HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - October 6, 2009C
~
CITY OF CENTRAL PQI1~T
PLANNING CO1V~1ViISSI4N AGENDA
Octaber• 6, 2fl09 - b:OQ p.m.
Next Planning Commission
Resolution No. 769
MFETING CALLF~T1 TO (~RDER
II. R4LL CALL
Connic Moczyg~mba, Chuck Piland, Pal Beck, Mike Oliver, Juatin Hurley, Tim
Schmeusser and Keith ~lVangle
III.
IV. MINUTES - Review and approval of September 1, 2009 Planning Cornmissian Minutes
~. PUBLIC APPE.ARANCES
VI. BUSINESB
P~.g. t- 17 A. File Na. 10001. A public hearing to consider a tenta.tive plan applieation for #he
purpose of creating a t~n (1 Q) lot residential subdivisian to be i.nown as Niid ~a.lley
Subdivision, located south of the existing North Valley Estates UnitNo. 3. The 2.14
acre propetty is loc~,ted in an R-1-6 Residential Sin~le F~unily zoning dish~ict
{Jacksc~n County Assessor's map 37S 2W 3BB, Tax Lot~ 3419 and 3500}. The
proposed project has been designed to connect the north and east secti~ns of Wiliow
Bend V~Tay, th~s completing_connectivity af this residential street. Appli~ant: Bob
Fellow~ Canstructian, LLC; Agent: Richarci Templin, ltichard Templin
Survey~ng
Pgs. 1$ - 3o B. Filc No. 9a25~31. Urbanizatioa Element, TecL. Memo Nfl. 2- I~nal
Pgs. 31- 79 C. File No. 90i7. Greater Bear Creek Yalley Re~ional Ylan
VII. DISCUSSION
VIII. ADMINISTR.ATIYE REVIEWS
iK. M1SCF.LLANFCiUS
X. ADJOURIVMENT
City af Central Poiut
Planning Commission Minutes
September 1, 2009
MEETING CALLED Ta ORDER AT 6:00 P.NL.
II. ROLL CALL
Cornmissianers Connie Moczygemba, Chuak Piland, Pat Beck, Justin Hurley,
Mike 4liver, Tim Schmeusser, and Keith ~JVangle were present.
Also in attendance wer~: Tom Humphrey, Community Dcvclopment Director;
Don Burt, Planning Manager; Da~e Jacob, C~rnmunity Plann~r; Connie Clune,
Community Planner; Didi Thomas, Planning Searetary; and Carol Fischer, At
I,ar~e Council inember.
Chairman Connie Moczygemba ~hanked Chuck Piland for standin~ in for her in
Au~t whil~ her son was in the hospital in China.
III. CORRESFONDENC~ - There were two urbanization tcchnical memorandums
distributed for review and future discussian.
IV. MINUTES
Iieith Wangte made a motic~n to approve the minutea of the August 4, Zaa~
Pl~nning Commission meetiug as submitted. Tim Schmeusser seconded the
mation. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; IIurley, abstained; Beck, ycs;
Schmeusser, yes; Wangle; yes. Mfltion passed.
V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
There were no pu~lic appearances.
VI. SUSINESS
A. File No. U90U3. A public meeting to consider an extension of tentative
plan approval for Table Rack Business Park, a twenty (20} lot industrial
subdivision comprised of 18.03 acres lacated in an M-I, Incfust~ial zoning
district south af Hamrick Road and Federal ~ay, and west of Table Rock
Road (Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2V~ i2II, Ta~c lo#s 80a, 900
and 902). A~~iicant: Table Rock Businesg p~rk, LLC; Agent: Gris
Galpin & Associates
Plannrng Commission Minutes
Septetnbet~ 1, Zti09
~'age 2
There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Connie iVioczygemba
~nd IVlike Oliver had made site visits.
Community Planne~~ Coiuiie Clune presented 8. StQ~ 1'~'~OL'~s ~~eque~tin~ ~ one year
~tensifln of time for filing of the final plat for this propoged indust~~al subdivision ta be
locatcd south of the cxisting Federal Express facility on 1'able Rock Road. Ms. Clune
explaincd that this is the first extension request for this project and that conditions
imposed for tentative plan approval have nat changec~.
Community Development Director Tom Humphrey provided some background
information on this proposed development for the bene~t ofthe new commission~rs.
Chuck Piland m~de a motion ta grant a one {1) year extension of time ta
Table Rock Business P~rk, LLC witLiu wLich to file ~ final c~evelopment plan
far a twenty (20~ lot indu~trial subdivision tv be located an 18.43 acres
{JRCksan County Assessor's map 37S-2W-12B, T~ lo~s 840, 900 and 902}
based on the standards, findings, conclusions and recommend~tions st~ted in
the staff report. Pat i3eck seconded the mation. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes;
Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Sehmeusser, yes; and Wangle; yes. Motion
passed.
B. Fils No. 49025l3). Urbanizatiun ~lement Memvs No. 2, 3 and 4
Planning Manager pon Burt distributed urbanization t~chnical m~morandum no. 2
addressing urban reserve areas, and wcbanization technical memorandum no. 4 pertaining
ta residential densities. Mr. Burt asked that commissioners read and study these
memorandums and ca11 him with any questions. Mr. Burt briefly explained the
differenees betw~en zoning districts and how they affect densities, acidin~ that fhe
Citizens Advisory Committee wauld also be discussing residen~ial densities and lan,d use
distributions at their 4ctober m~~ting.
Community Development Director Tom Hwnphrey commended Don But~t ~or the
exceptianal job that he has done to update the City's compmehensive plan while Mr.
Humphrey was averseas ~.nd added that Mr. Bui~t has set up a pi•ocess for the Cify to
update its cvmprehensive plan and incorporate the ideals sc,~t farth in thc Regional
Problem Solving (RPS) plan. The plan, Nir. I3umphrey stated, has aband~ned a lot of th~
larger tax lats in favor of keeping the urban form tight and respecting the goal to preserve
farm ~and.
Don Burt said tliat fhe comprehensive plan is comp~~ised of a number of elements wluch
deal with specific pianning issues. The urbanization clement establishes how lands vvill
be provided tv meet needs, The goals, objectives and palicies have been inspired by
statewide planning goal 14, the comprehensive plan that was adopted in the eazly 19$Os,
the Gentral Point Strategic plan and the Greater Bear Creek Va]ley Regic~nal Plan.
Pdunning Commission Minutes
Se~te~nbei~ l, a009
Pab=~ 3
Mr. Humphrey distributed prvposed aclditic~ns to the memorandtam of goals, objectives
a.nd policies recommending that the City would mvdify and ad~ust its campr~hensive plan
to incarporate the ~aals of the Regional Plan. In addition, the City of Central Poinl will
enter into Urban Reseive Ma~~agement Agxeements (URMAs) with the Coun~y so that
areas in the urb~n reserves can be rnaster plan~~ed. A further suggestion was for creating
a transition between Cennal Point a~d the County by encoura~in~ small scale agriculture
within city limits.
Don Burt asked commissianers to #hink abaut an~d recommend any changes that they
would iike to add to the urbani~ation element. He asked a.lso ihat they give somc thou~ht
ta defining the c~ncepts of a"small town image" and "livability."
Commissionexs stated that "connectivity" was iniportant #fl them whereby differ~nt
neighborhoads felt like pai~t of the greater conmau»ity. Mr. Burt added that all of t~ese
ideas need ta b~ addressed ~nd that the citizcns nceded to feel safe nnd that there were
economic opportunities and,jobs available to them.
Cc~mmissioners and staff then discussed the propased schedule of th~ RPS process, the
timing of open hauses loeally for the public to come in anc~ provide comment on the plan,
and obtaining input fram the C'itizens Advisory Committse, the Planning Commission,
arui the City Council.
VII. DISCUSS~Ori
VIIi. ADININISTRATIVE REVIEWS
I~. MISCELLAl~tEOUS
X. ADJOURNII~~NT
C~uek Piland made a motion to adjouru the meetiag. IViikc Olivcr secvnded
the motion. Meetii~ was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
The foregoing minutes of th~ S~ptember 1, 2009 Planning Commission rneeting were
approved by the Planning Commissi~n at ils meeting an thc day of
, 2Q09.
Planning Ca~nmission Chair
1VIID ''~I~AL~L~~Y SUBt3i'~'''I~IC~I~I
T~~I'T'ATI~~ PL~AI~I
Cit of Central Poin ~re on Camrnunitv D~~ment
14Q S 3rd Street, Central Point, OR 9'7502 Tom Humpf~rey, AICP
541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.b384 Cammun~ty Devefopme~t Direttor•
www.centralpointoregan.gov
~ikYOf
CEt'+~TRAL
~~i~~
Orr• g~an
STAFF REPORT
~ctobe3 6, 2U09
AGF,NnA ITEM: F~ie No.10001
C~nsideration of a Ten#a#ive Plan applic~tion for a ten tl Q) lot resic}ential subdivision knawn as
Mid Valley Subdivision. The 2.14 acre property is in an I2.-1-6 Residential Singlc Family zoning
district ~d is identified on the Jaoksan County Assessor's map as 37S 2~V 3 BB, Tax Lots 3419
and 35UQ. Applicant: Bab Fellows C~nstructian; Agent: Richard Templia, Richard Ternplin
Sur~eyin,g.
STAFF SOURCE:
GEIVERAL PRUJECT D~~CRiPTIQN:
The praject sitc is adjacent to tlie North Valley Estates subdivision, tocated south of Sc~nic
Avenue. As illustrated on the ori~inal tentative plan and Unit Na. 3 final ptat {Attachments B
and B.1), ii was intended that the subject property be a phase af the Nnr~h'~allsy development.
The project is designed to cvnnect the north and east seetions of Willow Bend 1~ay, thus
completing conneetivity of this resid~ntial street.
The Applieant proposes Mid Vatley Subdivision as a ten (10} lot residential subdivision to be
developed with detached single family dwellings of similar design to homes currently in the
subdivisian, Existing structures on the project site are designated t~ be removed as illustrated on
the tentative plan map, ~.
Figure 1. .~ """"W""°"'.~-"" """'
~ \ ,~ ~ ~ i ~
Density per net acre: a
The Mid Valley `
Subdivision is within an ~,
R-1-6 R~sidential Single
Family zoning district. ..~~~ -
,,/ ~
The R•1 zone has a -
~r
minimum of 4 units with a
maximum of G units per ~j~
~ ~""'""'
~
net acre. As designed the
project confornis to the ~
~
density requirement of the . .
~
2~ne witl~i 5.3 dwelling .
~ ~ ~
units {DU) per net acre. , Figure~' ~'
~"
Pa~c 1 of 3
/
_~
,~ ~,..
''~ ~ *~'•~,~ ~ ,~5,~,~ ~ .,t~.t~
. . -~ t~~. .~.
Nf f IM f
~~
~~, ~
" ~~-.~~.~~-,
v~~~aw ~e~d w~y ~~"~':C'.,.~
Lots 5i~ze: The ten (14) lots are designed to c~nform to thc lot area gtandards with an average
area si~~e of 7,000 square feet. ~ach lot has a minimurn width a~' b5 feet, thus conforming to
development requirements af Section 17.2U.050 of the CPMC.
Acce~s; Each Iot is desi~ned to have access via ~JYillow Bend VVay, a dedicated public right-of-
way, as shown on the tentative plan map, Figure 1. Access tolfram Highway 99 is prohihited.
Road Right-of-way and lmpravements: Willow Bend Way is a 52 foot right-of-way wifh curb
and sidewalks. The remaining sectian of Wiilow Bend Way will be cc~nstructed utili2ing these
standards for conformity with the existing slreet. Uniform Standards for Public Works
Constnzetion; Standard Local Street {R~trofit) ST-15 illustratcs the street desi~n to include
sidewalks and a ten (10) foot Fublic Utility Easemenl (PUE) tor both ~ides of the st~eet. The
retxoi"it street standard ~hall be a condition of approval as listed in the Public Vl~orks staff re~ort
dated Sepfember 22, 2009.
I-Iighway 99 frontagc: improvements adjacent ta the pi~rject will include sidewalk, irrigatian
system and street trees, A ten (].0) foot Yublic Utility Easement (PUE} parallel to Hwy 99
affecting Lots 1, 2, and 3 shall be provided as rcquired by the City's arterial street standards, ST,
32. The frontage irnprovements shall co~rrespond with the exisbng sidewalk and landscape area
parallcl to the highway. The existing driveway acc~ss from Hwy 99 will 6c climinated upon
completion of the fronta~e imp~rovements.
ISSUES:
None identified
FINDINGS:
See attaehed Attachment "H"
C~NDITIQNS QF APPROVAL:
1. Highway 99 right-of-way is a minimum of 55 feet measured from the cent~er line, This
right-af-way width shall be ver~fied and identified on the final plat map. The ten (10)
foot Fublic Utility Tasement (PUE) shall be ackt~owledged in the declaration and shown
on the final ~l~t map.
2, A ten { 10) fa~t Public Utility Easement {PUE) located on both sides of Willaw Bend
Way sha11 be acknowlcdged in the declaration and shown on the fina,l plat map.
3. Conditions as listed by the City of Central Point Public Works Staff Report dated
Sep~tember 22, 2dQ9 (Attachment C}.
4. R,ogue ~Talley Intern~tional-Medford Airport (Attachment D) requests an a~igation, noise
and hazard easement for the project site as required by Jackson County LUDO Sechan
7.2(~). Said ~asement sha11 be recorded a~id submitted with the Final Plat applicakion.
5. Conditions as iisted by Rogue ~alley Sewer Ssrvices (Attachmettt E},Conditions as listed
by Fire District 3(Attachment F) and the Building Depariment (Attachment G).
~
Page 2 of 3
b. Tentativc appraval to create a ten {10) lot subdivision shall be va]id for one year from the
date of approval. An application for a final subdivision plat map shall be submittcd
within the one year period.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachtnent "A"- Tentative Plan map
At~achment "B"- 1997 North Valley Estat~s Tenta#ive Plan map
Attaclunent "B. l"- Final Plat map: North Valley Es#ates, Unit No.3
Attaclunent "C"- Public Works S#affReport
At#achment "D"- Rague Valley Intei~ational-Medford Airport
Attachrnent "E"- Rogue Valley Sewer Service
Attachment "r"- Jackson County Fire District No. 3
Attaehment "G"- Building Department Staff R,epo~t
Attachment "H"- Findings vf Fact
Attachrnent "I"- Resolution
ACTION:
Consideration of a Te~tative Plan to create a ten (10} lot residential subdivision (File No.10001).
R~COIMMENDATIQN:
Approval af Resolution No. , granting approval of the Tentative Plan applicatic~n ~c~ create
a ten (1 Q) lot subdi~ision.
Page 3 of 3 ~
ATTACHM~NT Y~
Tentative Plan: North ~alley Estates Subdivision
1997
J
:;:,,-; :; ~ ~ ~~N ~~ ~
~: f ~~~ ~ ~
. ~ ,~ . ~~~,
::=.;.': ~ ~~v~ ~a ~p~~
~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~
IFG~s~ ' a ~`~~' ~s~ ~
S~
!f J~ ~~"• • ~ .~~ ~~x.~~~~
, g ~ ~ ~ ~ „ ,~ ~ s~#~~ ~ £~~~~
~i ~ a~N~~~
~ : ~ ~ +
~ ~ _s ~ ~
~
~ ~~~ ~~~~°
~.. ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~
~ ~ ~a /
QA ~~ ~ I
~ ~ ~ ~' ',
, ~ ° ~3 %~ ~'
i ~
y ~~~
C ~ ~~ ~ '/ Y s
~~p JJ. ~I ~
~, ~ .~ ~`~~ 4~~ J
~ ~ t'}``~ ' ~}°° >~ "' L
~~ r-v n ~v~ ~ i V i ~.~, .
'~
"""` . - -~i ~ ~AJ. 'r' ~~'_ ~'I.: ~~~'.
, ~s~. _ ,~: ~
. . ' ~~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~ E I '~J ~~a~..~.
J' ~ S c
y / ~ yC ~(~*~ ~ '
. . ~R/ ~. .i L~': ~. r . S~_ . _Y ~ 1 . .. . .
.
f ~• ~ !-~ ~_~.~ ~
~
~
,~',~ ~ ~ ~,±~ , ~ . ~.~~ ;
P y ~'!~ b `8i sarre
b ~ ~ [y~ 11Y.
~ ~ i~ 8 ~ _ . ._si _.
g ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ g ~ .f~ 5~0'13'bl'Y! , ItDJ
~ ~ - so.a's'f°'ar . O .~ '
`is. ~ - _ _ -_ ° F ~
~ ~ +y, r ~ ~ ~ ^ `~ ~, sarm•~
~ ~6' 2!' 119.Y
J~,~~ / Q: 300'11'Jhf J V
i~ •a. g ,~ ~ io9ao• --.....
. . . = ' y/*{`~ i ~(1 ~F sy_°a` Q' ~ I ~rT=__..iii;oa.' -~
". . .`~,a / ~ ,~9~ ~ ~,6'S f °~a~~ ~ ~i~ .~ ..~. f ' ~~I ~P I
~ ' ~
' ~~' @~~~ ~ /~ • ~ $o ~ pL ~~ °; ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~i -{ 8
~~ ~~~ •; ~ ~ ~ / i ~ ~ ~ ~~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
~: .. .l ~'~~ • ~ ; ,~•,, ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ a • za~~~ ~
~) - IriO ~. No. ° w' v' ~ _~~ i
~. .~ ~ ~ ! ~n ~ ~ ~+ ` °Q ~ y 4 ~am~o•~p'w ~
a(, y.'' / M o% L ~i ~' t'1'Y'E ^ yJ~ ~~
,~ L S'~ ~ ~~1y ~, ~ 0 "~ e'- CSy`~ pp~ \ ~ . - 175.00' (
~~' : . 41 + "0~ N ~ ~y- "f~ 1 `.. ~ -- ~ ~ ~-- ^^^• ~~ ~l
v,s~ ' i •a , t , ~~ y ~~ -1 t r ~ •
'~'~-. , ~ w '~.~; ~~ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r I ~ ~ ~ ' ~ f m ~
,~:'~ ' ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ _ ~"' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~', ~.~ ~ _ _ -~ f l_ _ _ --~ ~
~ o
~.;'_ : ~ ' ~~, J ~ \ ~ ~ / ~• ~~~3`~ / ~ ~ e
I~,' ~~ ~ '~ \ ~ LT ~ \ ~ ~~ ~ C
~ffi' ~:;. ' ; :; ~ ~ ~~ ~ \ I
`~~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ -~~ y~'r~~ ~~~' l y~, i
,!'~ ,.~ ~~~ ~4 eY •~v~~,r~~ I ~ r` ~d ~ ~~ ~ ~
~:~ ~~~ ~ ~~°~~~ ~ _ _ _ -~. ~ ~ i
~~ ~ ~ ~
`~ ~ - ~ ~ ;, 1 ~ I ~~ , i
~,` s i~ i ' ~ ~ l
~. ~ ~
~' ~ ~N'0[i i.e0.S0.t^US ~ ~~t_ _ ~ ~ ~
t
~'~ r. :- ~ ~ dq,6B- ~ `~ . ~~ ~
, : '. . . ~ ~~ I~ +~, ~ l. ~~~ ¢
~g I ~ 4 `' ~ ~
'{~ i•9L Ft ~ ~ i' ~ u A ...-' :i7~
@ ~ - 1'_ ,,.~'.$„~. ~ -.~ Y t ` `'~~
~ L f~ ~
~.,~ ~ ...- ~ ~ ~
.. ~~~ ~ ~ "i a 3 ~ ~ i I E
~~ f I
w ~~~~ v I ~ t i
~`...' ~ ~ '~ ~ y 1
~ Y~r~~
~ 1t ~ {NORfHW6Dp ORIVE} ~
~" "` _ nsm' i~ _ _ as}.~a• _ ... _ ,~ - ns_cy _
~I8~;'. : ~H"~ ~ ~ _ """„'~ soa~a•ix•t ~ ~
t ~ D ~ --- --~-~~ -r -- - ~
~.w.~ _ --~ ~ ~
K[1 .~~~..
.. ~ +. ~ Lf ~ V u ~.
.:. E `=I I ~,
, , ~
... ~~~.
