Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CAP032521
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Oregon City Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, March 25, 2021 Mayor Hank Williams Ward I Neil Olsen Ward II Kelley Johnson Ward III Melody Thueson Ward IV Taneea Browning At Large Rob Hernandez At Large Michael Parsons At Large Michael Parsons Next Res (1658) Ord (2073) ________________________________________ This will be a virtual meeting. Citizens are welcome to attend the meeting in the City Hall Council Chambers. I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comment is for non-agenda items. If you are here to make comments on a specific agenda item, you must speak at that time. Please limit your remarks to 3 minutes per individual, 5 minutes per group, with a maximum of 20 minutes per meeting being allotted for public comments. The council may ask questions but may take no action during the public comment section of the meeting, except to direct staff to prepare a report or place an item on a future agenda. Complaints against specific City employees should be resolved through the City’s Personnel Complaint procedure. The right to address the Council does not exempt the speaker from any potential liability for defamation. V. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of March 11, 2021 City Council Minutes VI. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA VII. ORDINANCES, AND RESOLUTIONS A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. _______, An Ordinance Adopting an Amendment to the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Map (Major) and Text Amendment to the Regional Plan Element Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement to Add and Maintain a Buildable Land Supply of Approximately 444 Acres to the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary for Residential, Non-Industrial Employment, Parks and Open Space for the 2019-2039 Planning Period (Holtey) B. First Reading - Ordinance Amending in Part Central Point Municipal Code Title 10 Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferential Parking Districts (Dreyer) C. Resolution No. ________, A Resolution accepting the Qualified Based Selection Process for the design and construction engineering of the Hamrick-Pine Signal Upgrade and Beebe-Hamrick Signal and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Dowl, Inc. (Samitore) VIII. BUSINESS A. Discussion - Anti-Camping Ordinances (Dreyer) IX. MAYOR'S REPORT X. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT XI. COUNCIL REPORTS XII. DEPARTMENT REPORTS XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City Council will adjourn to executive session under the provisions of ORS 192.660. Under the provisions of the Oregon Public Meetings Law, the proceedings of an executive session are not for publication or broadcast. XIV. ADJOURNMENT Individuals needing special accommodations such as sign language, foreign language interpreters or equipment for the hearing impaired must request such services at least 72 hours prior to the City Council meeting. To make your request, please contact the City Recorder at 541-423-1026 (voice), or by e-mail to Deanna.casey@centralpointoregon.gov. Si necesita traductor en español o servicios de discapacidades (ADA) para asistir a una junta publica de la ciudad por favor llame con 72 horas de anticipación al 541-664-3321 ext. 201 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Oregon City Council Meeting Minutes Thursday, March 11, 2021 I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Mayor Hank Williams II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Hank Williams Mayor Remote Neil Olsen Ward I Remote Kelley Johnson Ward II Remote Melody Thueson Ward III Remote Taneea Browning Ward IV Remote Rob Hernandez At Large Excused Michael Parsons At Large Remote Staff members present: City Manager Chris Clayton; City Attorney Sydnee Dreyer; Finance Director Steve Weber; Police Chief Kris Allison; Police Captain Dave Croft; Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore; Community Development Director Tom Humphrey; Planning Director Stephanie Holtey; and City Recorder Deanna Casey. This was a virtual meeting. All attendees added via Zoom. The City Recorder was locked in the Council Chamber for citizen participation. IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None V. CONSENT AGENDA RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV SECONDER: Melody Thueson, Ward III AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Parsons EXCUSED: Rob Hernandez A. Approval of February 11, 2021 City Council Minutes VI. PUBLIC HEARING A. First Reading - Ordinance Amending Comp Plan to expand Urban Growth Boundary City Attorney Sydnee Dreyer had each of the Council members declare if they had a conflict of interest on this land use item. No member declared a conflict of interest. 5.A Packet Pg. 3 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes March 11, 2021 Page 2 Planning Director Stephanie Holtey presented the finding of fact and background information regarding the Urban Growth Boundary expansion. The city has been working on the regional process in order to expand our boundary by 444 acres. She presented the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) Text. This amendment also transfers four roads from Jackson County to the City of Central Point upon annexation of property in that area. The City is not requiring anyone to rezone their property if they are not interested in becoming part of the city. She explained proposed city land use designations and pointed out open space currently in our city limits and areas that could be included soon such as the Greenway and Cemetery. She explained approval criteria and demonstrated the land need and land selection that reflects state and local priorities and criteria. The city did receive three letters in support of the proposed amendment. These letters have been included in the official record. The Planning Commission unanimously voted for approval by the City Council. Mayor Williams opened the public hearing. Larry Martin, Taylor Road resident. He is in favor of the proposal and part of the group of property owners in CP-6A that have submitted a letter of support to the city. He thanked city staff for all the work they have done to get this before the council. It has been a long process and they are eager for the ordinance to be approved. Katy Mallams - Heritage Road resident. She thanked the city staff and Planning Commission for soliciting feedback and listening to the people in the proposed expansion areas. Jackson County has not made an effort to hear from the citizens regarding annexation or zoning in regards to the UGB amendment. All the livability surveys are for people who don't live here at this time. She would like to make sure the city includes all the citizens when approving master plans. She would like to see noise abatement addressed for surrounding properties, and she is concerned about water tables as construction begins. The state wants to protect wildlife and she would like to see the city protect wildlife in areas being annexed. Dan O’Conner - representative for home owners in CP-6A There is a group of property owners in CP-6A in favor of the UGB amendment. He is excited to be part of bringing new development opportunities to Central Point. No one else came forward and Mayor Williams closed the public hearing. Kelley Johnson moved to second reading An Ordinance Amending the Comprehensive Plan Map (Major) and Text Amendment to the Regional Plan Element Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement to Add and Maintain a Buildable Land Supply of Approximately 444 Acres to the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary for Residential, Non-Industrial Employment, Parks and Open Space for the 2019-2039 Planning Period. 5.A Packet Pg. 4 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes March 11, 2021 Page 3 RESULT: 1ST READING [UNANIMOUS] Next: 3/25/2021 7:00 PM MOVER: Kelley Johnson, Ward II SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Parsons EXCUSED: Rob Hernandez VII. ORDINANCES, AND RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. _______, A Resolution Authorizing a Full faith and Credit Borrowing and Related Matters Finance Director Steve Weber stated that Council authorized staff to seek debt financing that would refinance the new Parks and Public Works Corporation Yard. In working with the City’s financial advisors, a request for proposal was distributed to financial institutions for a $5.35 million bank placement financing on February 2, 2021. The City received bids from five banks by the proposal due date. Staff participated on a conference call to review the proposals and give their recommendation of the Banner Bank 15 year amortization proposal due to interest rate, annualized debt service payments and more flexible prepayment options. Melody Thueson moved to approve Resolution No. 1657, A Resolution Authorizing a Full Faith and Credit Borrowing and Related Matters. RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Melody Thueson, Ward III SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Parsons EXCUSED: Rob Hernandez VIII. BUSINESS A. Acceptance of Park Commission Report Matt presented the Parks Commission report for February 18, 2021: Reviewed the White Hawk Subdivision and the current park design which includes two U-11 soccer fields, a playground and a restroom. The preliminary concern is the lack of parking which could be an issue if both fields are in use. The commission suggested adding parking to the west side of the facility. Cemetery Municipal Code and Rules and Regulations: Staff presented a draft cemetery municipal code establishing ownership of the facility, management structure, and guidance for cemetery operations. Changes to the rules and regulations would be reviewed and approved by the Park and recreation Commission with final approval by the City Council. Forest Glen Park playground equipment is over twenty years old and has reached the end of its life cycle. The Parks Department will remove the old equipment in the fall of 2021 and install the new equipment in the winter of 2022.project range will be between $126,000 and $167,000 depending on the equipment selected. Design options will be presented at the May 20th Commission meeting. 