Q Business Don Jones/Vilas Waterline Parks & Public Works Department ~}~y°' __ ... _ _ .._ _ _ _ _ CENTRAL _ . POINT STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 7, 2010 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MATT SAMITORE, INTERIM DIRECTOR Maft Samifore, Interim Director SUBJECT: DON JONES MEMORIAL PARK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING -~ VILAS WATERLINE SUMMARY: City Staff put out bid based upon the ORS 279A.060, where the City Council serves as our Contract Review Board. Staff used this method because of time constraints to get the waterline constructed prior to the overlay that will be occurring as part of the Don Jones Pedestrian Crossing. The difference in using this option is that it reduces the requirements for advertising the notice locally. The city uses a pool of qualified contractors for this type of bid. Over 10 packets were picked up, but only 6 bid on the project. The Bid documents for the construction of the Don Jones Memorial ParlC Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing - Vilas Waterline were opened on May 6, 2010. The City received six bids {Below) ranging in price from $ 128,480.62 to $ 158,$50.00. The low bid was presented by West Coast Pipeline. RECOMMENDED MOTION: The City Council, serving as the City's Contract Review Board, per ORS 279A.060, approve the low bid to West Coast Pipeline. 140 S. Third Streef • Central Poinf, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 • Fax 541.664.6384 t ~-~ k:~, CENTRAL POINT City of Central Point Vilas Vylaterline Extension Bid Results May 06, 2090 2:00 p.m. COMPANY NAME Hid Amount ~ West Coast Pipeline $ 18,480.62 2 Central Pipeline inc. $ '128,843,00 8 H2 Construction $ 938,385.40 4 Taylor Site Development $ 944,952.00 5 Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. $ 145, 658,(}0 6 Pacific Pipeline Inc. $ 958,850.00 ~ $ 8 $ 9 $ 10 $ 140 S. Third Sfreef • Cenfral Poinf, OR 97502 •541.664.3321 • Fax 541.664.6384 6 ,.~ .4