;;-'~ . ~ ~ O ~ • xE a c~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ . . u ti .
-:(i;•:...e. . r o e . . c~ ~-~ ~, ~
:4 ~~ x~' &~€ ~ ° ~~t' 9t~° ~~ ~ --_ ` ~
~ ~ » . ~a„
~ ~.. ~C ~s~~ F~$ ~~~ u ~ ~~-~ u
~~ ~,. R ~
~ p~'' -~~ 'G~ Tia ~ ~ }~j$n '~r:»o$$83~Y~$°876$`v'~tti~P~ii~li$&9~~ $
z ~_ ~^~ ~~~ ~
~~, ~~'~~, ~~ e~~ ~~ ~'tl~ tl~ n5 ~M~R e ~
,~~.°~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ F~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.~- ~~ ~ :~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~
~ ~< ~ .
~ ~ N ~
~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~§ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ppp~ ~ Y
I ~' ,
~ '' ~ ~ ~s ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~u .
t tl ~
..~~ :.••'•,'•,., 4 . .
~
~~ ~ 0
r
~~ ~
~~ ~
~ ~ ~
~~~ ~
~) ~~ ~
2 • ~
a ~~
~' ~
" °o y
O t/~ ~
~~s ~
4 ~ ~
Q ~ ~..
N w~ ~
p ,,,,~ .. ~ .
~ i~ rJ
~ ~
, ~ tq
~ Y
~ N Q
~ ~ ~
~ ~ Y
• ~
~~~ ~
~ ~
.~ G
W
~ ATTAG H N! E NT' "~
BQb PJerce;l~irector
Publ'ic Works D~part`ment ~~~~ Maft ~am~fore, aev. servrcas
~ ~
~~
pre~Pn .
P~TBLIC TYCIRKS ST~1FF RLPORT
~e~tember 22, 2~~
A~ENDA ITEM:
10•lat residential subdivision for 37-2W-03BB, Tax Lot 34] 9 and 3~OU
Applicant: Robert Fellaws ~
Zaning: R-1-6, Residential Singlc Fami~y
Traffic:
A~0-lot sabdivision will generate l.0 additional peak tLOUr h•ip {PHT}, a minimum of 25 PHT ia required ta
warra.nt a traffic stu~dy, and thus none is requir~d af fhis development.
Iss~ues:
1. Highway 99 Frontage Improvernen#s - The area adjacent to Highway 99 is Iandscaped with a m~eanderin~
sidewalk to both the Narth and South of the subject parcel{s). Unce improvements are made the City shall
t,alce over maintenance and irrigation of the frontage imnrovements. .
2, Vi~illow Bsnd Vi~ay R+etrofit - The existing portion of V~illow Hend VJ'ay is the old city standard for a
standard city street. It has curb side sidewalks and the right-of way width of only 52 feet.
~~cistin Infr~structure:
Sneets: 'VVillow Beud ~Way is a standard city sfire~.
Water: There are e~sting 8-inch line waterlines o~ both sides ofV~illow B~nd VVay.
Storm Water. There is an existing 8-inch storm drain ioca~ed on #he North side vf Willow Bend Way.
Eng~neering and Development Pians and Permit~:
Th~ Centrat Point Public'V~orks Dep~nent is charged with management ofthe City's infrastructure, including
streets, waterworks, and starm water drainage facilitaes. In general, th~e Department's "St~andard Specif c~tions and
Unifozm S#andard Details for Pubiio VVprks Constru~cfion" shalE govern how public f~ciiities are tc~ be constructed.
The Develaper is encouraged to ob~au~- ~te latest version of these specifications from the Public Works
Department.
In general, the pl~n. submitt~l shall in~clude plan and pro~le far st~eets, water, atorm dr~inage and sanitary sewers,
stvnan drainage calculations, storm drainage basin map, erasion cont~ol pla.n, utility ~.nd outside ageney
940 Soufh 3'~ Str~eet * CenfraJ Poinf, OR 97~02 •54~.664.332~ • Fax 541.664.fi384
~~ ~
notifications and approvals. The pl~tl may alsa include applicable traf~c atudies, Ie~al descri~tia~s and a traffic
control pl~n.
A Fublio Works Perrnit w~ll only be issued after the ll~partm~nt Dircctor appraves the ~nal construction d~rawings.
Aft~r app;bval, the fees associated with ~ie developm~nt will be calculated and ~ttaahed to #he publio works
permit, All fees are required to be paid in full at th~ timc tkLe Public ~1Vr~rks Permit is issued.
Cvnd~tians of Approval:
1. Wa~,r I..~ovin~; An 8-ench waterline shall be extended th~rough the development.
2. Highwa 9y 9 Izttprovements: Developer shall design and construct e rneandering sidewalk, irrigation
system and street fx~ees for the frantage area. adjaeent tc~ Highway 99 rnatching the existing im~ro~ements
t~iat a~e cun~ently in place #o the Na~th and South of the subject parcel.
3, Street Tree Pl~,,,n : Tree plantings shall have at least a]. ;~s" tirunk diameter at the time of insta~la#ion. All
street trees sha~l be izx~igated wi.th an automatic underground irrigation system. Plans for all public
improvements shall include a street iree landscape plan id~ntifying tree typ~, loca#ian, and irrigation
system. Maintenance of the landseape row will be by the property own~rs wha own the property directly
adjac~nt to the landscape row.
4. Highway 99w Survey - Un the engineer drawings and the fna~ plat the right-af way of Highway 99w sh~ll
be idenbfied.
5. ~t1~i~low Berid Wav -- The street shall be built usiag the Stand~rd City St~~eet Retrafit Profile, or drawing ST-
15. in the Public Works Standa~~d and Specif ca~ions.
6. Public Utilitv Easement - A ten feet (10') wide public utiiity easement {PUE) shall be placed along the
ficantage of 4Villow Bend ~1Vay and alang the back property line of the three parcels that parallel Highway
99w.
940 Sverfh 3'~ Street • Cenfrat PoPnt, OR 97502 •54Z.664.3329 • Fex ~49.~64.6384
~
~~; ~ ,~~-~~c~~n~Nr~t~ ~
Connfe Clune
From: Marcy 81aok [81ackMA(d~jack~~ncounty.org~
Sent: Thur~day, 5ep#emb~r U3, 2009 8:48 A~VJ
To: Cor~~tie Clune
SubJeat: Flle 1Q007 - Mld Valley Subdivision
The airport req~ests an avlgakion, nolse and hazar~i easement pe included in Che permit process. A copy ~f the
approved easement form can be obtalned at th~ airpnrt administrat9on offlce or aaunty planning ofFice.
Thanks for the aAportunity to aomment.
,~ .. ~
,: j
~
~~~~-~HMEiUT " ~ ~
~
~ ~~
,~ ~ , R4GUE V'ALLEY ~EirV~R ~~E~11'ICES
: ---..._._....__._...._. . ....._.. .. . ....___...._.__.._.._. ___..........._..__._......_......_.
Loeation: I38 Wcst VfEas Road, Central Poiat, O.R - Mailing Addross: P.O. Box 3130, Cet~tral Poinl, OR 7502-UOUS
Tc1. (541) bG4-6380, Faz (591) dfsA-7iT I www.RVSS.us
September 2, 2009
Connic Ciunc
City of Ccntral Poine Planr~in~ Dcpa~tmcnt
l SS South Second Street
Centra~ Point, Oregon 975~2
Re: Mid ~alley Subdivision, File ~100Qi {Tax Lats 3~319 and 3500, Map 37 2W 3BB}
Dear Connie,
The exist~ng sewcr facilities on VVillow Bcnd Way arc accural.ely shown on the tcntative plat. Seivice to
the develapment wil) require a m~in iine extension fronn one or both eacist~ng mai~ns.
Tha proposed developrnent ix within the Phase 2 Water Quality Management Area a~d must comply with
the requirements ou#l~ned in the RVS t'Vater Quality Design Manual.
We request that the following conditions be met prior bo finai plat approval:
1. Applicant rnust constre~ct a ncw public scwcr main in accordancc wit3~ R~S staadards. This
main line must be accepted by RVS prior to ~nal plat.
2. Apglicant r~nust obtain an NPDES 12U0-C permit. The permit application should be
su6mitted to Rague Valley Sew~r Services.
3. Applioant m~st submit a stormwater plan to RVS to demonstrate con~pliance with the
stormwater quality requirements of the Phase 2 NPDES permit.
Feel free to call me if you have any questions reg~rdin~~ sewer aervice for this project.
Sincerely, ,,
~~ ~I ~, Digitally slgned by
~` Carl Tappert
Carl Tappert, P.E. ~~ N: cn-Carl Tappert
District Enginc~r Tan ~~ ~te<;~U49.09.02
f" ~F~ o~:~~:a5 ~o7~aa~
~.~
11BCVSA TREEIBCVSA41 VOLI.MEDOR,BC'~SAIUATAIAGENCIES~GTI~'TPTIPLANNGI
suBn~vzszornza~a~xoaa~-NiID ~ALLEI~ SLIBDIVISiON.DQC
~~
~,. ,~ ~`. ,} .
1
~ac~son County Fire District Nv. 3
833~3 Agate R~+~ad - ~
VI~'hi~~ City ~R 975~D3-iQ~75
(S4i} $Z6-71Qa (voice) ~5~41) 826-45+&6 {#ax}
~ - _ . .tnternatlonally Accredit~d - ~~~5-2p2t~
~114T~~ H M ~ NT "..,.~,,,."
Sep#ember 2, 2~09
Connie Clune, Community Planner
Central Point Pianning
~ 4~ S. 3rd St
Central Point, OR 97502
Re: Project '10001
Cannie,
The praject will require one hydrant that would be centered between ~xisting hydrants on
Wiflaw Bend Way.
Sincerely,
s8~- ~ (/f~''''~/'~
Make Thrapp
aeputy Fire Marshal
~~
. ~ '`
I~~J~~i~~~i~t~ i6 ~ fs
r:<<~ur~.~.....: . .
Cit of Central Pain~, C~re on B~~Id~n De rtment
.._.~! w_--_ _____..._.~ .---.___..__...---... _~EN~~1~..-...__..__..__..._....._._._..._~:.___.__~_,~---_....Pa_._.._._....._.
I~Q S Third Street, Central Paint, OR 97502 7~dd Meador, 8uiltting Official
541.6b4.3321 Fax 541.6b~4. f 61 I ~~ I~~
www.ci.central• aint.or us °r' ~~``~~
P
~~uEST FoR co~~~v~rs
~t~,~~~~~~ ~ 1000 ~.
Falcon I,anding
~0 I.,at Subrli~~~ion
091Q3109
P~ior to rinal Plat appro~al, the appl~cant shall su6mit for appro~al by the
Building llepartment, an en~ineered grading pla.n to include the surface grading
a~id crosion cont~rol of a1l pro~~sed lots. The ~~-~.ding plan shall ideniiFy lot
drainage, pad elevat~on, and the locatian, height, and type of retaining wa1ls.The
grading plan shall clearly note ~at any changes to this plan axe s~bject ta the
ap~roval of ~he Building Department pri~r to submittal for a building permit.
The type (keystone/CMU/concrete/Ietc) of re~aining vva~l mater~aX must bc
addressed, and tl~e grading pla.n shall be designed ta assure i.~.at all surface
draanage ~d erosion will not adversel~ affect a.djoining ~roperties. The grading
~lan should ind~catc how ~his v~ill be ~mplernented in a manor that wi11 provide
continuity and uniformity ~hrough-out t.~e de~elopment. ~t should be noted
that,~his task, lef~ to contractors, homebuyers, landscapers at various stages o~`
development of ind~~ridual lots, ha~ not warked. Included with the grading plan
will be a crossection that indicates compliance ~i~h ~bove concerns.
Respectfully,
. ~~~
Tadd Meador
~4D S Third S~reet ~ Cenfral Poinf, OR 97~02 ~ 54~. G64.3329 ~ Fax 541. fi64. ~ 6~ 7
~~
A~.tachment H
FIN'DINGS OF FACT
AND
CUNCLUSI~NS ~F LAW
File 1~To: ~OOOT
INTRODUCTIQN
Consideration of a 7`entative Plan applicatio~i far a ten (1 a) lot residerrtial subdivision known
as Mid Valley Subdivision and is located south of the existing N~2~th Valiey Esta#es Unit
No.3. The 2.14 acre property is in an R-1-6 Rssidential Single Family zorung dist-ict. South
of Scenic Avenue, the subj~ct propcrty is identified on thc Jackson Counly Assessor's map as
37S 2W 3 Ba, Tax Lots 3419 and 3500, Applicant: Bob Fellows Const~uctivn; Agent:
Richard fiemplin, Richar~i Templin Surveying
CPMC 16.1{1.014 -16.1fl.0?4 Tentative Plans. Th~s sec[~on of code provides desrgn
sta~adar^d.s andrrinca~le,s of acce~tabilily, the ira, fo~rnation required to &e dncduded on a
tentative plan map and other supplementary ma~erial that may he r~equired fo~ review of the
uppricu~ion.
Finding: Th~ app~icatian and tentative plan map sabmitted contain the nec~ssary and
required information of ~e,ctions 16.10.010 through 16.10470 as evidenced by
Applicent's exhibit, Tentative Plan map,llttachment A.
Finding: Each of the ten (IO) ~ropased lots is designed wit4~ rnad access via Willow
Bend Way. The projcet as designed will connect the noz~h and east seotions of ;
Willow Bend VtTay, thus comple~ing connectivity of this residential street. Lots I and
2 are adjacent ta Highway 99, however, acc~ss ta these lots is pravided by Wi.llow
Bend Way.
Finding: The existing section of Willow Bend Way is a 52 foot right-of way with
curbside sidewalks. The section to be constructed will match the ~isti~lg street and
will meet City road standards. Highway 99 fronta.ge improvements are ~~equired and
include sidewalk, i~rees and ground cover adjacent to Hwy 99 to carrespond to tlue
existing improvements.
Canclusion: The tentative plan meets these requirements
CPMC 16.20A2U Stree~s-Ge~erally. 1 he location, width, and g~ade of.stree~s shalt be
considered in thet~ rclutiun tu exia7ang antl pdanned streeis, to dopographicad condBtiorts as
they redate tv drainage and the vpe~ativn of the wader, ~s~ewet~ systems, loptablic convenie~rce
and safety and their appt~oprtate relativn to the prr~posed use of the land to 8e served by such
.vt~eet.s. I3'here lr~cation is~ n~t shown tn a develo~ment pdan, the arrangement of'stree~s rn a
subdivision shall ei~her,
A. Provic~~, fvr the i°vn~inualivn v~ appt~o~riate projeetion of existing st~eets an sur~oattzdang
areas; vr
B. Conform to the plan for thc ncighburlro~d appt~oved or advpded by !he cily to meet c~
part~cular sttuation where topographical Qr Qther conditians make contin~aance vr
confnrmance tn exi.sting stt~eets ~tnpracfical.
f~
Page 1 of 4
Finding: Th,e existin~ sectian of ~Villow Bend Way is a 52 foot right-of-way with
curbside aidew~ks. '1'he newly constntc~ed section shall be built using t~~e r~trofit
pxofile drawing ST-1 S of the Public Warks Standard and Specifications. Said street
7telrort design conforcns to Public V-~orks Conditaons of Approval item number 4 as
provided Public ~JVorks staff report datcd September Z2, 2009 {Attachment C).
Finding: The retrofit street design s~ndard will pravide far the continuatian of the
existing street system and internal connectivity as evidenced by North `lalley Est~.tes
Unit 3 final plat 2G-29.
Fiuding: Highway 99 is classified as a S lane arteria~ streeet with an existing 110 foot
right-of-way. The cxisting right-af way exeeeds the vvidth requirement ofthe Public
Works Slandard and Specifications, ST-32 af 103 £eet (1Q8 feet with parkin~} and as
such, additional road dedicati~n is not requircd.
Conelusion: The propasal camplies.
16.Z4.030 Blocks--Easemcnts.
A. Utality ,T.ines. Easement.s fnr eZectric dBnes or o~her noncaly owned ptsbl~c art8li~des
may be required, and shall t~e a minimurra of ten feet fra wfdth located on the extet~ior
~ortiQn of cr s~ngZe p~vperty. ~asemend,s~ for city ulidities (i. e., water, sto~m draBn and
sanitary sewer main~) shuZ1 bc u rr~inimurra c~~;~f~ecn,feel in widdh lvcalec~ an the
exteriQr portion of u single pro~erty. 7'ic-bc~ek caaemcrrts ,~ix, feel wide by twenty,feel
long slzatl be ~r•ov~~ed for utidity pQles along lot lines at change of direction points of
ea>remen~s.
Finding: Watex, storrn drain and sanitary sew~er lines are located within the right-of-
way of th~ existing Willow Bend Way and are sufficient to servicc thc proposcd
project as identified in the Public V~orks sta.l'freporC dated September 22, 20U9.
Finding: Extensi~n of the existing utility Iines shall be reQuired for this project.
Fiuding: A ten (10) faat Public Utility ~asement (I~U~) is located on adjacent lots
and parallel to Willow Berui Way. As conditian af Approval, all lots sh~ll have a ten
{14) faot PUE. Said PLTE ~h~ll b~ aeknowledged in the declarat~on an~d shown on the
final plat map.
Finding: To faciiitate existing utility easements and the required Highway 99
frontage improvcments a ten (l Q) foot PUE shall be a condition ~f any approval. Said
PUE sha11 be shown on thc final plat ma.p.
I+tinding: The final engineered construcfian drawings require City of Central Point
Public ~Vorks Department review for compliance with the Standa.rd Specificati~ns and
Uniform Standard ~?etails for Public Works prior to the Public V~Torks Perrnit being
issued.
Conclusion: The proposal complies.
B. Watet•cou~ses. Wher~e a subdBvisi~n is traver•sed by a watercourse, drainagc wc~y,
channel or streatn, there may be required a,str~~rra water~ easement or dra2rrage right-
Page 2 of 4 ~ ~
of-way confo~mirag .substantialdy with the lines of such watet~course, and sucla further
~vidth as wdll be adequate fa~ the~urpose. Streets, parkways or access road~s purudlcl
~o rraajo~ watercout~ses may be reqz~ired.
~iuding: IVIid Valley Subdivision is nat adjacent to C'~riffin Creek, however, the
prvject sste is ideniified as 6eing within the flood zone X(S00 Year) fox Grif~in Creek
with no future hazard requirements as evideneed by the flood determination le~ter
dated August 25, 2049.
Conclusion: The proposal complies.
C. Pede,straar~ Way.s. In any hlock nver seven hundr~ed~f~y feet in dength a~xedcstrian
way may be requi~ed, ~he »tinimum wfdth of d~he pede.stt~ian right-of way must be at
least six f'eet in width whdch shalt be ha~d sx~rfaced th~^otagh the hlnck and curb fo ~urb
in order to pruvide cuay acces~s to scho~ls, parks, .sho~~irag centenv, mas:v
transportation sto~s vt~ vther cUmmunily services. If conditions requare bloek,s langer
than twelve hundred,~eet, two pedestt~ian ways naay be reyuar~d far iiombination
~edestr~iara way and utfd~ty easement. When essentiad fvr~ubdic cvnvenience, suc~a
ways may be requir~ed to enrznect tn cut-de-sacs. ~ong blocks pa~ullel tu urtcraal
streets may be approved wathout~edestrian way.s if'desirable ~n the inte~ests of ~aff c
.suf~ty.
Finding: The internal stree# systems of thc subdivision will be canst~ueted to City of
Central Foint street standards tv inc~ude sidewalics.
Conclusion: The praposal complies
CPMC 16.~4.040 Lvts-Uses.
A. The cily muy, in i~s discr~tion, deray approval far t~ae creataon ofany lot by a~y rraanner if
the effect of sa~ch creation of a tat woudd to, facidi~ute pe~~petualio~a of tx nonconforming ar,se.
Finding: The proposed ten (10) lot subdivision is within an R-1-6 Residenlial Singlc
Family zonin~ district and is proposed t~ be developed with detached single family
homes of sirniiar desi~n as the existing neighborhaod.
IS~ndiug: The subject site has an eYisting hvme and autbuildia~. These structures are
designated to be removed. The applicant is aware that a demolition permiC may bc
required.