5.A Packet Pg. 5 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes March 11, 2021 Page 4 RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY B. Planning Commission Report Community Development Director Tom Humphrey presented the Planning Commission report for the March 2, 2021: The Commission held a public hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit application to allow the Parks and Public Works Department to operate a Public Facility at 235 S. Haskell Street. The site is within the General Commercial zoning district in the TOD Corridor. Staff explained that a CUP is being pursued due to the nature of the pubic facility and to ensure it will be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. The public concern was in regards to traffic generation and impacts on the school at Pine and Haskell. Improvements will be made to street frontages, and also include landscaping and perimeter fencing. The Commission determined that the new use would be compatible with neighborhoods in the immediate area and approved the proposal as presented. The Commission held a public hearing to consider site plan and architectural review application for the construction of a public facility. The Commission determined that the proposal was in compliance with application with conditions recommended by staff including amendments. There is a Pacific Power easement that would need to be vacated prior to final inspection and certificate of occupancy instead of at the time building permit issuance. The rationale for this allowance is that there are no utilities in the easement and COVID has extended the review time for Pacific Power from a couple weeks to 5 months. Staff reviewed various development activities occurring throughout the city and the disposition of previously approved development plans. There was a brief discussion about adding food truck/food court issues as a discussion item in April. RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY C. Budget Committee Appointment 2021 Mayor Williams stated that we have two vacancies on the Budget Commission, there are two positions currently that either need to be renewed or filled. Mr. Walton and Mr. Stults have been on the Budget Committee for a number of years. In past years staff has advertised for applicants and have not received any interest until this year. We currently have two applicants interested in the vacancies. Kelley Johnson moved to appoint Kathleen Flanagan-Clark and Eden Foster to the Budget Committee with terms of 4 years. RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kelley Johnson, Ward II SECONDER: Michael Parsons, At Large AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Parsons EXCUSED: Rob Hernandez IX. MAYOR'S REPORT 5.A Packet Pg. 6 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes March 11, 2021 Page 5 Mayor Williams reported that he tried to attend the Mayor's United Virtual event, but was unable to log into the zoom event. He did attend a TRADCO Committee meeting where they reviewed the transportation projects in the area. X. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Chris Clayton reported that: The stimulus bill was signed by President Biden today. In addition to checks to citizens there will be funds available for local cities and counties. We are unsure when or how many funds will be available for local jurisdictions. There will be a Study Session on Monday night for Part 2 of the Utility Fee Discussion. Staff met with the Medford Water Commission regarding the Elk City Water District. The Oregon Department of Health has been putting pressure on smaller private districts to become public water systems. They will be having more discussions with the Elk City Water District to encourage them to come into the city. The Upton Road property the city sold last year has had some major updates to the property and facility increasing the amount of the property. The State is discussing prevailing wage legislation and it is expected to pass. The legislation is not good news for the City, it will drive up the cost of projects. There is alot of legislation regarding homelessness and camping on public property at the state level. This is something that we will be discussing at a study session in the near future. If the legislation passes it will be hard for the city to enforce no camping on public lands. There will be an executive session tonight to receive legal advice. XI. COUNCIL REPORTS Council Member Mike Parsons reported that: He attended the Parks and Recreation Committee meeting. He attended the Study Session meeting. He attended the Planning Commission meeting. Central Point lost a long time resident last week at the age of 100 years old. He was a member in the meadows and was an active resident in the community in his younger days. Council Member Taneea Browning reported that: She attended multiple Medford Water Commission meetings. There were several conversations about wild fire prevention. She attended the Study Session. 5.A Packet Pg. 7 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes March 11, 2021 Page 6 She wanted to thank Mrs. Holtey for a great report on the UGB and the way she presented it tonight. Council Member Melody Thueson reported that Walt Davenport is our new School Superintendent. Council Member Kelley Johnson reported that she attended the Study Session and attended the Chamber Board meeting. Council Member Neil Olsen reported that he attended the Study Session and Planning Commission meeting. XII. DEPARTMENT REPORTS Police Chief Kris Allison reported that: they are receiving a variety of calls lately including DUII, and Mental Health Services. She is going to review the different types of calls and return with the trends. Two weeks ago in Eagle Point a Deputy was shot in the chest but the vest saved his life. Chad Prins was a Central Point Officer a few years ago. Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore: The City will be spraying the greenway for weeds and working with FEMA. The gazebo and benches are moving forward. The temporary fencing around the skate park will be coming down before spring break. Finance Director Steve Weber has been working on the 2021/23 budget. Community Development Director Tom Humphrey reported that: Dusty's Transmission is doing some upgrades to their building. We have received and application for another mixed use project in Twin Creeks just south of the Park. IT Director Jason Richmond said that the issues in Florida with their water system was because of hackers. They were using the same password for each person accessing the system. We don’t allow that in Central Point but will keep an eye on our software. XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - ORS 192.660 (2) (h) Legal Counsel 5.A Packet Pg. 8 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes March 11, 2021 Page 7 Taneed Browning moved to adjourn to Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) Legal Counsel. All said aye and the meeting was adjourned to executive session at 8:20 p.m. XIV. ADJOURNMENT No additional action was taken after the Executive Session. The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the March 11, 2021, Council meeting were approved by the City Council at its meeting of _________________, 2021. Dated: _________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: __________________________ City Recorder 5.A Packet Pg. 9 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 11, 2021 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: Community Development FROM: Stephanie Holtey, Planning Director MEETING DATE: March 25, 2021 SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No. _______, An Ordinance Adopting an Amendment to the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Map (Major) and Text Amendment to the Regional Plan Element Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement to Add and Maintain a Buildable Land Supply of Approximately 444 Acres to the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary for Residential, Non-Industrial Employment, Parks and Open Space for the 2019-2039 Planning Period ACTION REQUIRED: Ordinance 2nd Reading RECOMMENDATION: Approval BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On March 11, 2021, the City Council conducted a public hearing and first reading of an Ordinance to consider a Major Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to expand the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and to amend the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) (“UGB Amendment”). The UGB Amendment addresses the City’s need to provide a 20-year land supply for residential, employment and parkland and includes land from Urban Reserve Areas (URAs) established following a decade long process to evaluate and