Conclusioa: The propasal complies.
13. ~+lo lot shadl be created unless i~ is in conaptiance wit~a all applicabde pravisio~rs o,f'this
COC~.
F~nding; The Mid Valley Subdivision is within an R•1-6 Residential Single Family
zane district. The R-1 zone has a minimum density of 4 units with a maximum of 6
ututs pcr ne~ acre. As desi~ned the project conforms to the density requirements of the
zone with S.3 dwclling units (DU) per net aere.
l~nding: The application as pre~ented is in compliance with applicable provisions of
this code. 1 ~
Page 3 of 4
Cunclasion: The propasal c;~mplies.
CPMC 16.Z4.fl50 Lots Size and determination. Lot sizes shall confar»a with the zo~aing
ordinance and shall be a~~ropriate for the location of the subd~vision and, f'nr the ty~e nf
devedopnaent a~ad use cotrtempdated.
Find~ng: The ten (10} lats are designed ta canfot~rn to t~ie lot area ~tandards of with an
average area si~e of 7,OQ0 square feet. Each lat has a~ninimum width of 65 fee~t, thus
eonforming to development requirements of ~ectian 17.2Q.U50 of the CP11~C.
Conelusion: The prapQSal complies.
CPMC 17.2U,OlU Purpose. T'hc pu~po.se uf the R-~ r~istrict is to stabilize and protect fhe
urban low de~tsily resit~entiul churucFe~-is~tic.~ c~f the district whijc prvmating and encouraging
s~itable environments fot~ famidy life. 7'he put~~ose of the ~-~ dtstrict is to stab~l~ze a~d ~rotect
the urbcrn low density re~identrat characterist~cs of tFre district whtle promottng arad
eneo~rag~ng su~tahle er~v~ronments for famaly l~e.
CPMC 1?.2~.45Q Densi~y, lat area, lot width, dimension, building height, lo~ covcrage,
and yard require~nen~.
~evelo~ment Requirements R-1-6
Minimum density 4 units!
acre
Maximum dens(ty 6 unlts!
acre
Minimum lot area (interior} . S,OOQ
Maximum (ot area {interior} 9,000
Minimum lot area (oorner) . 7,OOb
Maximum lot area {corner) N/A
Minimum lot width (inierior) . 50 feet
Minlmum lat width (corner) . 60 feet
Fiuc~ing: As noted in the above finding, lot ciimensions are an established standard in
th~ R-1 zone with each lot of this praject meeting or eatceeding said standard. ~ach lot
within the project is of a suffieien# size and is in complianee.
Finding: The project is designed with 5.3 units per net acre density, thus is
canforming to t~e density requirement of Section 17.20,050,
Canclusion: The proposal cQmplies.
Page 4 of 4 1~
ATTfiCHl1lIE~T "~
PLANNII~IG COMNII5SION RESOLUTION NO.
A RFSOLUTIflN GRANTING AYPKOVAL aF A TEI~TATIVE PLAN FQR A TEN (lU) LOT
RESillElVT1AL SUBll1V1S10N T~ BE KNUWN AS
M1D VALLEY SiJBD1VISIUN
~ILE NO.10001
Applicant: Bob Fellows Construction (37S ~W 03 BB, T~x L~ts 3419 and 3540)
WHEREAS, Applicant has submitted an application for a Tentative Plan far a ten (l0) lot residential
subdivision on a 2.3 acre pr~perty identified o~ Tackson County Assessar's map as 37S 2'~V d3 BB, Tax Lot
3419 and 3500, in t~e City of Cesitr~.l Point, Oregon; and
VYHEItEAS, the pc~operty is in an R-1-6 Residcntial Single ~amily zaning dis~rict and the appiication is
cansistent with thc lot arca and dimension standards set for~h in Title I7, Se~tion i7.20.050, and with tentative
subdivision plan map criteri~ of Title 16, Sectit~n 1 G.10; and
~VH~R~AS, an October 6, 2009, at a duly naticed public hearing, the City ~f Central Point Planning
Cammissian considered the Applicarit's request for Tentative Plan a~sproval; and
VYHEREAS, af~er duiy considerin~ th~e Applicant's reqttest, it is the Planning Commission's dctermination that
the application dves comply with lhe a}~piicable standards and critcria, and is subject to compliance with
canditions as set farth in the Planning Department S~aff Report (Exhibit "A") dated Octvber 6, 2009;
NOW, THER~FORE, B~ IT RESOL~D, that the Ptanning Commission for the City of Central P~int,
Oregon, by this Resaiution No. does hereby approve the ~pplication based on the findings and
eonditions of appro~al a~ set fc~r~h i~l Exhibit "A", the Planning Depairtment Sta.ff Repot~t dated aetober 6, 2a09
whieh 'rncludes attachments, at~ached hereto by reference and incorpoxated hcrein.
PASSED by the Planning Commission anci Si~ed by me in authentication of it,s passage this day of
Octob~r, 2049.
ATTEST:
Flantting C~mrr~ission Chair
City R~•esentative
Appmved by me this day of 4ctober, 20Q9
1 ~ Plaraning Cammission Chair
Plannin~ Cammission Resolution No, (~O1G120U9}
~.r~sAHi~AT~ara ~~~~~r~T, ~~o usE
~A"?"IC~S, C1RBAl'~II~ATIC)l~I 1V~~P, Al~ii3
U RMA.~
City o~' Central Point, flregon P~anning Department
194 So.7hErd St., [entral Polnt, Or 97502 ~~~T~~ Tom Humph~ey,qtCP,
541.654,3321 Fax 54i.66.4,6384 ~~~~ Carnmunity ~evetopment Dlrectort
www.ci.centra!-point.or.us AssistantCity Admi~istrator
URBANTZATIC}N
TECHNICAL MEIV~~RANDUM N0.1
To: Planning Cotnrnission and Citizens Advisory Committee
Frorn: Don Burt, Planning Manager
Subject: Urbanizatian Elem.ent, Land Use Ratios, Urbanization 1VFap, and URMAs
Date: Ocbober 6, 2009
KEY P03NTS
• By 20b~ tlie Cit~s population is expcctcd to bc 40,550.
~ A total of 4,669 acres have been set aside ta accommodate the projected ~opulatian.
• By 20b4 thcre will bc a 34% increase in residential density.
• The average residentia] density per gmss acre wiil increase frorn the 1980 avcrage
c~E 3.9 to a 2060 average of 5.9.
• The average residential density for new developrnent will be 8.7 units per grass
acre.
• Commercial, Induafrial, Civic, and Paxks jOpen Space Iand use ratios will be
reduced below 1980 I~ve~s. The reducEion in the Residential {100 to 68} and Civic
(16 to 6} s~ctar rat'ros ar~ substantial.
INTR~DUCTI~N URBANIZATIQIV ELEMENT
It is anticipated that the County wili cammence proceedings for consideration of the
Greater Bear Creek Va11ey Regional I'lan (the "Regiunal Plan"} in November of 2009. As
w~ proceed with consideration of the Regional Plan facus will turn to aefiians necessary to
in~corporate the Regional Plan into the Cif~s Cornprehensive Plan. The txtost appropriate
venue for in~clusion of the Regional I'lan into the Carnprehensive Plan is thro~gh the
Ur~aanization E~ement. ather elements of the Cornpreh~tsive plan ~cvil~ also require minor
amendments, such as the TSP, Populatian, and Buiidable Lands Inventory. C~hanges ta
~~ Page1af13
thesc elcments would be very minor, primarily focusing on references to population
projections and urban reserve areas identified in the Regional Plan.
Thc purpose of this memo is ta provide an overview of #he basic land use policies in the
current Urbanization Element ~liat will require modification to comply with the Regional
PIan. It is not the purpose of this memorandum to re-review the Regional Plan.
Discussian of thc Regional Plan (Central Point component} will be addressed in a separate
memorandurn.
THE URBANIZATION ELEMENT
As its ti~le infe~rs the subjec~ of the Urbanization Element is urbuvzation, Urbanizatifln is
defined as thc movemcnt of people from rural enviroiu~uents to urban environments, and
fram ane urban environment bo another. This xnovexnent can be motivated by any
number, or combinatian of reasons; scuh as jobs, lwusing, health care, or education. The
result of this movement is an increase in the demand for urban services such as housing
and support infrastruchxrc, such as retail, schools, streets, parks, utilities, etc. Urbanization
has its most negafive irnpacts when the demand far supporE infrasEructure exceeds
supply, resultiiig in ovei~crawded schools, paor health care, inadequate utility services, etc.
The solution is sirnple - plan for, and provide seivices reasonably in advance of demand.
It is #he purpose of the Urbanization Element to establish the basic strategies, goals, and
policies addressing the Cify urbanization needs. As such fihe Urbaiuzation Element serves
as a baseline guiding ~lie mare refined ~oals and palicies af such other elements as
Housing, Econornic, Parks & Recreafion, Transportation, and Public Facilities. The
information presented in the Urbanization filement sets the broad parameters jpoliciea
within which the City is expected to operate over a specified planning period/horizon.
The signifi~cance of urbanization on the econorny, environrnent, and general welfare nf a
community is aclcnvwledged in Statewide Regicaxtat PianniYig Gaa114, Urbanization;
wltich estabiishes as ~ statewide gaal the need to:
"Provirde f~r an orderd~ a~er~ ef~ici~nt hansitior~ fro~c ~r~I to urbar~ land use, to
accammodat~ urban pc~utation and urbara emprm, finent inside urhan g~owtl~
beundaries, tn estsure e~c~e~at use of dand, und fv ~rrovide for tivable oamncurait~ies."
Compliance with Goal 14 is rnandatory. The guidelines necessary for compliance are set
forttt in OAR 660-015-Q00(3~24}.
The goai af the Cify's current Urbani~ation Element reAda:
"To ~rovide f+~r an orderdy a~ci eff~cient ~ransitfa~ frorn rr~rad ~o urba~ tand asse."
Poiic~~ ~uestion, I~Yf7RtiZZGi~'t012 Cs0ldT: It as recvmmenr~ed t~hiat tJ~ ci~rrcrnt urbanization goad h~
mvdi, fied to reftect- su~orting docuttrents, such as the Regfortat PIara rarcd tl~e Ci~y's Strafegic Ptan.
The fadl.~wing is ~ro~rvsed drrx, f~ t.trh~z~tizat~on gor~t staterftent:
Page 2 of 13
~~
"'1'o pmvide for fhe orderty and e~c~ent transitio~ fratn rurr~t to urbc~ra t~std, fA
accanamodate the Citsf s projccted poputation and empt~~tn~nt, to ensure c~ccient
use of tund, to rnraintain and enhance tivabitittJ us enuisioned btf its ei~izens t~t.rough
the strategic ~tanning ~arocess, and tc~ sup~rnt thro:agh tJre Cit~j`s Corn~rehxresive
I~Ian t1~e gaads and policies nf tl~e Greater Be~xr Creek Va1te~ Regtonat ~Ian,"
Regional Planning Horizon
The Urbanization Element typically addresses the city's urban growth needs, via an urban
growtl~ bowtdary (UGB}, aver a mandat~ary plaruw~g pei~iad of twenty (20) years.
Through the regional planning process the plaruvng period can be extended up to an
additional thirty (30) ycars~, frn a tatal plarvti~lg period of fifty years (Figure 1}, and
include ru1 ~zrea referred to ~s the urbran reserve areas (URA). In the proposed Regional
Pl~n the planxiii~ period is not specified in terms of years, but instead is based on a
doubling af the regirn~al ~opulation, which is expected to occur within the neact 45 fia 55
years2 (2(}55 to 20b5). Fc~r the City of Central Point the prajected population wil~ approach
40,5503 at sorne poi~tt near 2Q60. For descriptive purpases this memorandum will use the
ye~r 2Q60 as equivalent h~ tl~e RPS prcyjected papulatian af 40,560.
Pol~c;~~uest~an, Regtanal I'Ic~nn~ng Hartzan: For pu~poses of incorpora~ing the
~egionad Pdan into t~~ t.IrbanizaEian Ede~restt it is proposed fk~t the Cit~y eyur~te the ~errr
20G0 zvit~a the Regionrzt P~r~ papu~~iarr profeet~on of 40,550. As un ralternative tF~e Cat~j
cn~c Ieaz~e the ye~r apen and reefer to the projeeEed Regianal Plarr. ~oputation. lYo~aever, it is
recommes~derX that t&e ~ear 206Q, or agreed orc adtetrzative b~ ~artici~a~ing jurisdiction, be
used. ~'he year 2~60 is raithi~ tke titnits prescr~bed by OA~t 660-021-0030(1), and
provides a de~nitive fzmeline tlzat carz be easYty refierer~ced.
The basic input to understanding urbanizativn is population grflwth. As directed by ORS
195.036 the County is required ta prepare a coorclinated popuiahon projection for all ciHes
within its jurisdichon. Based on the County and City Population Element it is expected
that by 2430 the City's population will reach 25,8804, addin.g appraximately 8,200 people
to today's populatian. 8etween 2055 and 2Q65 it is projected ~Iiat the City`s population
will reach 44,550, for a total populaaon increase of approximately 22,9Q0. Figure ~
illush~ates the City'~ pr~Jected population g7~aw~li as presenfed in the Populatic~n Elentent
and the Re~ianal PIan.
~ OAR b64-021~0030
2 Greater Bear Creek Valley Reginnal Plan, pp 5.
3 Gxeafier Bear Creek Valley Regi~onal I'lan, ILC'S AUocation vf Future Pvpuiation
A City of Central Point PopuIation Element, 2007 inclus,ive of UGB
Pagc 3 of 13
..1 .. ~r ~
Polict~ Q.uestiot% Pop~etation: 77~e Ci~j's ca~rrent T'cr~ula~aon Flement acknov~~tedges tlze
2U30 poputation ptiaJect~on of Z5,$S0, As a resutE ~f the Regianar P~ra it wiZ1 be rte.cessar~
th~t the Cit~~ acknazvtedge ~ 2060 poputatron projection of 40,550. As nated eartier ~~e ~ase
of 20&0 ras a re, ference fear ts far d~scriptive ~aurposes onty, und zs s~onynzous ivith fhe
f~gure o, f 4a,550. lt witt be t~ecessa~~ ta arr~ercd f.he PcrputaEior~ Edement fo include the
~0,550 papul~tion projection.
a
0
a
~i
0
a
FIGURE 2
CITY OF CENTRAL Y~INT
POPiJLATION PROJEC`TION5,1980 - 20G0
.~ ~~~
y.~~~nn+ -~------- -
' ~
4U,000 . 35 874
-----~--~~- --~..._............__.___._....___ ............. ..__..x............... ....
35,000 --_-„-°-3~.1-.?3-Z--
30,000
,
25,000 ,
20,UUIf .......-~---......._...._......__...__ ............._.....1.?,b96....... _.. _.
is,ovo
ia,aoa
s,non
~ . ... ...p... ,..y... ....~... ._r.. _~... ~--- ~- ~
I980 1990 20Q0 2010 2420 2034 2040 2b50 206b
Year
Land Use Needs 198U - 2000
The~e are numt~~vus methods used in caiculatit~g land use needs, most of which are
population based. Given the population proJections di.scussed abov~e, it is passible t~
estirnafie fihe amounfi, and fiype of land needed for urban grnwth. In the c.~rrent (1980)
Urbanization Elernent the Cit~s land use needs are measured in #erms of acres of land us~
per 1~~00 population. The ]980 Comprehen~ve Plan uses six (d} basi~c Iand use sectors as
follows:
1. Residendal;
2. Connmercial;
3. In~ciust~i,al;
4. Paxks & Open Sp~ce;
5. Civic {schools, government services, streets, etc.), and
6. Public Right-of-S+1Tay.
For purposes of this rnemorandum the sixth sector, Public Riglit of-Way, has beeci
distribufied propor~ionately to the ofher five sectors. This adjus#ment did not affect the
inbegrity of the methodolagy; however, it does simpiify use of the methadology i.n
forecasting future demand by land use, and it also standardized the use of the term "gross
acres".
,G ~ Page 4 of 13
In 198Q it was estirnated that the City would need an averag~ of 171 groas acres per 1,U00
populati,on, wltirh wc~uld be distributed asnong the top five land use secbors listed above.
The Land Use ra~ios used in Table 1 were developed basec~ on a survey of cihea ot sirnilar
size and characters. The acreage figures in Table 1 are presented in gross acreage term.g,
i.e, public right-of-way is inclucied in each Iand use sector. The figures in Table 1 are
based crn the assumption that by the yeax 2000 aII lands would be cieveloped and servin~ a
population vf 16,OQ0. As rwted in Tabie 1 the rnast significant land ~se is the Residentia~
sector, which account5 for 58 % of the Cit~s tafial land area. A ratio of 100 is equivaient i;o
a density of 3.73 units per gross acre.
TABLE 1
CI'TY OF C~NTRAL P4INT
G1iOSS LAND USE DISTRIBUTION & R.ATIOS1,1984
Resicjei~t~i ],595 58% 10(1
Coznmerciat 2A7 9°l0 1S
Industrial 437 16% 27
Parks & Open Spacs 202 7°~a 13
Civic tFubllc FacilRIeslSchools) 256 .9% 16
~Measuced'ui ~nus acres+1,00~ popula[ion
2Hi~k•of•x~v included in oacb land usa catogory
'Baeed on a poputation projection of 15,000 by tha yoar 2~00
3ource: Gtily at'Central Poiuf 1N80 CJan~re6ensive Plan, Urbauization Elcment, ~1
Cknlral Pouit Cbmpiafiwisiva Ylau, Year Z000 YrojectedLandUse Slunmary, pase 1lI-33
The puxpose of Table 1 is to provide baseline ciata in tlte Form of Land Use xatias and
acreage Percentage Dist~ibutions to cornpare what has occurred since 198~, an.d what i~
proposed as we plan for #he next 20 to 50 years. The 1980 ratios are not standards, but are
intended to be used as a general guide in estimating the demand for 1and by laxtd use
category. ,
Land Use Demand,l9$0 - 200T
Tn fhe previous section the discussion fvcused cm irhe land use ratios used tn determine
haw much land would be needed by the year 2000, witli a target population of 1b,000.
Since adoption af these raHas twenty-seven years o# developrnent have occurred
p~•ompting the question -- how accurabe were these ratios? In Table 2 the land use
dish~ibutions and ratios based on the actual use of Iand beitiveen 1980 and fhe year 20Q76
are presented.
5 City of Central Point Comprehensive Ylan, Land Dis~ributiott, Figure 2,1
6 The year 2AQ7 was selacted to mauitaui coitsistency with thc Regiona! Plan's use oF the year 2007.
~ ;~ Pag~e 5 of T3
~i
6Vith #he exceptian of the Industrial sector th~ development pattern by sector was very
~Iose to th~e Land Use Ratios established in 1980. The fallowing is a brief discussion of the
eatio comparison,s between 198Q ~nd 2007 by Iand use sector.
TABLE 2
CITY 4F C~NTRAL Pt?INT
LAND USE DISTRIBUTION & RATIOS', 200?
Resi~ential 1,684 GG°-~ 95 10l}
C'ommercral 235 }% 13 IS
Ind~ast~'sai 2{}i H% 11 27
1'arks b'~ Opcn S~racc 225 ~'/0 13 13
~Right-of-~vay inciudcd in cseb lend ~uc caregory, I~fc~ Suildablc Acrcagic cxcludcd
3BascQon 1hc2007 Cily & UC~population cslimatc of 17,627
Source: Clsy of Central Poin[ B~dldabie Land4lnventory•, 2407
Residential Sector - In 1980 it was expected that for each 1,000 population the Cily
would need 100 grass acres af residential land, which is equivalent to an average
residenfiial densiLy~ of 3.73 units per gross acre. By th~ end of 20Q7 the Cit~s
realized ratio was 95 gxoss acx~es pex 1,000 population, far a slight in~crease in
den~ity to 3.88 units per acre.
Althvugh the ratio decreased sligh~ly, the percentage distributivn incx~eased from
58°rb in 1980 ta b6% in 2007, an 8°~ gain. This gain was in respo~tse fiv the need #or
more residential acreage to accommod~te the population growth (17,652) in excess
of the '198fl target of 16,000. Because there were na UGS expansions the added
residential land came from other land use sectors, predominantly the Industrial
sector, which last 8% in its distributioii ranlcing.
Unless rresidential development policies are modified, it is highly probAble t11at in
fhe future the residential ratio will fluctuate between 100 and 95.
Commercial Secfar - In 198d the Land Use Ratio for the Comm~ercial sector was set
at 15 grvas acres per 1,Q00 pvpulatian. The realized 200~ ratio was 13. This min~r
decrease, in conjunction with the distribution re,xnaining at 9°!o i~dicates that a ratiU
of 13 is a bes#ed representative of the City's commercia~ use af ~and.
Unless commercial development policies are modified, it is ~iighly probable that in
the fu#ure the commercial ratio wili fluctuabe between Z5 and 13.
~,~ Pagedofl3
eJ
Industrial Sector - For the Ittdusfirial sector fihe diFference between fhe 1980 rAtio
and tlte 2007 rQtio was significant. While the target 198~ ra#io was 27 the reAlized
20U7 ratio was 11. •
In nddition to the Land Use ratio decline, there wAS nlso a decline in the Percenta~e
DistribtYtion from 26% to 7%. Any change in the PercentAge Dishibution is a rest~It
of a reallocatian of acreage frorn one sector to another. As noted earlier, most of
thAt xedzzction in acrea~e mc~ved to the Residen~ial sectar.
In considering Ehe above noted declines it i4 worth noting that of all the land use
secbors the Industrial sector is the anost unique in terms its demand far Iand.
Untike tha Resid~ntial and Comr~nercial sectars, inc~uafirial develapment is not
c~ep~ndent on populaNon as a determinant oF need. Qcxifie often indushial
developmer~t is a catalyst for residential growth. The Indushial s~rtor Land Use
ratio represents more of a policy statement as ta the importance of industrial
developrner~t (jobs) as a land use componer~t of the City.
Parks & Recreation Sector - This sector relies on a nat~anally r~cognii~ed sfiandard
for park lands. The National Park Lands Association recoxnnnends a rafiio of
beiw~~en 14 and 13 gross acres~ per 1,0~0 popula~ion. The City's 1984 ratio is 13
gross acres per thousand papulation, which is at the high~r range, and is con~iatent
with the City~s visson of a cammunity with plentiful parks and recreation faciIities.
Since 198Q the City has been improving p~rk lands at a rate filiat maint~ins the 13
ratio, consistent with its vision.
The percent~ge disixibation between 1980 and 2007 increased slightly from 7% to
9°/a. This is consistenfi with the City's vision.
Civic Sectar -The 2007 Civic sector Land Use Ratzo is below #he 1980 benchmark
(16 vs.11). The reduced usc of Civic lands was rnost likely the result o~ over
estirnation oE necd. On the cast sidc of F1ie Cihy the school disiricl has already
assembled Iands to serve the developing needs oF the east side.
The percentage distrribution betwee~n 1480 and 2007 remained constant at 8%.
Fublic Right-of Way -~Although not a~ategory in Tables 2 and 3, publir right-o#-
way was benchmarked in 1980 at 34 acres per 1,000 populatian. By 2007 th.e figure
was 38 acres per 1,000 popula~ion.
The inforxn.ation in Table 2 provides an histvric perspect~ve an what has occurred over the
past twenty-seven years relahve to th~e 1984 rahos, validating; in general, the 1980 rativs.
7 Adjusted to reflect a gross acreR~;e figure including public right-of-way
~ ~ Page 7 of 13
Pro~ected 2060 Land Use Needs Using 1980 Ratias
Until modified ~te 1980 Comprehensive Plan ratias are the officiatly recogni.zed ratios fdr
the City's land use distribu~ic~n, and witli the exception of the Industrial sector, have
proven to be reasonably accurate. If fhese ratios were carried forward to the City's 2060
plaYUUng harizon the City would require 6,937 acres tn acccYmmodate all land uses (Table
3). Unless land use policies change, over the course of the next 50 years, the C~ty wi1Y
require ict excess af 4,OaD additic~nal acres than exists within the carrent UGB. However,
Iand use palicies are about to change.
TABLE 3
CITY OF CENT~iAL PUINT
GROSS ACREAG~ COMPARTSONS1, 2000 and 2460
USING 1980 LAND USE RATIOS
Residential 1,S9S 4,(l42 100
Cnmmercial 247 62G 15
indi~strial 4~7 1,108 27
Yark.g 8i C}~ien Space 202 312 13
Civic fPublic Facititieq/Schno[sl 2S6 649 16
'l3asedon ]960 LandUxl2atiosand°~easiredin gossacresJ1,U00 papufafian
2Ri~t-of-wdy includedin each la~~d use category
gllascdon spoputation projeotion of 16>Q00 in~ theyesr 2000 and40.S5U by 2060
During,preparat~on af the Regional Plan it was agreed by alI participatingjUrisdictians
fihat one of th~ Regional Plan's primary ~oaIs was to imgrove efficiencies in the use of land
for urbaniaation8. In achieving this goal the residential anci emplayment dens~ities for all
cities wer~ rn-evaluat~d and the histc~ric averages appropriately adjusted. In Table 4 th~e
adjusted Land Use Ratias n~eeded to accomrnodate the projected populatian by 206Q ~re
presented. These ratios are based on the current and propvsed land use mix, and full
build-out by the year 2060, at a papulation of 40,550.
TASLE 4
CTTY 4F CENTRAL pOriVT
LAND LISE DYSTRISUTION & RATIOS''~, 2054
Residential 1,R(i5 899 2,7fi~l 59% 8R 11f0
Crntunei~eial 311fi ~5 34l 8"/0 lU 15
I~rlushi~) 271 578 849 18°h 21 27
Pactcs & Open Spaee 22i 2D8 433 9% 11 13
Civie (Public Rac~itEcslSchoola) 193 S8 251 S% 6 16
'r,twwrW iu aciwd~,mu povot~iso~~
'Rlghl-af-way inctu~3 Li sach taxd~e category
'Basedou a papdilipu p.o)a~bu uf 40,550Iry tda yw2060
" Grepter Bear Creek Vauey Regional Plan, page 1-10
Page 8 of T3
~ +.~
As iliusi•rated in Table 4, aver the course of time the Grand Total ratio significanfi~y
declines from 171 ta ] 16, a 3~°h r~duction over fh~ 1980 ratia The acrea~e need declineci
from 6,937 fio 4,688. Based c~n popnlaHcm it is very apparent that the proposed ratiob
provide for a more efficient use of land than currer~tly defined in fih~ Comprehe~nsave Pl,an.
The following i4 a discussian of the raHo changes by sector. In considerin~ th~ ratio
distribution it is important to underatan~d ~liat the ratios are based an the proposed
inrrenfiory of ur.ban land, bath within the UGB and the proposed URA. '£his inventory is
finite. By increasing one raHo there will be a r~c~uction in other ratios. To generaIly
comply with the ratios as praposed it will be ner~ssary fihat the City rnvdify its Lanci
Development Cade.
Residential Seetor - Since 1980 residential develapment has been occurring at
slightly higher densifies as the acreage needs per 1,OOQ population have declined
from 100 to 95 grass acres per 1.,000 populadon. As the Cify m.oves forward this
decline is expecled to accelerate. Commencing with advption of the Regionai Plan
the Residential ra#io is expected to drop to 68 by 2060, an approxim~ate 32%
improvem,ent in average density. At a ratio of 68 thc avcrage city wide density
wauld be 5.9 dweliing units per gross acre, up from the current 3.88.
Poticy Question, Land tlsc Need - Rcsidcn~ictt. Tftc pt-o~osed Res~dcntial rafio
is 68, zi~laich is consist~~t with the Itegianat Ptan's trarget de~si~t,~ of 6,0 ta 7.3 grass
acres ~er ut2it 7vithin the URA, and 5,5 zr~ithin tl~ cr~rrc~ct tIGB. To aacommoda~
fhis eFtaKge in Eite Residenfint ratio it zuiir bP necessar~ ttaast cit~j zviafe r~ezu
developrnent zapll tseed to rrchieve ar~ uverage dcnsih,J o~'8.7 dwctling units per gross
ucYe, The higl~er densifij (8.7) can. be acca~rt~disl~ed pravided it is undeYSttxvd tjuit
tlte diff~rerzce wi1Z be ~artiall~ r~rozlered tl~rough ~nodafar.rxfir~~a vf in 'II rznd
rede•uelopment strategaes withan the current ~.tGB.
It is mcons~nended tJr~t thc 68 ratio be crcceptcd, bact maraatored on cc fi've ~ear c~~ck
und radjusfed r~s rrecessary.
Corn3nercial- Bei~veen 198Q and 2047 #he cornmercial dernand for Iand was 7.3
acres per 1,OOQ populatian, which was close to the 1980 benchmark (~5}. As the
City moves forward to 20b0 a ratio of 10 acres per 1,000 population, a 31°r6
reduction, is expected to be adequate.
Poticy Ques~inn, Latu~ Use Need - Cvtnmercial; Since 198Q the Comttret~citz~
r~tao lzas seftT~d r~~aund 13, and apper~rs to huve r~dequat~Iy represer~ted ttze Cittj's
cornrnercrut t~nd needs, A raf~n of ~0 woutd he acaept~bte cvith the ~nr.i~rsfa~cding
that it oret f appties to the CiCy's r~etail arar~ persvrcat serr~ice needs, and that geraerut
off~'ce e~npIo~fnsent zvoutd fatl under tl~e Industritrl sectnr.
1t is recommended tl~rat ~he 10 ratr.o be acce~pt~~, but rnvnitored an a~ve fear cti~Jcle
ar~d adjusted as necessary.
2~ Pagc 9 of 13
Industri~al - As discussed tlne 2Q07 th~e actual industrial demand for Ian~d fell shart,
by a substantial amount, from th~e benchmark of 27 acres per 1,OOQ populaiivn set
in 1980. The propased ratio, at 21, remains high, but is consistent with the Cif~s
policy to improve th~e balance betweexi housing and jobs.
Podic~ Questton, ~.ahd t.Ise Need - Industric~i: It is recomrr~en~d tT~at tT~ 2?
rc~tio be r~ccep~ed.
Parks & Qpen Space - Since 198Q tite parks attd apen space ratio has been veiy
consistet~t. Tn the Regional Plan the Park and Open Spacc ratio wil.l decliulc slightly
frrnn 13 to 21, a 16% reduction.
Potzcy Questzor~, Land tlse Need - Park.~ £~ Recreat4an: A ratio of ?I is
rcrfthin fhe recc~rrcrr~ended Nutionat Park Lunds Assocpaffan s~rldards (?0 -13}.
ft is rccom~ncndcd fhat the 11 rc~tia bc accepted.
Civic - In 1980 it was expected that the civic sectar would reyuire 16 gross acres
per thausand population. By 2007 the actual use was 11 gross acres per thousand.
In the Regzonal Plan it is proposed that the need for civic lands will further dectine
ta a x~aNo of 6.
Policy Qusstian, La~nc~ 1.Ise Ne~d - Civic: The difference in tlu~ Ciz~ic sector's
ra6io decIia~e frortc 16 to 6 is a si~iJ"icant reduct~on frmre not ontif the historie rana,
but alsa tj~ 2007 rr~tio. T~1C YCl~!{CtY0f2 25 ~~IC YCSU~t tli lOZUCY forccasts fvr
governr~~ent jobs.
It is recornmen~led tjeat the 6 ratio he acx~e~tec~, bc~t nroniMred an a f`iz~e 1 fe~r c~cte
anct adjusted as tiecessary. ~
The City's overall acrcage de~.nand per 1,000 populaHon will be 32°lo below the 1980 ratio.
Thia clearly illustrates the City's effort ko imprave the efficiency in its use of Iand Far
urbani~ation. In using tlte above ratios it is irnportant bo re~ognize that they are intended
as guidelines only, and axe Yiat to be used as sfandards.
~ t~ Page 10 of 13
FIGUIZE 3
URBANIZATION REGIONAL PLAN
ip~nd
ut lGt
~ttlwFrxt~w
ltiMf fNttf ~ &s71fy
Centr~t Poi~tt
„m'°~`=°`Y.`~' Urba~i Itese~wes
«~:~,
Urban Caice.~~ Bonndnty 2049
LAND USE REGIflNAL PLAN MAP
Figure 3 illustrates the Git~s prapvsed Urbanization Regional Plan ivlap that includea #he
Urban Res~arve Areas identified in tlte Regional Plan. The Ci~s approval of the Regicrnal
Plan requixes identifzcation of the urban reserve areas. 4n the Cii~s Urbaruzation Map
there are £or geagraphic categories:
Page 11 of 13
2~
ENTR.AL
P~I NT
1. Lands within the City Iirnits;
2. Lands within the Urban Grawth Boundary;
3. Lands within the Urban Reserve Area; and
4. Area of Spec~l Re~ional Planrtii~g Concern (Gibban Aci~es)
Subsequent fo ap~noval of the Regional P1an the City will adapt the Urbanizat'son Map as
part of it Urbanization Elcrnent.
DI~AF~' - UftBAIV ItESERVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT - DRA~'
A cQmpulsory rec~uirernent of adoptr.ng urban xeserve areas ia for the Gity and County tb
enter into Urban Res~xve Agr~ements (URMAs). The parp~se of the URMAs are Eo
establis~h conditions addressing the timing and development of property within the City's
urban reserve areas. In ~ddition #o btandard restri~ctions an cievelopxnent within an urban
resexve same vf the Cit~s proposed urban reserve areas {CPGP-1.B amd CP-4l?} have
unique conditions that must also be included in #heir URMAs. The fvll~owing Ss a model
URMA contained in the Regional Plan, Over the course of the next several months this
model URMA will re-written fio xneet the reyuirements of each parHcipating city z+nd
urban reserve area.
,ll~fodel Urban Reserve ltfiantigement Agr~emetit (UItAfA~
Qre~on Administt~ative Rude b6U-U21-O(I5U requare.r that ~rhara reaer~e
~egional ~'lannrng shald fnclude adoption a~d marntenance vf ~erban ~esetwe
agreemenfs among cities, counties, and special districts serving or prolected to
se~ve the designated ut~ban reserve a~-ea in order ~u ~nsure the c~reu widd not be
devedc~~ed praar Fn expan.rinn of the i.IGli in a manne~ that t-vould prevent or
inhihit future ur~han~zat~on.. 7'hese agreements shald be adop~ed by each
appl~ca8le~urlsdict~o~r and at a minimuna shald address the reguBre»aents of
OAR 660-02X-0050{~ -4). Upu~z crdvptian the LII~A ~•hudl be uppen~ec~ tv this
agreement, A sarrrpde of'the rninimum requit~ed a~^eeme~~ f'oddow,s:
1 his Agreement hy and &etween Jaelrson County (Cou~rty} and the City of
(City) shadl govei•n dand use aetions withrn those lands
desig~rttted as ~Jrban Reserve Areas,for tlze City, in accordanc~e wi~h the
fr~dlvwing puldcaes•:
(1) ~Intid included in the ~~bar~ growth boundaty, lands in fhe Urban Reset~ve
Area widd continue to be plann~d and zvned far rura! uses in a manncr that will
fucalidute th~ eventuad e~cient transi~ion lo urban dun~ ~sses and the pravisaon
af'urbun service,r.
(2) Measures~ to ensure that (i) above t.s ~ossibte at~e as f'ollows:
(a) The cr~eation o, f new parcels of less than te~a acres Bs prohibited.
{b) Praar to expansion of a UGB the c~ty and county wall coordinate the
development and ado~tion of an Urban Reserve A~ea Master Regional Plun
which will incl~ade ~he satin~ vf mujor in~rustt-uctur~, ~nujvr elements uf tlae
laead s~r~eet ~etwo~k, arad the dedineation of areas a, f'agrrculta{rul bu,,~'f'ering,
dndicating how the Urhan Reserve Area widl tran.ritinn i~ato CJGB dand.s.
Page x2 of 18
~~
Pravide~-s uf r-zajur infrastructure (water, sewer, stor^mwater, ~oad.s,
tedecomtnuraacation,s, pa~lcs, and schoalsJ wdld be included ir~ ahe Regiunad
Pdanndng as ap~ropriate.
{eJ ?'o avaid confdic~s~ with pt~ojecled public facititie,~ eorridars and ~ights-of=
way, sitrng of a1Z new devedn~ment shcrlt he ,s~ah,~ecd lo the LTrban R~aet-ve
Master~ Regionai Plan.
{d) IZe.snu~ce land thal is i~ecluder~ in xarban reserve areus shadl cvntinue to 8e
~egronat Planned and zoned under 8he ~eqz~irement,s of rx~placable St~r~~wide
.~egaonal Ptanning Goals. Except 1n urban containment boundaries or ~thet~
area.s subjecl do a joiMtly crppruvecl rnanu~ement Regrona! ~'lan, no zane
change.c tr~ rnnre in~ensive u.ses wldl he per~mi~ted
{3) Lvcal government respansibitities, for ~tegional Pdanntng, puhdic ,rafety, and
service prwi~ionfvr the urban t~eset-ve ~rt~ea will be distributed asfoltows:
(a) 8uilding code adminis~ration -- ~(detatls .r~ecific t~ each agreement)
{b) la~rd use regudaliun -(c~etuila apccifac to each a~eement)
~c) sewer -(detatls specrfic to each agreerYrent)
{d) water -(details specif c~o each agYeement}
(e~ frre protectio~ ~-- (deta~l.s .spec fc to each agreement)
(f) police -~-- {detaits ,specafrc tu euch u~reemen~)
(~ ~ark,s and o~en s~aee --- (detail.v s~~ecifrc tn each ag~emend)
(h} tt~anspvrt~a~ivn facidities -(detaals spec~c to each agreeme~t)
(i) .rtorm watet~ -(detaids specific to sach agr~eement)
(j) schools -~detail,s speci~c to each agreetnent~ ,
Tes~ms a-td ca~ditions shaIt be specified ur~der r~vt~ich servac~e responsibility zvill
be trans, ferred or expanded fvr arer~s where flze prvvider of the se~vice is expected
fo chrz~ge over fime.
Page 7.3 of 1S
~a
~F~~AT~I~ B~AR ~R~~K ~ALL~Y
R~~lor~~,~ P~.~a
city4f
_ ~^~~"'~'~ ~ Communit -~Development
STA~F REPQRT ~~~~~ Tom Humphrey, AICP
~~.~g4~ Community Development Director
STAF~ REFt~RT
actober 6, 2~a9
AGENDA IT~M: File No. 49d17
Review and Discussion of Greater Beax Creek Valley Regional Plan
STAFF S4LJR+C'.E:
Tom IIumphrey, AICP
Community Develapment Director
BACKGROUNQ:
The primary purpose af this report is to:
1. Review and discuss the draft of the Greater I3ear Creek Valley Regional Plan as it applies
to the City of Central Point; and
2. Tentatively schedule a publie hearing to invite public eomment on the Plan ag it ~~plies
to thc City of Ccntral Point.
The Jackson County Plannin~ Commission is tentatively schedttled to com~nence con~ideration
of the Greater Bear Creek R~egional Pian (the "Plan"} at their November i2, 2009 meeting.
Subsequent to that meeting it is expected that the County Planning Commission will request
input on the Regional P]an kry all pa2~ticipating cities. Attached is a copy af the sections of the
draft Plan that apply t~ the City of Central Point {Attachment "A"}, includin~ a summary ~f the
gbals, palicies, and othcr c~rnmitmcnts that cach participating jurisdiction will bc obligated
(At~achment "B").
There are eight {8) basio elements of the Plan. In Attachment "B" each of the eiements are
presented and discussed. The eight (S} elements are summarized as follows:
1. Purpose - The prirnary purpose af the Nlan is to provide a mechanism that allows
gaz~icipating jurisdictions ta plan for urban growth in a coordinated and collaborativc
manner. The participating jurisdietions acknowledge that the independent pianning for
urban growth is not only unrealistic, but also an inefficient use of resources, and that it is
to the betterment of the regional carnmunity to collectively address the growth needs of
our re~ion.