select lands to accommodate future urban growth. After hearing public testimony, the Council voted unanimously to forward the Ordinance to a second reading. This action affirmed the Planning Commission recommendation per Resolution No. 887 that was approved on February 2, 2021 at a Joint Planning Commission meeting with Jackson County. During the joint public hearing, public testimony was received in support of and in opposition to the proposal. Proponents cited the need for residential land and recognized the extensive public process from Regional Problem Solving up to the submittal of the City’s UGB application. Opponents expressed concerns about urbanization impacts to traffic, noise, farmland, wildfire risk and rural quality of life. Both Planning Commissions considered the testimony received and acknowledged that urbanization will have impacts that will be addressed as part of the development process only if and when lands are annexed. Planning Commissioners also recognized the extensive public process and thorough documentation of land needs and proposed UGB location that satisfies state and local requirements provided that the City 7.A Packet Pg. 10 completes three outstanding items prior to annexing lands from the proposed UGB. These include: Updating the residential zoning districts to comply with the minimum average density commitment in the Regional Plan Element; Completing public facility plans (i.e. Water System Master Plan, Stormwater Master Plan and Transportation System Plan) to address the proposed UGB expansion areas. Following completion of these plans, the City must update its Public Facility Element of the Comprehensive Plan.; and, Conducting an inventory of environmental resources consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 5 and updating the Environmental Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Following discussion and deliberation both Planning Commissions found that the proposed UGB Amendment complies with the applicable approval criteria as conditioned and unanimously voted to recommend the City Council and Board of County Commissioners approve the application as presented by staff (Attachment 1). Comprehensive Amendment Description: The purpose of the UGB Amendment is to provide a 20-year land supply for residential, non-industrial employment and parks and open space uses. The UGBMA is an intergovernmental agreement between the City and Jackson County that establishes roles, responsibilities, policies and procedures for management of land in the UGB. The proposed amendment to the UGBMA recognizes the importance of maintaining a usable land supply for future urban development, and proposes two (2) new polices that limit land division lot size and zone map changes for land in the UGB prior to annexation. The City’s UGB Amendment proposal is based on the most recent Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County and Urban Growth Boundaries; and analysis of housing, employment and parkland needs (See Attachment “2” – Exhibit “D” (pages 1-20)). The proposed location is based on the state requirements, as well as performance indicators in the Regional Plan Element relative to minimum average density, land use and transportation concept plans, and mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas (See Attachment “2” – Exhibit “D” pages 21-32)). At the March 25, 2021 meeting, the City Council will consider a second reading of the Ordinance and take action to either approve, approve with changes or deny it. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: The proposed comprehensive plan amendments do not generate additional cost to the City beyond in-kind staff expense. LEGAL ANALYSIS: In accordance with ORS 197.296, the City is required to provide a 20-year land supply 7.A Packet Pg. 11 for its land needs. The proposed UGB Amendment reflects the City’s evaluation of land needs and location to provide for orderly, efficient and economical growth consistent with the State’s Planning Goals and the requirements provided in the UGBMA, City policies and regulations. More specifically, the proposed Major Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and UGBMA text amendment has been evaluated against the applicable criteria below and found to comply as evidenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Attachment “2”, Exhibit “D”) as conditioned: Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement. [See pages 33-38]. Statewide Planning Goals: Goal 1, Citizen Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 3, Agricultural Lands; Goal 4, Forest Lands; Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces; Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality; Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters; Goal 8, Recreational needs; Goal 9, Economic Development; Goal 10, Housing; Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services; Goal 12, Transportation; Goal 13, Energy Conservation; and, Goal 14, Urbanization. [See pages 39-45]. Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660 Division 24, Urban Growth Boundaries. [See pages 46-56]. OAR 660-012-0060, Transportation planning Rule Plan and Land Use Amendments. [See pages 56-59]. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 197.298, Priority of land to be included in the UGB. [See pages 60-61]. City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan: General Policies; Citizen Involvement Element; Population Element; Economic Element; Parks Element; Land Use Element; Regional Plan Element; Public Facilities Element; Transportation System Plan; and, Urbanization Element. [See pages 69-118]. City of Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC) 17.76, Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary Amendments. [See pages 119-120]. COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: The City Council goal to provide managed growth and infrastructure is fundamental to the UGB Amendment project as it provides for needed land to meet the housing, employment and recreation needs of residents. Adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments accomplishes this long standing goal and positions the City to implement recently adopted strategies in the 2040 Strategic Plan relative to Community Investment and Vibrant Economy priorities. 7.A Packet Pg. 12 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a second reading of the ordinance for proposed comprehensive plan map and text amendments and approve the Ordinance without changes. RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve Ordinance No. _______, approving the Major Amendment to the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Map and Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement to add and maintain a buildable land supply of approximately 444 acres to the Urban Growth Boundary for residential, non-industrial employment, parks and open space for the 2019-2039 planning period. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment 1 - PC Resolution No. 887 (Exhibits avail. upon request) 2. Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits 7.A Packet Pg. 13 7.A.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Attachment 1 - PC Resolution No. 887 (Exhibits avail. upon request) (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Attachment 1 - PC Resolution No. 887 (Exhibits avail. upon request) (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CENTRAL POINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP (MAJOR) AND TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE REGIONAL PLAN ELEMENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT TO ADD AND MAINTAIN A BUILDABLE LAND SUPPLY OF APPROXIMATELY 444 ACRES TO THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY FOR RESIDENTIAL, NON-INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE FOR THE 2019-2039 PLANNING PERIOD Recitals: A. The City of Central Point (City) is authorized under Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) Chapter 197 to prepare, adopt and revise comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances consistent with the State Land Use Planning Goals. B. The City has coordinated its planning efforts with the State in accordance with ORS 197.040(2)(e) and OAR 660-30-0060 to assure compliance with the state’s land use planning goals and compatibility with the City Comprehensive Plan. C. Pursuant to authority granted by the City Charter and the ORS, the City may amend the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary with Jackson County, which was originally adopted on September 26, 1984 and has been amended at various times since. D. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in CPMC 17.76 Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary Amendments, the City Council approved Resolution No. 1599 initiating a major comprehensive plan amendment to add needed land to the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary including lands from Urban Reserve Areas CP-2B, CP-3, CP-4D and CP-6A. E. In accordance with CPMC 17.96.300, the Central Point Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on February 2, 2021, and following deliberations adopted a resolution recommending approval of the proposed amendment. F. In accordance with CPMC 17.96.300, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to consider the proposed amendment on March 11, 2021. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Pg. 2 Ordinance No. ____________ (__/__/___) Section 1. The City adopts Exhibit “A” to this ordinance, an amended Comprehensive Plan Map adding approximately 444 acres to the Urban Growth Boundary from portions of Urban Reserve Areas CP-2B, CP-3, CP-4D and CP-6A. Section 2. The City adopts Exhibit “B” to this ordinance allocating residential, non- industrial employment and parks and open space land use designations on the General Land Use Map in the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element. Section 3. The City adopts Exhibit “C” to this ordinance, an amended Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement between the City of Central Point and Jackson County, including two new Urban Growth Policies to preserve land supply by limiting the minimum lot size of new land divisions 40 acres and prohibiting zone map amendments. Section 4. The City adopts Exhibit “D” to this ordinance, which includes the findings of fact and conclusions of law and all exhibits thereto that support the preparation and adoption of these amendments to the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan. Section 5. The Planning Department for the City of Central Point is authorized to prepare planning documents to reflect the changes adopted herein, including deleting and adding textual material and maps, renumbering pages or sections, and making any technical changes not affecting the substance of these amendments as necessary to effectuate the adopted amendments. Section 6. The effective date of this ordinance shall be thirty (30) days from its passage by the City Council. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this _____ day of _____________________, 2021. __________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: _____________________________ City Recorder 7.A.b Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Street Names Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth BoundaryProposed CP-6A Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential CommercialProposed CP-3 Land Use General Commercial (GC) Bear Creek Greenway (BCG) Parks and Open Space (OS) Proposed CP-4D Land Use Parks and OS Residential Very LowProposed CP-2B Land UseHigh Residential Medium Residential Low Residential Neighborhood Commercial Civic Parks & Open Space Proposed Land Use General Land Use Plan Map Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson CountyEXPO WILSON RD UPTON RD GEBHARD RDUpton Rd Wilson Rd East Pine St Taylor Rd Scenic Ave Grant RdGebhard RdPeninger Rd H wy 99 Beall Ln 7.A.b Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON (CITY) AND JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON (COUNTY) FOR THE JOINT MANAGEMENT OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY WHEREAS, under ORS 190.003 to 190.030, and 197.175, et seq. City and County are authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements and are required to prepare and adopt Comprehensive Plans consistent with Statewide Planning Goals; and WHEREAS, under ORS 197 - State Land Use Goal 14, Urbanization, the "Establishment and change of the boundary shall be a cooperative process between a city and the county or counties that surround it"; and WHEREAS, City and County have adopted a Regional Plan which necessitates revisions to the previous agreement; and WHEREAS, City and County recognize the importance of providing an orderly transition of urban services from County to City jurisdiction and administration as the Urban Reserve transitions from a rural to an urban character; and WHEREAS, ORS 190.003, et seq. requires that an intergovernmental agreement relating to the performance of functions or activities by one unit of local government for another shall be adopted and shall specify the responsibilities between the parties; NOW, THEREFORE, the City and County adopt the following urban growth policies which shall serve as the basis for decisions pertaining to development and land uses in the area between the City limits of Central Point and its urban-growth boundary, and other lands that are of mutual interest or are of significant importance to Central Point's long-range growth and development. DEFINITIONS 1. Area of Mutual Planning Concern: A geographical area lying beyond the adopted urban growth boundary in which the City and County have an interest in terms of that area's types and levels of development, land uses, environment, agriculture, and other unique characteristics. The area is not subject to annexation within the current planning period but may be in the path of longer-range urban growth. Therefore, the City and County will fully coordinate land use activity within this area. 2. BOC: Jackson County Board of Commissioners. 3. Comprehensive Plan: State-acknowledged comprehensive plan adopted by City or County. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 2 4. Contract Annexation: A process whereby the City, County, and other involved parties enter into a contract that permits: A) The parties to administer urban land use regulations on the development of property following an annexation decision while the property remains under County jurisdiction; and B) The City to annex property developed to City densities and uses, with the improvement to appear on the County tax rolls prior to the effective date of annexation, resulting in a greater benefit to the tax base of the community. 5. Council: City of Central Point City Council 6. Develop: To bring about growth or create new opportunities for growth; to cause the expansion of available lands; to extend public facilities or services; to construct, alter or expand a structure; to conduct a mining operation; to make a change in the use of appearance of land; to divide land into smaller parcels; to create or terminate rights of access, etc. 7. LDO: Jackson County’s Land Development Ordinance. 8. Non-Resource Land: Land that is not subject to the statewide Goals listed in OAR 660-004-0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d). 9. Planning Services: Legislative activities, such as adoption and amendment of comprehensive plan text and maps, adoption and amendment of land use regulations, and quasi-judicial processing of land use actions. 10. Resource Land: Land that is subject to the statewide Goals listed in OAR 660- 004-0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d). 11. Subdivide or Partition Land: The act of dividing the legal ownership of land into smaller units, as set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes 92.010. 12. Urban/Public Facilities and Services: Basic facilities that are planned for and provided by either the private or public sector, and are essential to the support of development in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Such facilities and services include, but are not limited to, police and fire protection, sanitary facilities, public water and storm drain facilities; planning, zoning, and subdivision controls; health services; recreation facilities and services; energy and communication services; and community governmental services including schools and transportation. 13. Urban Growth Boundary: A site specific line on the Official Plan and Zoning Map of Jackson County, which identifies and encompasses urban and urbanizable lands within the County, including: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 3 A) URBAN LAND: Residential areas generally comprised of parcels smaller than one acre, or highly developed commercial and industrial areas which are within incorporated cities or which contain concentrations of persons who reside or work in the areas, including land adjacent to and outside cities, and which have supporting urban public facilities and services. B) URBANIZABLE LAND: Areas within an officially adopted urban growth boundary which are needed for the expansion of that urban area, and which have been determined to be necessary and suitable for development as future urban land and which can be served with necessary urban public facilities and services. 14. Urban Reserve Areas (URA): Land outside of a UGB identified as highest priority (per ORS 197.298) for inclusion in the UGB when additional urbanizable land is needed in accordance with the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 14. INTENT AND PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT The intent and purpose of this Agreement is for City and County to: 1. Enhance long-range planning in the Urban Growth Boundary and the Urban Reserve. 2. Maintain and improve coordination and communication between City and County. 3. Develop consistent policies and procedures for managing urban growth and development within the Urban Growth Boundary. 4. Minimize impacts to property owners, local governments and service providers related to the transition of property from within the Urban Growth Boundary to within the City Limits. URBAN GROWTH POLICIES 1. The City of Central Point shall have primary responsibility for all future urban level development that takes place within the City and urban growth boundary area. Additionally: A) All urban level development shall conform to City standards, shall be consistent with the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, and shall meet all appropriate requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance and Map. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 4 B) The term "urban level development" shall be generally defined, for purposes of this agreement, as any commercial or industrial development, and any residential development, partitioning, or subdivision that creates actual or potential densities greater than allowed by the City’s Residential Low-density District (R-L). The expansion or major alteration of legally existing commercial or industrial use shall also be considered urban level development. C) Urban level development proposals submitted through County processes must be accompanied by a contract to annex to the City. D) Prior to annexation of urbanizable lands, no land divisions shall be approved by the County which create lots less than forty (40) acres in size. E) Prior to annexation of urbanizable lands, no property shall be rezoned. This restriction advances the purposes and policies of the Regional Plan to make more efficient use of urbanizable land. 2. A change in the use of urbanizable land from a use designated on the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map to uses shown on the City Comprehensive Plan shall occur only upon annexation or contractual intent to annex to the City. Additionally: A) Development of land for uses designated in the Comprehensive Plan shall be encouraged on vacant or underdeveloped lands adjacent to or within the City limits prior to the conversion of other lands within the urban growth boundary. B) Urban facilities and services must be adequate in condition and capacity to accommodate the additional level of growth, as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, prior to or concurrent with the land use changes. C) The City may initiate annexation and zone changes of lands outside the City limits and within the UGB that are under a County "Exclusive Farm Use" designation or otherwise enjoying farm-related tax incentives when such lands are needed for urban development. 3. City annexation shall only occur within the framework of the City's Comprehensive Plan and within the Urban Growth Boundary. 4. Except as provided in Policy 11 of this agreement, specific annexation decisions shall be governed by the City of Central Point. The City will provide opportunities for the County and all affected agencies to respond to pending requests for annexation with the response time limited to sixty days to minimize any unnecessary and costly delay in processing. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 5 5. The establishment of the Urban Growth Boundary does not imply that all lands within the Boundary must be annexed to the City. 6. Jackson County shall retain jurisdiction over any land use decisions, other than annexations, within the unincorporated urbanizable area, in conformance with these adopted policies. Additionally: A) The City shall be requested to respond to pending applications for land use changes in the unincorporated urbanizable area. If no response is received within fourteen days, the County will assume the City has no objections to the request B) The City will request that the County respond to pending applications for land use changes within the incorporated area which could affect land under County jurisdiction. If no response is received within fourteen days, the City will assume the County has no objections to the request. C) Recognizing that unincorporated areas within the Urban Growth Boundary could ultimately become part of Central Point, the City’s recommendations will be given due consideration. It is the intent of the County to administer a mutually adopted City/County policy in the urbanizable area until such time as the area is annexed. 7. Lands in the vicinity of the Seven Oaks Interchange, as delineated on Map 1 attached, are considered unique because of the transportation facilities present. The I-5 Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for Exit 35 addresses the unique characteristics of the area and recommendations from the plan will be incorporated into the City and County Comprehensive Plans. Portions of this area are in Central Point’s Urban Reserve while the remainder is designated an Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall be protected from premature development. Additionally: A) The County shall ensure that the area remains in a rural character so that a priority is placed on urban development within the UGB, as planned. B) The Seven Oaks Interchange Area of Mutual Planning Concern shall retain its present County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designation, or similar "rural" designation, until such time as the area can be shown to be needed for the City's urbanization, in accordance with the seven urbanization factors of Statewide goal 14 and the provisions of this agreement that pertain to City-initiated comprehensive plan amendments. 8. Lands in the vicinity of and including Forest/Gibbon Acres west of Table Rock Road, as delineated on Map 2 attached, are considered remote to Central Point at this time. Although located outside of any Urban Reserve, this area is designated 7.A.b Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 6 an Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall be protected from premature or more intense development. Additionally: A) The County shall ensure that the area remains in a rural character so that a priority is placed on urban development within the UGB and URAs, as planned. B) The Forest/Gibbon Acres Area of Mutual Planning Concern shall retain its present County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designation, or similar "rural" designation, until such time as the area can be shown to be needed for the City's urbanization or for inclusion in Medford or in White City should it incorporate. Inclusion in a planning area will occur in accordance with the seven urbanization factors of Statewide goal 14 and the provisions of this agreement that pertain to City-initiated comprehensive plan amendments. 9. Lands under the ownership of Jackson County between Gebhard Road and Interstate-5 north of Pine Street, including the Jackson County Expo (fairgrounds) and property in the ownership of Jackson County adjacent to the Expo as delineated on Map 3 attached, are designated an Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall be protected from uncoordinated land use development. Additionally: A) The County shall ensure that all land use planning that occurs will be coordinated with the City so that a priority is placed on urban development within the UGB and URAs, as planned. B) The Jackson County Expo Area of Mutual Planning Concern shall retain its present County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designation, or designations unique to the fairground master plan, until such time as the area can be shown to be needed for the City's urbanization, in accordance with the seven urbanization factors of Statewide goal 14 and the provisions of this agreement that pertain to City-initiated comprehensive plan amendments. C) During the first coordinated Periodic Review process for the Regional Plan, Jackson County shall consider including the land occupied by the Jackson County Expo to the City of Central Point Urban Reserve Area. D) The impacts of County development upon City and Regional infrastructure shall be assessed and mitigated in order to obtain a mutually beneficial outcome to both entities. 10. Lands within the urbanizable area which currently support a farm use shall be encouraged, through zoning and appropriate tax incentives, to remain in that use for as long as is "economically feasible". 7.A.b Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7 A) "Economically feasible", as used in this policy, shall be interpreted to mean feasible from the standpoint of the property owner. Implementation of this policy will be done on a voluntary basis. B) "Exclusive Farm" or other appropriate low-intensity rural zoning designation shall be applied to areas within the UGB by the County for the purpose of maintaining agricultural land uses and related tax incentives until such time as planned annexation and urban development occur. C) "Suburban Residential" or other zoning designations that would permit non-agricultural land uses to develop prematurely could result in obstacles to future planned and coordinated growth and, therefore, should be restricted to only those areas that are already developed to such levels. D) Agricultural zoning policies contained herein apply only to areas identified by the City or County as agricultural lands within the UGB, URA’s or Seven Oaks Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall not be used as a standard to review other land use applications within these areas. 11. The City and County acknowledge the importance of protecting agricultural lands. Therefore: A) While properties are in agricultural use, the City will apply the below standards when adjacent lands are proposed for urban residential development: i. To mitigate the potential for vandalism, the development's design should incorporate the use of visible public or semipublic open space adjacent to the agricultural lands. ii. To mitigate nuisances originating from agricultural noise, odors, irrigation run-off, and agricultural spray drift, the development's design should incorporate: a. The use of landscaping and berms where a positive buffering benefit can be demonstrated. b. The orientation of structures and fencing relative to usable exterior space such as patios, rear yards and courts, such that the potential impacts from spray drift, dust, odors, and noise intrusion are minimized. c. The design and construction of all habitable buildings, including window and door locations, should be such that the potential impact of spray drift, noise, dust, and odors upon interior living/working areas will be minimized. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 8 d. Physical separation between agricultural lands and urban development shall be utilized to the greatest extent possible to minimize adverse impacts. Site design emphasizing the appropriate use of open space areas, streets, and areas not designed specifically for public recreation or assembly shall be considered. B) The City and County mutually agree herewith that the buffering standards established by the Jackson County Regional Plan and adopted by the City of Central Point have or can and will be met, prior to annexation or urban development of lands. C) The City and County mutually agree to involve affected Irrigation Districts prior to annexation or when contemplating urban development of lands. 12. The City, County, and other affected agencies shall coordinate the expansion and development of all urban facilities and services within the urbanization area. Additionally: A) Provisions for urban facilities and services shall be planned in a manner limiting duplication in an effort to provide greater efficiency and economy of operation. B) A single urban facility or service extended into the urbanizable area must be coordinated with the planned future development of all other facilities and services appropriate to that area, and shall be provided at levels necessary for expected uses, as designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 13. All County road construction and reconstruction resulting from new development, redevelopment, or land division, in the urbanizable area shall be to urban standards, except that the term "reconstruction" does not include normal road maintenance by the County. 14. Except for URAs, no other land or non-municipal improvements located outside the Urban Growth Boundary shall be permitted to connect to the water line serving Erickson unless it is first included in the Urban Growth Boundary or a “reasons” exception is taken to applicable Statewide Land Use Planning Goals which allows such connection. The owners of such benefited property must sign an irrevocable consent to annex to the City of Central Point. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 9 AMENDMENTS AND CORRECTIONS TO THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY The procedure for joint City and County review and amendment of urban growth boundary and urbanization policies are established as follows: MAJOR REVISIONS Major revisions in boundary or policies will be considered amendments to both the City and County comprehensive plans and, as such, are subject to a legislative review process. A major revision shall include any boundary change that has widespread and significant impact beyond the immediate area, such as quantitative changes allowing for substantial changes in population or significant increases in resource impacts; qualitative changes in the land use itself, such as conversion of residential to industrial use, or spatial changes that affect large areas of many different ownerships. Any change in urbanization policies is considered a major revision. Major revisions will be considered by the City and County at periodic intervals in accordance with the terms of the mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreements between the County and each municipal jurisdiction. It is the intent of the governing bodies to review the urban growth boundary and urbanization policies for consistency upon completion of the City and County Comprehensive Plans. A request for major revision can be initiated only by the County or City governing bodies or their respective planning commissions. Individuals, groups, citizen advisory committees, and affected agencies may petition the County or appropriate City in accordance with the procedural guidelines adopted by the jurisdiction for initiating major legislative amendments. The party who seeks the revision shall be responsible for filing adequate written documentation with the City and County governing bodies. Final legislative action on major revision requests shall be based on the factors stated in each mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreement. Generally these are: A) Demonstrated need to accommodate unpredicted population trends, to satisfy urban housing needs, or to assure adequate employment opportunities; B) The orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services; C) Maximum efficiency of land uses within the current urbanizable area; D) Environmental, energy, economic and social consequences; E) Compatibility of the proposed change with other elements of the City and County comprehensive plans; and, F) The other statewide planning goals. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 10 Major revision proposals shall be subject to a mutual City and County review and agreement process involving affected agencies, citizen advisory committees, and the general public. The review process has the following steps: A) CAC and planning commissions review and make recommendations to the City Council and Board of County Commissioners; B) Proposal mailed to the affected agencies and property owners; and, C) Proposal heard and acted upon by City Council and Board of County Commissioners. MINOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS Minor adjustments to an urban growth boundary line may be considered subject to similar procedures used by the City and County in hearing zoning requests. A minor amendment is defined as focusing on specific individual properties and not having significant impacts beyond the immediate area of the change. Application for a minor boundary line amendment can only be made by property owners, their authorized agents, or by a City or County governing body. Written applications for amendments may be filed in the office of the Jackson County Department of Planning and Development on forms prescribed by the County. The standards for processing an application are as indicated in the mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreement. Generally these are the same factors as for a major urban growth boundary amendment. CORRECTION OF ERRORS A. An error is generally considered to be a cartographic mistake, or a misprint, omission, or duplication in the text. They are technical in nature and not the result of new information or changing attitudes or policies. B. If the City Council and Board of County Commissioners become aware of an error in the map(s) or text of this mutually-adopted urbanization program, both bodies may cause an immediate amendment to correct the error, after mutual agreement is reached. C. Corrections shall be made by ordinance, following a public hearing conducted by both governing bodies, but hearings before the planning commissions shall not be required when an amendment is intended specifically to correct an error. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 11 REVIEW, AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. This Agreement may be reviewed and amended at any time by mutual consent of both parties, after public hearings by the Council and the Board of Commissioners. B. Any modifications to this Agreement will be consistent with City and County comprehensive plans and state law. C. Staff from City and County will attempt to informally resolve any disputes regarding the terms, conditions, or meaning of this Agreement. For any disputes not resolved through this informal process, the Council and the BOC will meet jointly in an attempt to resolve those disputes. Either party may request the services of a mediator to resolve any dispute. D. This Agreement may be terminated by either party subsequent to dissolution of a URA or an Area of Mutual Planning Concern. Such termination shall proceed through a properly noticed public hearing process. This agreement supersedes the prior agreement between the parties on the same subject matter approved by the County on _________________, 20___, and by the City on ______________, 20___. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT JACKSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ______________________________ _____________________________ Hank Williams, Mayor DATE Rick Dyer, Chair DATE APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ County Counsel ATTEST: ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ City Administrator Recording Secretary 7.A.b Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 1 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment City File No.:CPA-19001 County File No.: TBD Before the City of Central Point City Council and the Jackson County Board of Commissioners is consideration of an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan adding approximately 444 gross acres to the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to provide residential, employment, and parks and open space to accommodate forecast growth for the next 20-years, 2019-2039. Applicant: City of Central Point ) Findings of Fact 140 South 3rd Street ) and Central Point, OR 97502 ) Conclusions of Law 1. Introduction The City of Central Point requests an amendment to the City and County Comprehensive Plans to add approximately 444 acres of land (51 tax lots) for residential, employment, parks and open space, and associated public facility uses. The proposed UGB amendment (“UGB Amendment”) responds to the following: Forecast Growth. The City is expected to add 7,216 people to its population between 2019 and 2039 primarily as a result of net in-migration.1 To accommodate growth Central Point will need housing, employment opportunities, parks and public facilities. Land Needs Exceed Buildable Land Supply. The City does not have a sufficient buildable land supply for housing2,3, commercial and other employment4,5, and parks6 to accommodate growth. Due to the City’s efforts over the past 20-years to increase land use efficiency through Transit Oriented Development (TOD), performance zoning, imposing maximum density and off-street parking standards, and adoption of a minimum average density over the next 50-years7, the City is now looking to expand its UGB. Availability of Urban Reserve Areas (URAs). Adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan as the City’s Regional Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan (City Council Ordinance No. 1964) established eight (8) URAs that are first priority lands available for UGB expansion. 