2. Plann~ng Horizon - The Plan is based on a doubling of fhe regional population, whieh is
e~pected to occur by 2060. The maYimum planning hoxizon allowed by state Urban
Reserve Rules is SO years, which would be 2064, using 2010 as a pvint af beginning far
the adopted P1an. For purposes of the ~c~pulation pra,~ections it was agreed that the 2007
3 ~.
Portlan~d State ETnivcrsity population cstimates rep~~esent the regionai popula#ion base
used ta calaulat~ a doubling of the populatian. Using the regional populatian projection
each participating city was allocated a p~rcentage ai'the new regional papuiatian as per
the Plan. For the City of Centrat Point th~ n~w population allaeation was 22,89$1 for a
total pro~ected population of 40,550.
3. Goals and Polfeies - There are three (3) gaals sup~orted by fifteen (1 S} poliaies. Each c~f
the ~oals and policies are presented and discussed in Attachment `B". The goals and
policics arc bascd on thc Plan's Guiding Principles, which are:
a. The Region must plan collaboratively to minimize conflicts, and maximize
TeSOUIC~S;
b. The Region will grow and the growth r~eeds ta be managed;
a Limit grawth to designated areas;
d. Preserve agriculture;
e. T,imit, as reasonably p~ssible, growth to lands tilat do nat suppoirt commercial
f~rming;
f: Cc~mmunitics will grow at different rates;
g. Efficient use of land far urbaniz~tion; and
h. Maintain the physicallperceived separation between communities to reinforc~
individual identity.
4. IYnplementatiou - To meet tlie requirements of #~ie St~te RPS st.~tute it w~s necessary to
include implernentation strategies as part of the Pl~n. As dz~afted the Plan includes eleven
(11) implementation strategies a.~dressing the three goals. Each strategy is presented and
discussed in Attac~nent "B". 1Viost of the strat~gies toeus on ec~ordination arnong
jurisdictions in maintaining the Plan. The most challen~ing strategy will be agricultural
buffering standards.
5. Urban Re~erve A~reas - For the City of Cent~al Point there are eight (S) proposed urba~;
reserve areas. The urban scrve areas are designed to accommodat~ the projected
popttlation and employment for ~ach j urisdiction, while minimizing impacts to
commercial agrieulturallan~is. The Plan also inctudes what is refened to as Gibbon
Acres, an ~1rea of Special Planning Concern.
6. Ferformanee Indicator~ & Monitori~ag - As with implerneni~tion strategies the State
RPS statute requires thc Plan to includc mcthods far evaluating pcrfarmancc. As drafted
the Plan contains ten {10) performance indicators. Many af the performance indicators
are ineluded in the implementation strategies.
~ Be~ Creek Valley Regional P'lan, RPS Allocation af Future Population.
Page 2 of 4
~~
?. Incentives and Disiacentives - As a requirement flf the State RPS process in is
necessary that the Plan deiineate the factors, mechanisms, or outcomes that constitute fihe
mast compelling rea~ons for participants to comply with the Plan. Listed in the Plan are
six (6} major incentives, and six (6) disinoentives.
A. Amendments - To asstue tliat the plan can be amended there are provisions ~.llowin~
rninor and rnajt~r acnendments to the Plan.
Since 2001 the City has periodically held public meetings and hearings to discuss various
wmponents of the ~'lan as it was b~in; d~velop~d. At #his time it is the objectiv~ to r~vi~w the
complet~ci draft Pian and, penciing a public hearing, forward a recommendation t~ the City
Council. The City Cauncil will then schedule a public hearing and forcward their
recommendation to the Jackson County Plam~ing Cornmission. The 3ackson County Planning
Commission will then conclude their he~xin~s and farwarrd a recommendation to the Taekson
County board of Commissionera for final consideration.
The Citizen's Advisory Camrniftee will be conducling a sirnilar review of lhe Plan at their
4etober 13, 2009 meeting. It is expected that they will then schedule an open house sometime
prior to the Pianning Cornmission's public hearing.
FIIVDIN(;S:
Thc~e arc; no finc~ings at this time, Attachrnent "B -- R~gional Plan Summary" providex ad~clitional
informativn vn each of the eight elements nated abave.
iSSUES:
In wnsidcring thc Plan thc Planning Commission necds tc~ bc awarc that:
l.. Adoption of the Plan repxesents a commitment an the par~ of the participating cities to
collaborate with the county in regional planning effarts as set forth in the Plan. This
collaboration includes compliance with the goals and policies of the Pian.
2. Statf is propQSing minar adjustments to thc urba~ reserve boundaries. These minor
adjustments do not include, or exclude tax lots already proposed within each uxb~n
reserve area. The boundary adjustments are considered technical refinements to the
h~undariss a.g pmposed {sse Attachrnent "B" for discussic~n).
ATTACHMENTS:
Attaclunent "A - draft Regional Plan {Central Point component)". For a tull capy of tl~e draft Regional Plan
go to: ht~p:IIWWW.rvco .~or mn.asp?u~=r~s main~a~e
Attaclunent "B - Regional Flan Summary°'
Page 3 of 4
33
ACTIQN:
Discussian of the Plan elemenfis aud directivn to schedule a public hearing for public camment
ragarding the Plan as it pertains tQ the ~ity of Central Point.
Direct s~aff, by motion and vote, to sohedule a public hearin~ n~ soon~er th~~ thirty (30) days
from the date of ihe County Plannin~ Commission's f rst he~xin~ on the Plan.
Fage 4 of 4
3 ~~
ATTA~HN~L(~T ~t !~ ri
Chapt~r ~ Prvposed Urban Reserves
The cc~tcr~iccc of Orcgon's land use planning pragrarn is a reqttirement for most new
development to be located inside urban growtk~ boundaries (UGBs). These UGBs are planned to
ptrovide the necessary mix vf uses, residential densities, and public facilities to support urban
development.
This RPS process addresses a further refinement of Oregon's urban expansion strategy, the ability
to designate urban reserve areas (URAs). These areas are lazids outside af establisl~ed UCBs tl~at
qualify as first priority in future UGl3 expansions. Alt~iough veiy few urban reserv'es have been
e,tablished in Qregon, the ability to designatc the long-term dircction and extent of areas Qt'future
growth in southern Oregon was a major mo~ivating factar in gaining the pdrticipatian r~f
jurisdictions in RPS, and remair~s, after eight years, one of the most impor~ant reasons they have
remained involved.
While this RPS proeess does not direetly address future UGB expansions, the establishment of the
URAs will fundamentally change the UGB expansion process tor thc County and participating
cities. Mosf significant~y:
- The RPS process determines the suitability of the URAs for future urbanization by making
them the highest priarity for UGB e~cpansions. This will dramatioally reduce the co~t,
compiexity, and tima commitment of the UGB expansiot~ process for d~e state asid
participating jurisdictions.
-'The wider selection of URAs for most cities will al~ow rnore careful tailflxing of their
UGB expansians.
- The simpler prooess inay allow oities ta make more fc~equent, smallec• CJGB expansions.
On-t~ic-ground realities have meant that some exception ~ands and low-valu~ resource lands with
high potential for residential or employment have not bees- proposed as urban reserves. At the
same time, some prvductive agricultural lands have been included in the plan as areas for future
urban growth. Nonethele5s, participants agree t~at this process has been extre~nely successful ir
o,~ 3 5
5-2 Proposad Urt~an Reserves
loca,ting and resetving the most appropriate landg for future urbnn uses by Valley's cities, while
als~ preseiving its most irnportarit resource lands and open space.
This chapter details the growth issues vf each participating jurisdiction in the RPS process, and
the speaific grrowth areas each proposed. The following surnmaries for each city explain why the
growth area~ are needed, how these growth areas will address each city's need, and finally,
alternative areas that eaeh city evnluated, but eventually dropned from c~nsideration.
This chapter also intcod~ces and evaluates baseline residential "targets" tv assist in gauging
whether the proposed growth areas will be sufficient for each ciry, and whether the sum of the
proposed grnwth meets the region's needs within the RFS planning horizon. It will also provide
benchmarks for use in monitoring the progress of the plan durin~ its itnplementation.
dreft
~ ~
Oraft ~ ~
Bear Creek Valtey Regfonal problem Solving ProJect - Plannlag Re{~ort 5~
praft ~ ~a
5-4 Propased Urban Reserves
Bear Creek Valley Reglartal Problem Solving ProJect - Planning Report 5-S
DreR ~ ~
D~gft 4 ~
5•6 ProAosed Urban Reserves
~ear Creek Va11ey Reglonal Problem Solving ProJect - Planning l2eport s-7
Exhiblt 5-5
. .: `~~''`~~.::.
Draft
41
Draft
~~
5•8 Proposed Urban Reserves
Bear Creek Va11ey RegEonal Problam Solving Projeot -- Planning Repori 5-8
Draft 4 ti
Draft ~ -z
5-10 Proposed Urban R@aerves
Bear Creek Velley Reglonal Problsm Salving ProJect- Planning Repqrt 5-~1
Exhibit 5,9
Urban R~serve GP-5 CP-6A and CP-6B
`"``~ ~ ~~::~~: `} i~MI - - , ~~
-: e..~~p~'. ~ ~ "t,~ ~A < , ~
~~~ S
^;\ :V,".;"' w ~f~. . c
».s:w~ ._o r~ ~ ~~ ^ ,~~;~~(`~a`~f -~ ,i~
.>.'. .:::~~~'~~.':M ,f .~~:, ~, ~.~~ ` ~
~ f~. ~(._ .~{ ~,.4.~ ~_?
y .F ~ 3,
.~. ,,~~ ~..1 ~.; ~-Y > ~~~~ - ..4'1
r-,~\ "` ..Y; ~,"
'~~r ..~, ~,.,~,e. ~ ~ 5_.H - .C~- . ~.,~".~'
: r:-. ,f x '~ ..
~,r ~ .,
~'~ ~ •
( ~ `~Y
Y ~C 3s
_~
~ g . Q:
5f ~
~'
v~'e'_
~'
~
J .t..,. ~.~
:?~\ - . Y. - ~ ~
.~~ !
y' \
, .l.. ~ ~~q ~'.'
.:..# ''rf..
~ ',. Y..., t "y
• 7.~'.~:.. _ C
~, .. :~ ~ ~.~..
. 1 ~~,~s .2':
p ~ rL y
i~
/ ~~ i
F 4_
L:. ~_ i~~~ i
~4~..h'~ `~
~ i
< :3~ ,~"~; .~,~ ~~ , ~ .1.,:
~ , s ~~ <
~ ,'. r' '_I~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~,; ~~ ~e~~~~t~`~ ~ ~ s~t,
.. . r' ~ 9' 1~.,, ~~_ b ~ i o .;L ~ f .~i4. -ir~:
-~. . ,. ~S ,L:I '.r~ i. ~~,~
3. f 'i I! 1 ~ ,
.~ ~ ~~ ~
~
~} ~, < ,,,, ~, :, ~,1 R ~~ ,s ~;,"' .;~,
_, , ~ ~ ~., ~. -:~
i;-' ` ~ f' ~~ ' ~~~
.. . ~~~~ ~~~~~,~ ~
- . ~~`° `'. ~ . , ~ , ~r, y+~,,r ~ ~~ ~ ~. c ; ~ ~: ~;~;
~ \: ~- t ~K r. ` , r. ;~'r .~., . ,•.
.~... " . Z~`rR~~' . ~ r.;`M1~^!R., ~s ~~ c.-:`.~~ .i ~~~~M
.. ~' ~az' ~ ~ r ' #f ~st~~~{ 1~
s'' t J `'~ x~'~~''~~~t. )~ }~~Y.
T }
. ~ ~
' ' . , ' . t ~~`~.. ~ : 3 ~~ ~~ j ~1/~£~'~?,)~:
t
_ . , ~' ~5; ,f` f ~,,~ ,, S 1t,, ~~.~ ~~~~~~
ttf ~ ,' r~?1 ('' 1 g~f" %
4 ~ ~~j , ' ~ ' ,~
>
. - f
, ~ ,~ ; , ~, ,~ t r
' . . . '~~=11I' ~~~,:~',... ~~ 1y~~'.I ~ ..y1> .L ,~~~ . o- t
3 ~ 4J :
~~~: ~
:~:.~. ~~ w . . . ' ':o~M^r-.:',' " ~j~ 1 7 ~Z 11 ~ j4 ' r~ ~3
~_: ':. ,..:~ , . ' 1~` ~~ : c ~i~ t h ~{
~R-00-w., ~,:.~.. ~.~~~ ~,~,` - ~ ~ t~~s . 3 ~-~~ : ~~
~.~ ~ ~.
• y;! . n.~ • ! 1 ~ ~ 1 - Y ~ '4 ~s r~; .. r
,',. -~.. y i : "~ L~ ~ (` ~'~ ~ 2 t
~ ~~':'~' .~~ v ~ ~ ~ t, ~Y ~ ? ..~t 1. r
~ ~~. ~ r
a``%.~.~. _...~ j;'. 1,:1~v~~# ~-~tf ~ e.~ r~~~..~ f~,'r`
p s t
~l ; ; M . ir , , ~, Z 9 J . ° ~ ., *'. \~ ,~.
t' OR~,~. ~ '~y~~ fi~~~ ti~.'~ ~ 4~~•/'~ 1~~ -i- 4~~
~~~':~. I.~'~~::. ~~.^';` ~.._. ,t}~ ~,~...i~._ F;r4 4 `..~.A
h i 1 7
. L.~R:. ~ ...., .. jh;') ~ '. . ~ t 7 ( ` £ .F S'~ ~ ~ ~I } 3 -'s h
~,:;_:~,~ _~ ~.:~..:.:~~.~~- ~ o :~~ R ss:3~ ~~ ~ : ~,
,-. -as::..~, .. ..._;.. ~_._ ~;:. : ~ .. ~ ~ • ~ -.'` ~~~,~ ,'~ ~ E ~~~~~'7E~ ~ j k~; .~.~ ~ ~ -h~ t ~-~
_~.k_.. ....,~ ~ ~,1 _
...~> . ;~ .. :~ ~~.w~ ~ '~',~ ~~j.t , ~ S 7 t ~€l { F sl ' ~-;~~( .~..~i
2 G' r' ~ ~ z`~t x.
"" ~ ~ ;- ._. .::~x::; ' ~.. { ~ ~ 1~ ~~~~ ~ a k ' k~ f~
.. ~q ~i.A.~/. ~wl,:....r . . ~•.~f. .. ' ~~)... ( ~ /~ ~ -i ~ ~ :. _ +~
~.P ] ~ 1
~n J i ' ' ~ I rra~~1f S~ `~.~..~~ rl (~ G~~L`' Sy r~~ f ~F ~.: .,~~
...~... a. 4~~ ~ / ; ` ~ ~.,~r 4 .--~ ;~+~[ i`+ ,~` ~` !. ~ F s: ~f7i 34~ ! Y
,. ~;'- r~ y , re~
~,( /. r :a ~,1 G ~,: v ,~ r ~+
RR-S•~ ~ ~ ~ . .
e. ..~l~~~~ . .. . ~~j ~x rRka~ t.~~r ~€ ]( t ~1 ~ < s ~rfa;~
~~ E~ ~~.'~;o~ , ~'• ~ ~~ "~ c ~~a e~i ~ ` ! ~~8 Y[~ 4..~s'(~ < x ~4' u
~ ~. ~ r~,.~ 't L~~ :~'~~j Z~F.~•.s'~rl~a~.:rY r.j .{~i~
<.~ ~~~~. •':-~. '.. . . , ~~ ~ ~S ! 4- ~[?~1~s~~z ~ r~ #,~J~c ~ ~~~ ~r`~,~ :
, i~'~ ;; ~..~, ~~~~ f. •{' ~ t~ ° ~S~r~ ~~~, _.' a s yc~3 ~;}~I~~!
1
Re `..~..~ .... ~~i~.t~ . _ r r ~ ~ 51~ - f ~ Y
~ O~fFS. I: t~ 4.L~1{~yC~ '~ 7
~:aq~.'~..c ~..:~ ~...~~ „~' ~~ww .~;
+.... i `y ~ w
' ~~•.. „ ~ .., .w. ' i ,~;~~.~~~ ~ ..1.~ ~ ~~~~~5 ~, w~r ~~ a ~i ~1 „"3~.~r
': , , t. ........~.... ~.~,•~,:'„;,,}¢ •:~ . ` ~ J j, J> ~~~ ~~„, `~~ ~ 7-~ P 3
. .,. . »,_....
~ .,. ~ ~., d .. ~.. _.. . ;, ~ ~
~ ~ '' 1 ! i .~^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~ S ~ G C > ~ . ~.
~ , _ r~ ~
`~]~i ~. `'i~_~, .;~, --. '~ ~ ~ `, , ~ t~c , i,
~^ ({ ,' ~ l ~. ~f ~.r {.l.' : ~. f ~. ~: .. Y.R~ ~~ S} `~ ~ C! y i ~;~//a ~ 3 ~~t .~i~ :
..l 1... • • ' ~i ...~ x~ t~1'~,~~ }!f>. t~~~4I'}~i ~ C t( 1. ) ~
~~... n ~ . 1\ 1 3~ ~'r4 !
~ yfi~ ~. ~rxi, ~w... ,.:e, ~ ~ ~'~~':~ ~ ~'` xSJ~r`i . i~€ Y 1 _i~s~~` ~ ~`4c ~
Ai ; 1 ~~ i ~ i ~'., `b ~. ,
.., . ~~, . : :. . ~;: ~,- ~ i ':, . ,,. c~ ~ ,a ,, r ~
....,,. ..r~ a.>. ~~~,•;•;~~~ %i ~ ~,` ~. ~ ~ ' `~ ;~a ~`~ q ~ '} `~ j 1'~~ si~ ~ ~
f ..: ~ . ~ ~ 'o ~! ~~+ u ~~ ~ ~i ~~Z ~
; i ,~ c t B ~}
....... ~ ~'~~~.~.~'''••~ '.'f. f ~~' 1 '1Y. ~ 4 ~~~.~1 j ?t
~ ~~~' '. ' . ~~~.T:i; • I '3 ~ fk F , ~y~~ f (~ ~ 1 ~
. '.'•. ~~' ' ..~ < i:.!:-~:;.~ i ~ ;, ~., r1 { ~.i!? ~: ~ ~i~:r~~~ t ~ ~ } 4~ _,.~ ~
~. .,.:,~,AO ~.. ~ ': j'.. ._~' .: : s ~ .^ 1"~i/ '~ ,_ ~;~ ~' R +'VD ~`-,a1 i :~
.~..,.'.. ,,...y . 'e": . ' ', ; ~ .`.3t^~ ~ ~ r. '~ ~..
..! ~1 ~ ~. i ~ ~ i '
.~~, : .. ~ > €t : ~ .E.~'i ~ ~ ~~~ . ... .~ .. ~ ~ 3.
-;~. ,,.~.~ ../': ...;.
~ ,~~% ..~.. ~-~.. .A~ : ~~ . ~` ` :'~ : ~~~~ r , r~ 3 ~
~.: ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~: :..!~ ~'~ ~~'; ~' ,
, ~ ~, . .
a.. - t -
,,;:- ~ ~~ ` S ~r:r ,:_:-:;.....
.~..~ ~R ~~~ ~ :.RR~~-=~ l:,. ~ .~,.,',~ -::,
, . w ..... y~ ~ :::.~. ~. ..~.,;:;<.~:: ;: f,~~ ;;'~`~`; ~. ~.? .t:':: ~.:
~, ~ .::~,:;~ .,, ~ ~ ~ .; R~R~ ~ ~~. ~ : ;~r
-,. ~>'?;~<': ;.,;',•'....;,'•a, k~'~~-:"',.
~-~ ~~ . ~ ~ , ... ;.. ::,i. ~~.:.: .,?'~... 'iri~~~:.; .
: i~....i'.:~~~; ..
, . - yF >:t :
; ~1.': ~ ~.;.`> : ' ~,
..~ .
^-<, ..,
.:~::,
~'±
w~... _-~:~` -'~~` ` `'
~~..'r.,,,..'' - '"'
NM.v.yr .fa~ .. ... . .. .i.
:~
~iwvw
n:H~~. i~ ``
;
. ' . •.. : . .. . .. ..;ww
w.~:"~.~ ''.'.,''.~.;..~. S
~~. ;;;~
~ { <.
• ~ ,= '
~~
.::`~,;.~ . V' :. ~:
l
I~
~iR 2~
~~
Drah
' ~~
5-12 Proposed Urban Raserves
1 Centra! Point
Central Point is ane of tlie fastest growing small cities in the state. Rapid gro`rrth in the early
199Us led to the creation of the Cent~al Point Stxategic Plun, adopted in 1498. The plan asta6lishes
a vision to preserve small town character anci cvrnmunity values, and to enhance commu~nity life.
Effective growth management practices have led to a fallow-on strategic plannir~g process,
Ce~ats•ad Puanl Farwlircl. Through this process, the City has updated tlje 1998 vision, goals and
action~ to implement its desired future.
The City has nlso created ~ plan to revitali~e its downtown, adopted Transit Oriented
Development (TOD) palicies and zoning, and has promoted land use and transportatian master
planning.
Central Point intends to continue planning and building master planned cammunities that c~ntain
a divez•sity of use.s inoluding parks, apen spaces, civio areas and commercial uses that contribute to
thc city's character, The City will nlso incorparate natu~•nl teatures into new development so they
can become living assets within thcir new neighborhoods,
In 2~02, the City adopted Tras~sit Oriented Development (TO~) iand use classifications and
zoning st~ndards. This ~rovides for l~igl~er residential densities, mixed-use zoning, and more
integratcd ci~ic and open space development. The City is also working wit~~ mult~ple property
owners to design a new nei~hborhood narth of Beebe Road in onc of thc few-remaining
residentially zflned areas in the growth boundary. Preliminary plans call for zone changes that
inci~ease i~esidential densities, integrate more parks and ape~i space land and introduce l~mited
cornmercial uses. This will likel}+ bee~rme the eity'g second TOD.
Of the non-residential land in Cent~al Point, almost 20 percent is classified as vacant. Cornm~rcial
and industrial devejopment each m~kes ~p a6out 5 percent of Central Point's overall land base.
The remaining 30 percent is classified as "other", which includes parks, open spaces, places of
worship and public right-af-way.
The City would like to inct~ease its employtnent and industrial land base, both to balance jobs and
housing, and lo provide moxc immediate services to a growing population. Recent building
activity suggests there is a growing local demand for commercial and indast~ia[ uses. Rccent
devsloprnent includes the USr Reddaway truck terminal, expansion af the LTM regional fll~ices,
and tlie }~attial develnpment af ~e Airport Orchard industrial site.
The City would also like development to continue #owarcis the west, rather than east of the
~reeway. The City has determined that development east of the freeway would not encourage a
cotnpact urban form, and wnuld nat help the city expand their infs•ast~uchu~e.
Drdft ~ ~
Bear Creek Va11ey Regional Prabletr3 Solving Project - Pianning Report 5-13
Addi~onally, Inters~tc 5 impedes east-west movement within tha city, another reason to grow
tawards the west. In an effort to itrnprove aecess to downtown from enst oYthe interstate, Central
Paint has sef aside funds to improve Seven Oaks interchange, as well as at the Uptox~ Road
overpass.
Proposed Central Point Urban Reserve Areas:
CP-1 B ~Tc1o).
-;.,.: : ~,;: ,. -;.
::<,:~-~1'X:'::;~:
Qpc~t Space
-~~ ~='~~~z'-` :
, .at~'~~.
>
•~ Res. Comm. Ind. Institutlanal
Parks Re.gource
;
..
:.•`
Exii~tl~ng
7
w
~'~4/§~`
t; .r 3
-1i5
';~~ /o"~'
~ k : i
d~
`
a.
_;~~°/a 1
~
~
i
tro ~ x.z ir
~j` ~~n'' ~`_ ~`~
~: § + ~^~ ` ,
5
N' 1'S.1 ~ d~
~-•~' ~ u,'
~'~~j'~4` i 3
1t' X/ r n,~.
~ ° ~ s
, ~ !Q E~ ~.
L~~~~1[J
a R
iJ
~ f( .
,'
F
'r~i
< f~
'i.~~ l
t
~,
.L 4 41 ..~~
~<~ i~ i
S 5 i~~ 3~r t 4 _ v y r n
> a~
S ., T r~c
1i} ':i~
Prapused ,
.
'~ ~! ~ >
` i
rC'~ .
.
alx~ry3,~' IS f
~iR;u~~ ~~ .
~ ~~y"~ ~Sis
~~r"~~~IF1 :. ~ i~ t ~ '~' es~`t 5
~ ~5 ~ ~?~£{~1~~~I .
r
~~ ~1 ~~
~i:~`>ij ~ ~•} j ~~ :
~l~ ~ti c"~~t ~+ _
~~:r ~rT~n ~
US$C sJ
. i j
5
~ i
~~
~
?'. s E ~; ~
:
t
~
'
;~:f ~ F :~, r~
sv. _
1
!:
_
,
:~_4
~ . rr3_.~.,.- ~
. d~ ~
.
„~..v .F
. :,
. i a
This urban reserve has been through several modifrcations
since the time it was o~iginally presented. Ti~-e area currently
propoaed ~s approximately G17 acres. The majority of this
area is locatcd north of Interstate S and west of its junction
with Highway 99. The area is zaned for a variety af uses,
including rural residential, industrial, open space, ~nd futurc
urban uses. A small pocket af land in this area e.ctends south
of Interstate 5 to Willaw Springs Road; this area includes
land owned by Erickson Air Crane, tt major valley employer.
The area alsv can#a.ins some land ~oned for Exclusive ~arm
Use, 48 acres of which was recommendeci by the RLRC as
p~ af the Conune~~cial Agricul#ural Base.
The Seven Oaks Interchange is a strategic transportation hub
where three separate facilities converge-the Central Oreg~n &
Paci~c Railroad {COPR), Fiig~way 94, and Interstate 5. The
city's comprehensive plan addresses proximity fio the
interchange as an opportunity to develop transpo~rtation-
dependent uses in the area. A City-Caunly plan cux~rcntly
propases a tYVCk-train freight transfer szte near the interchange.
£xhtbtt 5-10
The itutial proposal far a Talo area urban reserve was l~ger than
the present one, but in response to concerns about incl~~ded
commercial agricultural ~ands, the City responded by excluding
some of thc arcas recommended for preservati~n by t~~.e RLRC.
a~aft 4 `7
Totel Acres: 617
S14 Proposed Urban Resetves
Central P~int lack~ at~active and suitabie sitcs for ncw industrial
development. The Highway 99 cornidor is transitioning from
rail-dependent uses to employment uses that supp~rt transit and
pedestrian-oriented devetopment. The Tolo area's industrialiy-
zoned sites could accomsnodate new industries and the
expansion af exist~~g industrial uses. The City r~vill use
agricultural. buffexs where urban develapment occu~rs adjaccnt to
productive farmland.
Thc ~ 984 Urban C'rrc~wth Bounda~y and Poiioy Agreement
{updated in 1998) betwecn the City and 3ackson County
designated lands in the vicinity of the Seven Oaks Interchange as
unique because of the ~ranspor~ation facilities present. The area
was designated as an Area of Mutual Planning Concern to
px•otect it frosn ~remature deveiopment, but a~ailable for
urbanizatian when it could be shown to warrant such
development.
The RPS projeot has proposed ta locate many of the region's
new indusiri~ urban reserves awuy from the two higt~
concentration PM14 are~s, Meci,ford and White City. Urban
reserve areas CP-1B and PI-I-5, two areas propvsed for primarily
industrial use, are outside of these high concentration areas. As
the historic focal centers of the region's industries, Medford and
Vi~hete City have the highest modeled annual PIVi10
c~ncentratianb within lhe AQMA.
Conditian ofApproval: Approval of CP-1 B as an urhan reserve
by the Poiicy Coxrunittee was cantingent o~i the following
COlldltk4ll:
• Prior to the expansian of the Centxal Point Urban
Cmawth Boundacy into the CP1-B area, ODOT,
Jackson Cou~ty and Central Point ~hall adopt an
Interchange Area Mar~agernent Plan far I:he Seven
Oaks interrchange area.
Commercial A~icultural Resourc~ Basc Status: 48 acres of CP-
1B were recommended as part of the cvrnrnercial agricultural
base by the RLRC. However, the decision made at the first state
agency review in March, 2Q0'7 was ti~at the case far eventual
ti~ft 4 ~
Bear Crieek Valley Reglonal Prob~em Sotving Project - Plannirtg Re~ort 5•'!5
urbanizatian of CP-l B was moj~e compelling than the one for
maintaining thcm in agrricultttral use,
C~~ 1 ~I.
This urban rese~~ve consists of about 75 acres and sits nenr the
northwcstcrn cvrner of the ~e„ntr~1 Paint city limits and UGB. It
extends froxn Jack~on Creek to Grif~n Creek, with Sccriic
Avenue de~ning its southern edge. This area was originally
proposed by the City as the southern end of a much larger urban .
reserve, previausly narned CP-1. The City is no fongei-
considering most of thc land bctwccn this ncw arca and VVillow
Springs Raad because the RLRC has re~omrnended much of it
as commercial agricultural land.
The Cifiy has opted to retain CP-1 C, in part, b~cause it must
improve the raiiroad crossing and the intersection at Scenic
Avenue and I~ighway 99. The new railroad facility will need to
cross Highway 99 al a righl angle, which meaas t~e road will
need to extend north from Scenic: Avenue, ~n the east side of the
highway, ~efore crossing Highway 49 in a perpendicular fashion.
The triangular tax lat at the northwest corner is necessary to
ensure that the geame~ty of the new interseetian is efficient and
safe.
Ne~w infrostructure to serve tliis area wou~d not require axtensive
public or pcivate funding. Currently, a 12-inch water line extends
the length af Highway 99 from the city boundary ta the Erickson
Air Crane facility, at the edge Qf CP-1B. Anot~er smaller water
line and a sewer ~ine are nea~ CP-1C, inside the aity liniits.
'1'!ie area contains three parcels, totaling 50 acres, which have
been recommended by RLRC as part of the Commercial
Agricult~ral Base. The pareel ittunediately eas4 of Highway 99 is
bordercd by cxception la~d to the nor~h, srntth and east. The
Exhlblt 5~14
Draft ~ ~
Tota! A~rea: 76
6-16 Prapased Urban Reserves
parcel fu~ther to the east is bordered by the city on the east, by
exception land to the south, and partially by cxception land ta
the wesl. The last parcel, ta the west of the highway, is bordered
by Jackson Cree~ to the west and by Scenic Avenue #o the south.
The urban reserve area in total cont,ains over 20 residences.
Existing agricultural uses are not intensive ones, and the City has
agreed to implement agriculturai buffering tc~ ~Srntect adjoining
produclive farrnlands.
The northern portifln of this urban reserve area is developed with
approximately 15 residences. New infrastruchire to this site
would not require e~ctensive public or private funding. Currently,
a 12-inch water line extends the length of Highway 99 from the
city boundary to the Ericksun AiriCrane facility, alc~ng the
western edge of CP-1C. Another smaller water line and a sewer
line are near CP-1L, inside the city limits.
The City wi11 prornote a inaster plan for lkiis area ta ensure more
efficient urban development, incorporate natural features (i.e.
Griffin Creek) into the neighborhood design, create agricultu~ai
buffers, and lay out an internal st~eet netvvork that minimizes
access onto Highway 99.
Commercial A~ricultural Resouree Base Status: SO acres of CP-
l C were recammended aq part of the cc~mmercial agricultetral
base by lhe RLRC. Hawever, the decision rnade at the second
state ag~cy review in December, 2407 was that the case for
eventual urbanization of CP-1C was more campelling than the
ane far maint~ining it in ag~-icultural use.
Draft ~ ~
Bear Greek Valley Reglonal Problem Solving Project - Planning Report 5-17
CP-2B:
This arca, approxi~natcly 32.9 acres, is defincd ~an thc north by
V~ilson R,c-ad and ~n the bouth by the Jactcs~n Cuani.y
Fairgrounds Expasition Park and portions of the Ce~tral Point
city limits. The city limits also def~ne this area's eastern and
western baundaries. The area's zoning is a mixture of EFU land
and rural residential, a~d the RLRC recammended l 97 acres as
part of the Commercial Agricultural Base, About 20 percent of
tl~is area contains aa1€ savanna, and same areas have ponded
sources of irrigation water.
This area is critical far cxtcnding starm drainagc from t~hc
exception area south af Wilson Road and from other areas closer
to Bear Creek, The City also plans to e~tend the east-west leg of
Upton Raad furt4~er east to Gebhard Road #a improve
transpor~ation connecti~ity. The Co~nty Roads Departme~t, in
caoperation with ODOT, will be recanstructing the Upton Road
bridges ia the near future. This will strengthen the connection
betwe~n northeast and northwest Central Paint. Public
infrastivoture, in the for~n of sewer lines and gas lines, already
extend into CP-2B. ~latcr lines exist in city subdivisio~ns cast of
Gebhard Road and nortl~ along Table Rack Road. These water
lines can be extended into CP-2B.
VVhile Gentral P4int recognizes ths conflict belween urban and
rural uses, it has few places to grow without encroaching into
farmland and/or open spaoe. The interstate currently splits the
city, and it is important to mnintain an urban form by closing the
ioop along the city's northern bonuidary. City planning staff is
coliaborating with the Fair Board in their master planning
efforts. The Jacksan Coanty Expv praperty may become a
recreations~/parks oenterpiece ~n the fiiture, svnilar to Stewa~t
Park in Rase~urg. The City also plat~s to protect CP-2B's
~xr,ibic s~~x
Draft
~ ~
Total Acres: 329
5-18 Proposed Urban Resetves
natural resources by inrrorporating them inta a master plan, and
will also require a~cultural buffers to protect nearby
agricultural lands that remain in production.
The State has also suggested that the City conside~• extending
this urban rescrve into cxccption areas to the north of CP-2B.
Central Point has given two rea~ons why this is not practical or
desirable: the presence of aak savannah habitat, and large areas
af wetland. The significant areas vf oak savannah habitat consist
of open grassland or grass heneath oak-dorninated ec~mmunitie.~
of varying densities. This area hosts a significant example of this
eeosystem, and was recognized and catalogued as such by the
RFS Citizen Tnvolvement Commit#ee {pCIC). The area also
contains wetlands, which have been addressed most recently by
a Department of State Lands emplc~yee who toured the area in
spring of 2Q07. Accarding to DSL, about 11 S acres, or 3fl
percant of thc sito may bc wctland, and a substantial partion of
this site may presen# wetland-development conflicts.
Commercial A~,ricultural Resource Base Status: l97 acres o#
CP-2B were recommended as pxrt of the c;ommercial
agricultural base by the RLRC. IIowever, the decision made at
the second state agency review in Decernber, 2007 was that the
case for eventual urbanization of CP-2B was mare compe]]ing
than thc one for maintainin~ it in a~icultural use.
CP-3:
This 41-acre grawth area has EasC Pine Street, and the Central
Point city limits, as its southern bou~n~da~ry. The e~ctension of
Beebe Road defines the area's northern edge. Penniger Road
bisects the southwest eorner. The area is east of the Fairgrou~~ds,
and also has Central Pnint city limits defining its southe~n
and eastern boundarics. Bcar Cxcek and it~ assaciated floodpl~in
Oak Ssvenna korth at CP~B
These oakslands have become
pan~l~ssauedy Iess eommon in the
regrun uver dhr Icrxt cenlHr}r, fi~!ling
ii~itiadly tc+ agricullure, and iinw
inereasin~ly to develapmerit. 7Yre
recon:mended slunely ure especirtlly
~»~roYranr due ro ahe~'aca shar r1:e
trees, not being economica7ly valuable
nor i~i rlenx~~u1 ps urnunienlaJs, a~x~
nnt bei»g r~eplauted. Sfr:ce [f~e o~:ly
signifrcanl occirrrences of these trnes
ut the freture are goir~g ~o be rirr~lrally
occ~rm,:g i~ exisrir:~srur:ds, ttie pCIC
rs rernnrrnendrng thaJ these examples
bc praservcd.
!tI'S Yhasc 1 Stakus Rcport, pagc 25
Exhlblt 5-95
Draft
J
~~
Tota! Acres: d1
Bear Creek VaUey Reaional Pwblem Solving ProJect - Planning Repert 5-99
cross Yliis area's eastern ec~ge.
Water and sewer infrastructure is either in place or is planned for
the area. The East Pine Street Transpor~ation Plan is
xecommending improvements to the I-5 interchange and
reconfi,gttration of fairground access; this may dictate the type
and the amount of new cainmercial usas alon~ No3~th Penni~er
Road.
The majority of this urban reserve is zoned for Exclusive Farm
Use, or open space, though the RLRC did not recommend any af
it as part of the comsnercial resource base.
Since the 100-year fl~adplain crosses this area, ideas for future
developm~nt have been Iimited to regional parks, open space
and #ourist comtnerciai uses. The Ciry removed a northern
portion nf a~raxim~tely 70 acres, the RLRC identifioc} as
commeroial agx~icultural land. The partion of CP-3 that remains
is surrounded on three sides by #he Ce,ntral Point city limits ar by
the fairgrottnds.
CP-4D:
T~iis urban reserve is a triang~lar-sha.ped area that runs along
the northeastern ~ide of Interstate 5. About Sb acres in size,
most of this area is zoned as E~cclusive Farm Use. A smail
extension at the southern end is zoned frn rural residential use.
CP-4D as originally proposed was 44~ acres, and extended
fro~n the I-5 on the west to CP-2B to the east, but was reduced
to the present CP-4D a1~er thc agricultural value much o€the
area became clear. The remainiag laad is owned by Jackson
Caunty and is part of the Bear Creek Greenway between Bear
Creek and 3nterstate 5. While these parcels are zoned EFLJ, they
are nat in agric~itural production and 1.hey do not hold a soil
classification on caunty maps,
Exhibit 5-44
Dran ~ ~
Tatel Aeres B8
5-24 Propafied Urban Reserves
This area also has environmental constrair-ts. About one third of
this 86-acre urban reserve sits within the 100-year floodplain,
which cuts along eastcrn edge, Additionally this area contains
several wetlands. The City expeets ta use this area for passive
recreatian, dedicated open space, or parks, especially for Bear
Creek Greenway use. Where urban areas are adjace,ut to
productive fat~nl~nd, it is understood that agricultural but~ering
vvil~ 6e incarp~rated.
The RLRC recommended this area as part of the Comme~~cial
Agricultural Base when it was p~ of the oYl~lI181, much tat~er
444-aere CP-4D. This smaller piece was not revisited by thc
RLRC once it had been reduced its present size; and as a result,
the RLRC designation was eventually removed by the agreement
af bath the Policy Committee and the state agencies due to the
fact that the land is fairly heavily wooded, is not in agricult~,iral
production (nor has it been within memory), and has no soii
cla,gsifica~ion on County maps.
Condition of A~proval: Approval of CP-4D as an urban reseive
by the Policy Committee was contingent on the follotiving
condition: ~
• This drea ~hall only be used fvr greenway and parks.
7/~~~.
This growth ~rea, approximately 33 acres, sits itnmediately west of
the city limits, east of Grant Road, and sou~ of Scenic Avenu~,
Most garcels are zpneci RI~-5, ~nd there is a 10-acre parcel zoned
EFU at the sauthern end. The 10-acre ~FU parcel tivas initially
recommended by the RLRC as part of the eommercial resource base,
but that reeoinmendation was reinoved in a subsequent r~
evaluation. The parcel contains ~ walnut ~ove, Christmas trees, and
a dwelling with accessory uses southwest of t~ie ereek. A small
Exhlblt 6~15
o~rt
~ `#
Total Acres: 33
~''i ~~'
~ ~,~
eear Craek Velley Reglonal Problam Solving ProJact - Planning Report 5-27
pasturre and two bairns are on the other side. Because the creek
runs through the property and portians are in residential use, the
ef~-eative fartnable por~ion of the pro~erty is signiticant]y less
than ten acres, particulxrly when no adjacent parcels arc
availablc for farm usc. Jackson Crcck and its associated 100-
year floodplain follaw Grant Road except where they cut
through the EFU parcel. These riparian areas create a signifcant
physical barrier froin the ls~rge~ tract of fafmland t4 the west.
The properties in this urban reserve are adjacent to th~e ciry
limits, and coald easily be served by the extension of public
utslities and services from the ~vin Creeks develapment. The
aa~a eould be used for either residentia.l development or
dedicRted open space for Twin Creeks. The locatic~n af Jacksan
Creek and Crrant Road reinforccs this axea's stronger rela~ionship
to urban development than to farm land across the creek and to
the west. A raad and creek would serve as a much batter dividing
line between u~•ban and izual uses ~tian would ~, propei-ty line
having no discernablc diffcrencc on eithcr side of the fence.
CP-6A:
Eachlbft b~i 6
This area consists of 457 acres. Th~ City and its residents have
supported including this area because it helps the City's goal
of developing in a centric pattern. The City envisions larger
ma.gter planned communities in the areas where several large
ic~ts can be assembled far higher density residential
cievelopment, sUme open space preserved and agricultural
buffers created. Managed growth to the west will promote
eff'icient local residet~t access to the Downtown eore.
The propei~ties iu this urban reserve are adjacent t~ the city
lirnit~, and could easily be served by services fram the T~vin
Creeks development or from existing collector roads, such as
Beall Lane, 'I~ylor Road, and Scenic Avenue. The ciroulahon
DraR
~ ~
Totaf Acr@s; 45T
f
~. ,
_ .~~ `x'
5-22 Proposed Urban Resernes
plan for this area is a natural extcnsian of thc Twin Crceks
Development, and of historic east-wesC roads sEich as Taylor and
Beale, The City believes thdt there are rnore natural linkages
fram the areas west of Grant Road to the Downtown and other
neigh~orhoods.
VVater, nah~ral gas and sewer maps indicate that ather
infrastructure can be readily, eff'icieretly, and economically
extended to CP-6A from the east and the sou#h. Storm drainage
can be developed, treated, and effectively drained into existing
systems. The Twin Creeks Development is using passive water
treatment, which the City will irrapose on ~ew dcvclopmcnt in
~iis area.
Approximately 213 of the lAnd in this urban reserve is zaned as
Exclusivc Farm Use, and has been recommendeci by the RLRC
as part of the Co~nn~ercial Agricullural Base. The remaining 113
is exoeption lands zoned for rural residential use. Soils in this
area are class 3 with limited amounts af Class 2. Locallong-term
members of the fartning co~ununity have ;naintained thae the
land is not produc~ive, and that for years it ~as bccn uscd
extensively for grazing, or has been allowed to remain f~llow.
Commeroial Agrieultural Resoiu~ee Base Status: 292 acres of
CP-bA were recommended as part of the comrnercial
agricultural bass by the RLRC. However, the decision made at
the second state agency review in December, 2007 was that the
case for eventual urb~nization af CP-6A was more c~tnpelling
than the one far maintaining it in agrieultur~l use.
Draft
5 b~
Bear Creek Valley Reglonal Prabfem Solvln8 PraJect - Plannfng RepoR 5-23
~l~~v~.
This 2Q0-acre area sits immediateiy s4uth of CP-6A, which,
along with Renil Lane, defnes its nort}~e~m boundazy. Its
southcrn boundary is dcfincd by Sylvia Road, its westcrn
botmdary is Old Stage Road, and the eastern bot~ndary is
defined by the 100-year floodplain along Hanley Road. Zoning
is prima~ily for nu-al residential use, with two developed areas
t4iat are zoned EEU. Nane of t~ie lands in this urban resetve
have been rccommandcd as commcrcial agricultural land by
RLRC. Vl~iie this area is relatively flat, steeper slopes t~ the
south~vest and northwest provide a buffer from other rurat
lands outsida of the reserve.
CP-6B was a later addition by the City to its set of proposed
urban xeserves, and was ac~ded largely in response to DLCD's
request ta consider the area's high concentration of exception
iands. This is n mixed area, with scattered large lot development,
and a little league field in the soutt~eastern corner. The City has
also reported some septic system faiiures poten.tially affecting
aquifers in t~sis area, which eould be addressed by extending
urban services into it.
Gibbon Acres - Area of Special Planning Cancern:
Both the State and Jackson County have expressed concern
about the unincorporated community of Gibbon Acres not
bcing proposed as an urban reserve. Central Point
acknawledges that concern, and as a condition lo creating
limited Urban Reserve (UR) areas west of Grant Road, the City
has agreed to assume future jurisdictional responsibility for
Gibbon Acres west of Table Roak Road and narth of Wilson
R,oaci.
The Gity and County have agreed in principle to managing
Gibbon Acres as an "Arca o:f Mutual Planning Conccm"
Exhibit 6-17
Draft ~ ~
Total Acres: 200
Exhib3t 5-18
Gibbon Acres
5-24 Propoaed Urban Reserves
thr~u~h an Urban Grvwth Management Agreement (UGMA}.
This agreemenfi will be adopted by both jurisdictians and remain
in effect until it is determined that the area will be managed as a
new Central Paint urban reserve area nr a~ part af an
incorporated VVhite City urbta.r~ reserve or urban gr~wih
boundary.
It is understood that Central Point is not able and consequently
not obligated ta urbnnize GiUben Acres until it hecomes part of
at~ urban rescrvc, and un.til adequate fnancing is identified for it
to be effectively retrofitted and/ar mare c~mprehensi~ely
developsd.
Addressing the local and regional nead
Accordin~ ta thc land nccd estit~ates developed far this plan,
Centrai Point needs between 852 and I, I i 9 acres of additianal
residential land. Central Point is designating close to this
amrnuit, 899 acres af t~esidential land, in its urban reserve
proposal.
If Central Point's urban reserves develop closer to the higher
ran$e of its proposed residential densities psroposed {7.3 units per
aore} and redevelapment activity continues within thc city,
Ceniral Point's urban reserves will easily accommodate the bulk
of its allocated residential growth. If #hese areas de~elop closer
to the lower end of its proposed densities {6 units per acre), or if
i~edevelopment activity is slower, CentrAl Point eauld requi~•e up
tv 220 acres of additional residential ~and.
Central Paint has also designated 929 acres far nan-residential
uses i~i its wrban reserves, 578 of which are envisioned for
inciustrial uses, As noted carlier, the City would likc to incre~se
its employment and industrial land base, ~oth ta balance jobs
and housing within the city limits, and to provide more
immediate services to a growi~ig population. Speci~cally, the
City would like to incxcasc its curre3nt employment laa~d base
fram the curr~n.t lev~l of 9 to 10 acres per 1,OOU residents for
cornmercial and industrial land, to 1S acres per 1,000 residents.
This is cansistent with benchmarks in Central Paint's
Draft ~ ~
Bear Creek Valley Regianal PtroblBm So{ving Project-- Planning Repon 5-25
comprehensive plan.
Recene building
activity suggcsts
there is a growing
local demand for
cammercial and
industrial uqex. '
Examplcs ot rcccnt
developrnent
include the USF
Reddaway truck
terminal, expansion
of tha LTM regiotial
c~ffice~, atul the
partial development
of the new Airpo~t
Orchard u~dust~ial
Slt@.
Exhlblt 5-19
Certtral Point Urban Reserves - Proposed Land Use~
I~esiden#ial
lnstitut~onal
3%
Parics
9 ~%
Commer
5%
At#ernatives Anaiysis
When Central Point commit~ed itself to tlte RPS process it was
aware of the `give and ta~Ce' that occurs in regional land use
planning and callaboration. Thc City has been laking sl.eps in
recent yeax~ to prornote aud develvp new and more ef~ZCient
planning practices that include mixed use and higher density
develapment. These practices are cil~o aimed at extending
dcvclopmcnt tirnclincs a~d prescrving impartant farm land. The
City has also been trying to establish its own identity,
independent of Medford and other Rogue Valley cities.
Consequently, these g~als have att~acted more new residents to
the City. Central Point is co~nmitted as a community to acc~pt a
considcrable share of thc rcgion's future papulation gruwth;
however it is alsa faced with numerous constrainfis to the
expansion of its ur6a~ footprint. The city is also committed to
expanding its supply of ernployment lands which will allow it to
rmove away fram its status as a baciroom cornmunity.
Oraft ~ ~
mau5u ~ai
31°~-
5-26 Proposed Urban Reserves
Area A
At one po~nt in the process,
Central Point included a
much larger ur~aa reserve
proposal north of the city.
The eastern half af Arca A
was mappcd as CP-2, and
added approximately 1.,000
acres to the existing CP-2B.
Much of this area is
nccupicd by oak savanna,
vernal pools and wet soi]s,
severely limiting
deve~Qpment. The area has
packets of re.~idential
devel~pment in the city to
the south and on both sides
of 1?~lilson Raad. The
significant areas of oak
savannah habitat in this area
Exhibft 5-20
consist of open grassland or
grass beneath an oak-
dominated ecosysfiem. The
area was recogniae.~ and catalagued as signi~icant by the RP~
Citizen Involvetnent Committee (pCTC) several years ago. The
area also contains wetlands, which have been addressed most
recently by an emplvyee from the Department of Sta#e Lands
who toured the area in the spring of 2407. According to DSL,
about 115 aeres, or 30 pereent of the site may be wetland, and a
substantial por~aon ofthis sitc may present wetland-development
conflicts.
The w~estern half of Area A vc-as the original CP-~D, almost 40a
acres lar~er than it is now Since there is an active commercial
pear c~xchard managed by Bear Creek Corporation on the land
and due to the cost and difficulty in e~ctending infraserueture, the
City eventually abandaned this area for future urban use and
reduced CP-4D Co lhe present remnf-nt af city and cvunty owned
l~ui.
Dratt V l,t
6ear Creek Vslley Reglonal Proble~n Solving Project- PEanning Repori 5-27
QI'@S B
Imrnediateiy bouth of the City, east of CP-dB and west of the
Medford city limits is an area that was never included in the
City's mapping of urban reserve proposals. The EFU-zoned land
here is universal~y viewed hy the region's agricultw•al
con~munity afi having some of t~~e deepest and highest quality
soils in southern Oregun, and as such, it was ncvcr scriously
considered for future urbanization.
Area C
Thc city originally proposed only the ve~y small CP-5 area on
the west side of the city tv square off its wester~n 6vundary and ta
reduce its expansian west because the area contained high-value
farniland. VJhen it became apparent that the agricultural lands to
the narthcast and to the sQUth of the ciCy were the most
productive, and that there were no other viable aptions for its
Central Point's allocated population, CP-GAwas proposed. It
was during tllis time that the City al~o re-evaluat~d its urbat~
form and a inore logieal and aast effective extension of its
infrastructure. As a tiuther refinement, a 150 acre parccl was
remvved ta reducc CP-6 to the present proposal. Altl~ough
Central Point's total proposed urban reserves wi11 not be
suff~cient ta n~eet all of the city's needs,,even at the most
ambitious density tar~et~, the city wiil not propose a further
westward cxtcnsion of CP-b due to the greater value and
productivity vf the lands further west.
Area D
The area was originaliy pr4posed by the city as a means of
meeting its fitll population allocation and to pravide an
urbanizable conneetion with thc Tolo arca. Nonethclcss, ance ii
w~s dcmonstratcd tha.t thc agricultural land in this location
{es~eLially the Seven Oaks farm),1ike the land in Area B and in
the western half ofArea A, was highly prnductive, the city made
the decision to considerably reduce the original area to the
present CP-7 C, and to rely on CP-6A ta pr~vide most of the
needed residential land.
Draft (~ ~
V
AT3'ACHMENT j~B -- BEAR CREEI~ VALLEY REGIONAL PLAN SUMMARY"
o~t~~~r ~, 2aas
INTROllUCTI~N
The draft Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan ~the "Pian") is complete and tentatively
scheduled for review by the Jackson Caunty Ptanning Cammissian (the "JCPC") at their
1Vvvember 12, 2009 meeting. At the November 12`h meeting it is expected that JCPC will open the
public review of the Plan and request participating jurisdictions tc~ review and cornment.
The primary abjective of the Plan is to cc~ordinate long term regional growth in a manner that
pt~ovides for the eoordinAted and otrlla.bor~.tive platmin~ for the regic~n's g~•owth c~ver the course of
the next 50 years.
I. Planning Horizan
II. Goals and Policies
III. Implementation
IV. Urban Reserve Areas
V. Performance Tndioators & Monitaring
VI. Incentives & Disincentives
VII. Amcndment~
The purpase of this Attachment is tv summarize and camment on the draft Plan, Staff comments
to each element of the Plan are presented in italic.
I. PLAN1~iIlYG HURIZUN
Initially, participants decided upan a 50-year planning horizon c~nsistent with the UrL~~n Rer;erve
Rule's 3U-to-50-year projected population reQuixed by OAR 6~0-021-OU34(1}. IIecause of the
difficulties in matching population projections with time it was decided #o base the plan on a
doubling of the regit~nal pQpulation for the following reasons:
1. A doubling of the populatian was intuitivc -- doublc thc numbcr ot' pe~plc, double (or
more) the number af cars, double the houses, etc. The easier it was to envision, thc; morc
engaged the public was likely to be.
2. The time ~rame could ~e flexible without cornpramising planning. Once a salid plan was
devised for thc tar~et papulation increasc, it wouldn't matter whether the doubling taok 3S
years or 65 years.
3. The state-mandated 20-year population projections and allocations had been extremely
contentious and problematic events in the region -- with the doubling, there was nothin~ ta
evoke those prior issues.
4. It was a bald, new idea, which fit vvell with the uniquc directian ~.tY~ was taking the reg~on.
~~
~'vmmett! No, II-1: In pursufng the do~rbling it was necessary ~hat the RPS pracess
establish a base~o~zttati~n. T'he buse populataon initialdy used the 200D Cen,stes.
hfoweuer, as the RPSprocess moved,~'urward it was ~ealized that the ba,re ~opudation
needed ta be u~,*datec~ As presented, the 1'lan uses the I'ortland State Univ~rsity populativn
~ro~eetions, fat~ 2007 as the base t~egional papttdatton {168, 966)1. For the Ctty of Cent~al
Pnint the base ~o~nrlation was 17, 5522.
Cammetrt No. II ,2: ~no~her i,ssue that n~eded ~c~ be addressed in douhling the regioYtul
populalian tivcrs ~the U~ba~a Re.ser~ve's ~ute nat to exceed a maximum af a SQ yea~ planning
pet~io~ 7'he Go~en~y, fn prepa~ing its coo~dinated popudation, f'orecast as t~equit~ed by O~.S'
195.036, contracted with ECONo~tlawest ~a prepare the pvpulation projec~ions.
~C41tilor~hwest estimated a regional po~ulation o, f 339, 744 by the yea~ 2455. Thc Plan
estimate ~va~s 335, t1OQ, yvhieh is the ~ecogni~zed popudation projeetion for ~he Plan 8y the
year 2f?573.
Based on coordinated discussians with pat~ticrpcr~ing ci~ies the regianad population ~
p~ojection was allocated amongst ~he caties4. C.'entral Point (117%), Eagle ~'odn~ (234%~,
uncl ~Iedfvrd {~1?%} cr~e expecterl !o mv~e than rluuble lheir population over the nexl SU
years. For the City qf'~.'entrul PUint thc~ prvjecte~X 20S7pup~eYatir~n was 40,SSO,,fur a
popudafion inc~case vf 22,598.
II, GOALS AND POLICIES
The Plan contains three (3) goals suppvrted by fifteen (15) policies. In adopting the Plan every
par#icipating jurisdictian is e~pected to comply with each of these goals and policies. Complianc~
will occur as a result of required o4mprehensive plan amandments.
'1'he fallowin~ is n listing of the gaals and their supporting polieies:
1) Manage future urban grovv~h for the greater public good.
a} Policy No. ~- The expansion of urban areas shall be consistent with the Regional Plan,
as amended.
b) Yolicy No. 2- The Re~ional Plan will be implemented by intergov~~mental
~greements and amendments to the comprehensive plans and iinplementing ordin~ances
af the vaacious individual jurisdictions.
c) Policy Na. 3- The itegion's ov~rall urban housing density shall be increased to provide
for mare efficien# land utili~ation.
' Be~r Creek Valley Regional Pian, Bxhibit 3-1
z Ibid
3 Based on the PSU 2007 population estimate
d Bear Cree~c Valley Regional Pla«, IiYS Allocatian ofFuture Y~pulation.
Pagc 2 of l8
V t~
C~mtttettt Nv. Ill-1: For the City o,f'Central Pnint the minitna~m aldowahle s~esfdential
den.sity is fi c~welling unit.s~~er g~^n.ss ac~e, and is r~,f'erred to as the "Ifagher^ Land
Need" density. ~he Plan adso contains a"~,owe~ Lancd ~Veed" density, which for ~he
C`i~y is7.2b dwellfn~ unit~s per ~ass ac~e. Clnly the "Higher Land 11Teed" density is
mandator~y. Using the "Higher Lanc~Need" densfdy the averuge ~OGO den,s~ity for the
Cidy woudc~ be S.9 uni~s per ~rvss acr~e. T'v meel ~hese new density dargets utt ~aew
residentiat develo~ment would have to meet an averuge c~ensily of 8. 7~nitx~er ucres.
d) Policy No. 4- The Region wi~l adhere to a uni.form policy to regulat~ the extension of
sanitaxy sewer and public watar facilities beyond established urban gmwth boundaries.
e) Policy No. 5- The Region will identify maj or infi~aghucture coj~ridars needed in the
fuhu~e ~uid develop s~rategies to aehieve tl~eir long-term preservation.
1~ Policy No. 6- The Region's,jurisdictions will ensure a well connect~d network of
public stree4s as a means of reciucing dep~ndence Un stat~ highway~ for intra-city travel.
Commet:t IVo. ~~~ 2: Podic~es 4- b wild be spec~, f.~cally addressed in UR11~4s a~zd
anaendments ta the Ctty's Com~ehensive Plan.
~} ~'o~icy IVa. 7--'1'hc Region will facilita#e development of a healthy balan,ce of jobs and
housing within each of the communities, and will do the same an a regional basis to
accQmmodate needs that cannoi be met withia individual communities.
Corrarnent~Ya~. ~II-3: Incd~ded an the Plan aj~e employment designated tands. For the
City nf Cents~al Poan~ the ratio ~f em~lnyment hased acr^euge to po~~dation is lower
than the cu~^~e~z~ Com~~r~ehensive 1'lan, which provides 27 acre.s per 1, 000 population
vs. 21af'or indu,rtr~aal land and 1S ac~es vs. 10 pe~ I,D00 poputadion,fvt~ cotnmercial
lands .
2) Conserve resource and open space lands for their impartant economic, cultural, and
livability benefits.
a) Policy No. 1- The Region will establis~h inter~overnmental agreements and administer
policies and laws that implement the shared vision of maintainin~ a commercially
viable land base for agriculture, lorestry, and aggregate resourc~s.
b) Policy Nv. 2- The Region's jurisdictions will establish and implement uniform
standards to buffer resource lands frorn planned future urb~niza~i~n.
c) Policy No. 3- The Region will explore strate~ies ta increase the viability and
profitability of resource lands.
s City of Central Paint, Teehnical Memora~dum Na. 2, Octaber 6, 20a9
6 I6id
~'t~c 3 uf 18
~ ~.#
d) Policy No. 4- The Regian will explore incenti~es and other measures to achieve the
long-term preservation of regionally significant open space, including lands located
within the designated community buffer a~eas.
Comment No. Ilf 4: For podicie,s 2a - 2d the (:ity wnuir~ be expected to cooperate wfth
the Region (C'ounty and participatir~g cities) with spec~c st~ategies,fot~ implement~ation
of these r~source lands t~elat~t~ pvlieies. For the G'ity r~f G'entral Poin~ dhere are no
, foYmudly clesiKna~cc~ cUrramunity bufJ`'ers, uthcr lhcan di~si~n basec~ bufJeYS ad k~y
guteways dv !he Ciiy, i. c. Tubte Ruek ut Bidr~le, Bcadl ut Htvy. 99, uncl ?'crbde Rc~ck ad
Vilas.
3) Reoognize and em~hasize #he individuai identity, unique features, and relative competitive
advantages and disadvantages of each community within the regian.
a} Policy No. 1- The Region wi~l faciiitate and enhance thc individual identity of each
community: A) by maintaining buffer arcas af rura3land betwcen thc various cities, B}
wherc cornmunities are planned tfl be conhguous, by establishing dist~net c~esign
features along transportation cvrridors that demark the municipal boundaries, or C} by
other appropriate means.
b) Policy No. 2- The Region will facilitate individual community flexibility in the extent
~f future boundary expansion~ in ~rder to enha~ee the implementation of the Re~ion~l
Gaals and Policies.
c) Pt~licy No. 3- The Regivn will d~velop ~ str~tegy permitting an unequal c~istributic~n ot
certain land t~,ses amang iis jurisdictions.
d) Policy No. 4- In order to facilitate urb~i growth planning aauid C7oa1 l4 decisions, the
Re~ian will encaurage and coordinate the develo~ment af individuali~ed definitinns nf
"iivability" for eacli community based upon its unique identity and vision of its future
urban form and character,
1II. REGICINAL PLAN IMYLEMENTATIQN
Qn~c of thc many Statc imposed requircmcnts far an appro~~d regional plan is inclu~ic~n of
implementatian strategies ~ORS 197,656(2)(b)), Fvr each of the goals in the Plan there are eleven
implementation s~rategiss.
Goal 1
S~z~ategy No. 1- Coordinated periodic revie~w.
Strategy No. 2- Ten-Ycar RPS review
~trategy No. 3- Coordinated population allocatian
~h~ategy No. 4- Greater coordination with the MPQ
Page 4 of 18
6 ,J
Goai No. 2
Strate~y No. 1- I]esi~nation of urban reserves
Strategy Na. 2- Regional agricultural buffering standaxds
Strategy Na. 3- Community buttcrs (Critical Open Space)
Sirategy Na. 4- P~~rchase af conservation easem~nts
Goal No. 3
Strategy No. 1-- Community buffers (Critical apen Space)
Strategy No. 2-- Allocating to competitive advantabes
Strategy No. 3- Purchase of oonservatian e~sements
IV. URBAN RESERVE AREAS
There are eight {8} propased urban r~serv~ areas, totaling 1,839 acres. In considering each of these
areas
Canament~o, if 1; Abitity to rrteet C'ity's grow~h needs, In total the pr~oposed
urban rese~ve at~eas provade the Cily with su~cient acr~eage lo accr~rnmr~date a
dar~bling oj'thc .2UU7 pupudutiUn, from 17, 65.2 l0 4U, SSU. In ull lanc~ u~e eategorics
suf~cient dunc~ has been providccl t~ uccammoc7ute the eity's ~owth nceds.
..................................... ............ . .. ..................---.._ _ ......... .._ ......_........ ......_.._....... _..~............. _..........._......_.._.._ _.......--- - - --- -.._........_........_....... ................._._. .._.........------...
TADLE 1 . ... . .. . .. . . .. ..:
................. ..... . ... ..... . .. ..
.. .. I. ... . .... . .
URBAN RESER~E BOUNDARY ACREAGE ADJU'STMENTS
~ Urban Reserves I Propased RPS Proposcd Ci#y ~ Acreagc ~ ~ ~
AreA ! Acres Acres 2004 Di~'erence Ri~h~-of-Way Tag Lot !
.._._ ..............................._........_......__...__......._.._ _......---.._.......__._..__....._._. ...
.._........_.......... ............._......_. _ ....... .. - ---- - -~ - - --~-- -
CP-1C 75.79 , 77.4$ ~ 1.69 1.99
CP-3 .. . ... ..........~ ......... . ... .... ..40.74. i. ... -- - . . ..40.09. ~. .. . .. ... {U.bS) ~ .. .. .. (1.14)'.. .. O,A
CP-SA--------------.~...._._..----- --~---- 33.29....... ...------- --...._34.39 ~ ......................... . ...1.10 ~ 1.~.0~........._......-------- --....... ~
I TQTA~, I ~..839.04 : 1.891.64 I 52.60 i 50.2fi I 2.341
Comme~at No. Y 2: 7'he ge~eral bnundaraes of each u~ban reserve at~ea have been
care,f~lly dedineated, particutarly as they affeet corramerciad agricudtur~e land, 1 he
acreages,ro~ each urban ~eserve area we~e calc°udatec~ using the GIS sha,~ae,~de tood,
whach ullUws the vpcrutur t~ u~rurv u buunc~ury and then uu~otna~iculdy culculutes
the urea within the 8ounc~ur~y. A review af the baa~ndaries and acreages of each
u~ban ~eserve area was completed by Sta, ff, and it was found thrxt some mtnor
ad,~a~stments wet~e needed. The~re adjustment,s a~e dd~cussed ancl illustrated bedow
, for eac~ of the urban area,r. :
~~~~~ s ~t ~s
~1.. ~ ~J
Fo~ purpvses of consislency lhe ~lc~nnin~ Dept. hus adjusted lhe boundaries using
lhe,fotlc~wing cvnventions:
1. l3oundaries alongpubdic rights-of way shadl use the cent~erline {upprox.)
as the boundary limat; and
2. Where a~zahlic right-n,f-vvay dnes nnt serve as the bnundary, the the
boundary .rhall he hr.~ced nn tax Zot dine s. 7'r~c lnt.r shaZd not be s~1it by a
Uoundary. If'a tcrx dot is tivithin an u~bara reserve ar~ea by 50°10 or~ more the~a
it sh~zld be tvdally a~acluded withan dhe ~rbr~n ~eserv~ at~ea.
The 2ase uf the ubove will uvoicl eonf~raion in,~l~rr~ ycur~s, while providing a
doc~mented standcrrd fo~ baundary line designatiatrs. 1'n totad the 8oundary
adjusttnents add approximately 52 aci~es. Mr~st o, f the added acreage is pubdic
rdglat-of-way (~16~). .4 ,rmald~ercentage (4%~ i.r frnm ad,ju.sttraent.r tn coincide with
tirx lot line.s. Tahle 1 ildu.strate.s ~he act~eage cha~ges fv~ each urban r~e.serve rn^ea.
7'he propr~,sed hox~ndary changes hy iarban re.se~ve a~ea are di,scussetZ fiedow.
T4L0 ROAD AREA (CP-1B) - The following changes have been made to the boundary of CP-
IB:
1) The sautherly boundary previ~usiy w~,~ located ~n the north side of i-S. It has now
been adjusted to the cente,rline o£t~ie I-S xight-of-way;
Pa~e b of' 18
~ ~
2} An addi~ional section of the I-S right-of-way has been included near ihe Seven
Oaks intersection, while at Exit 35 there have been some minar adjustments in #he
I-S right-of-way; and
k.egentl
RGS Urban Reaerve_ RVCOG
(~CP-1B 617ACros
Centrel Po~nt UR 2808
~GP-1B 828Aoras
3) The northeasterly bound~ry alon~ Blackvv~el! Road has been adjusted to the
centerline of the ri~ht-of-way.
Page 7 of i$
V ~
Table 1 compares the acrea~;e per the R.PS Plfui vs. as adjusted by the City. `I'he differenees
are reflected in the inclusivn of right-of-way only. No additional t~ lots havc been added
or excluded.
SCENIC ROAD AREA (CP-1C) - The followin~ changes have been made to the boux~dary of
CP-1 C:
1} In the RPS Pl~n the boundary went to the northeriy limits af the Scenic Road, and
has been adjusted to the centerline of the right-of-way;
S~enic Road Area {~P-1 C~
~ga~
RP8 thban R~sorvo_IIVC00
~~GP-1C 76.TDAnaaa
C6t1k01 POlnt VR Y008
~ CFtG 77.16Avaia
2} The RPS Plan used the easterly limits of I-5, it is naw adjus~ed ta the centerlin,e;
f~a~c 8 of 1$
~~
3} At the westerly end of Lark Lane the easterly edge af the intersecting right-of way
was used a~ the boundary. This ha~ been adjusted to the ce~~terline ofthat right-of-
way; and
4) In three areas th~e boundaary has been adjt~ste~ to corz~espond with the tax lol
boundaries.
Table 1 illustrates th~ acreage per th~ P~PS Plan vs. as adju~ted by the City. The differences
are reflected in the inclusion of right-of-way only. No additional tax lots have been added
or exciuded.
WILSQN ROAD ARFA {CP-2R) - The following changes have been made to the boundary of
CP-~B:
Legend
R?5 Uiban Reaarv RVCOp
~~ CP-28 328.9ACroS
Canlrol PaIntUR9Q09
~ C P-28 934.19Acres
Yagc 9 ~f 1$
~ ~
^wre~_._~ r~__~ w ~__ r-r~ ~~s
1. The baundaries along V~ilson Rc~ad, Gebhard Road, and Upton Road have been
adjusted Co ihe cenler line of the rights-of-way.
Table i illustrates the acreage per the RPS Plan vs. as adjusted by the City. The differences
are re#lected in the inclusion of righ#-of-way only. Na additional tax lots have bee~~ added
or excluded.
EAST PINE ~TREET AREA (CP-3} - The following changes have been made to (he bvundary
of CP-3:
East Pine Street Area {CP-3~
Legend
RPS Urnan Wa36ry6_RYCOD
~~ j cP-saa.7acree
Cenerel Pefei UR 10U9
~ CP3 A0.08Atfla
Page 14 af 18
1~
6cit 33 _
~ ~ ---
~
~so ....
e~
1} The interseati~n of Bee~e Road and Gebhard Road vvas excluded. It is currently
within the City limits.
Table 1~llustrates the acreage per ~he RPS Plan ~s. as adjusted by ~he City. The differenees
arc rcflected in the inclusion af right-of way only. No additional tax lats have been added
or cxcluded.
B~AR CREEK AREA (CP-4D) - The following changes have been made to the boUndary of CP-
~D:
I) The w~esterly boundary was adjusted to thc centerline af the I-S right=af way and
where cant~guous to existing city limits the boundary moved to include all the
right-vf way.
2) To provi~e contiguify to GP-1B the I-5 righ~-of way at the northerly end of the
boundary was included; and
Legend
~+s umen ReaerveJtvcaa I'age 11 of 18
~ CP~bD 8&2Acrea
ClM1~ro1 PO1qtURT~~9~
~ CR6D 80,45 Aaeat 1.6 28.65 Atreb
~~
Bear Creek Area {CR-4D~
3) `1'1ne boundary just west of Raymond Way was adjustcd to match ihe tax lot lines.
GRANT ROAD AREA {CP-SA) -- There are no chang~s to CP-SA.
Grant Road Area {CP-5A}
~ ....
<
~~
. ~~
~~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~
Legend
(ip6 Urhan Racerver~tYCCG
~~ CP-5A 83.SAUes
CentfaT Potnt UR Z008
~ CP•SA 84,88Acres
TAYLOR ROAD AR~A {CP-6A) - The fo~lowing changes have beem m~de to the boundary of
CP-6A:
Page 12 of 18
( ~
In CP-6A the centerline of Grant Road and Sccnic Road was used as the easterly ~id
nvrtherly baundary. in the RP~ Plan th~ boundary went to fhe southerly limit of the Sccnic
Rflad right-of-way and the westerly limits of th~ Grant Roac€ right-af-way. Table 1
illustrates the acreage per the RP~ Plan vs. as adjust~d by fhe City. The differences are
reflected in the inclusion of right-of-way only. No additional taY lats have been added or
excluded.
Logand
rsva ure~n ~ae~iw~tvaoa
rr.~~P~~,.~,~.
c«wuvaMUa¢ew
~ C-06A18QA1 Aue~ _
Pa~ 13 oY 18
1 `~
Taylor Road Area {CP-GA)
BEALL LANE AREA (CP-6B) - The following changes have been made ta the 6oundary of CP-
6B:
Legettd
RP8 Vlb+tl Reune_nvcoa
~ CP~08 SA9A0 Auw
Conkel PdntL1t4009
~ CPtB200A9aaey
V. PERFORMANCE IND~CATORS
During the coui~se af the plaaaing period each partiai~ating jurisdiction is expe,cted to periodically
evaluate their performance in achie~~ing the goals of the Regional Plan. The specific perForinance
indivators that must b~ address~~ are:
1) On a regular basis, every 10 years s#arting in 2Q12, the Region'~ jurisdictians may,.at
the~r disoretion, partieipate in a process af coordinated periodic review.
Page 14 c-f l8
~J
n....~~ ~ ..W... w...... nrs ~o
ContnaetttlVa.1: 7laas pet^formance indfcator, alo~ag with the following, is confusing fn it.s
applicadion tivBth re.spect to use af the leYin "may" c~tu,~ "wadl ",
2) On a regular basis, every 1 Q years starting in 2012, all Signatories to the Agreement
will par~icipate in the regular RPS review process.
3) Participating cities wili incorporate the partions of the RP~ Plan that are applicable to
each individual city into that aity's compr~hensive plan and itnplementing ordinances,
and will reference the Plttn ~s an adapted element of Jackson County's camprehensi~e
p~an. At a minimum each city urill:
(a) Urban reserves;
(b) Target residenba.l densities (far the urban reserve areas};
(c) Agricultural bu#'fering standards (for the urban reserve areas);
(d) Implementing c~rdinances (for the urban resezve areas}.
4) Signatory jurisdictions will com~ly with the general o~nditic~ns as listed in Section X of
the Agreement, as follows:
{a} Agricultural Buffcring - Wherc appropriatc, citics shall apply thc agricultural
buffcring guidelincs developed through the Regiot~l Problem Solving proccss.
(b) Transporta.tion - The Plan shall include policies to:
(i) Identify a general network of locally owned regional]y significant north-
south and east-west at~t~ials and associated projects to }~rovide mobility
throu~out the Re~ion.
(ii) Designate a.nd pr~tect corridors for locally-owned regionally significant
arterials and ass~ciatcd pro,~ccts within thc MP4 to cnsurc adequate
transportdtion connectivity, multimodai use, and minimize right-of-way
cos~s.
{iii)Establish a means of providing supplemental transportation funding to
rnitigate impacts arisjng frc~m future growth.
{c) Conditions ofApproval - For sclectcd urban rescrvc areas the Plan dc#incs
conditions vf urbanization that the underlying jurisdiction must address prior t~
inclusion in an urban growth boundary. .
C'ommen~ 1Vi~. 2: The most oner~ous of the canditions is the agricultur^al buffering
requirement. ~It rhe ~Vavember Pd'anning ~`vmmBssion meeting the rrgriculturad
b~affering guidelines p~esented rn ~he ~'lan wilZ he discussed.
CommentNo. 3: ~'he transportation related conditBons tivill be included with other
comprehensave plan amendments required by each jur~isdictBon upan adop~ion o, f the
Pdan. It i.s very dikely that the City widl need to amend its TSP at tinae of ado~tion ~f the
Pdan by the City.
Page l S nf 18
i V
5} Signatory jurisdictions serving or projected to serve a designated urban reserve will
adopt an ih~ban Resefve Management Agreement {URMA).
Camment 1Vv. 4: Currently, ald Juri,sdictiQns are workang on a.rtandat~diaed zIRM~t,
which will be used as the ba.sis far each urban reserve area. Becau.se ~_f'conditinrr,r
unic~ue tu eucla urban ~eserve aYea it is llkedy that thet~e wBdd be separa~ed U~As,
6) Urban rreserves identified in the Plan ~re the first pri~rity lan~s useci fc~r UGB
expansions by participating cities.
'1) When applying urban designations and zones to urban reserve land included in UGB
expansions, cities will achieve, at least the "hi~her land iieed" residential densities as
describcd in the RPS Plan.
Comme~ar No. 5: Fur the Ci~y the "hiKher land neecl" ave~age density is six (6) u~aits
per gross acre for the urbun reserv~ areus. ~'v dude lhe all discussion aboud,~itlure
cdensity has been based on 6 units per gt~oss acre. T'he "dower land need" density is 7.4
unit.s per grnss acre.
S) When applying t~rbsan desi~nations ~nd zones to urban reserve land included in a UGB
~xpansion, cities will be ~uided by the ~encral distribution c~f la~nd uses prapased in the
RPS Plan.
Commer~t No 6: In ~he Urban Reserve discussion a~abde was ~r~esera~ed f'or each urbun
reserve identlfy~ng the p~oposed land use mix. ~'he mix of land use illustrated in the
plan fo~ each urban re.set~ve at~ea v~8ll be ~e~sed a.s a generad guide. .Iu.stz~ahle, and
minv~^ deviadaon.s, are~ermissible.
9} Canceptual plans for urban resexves will be deveioped in su#~icient detail to aliaw the
Region to determine the sizing and location af regionally significant transpartation
infi~astructure.
Comment No. 7: 7'he tirning af the prepa~ation of conceptuad nlans ds r~ot addre.ssec~
The mvat logic~al time is ad dhe time of incdusion in an urban g~owth boundat~y. The
pre~aYation q~'a cvnccpt~al plun would si~ni~canlly ass~asl in p~e~ara~ion of~nding,s
and dete~mination of the tand uses ancl bc~unc~ury configut•aliort o~'a p~vpa,sed ~arban
growth houndary ex~aans~on.
10) Thc County's p~pulatian element is updated per statute to be consistent with the
gradual implementation of the RPS Plmn.
ty t~
(
Page 1G of 18
Comment No. $: The County as the lead agency tn matntain populatian prujectaans.
Based on the Coz~nty's po~ulutic~n upd~rtes~ the City tivlld rnnnitnr 1ts p~ogress relative to
the Plan.
YI. 1tPS YLAN MQNITORING
Yartieipating jurisdietions will maintain a monifiorin~; syst~an to ensure compliance with the RPS
Plan. Section IV of the Part~cipants Agreement lists the specific standards against which
perfarmax~ce wili be jud~ed. These standards are restated in the Regional Plan as thc Goa1s,
Policies, and Implementation Strategie.~. Every ten years the jurisdictions will be rec~uired lo
prepare rep~rts evaluafing implementation of the Re~ion~l plan during the past 14 years. .The
reports are to inciude:
{1 } A descriptian of the activities thal were perttinent to the RPS Plan;
~2} An analysis as to whether and haw well those acbvities meet perfo27nanoe
standards; and
(3) A projection ~f activities for the next ten-year period.
Comment No. Yll-i: It will be the resllon>sihility of the C~ty to develop a»ronatoring
and reportin~ system. .Zi a~ recommended that the Pdanning ~epat~tment devedop,
maintain and Yepurt un an unnual basis compliance with ~he Ptan :s rnonft~ri~ag
pt~ovfsion, and on at2 annuat basis, and pr~esetat ~he repo~l lo the 1'lanni~tg Go~tamission
, fot• review and cotrtment.
Amendments to the Regional Plan can onty be proposed by the goveming body of a jurisdiction.
The County is responsable fox pracessing thc al1 pibpased amendments. Amendments to the
Regional Plan can be either minor ox major arnen~dments, defined as follows:
1Ylinar Amendment - An amenciment to the Regiflnal Plan that does not:
a) Conflict with the generel canditions listed in Se~tion X of the Participants'
Agrc;ement or apecific conditians of approval described in the adopted RPS Plan;
~nd
b) Propase an additian of more than 50 acres to a city's urban reserves established
in the Regional Plan or mc~re than a 50-acre expansion af the UUB intn non-urban
reserve i~ural land.
Cammen~ N~. ~'ll.~ ~: ~'he SD-acre provdsion is a ~ne time opportunity. Once a
eornmunity excecds un a~~egale af SD acres the anaendmerat is class~f~ed as a
maJor amendrtrent
~'otrarr~erat No. Vll~l-2: Mtnor amendments ar•e limited to aff"ected,jurisdictions, with
proposals fieing processed by the co~tnty.
Puge 17 of 18
{~
Corttm~nt 1Va. Vlll 3: Procedu~atly, the minor amendment~~oce,ss wilt be the
samc as u cvmprehensive plan anaendrrrent.
Ma~or Amendment - Any requested amendment to the Regional Plan that does no~ meet
the definition of Iviinor Am~ndment.
~`omme~at No. IV-4: ~Ill signatv~~es and a, f~`'ected agencies will bc nuticec~ ? he
Technical fldvisory Corramattee w8ld advise fl~e Policy Committee. Thc Podic~
Conzinidlee (by ~ruper majari~y) will ~nake a recnmmenda~ion fo the County.
Comme~t No. I~ S: Proceduralty, the ntaJot~ amendment~roce.s,s w~dl he the same
as a camprehensfve plan anaeradment.
Page 18 vf I8
~J