1 Portland State University Population Research Center, “Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County and Urban Growth Boundaries.” June 2018. 2 City of Central Point Residential Buildable Lands Inventory. Ordinance No. 2053, March 14, 2019. 3 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. Ordinance No. 2057, April 11, 2019. 4 City of Central Point Employment Buildable Lands Inventory. Ordinance No. 2058, June, 11, 2019. 5 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Economic Element. Ordinance No. 2059, July 11, 2019. 6 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Parks Element. Ordinance No. 2045, July 19, 2018. 7 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Regional Plan Element. Ordinance No. 1964, August 9, 2012. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 2 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions The purpose of these findings is to demonstrate that the City’s proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) between the City and County, and the goals and policies of the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, Oregon Revised Statutes; the County’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Ordinance, and the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. 1.1 Application The Central Point UGB Amendment application constitutes a Major Revision per the Central Point and Jackson County Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA). In accordance with City Council Resolution No. 1599 (Exhibit 1), the City of Central Point requests the following land use approvals: 1. Amend the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Legislative) to add 444 gross acres and 51 tax lots to the Central Point UGB (Figure 1, Exhibits 2-3). The proposed amendment is to retain the County land use and zoning designations as “Urbanizable Area” until such time the properties are annexed into the City. 2. Amend the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Legislative) to add 444 acres to the Central Point UGB and designate land uses for the properties to be included (Figure 2). 3. Transfer jurisdiction of the following roadways from Jackson County to the City of Central Point per the Urban Reserve Area Management Agreement (URMA): Beebe Road from Hamrick to Gebhard Road; Gebhard from Beebe Road to Wilson Road; Grant Road from the Twin Creeks Crossing to Beall Lane; and, Taylor Road from Silver Creek Drive west to the proposed westerly UGB boundary. 4. Amend the UGBMA to add Urban Growth Policy 1(D) as follows, “Prior to annexation of urbanizable lands, no land division shall be approved by the County which creates lots less than forty (40) acres in size.” (Exhibit 4) The following supportive actions will occur prior to annexation of lands added to the UGB: 1. Amend Central Point Municipal Code Title 17 to adopt gross density requirements and development standards consistent with the City’s minimum average density commitment per the Regional Plan Performance Indicator 2.5.1 (County) /4.1.5.1 (City). 2. Amend the Public Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan including updated public facility master plans that include the adopted UGB expansion areas. 3. Amend the Environmental Element to complete Goal 5 planning for the UGB areas. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 3 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 1, Proposed UGB Expansion Areas, City & County Comprehensive Plans 7.A.b Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 4 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 2, Proposed City Land Use Designations, General Land Use Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 5 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 1.2 Procedural Requirements The subject application is a major legislative UGB Amendment (Type IV) subject to joint city and county review in accordance legislative procedures in Jackson County Land Development Ordinance (LDO). Amendments to the UGB are governed by the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) between Jackson County and the City of Central Point adopted per Ordinance No. 2001 (Exhibit 1). The proposed UGB Amendment is a Major Revision, which is subject to mutual City and County review. 1.3 Approval Criteria The above amendments are governed by the UGBMA between the City and Jackson County and additional state, county and local criteria as set forth below: 1.3.1 Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) ORS 197.298 – Priority of Land to be included in urban growth boundary 1.3.2 Statewide Planning Goals/OARS Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement Goal 2 – Land Use Planning Goal 3 – Agricultural Lands Goal 4 – Forest Lands Goal 5 – Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas and Open Spaces Goal 6 – Air, Water, Land Resources Quality Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Goal 8 – Recreational Needs Goal 9 – Economic Development Goal 10 – Housing Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services Goal 12 – Transportation Goal 13 – Energy Conservation Goal 14 – Urbanization Goals 15-19 – Address Willamette Valley and Ocean and Coastal Resources, which do not apply to the City. 1.3.3 Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) OAR 660-024 – Urban Growth Boundaries 1.3.4 Jackson County Comprehensive Plan Regional Plan Element: Performance Measures 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, 2.13, 2.17, 2.18, 2.20 Transportation System Plan: Policies 4.2.1-I, 4.2.1-P, 4.2.1-Q, 4.2.1-R, 4.2.1-S, 4.3.2-A, 4.3.2-B Urban Lands Element: Policy 1 Map Designations Element 1.3.5 Jackson County Land Development Ordinance (LDO) Section 3.7.3(E) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 6 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 1.3.6 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan General Policies Citizen Involvement Element Population Element Housing Element Economic Element Parks Element Land Use Element Regional Plan Element Public Facilities Element Transportation System Plan Urbanization Element 1.3.7 Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC) 17.76 – Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary Amendments 1.4 Exhibits Exhibit 1 – City Council Resolution No. 1599 Exhibit 2 – Jackson County Application Form Exhibit 3 – Tax Lot Inventory Exhibit 4 – UGBMA with proposed revisions Exhibit 5 – Location Analysis Report Exhibit 6 – Maps Exhibit 7 – Regional Plan Progress Report Exhibit 8 – Mailing Labels 7.A.b Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 7 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 2 Central Point UGB Amendment Background The City’s UGB Amendment aims to provide a sufficient inventory of land that is both available and suitable for urbanization over a 20-year planning period. The current UGB was first established in 1983 and amended in 2014 and 2015 to add roughly 50 acres of open space and industrial land. Aside from these minor amendments, no land for housing or commercial employment has been added to Central Point’s UGB in 36-years. Based on the most recent analysis of land needs, the City’s forecast population growth for the 2019-2039 planning period requires more land for housing, jobs, and parks than is available in the current UGB. Given the City’s efforts to increase land use efficiency over the years, there is little opportunity to further extend the life of the current UGB to accommodate the 20-year land need. Consequently, the City is proposing a major UGB Amendment to add land for needed housing, jobs and parks. In 2012 the City adopted the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan as the City of Central Point Regional Plan Element (“Regional Plan”). The Regional Plan established eight (8) Urban Reserve Areas (URAs) that serve as first priority land for UGB amendments. The Regional Plan includes twenty (20) performance indicators, including but not limited to minimum average density commitment for lands newly added to the UGB from the URAs, and requirements to prepare conceptual land use and transportation plans and meet benchmarks for providing new housing and employment in mixed- use/pedestrian friendly areas. The performance indicators have influenced the determination of the City’s land need for housing and the location of proposed UGB expansion areas. UGB Amendments are governed by state, county, and city criteria designed to minimize impacts to valuable agriculture and forest lands, while promoting compact and livable urban development. To accomplish this, the City evaluated its land need needs relative to forecast growth and considered opportunities to accommodate growth within the current urban area. Subsequently the City established a study area and evaluated lands based on priorities and criteria set for in the Oregon State Administrative Rules (OARs), Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) and City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan to identify the most suitable location for the Central Point UGB. 2.1 Land Need The City’s land needs are set forth in Table 1 and the Central Point Comprehensive Plan, including the following Elements: Population Element (Ordinance No. 2030) – Adopts the most recent Portland State University Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County and Urban Areas and sets forth the number of persons per household based on historic trends in Central Point. Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), Land Use Element (Ordinance No 2053) – Adopts the updated inventory of available buildable lands for the 2019-2039 planning period. The Residential BLI finds that there are 105 acres of buildable lands available and likely to develop during the 2019-2039 planning period. Housing Element (Ordinance No. 2057) – Adopts the City’s analysis of housing needs based on the PRC Forecast and Residential BLI to determine the City’s residential land needs. Employment Buildable Lands Inventory, Land Use Element (Ordinance No. 2058) – Adopts the updated inventory of available buildable lands for employment use based on use and parcel size. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 8 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions The Employment BLI finds that the City has 147 acres of buildable employment lands likely to develop over the 2019-2039 planning period. Most of the vacant lands that are available and likely to develop are for industrial and retail use. Economic Element (Ordinance No. 2059) – The Economic Element was prepared in accordance with Goal 9 and acknowledged by DLCD. It sets forth the City’s gross employment land needs over the short- and long-term, identifies the needed site types by use, and the City’s target markets for employment capture. Parks and Recreation Element (Ordinance No. 2045) - The Parks and Recreation Element sets forth the inventory of current parkland in the UGB and land in the URAs outside the UGB that are owned by the City, and identifies performance standards for core parks (i.e. community and neighborhood), and associated land needs to provide core park recreation opportunities for the 20- year planning period. Table 1, Summary of 20-year land need by land use category Housing Need Employment Need Core Parks Need Persons per Household8 2.5 Regional Job Growth (Total)9 28,840 Level of Service (LOS) Standard 3.5 acres per 1,000 Residents Household Increase 2,887 CCP Job Capture Rate 6.8% 2039 Population 26,317 Average Gross Density10 7.04 Total CCP Job Growth 1,948 Total Parkland Acres Needed 92.1 Needed Gross Residential Acres 410 Commercial: Needed Acres Buildable Acres Add’tl Acres 83 61 21 Existing Parkland Acres 37.29 Buildable Residential Acres11 105 Institutional Needed Acres Buildable Acres Add’tl Acres 18 0 18 Additional Core Parkland Acres Needed 55 Additional Needed Gross Residential Acres 305 Other Needed Acres Buildable Acres Add’tl Acres 34 0 34 TOTAL EMPL. ACRES NEEDED: NET GROSS 74 93 TOTAL ADDITIONAL LAND NEED: 453 8 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Population Element, 2019-2039. 9 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Economic Element, 2019-2039. 10 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Regional Plan Element, 2015-2035. 11 City of Central Point Residential Buildable Lands Inventory, 2019-2039. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 9 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions To address the identified land needs and deficient available buildable land supply inside the current urban area, the City is amending its UGB (Table 2). Table 2, Proposed UGB by Location and Land Use Classification Expansion Area by URA Proposed UGB Land Use by Gross Acreage Totals Residential Employment Core Parks Open Space Bear Creek Greenway Existing ROW CP-2B 110 13 17 4 0 3 147 CP-4D 1 0 21 0 0 0 22 CP-3 0 18 0 1 15 2 36 CP-6A 212 5 17 0 0 6 240 TOTALS 323 35 55 5 15 11 444 For the purposes of this UGB Amendment, the City discounted environmentally constrained lands and existing right-of-way to determine ‘reasonably developable’ acreage as defined in the Regional Plan (Table 3 and Exhibit 5).12 When establishing the study area, the City eliminated SFHA lands with the exception of 3.4 acres in CP-2B. The SFHA land at this location is owned by Jackson County. Following the Pre-Application Conference, the City modified the proposed land use from Medium Density Residential to Parks and Open Space per the County’s suggestion. Based on this land use adjustment, the SFHA discount was not necessary since open space and parks are generally compatible with floodplains. Table 3, Central Point UGB Proposal with Reasonably Developable Acreage Land Use Analysis CP-2B CP-3 CP-4D CP-6A Total Residential Gross Acreage 130 0 1 235 366 Parks Adjustment 17 0 0 17 34 Gross Residential (Minus Parks) 113 0 1 218 332 Environmental Constraints: High Risk Flood Hazard Area N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mapped Wetlands 3 N/A N/A 0 3 Total Environmental Constraints 3 0 0 0 3 Existing Right-of-Way 3 0 0 6 9 Reasonably Developable Residential Acreage 107 0 1 212 320 Employment Gross Acreage 13 20 0 5 38 Environmental Constraints: 0 High Risk Flood Hazard Area 0 0 0 0 0 Mapped Wetlands 0 0 0 0 0 Existing Right-of-Way 0 2 0 3 12 Oregon Department of State Lands, Statewide Wetland Inventory Mapper. https://maps.dsl.state.or.us/swi/ 7.A.b Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 10 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Total Adjustments 0 0 0 0 0 Reasonably Developable Employment Acreage 13 18 0 5 35 Parks & Open Space Core Parks 17 0 21 17 55 Bear Creek Greenway 0 15 0 0 15 Open Space 4 1 0 0 1 Gross Parks and Open Space Acreage 21 16 21 17 71 TOTAL GROSS UGB ACREAGE 147 36 22 240 444 TOTAL REASONABLY DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE 136 18 22 234 410 The following sections present evidence from the City’s Comprehensive Plan Elements used to support this UGB Amendment application. 2.1.1 Residential Land Over the 2019-2039 planning period, the City’s projected to add 7,216 people equivalent to 2,887 new households. Most of the growth in housing is expected to result from people moving to Central Point from in-migration. According to the Housing Element, single-family detached owner-occupied housing will continue to be the preferred housing type followed by multi-family housing. A summary of the City’s residential land needs is provided in Table 4. Table 4, Projected Residential Buildable Land Need, 2019-2039 The City has not added any residential lands to its urban area since the UGB was established in 1983. Since that time, the City has implemented several efficiency measures that have contributed significantly to increased land use efficiency and longevity of the residential land supply (Table 5). Table 1 Projected Residential Buildable Land Need 2019 to 2039 2018 Pop.1 19,101 2032 Forecast2 23,662 2039 Forecast3 26,317 Population Increase 7,216 Persons/HH4 2.50 Household Increase 2,887 Average Gross Density5 7.04 Needed Gross Residential Acres 410 Total Buildable Residential Acres6 105 Additional Needed Gross Residential Acres 305 1 Portland State University Population Research Center, Preliminary Estimate, 2018 2 Portland State University Population Research Center, Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2018-2068 3 Based on PSU Interprolation Worksheet 4 City of Central Point Population Element, 2017 - 2037 5 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element, 2015 - 2035 6 City of Central Point Buildable Lands Report, 2019 - 2039, Table 5. Infill Availability Adjusted Buildable Vacant Land by Comprehensive Plan 7.A.b Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 11 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Table 5, Residential efficiency measures summary No. Measure Description Status 1 Increases in the permitted density on existing residential land Increased in 2000 and 2013 in the TOD and ETOD: min. density increased from 3.1 to 7.7 units per acre. 2 Financial incentives for higher density housing May be considered as part of the City's Housing Implementation Plan (HIP). 3 Provisions to allow density bonus in exchange for amenities City has allowed PUDs since 1989. These allow exceptions for amenities. 4 Removal or easing of approval standards or procedures Per the HIP, the City is working on evaluating and amending standards. 5 Minimum density ranges Minimum density standards were established in 2006. 6 Redevelopment and infill strategies The City approved a HIP, which includes looking at infill and redevelopment. Strategies. 7 Authorization of housing types not previously allowed Per the HIP, the City is preparing text amendments to allow Cottage Housing. 8 Adoption of an average residential density standard Per the Regional Plan, the City adopted an average density standard (6.9/7.9 u/ac, gross) 9 Rezoning or re-designation of nonresidential land The City has not proposed re-designating nonresidential land due to needs for employment. 10 Minimum/Maximum parking standard The City adopted a minimum/maximum parking standard in 2006 to increase efficiency. 11 Infill participation increase In the BLI/Housing Element, the City increased infill participation increase from 6% (historic) to 20% (next 20-years). The proactive approach to increasing land use efficiency satisfies the criteria in ORS 197.296(9). The most significant of these include adopting Transit Oriented Development (TOD) regulations and minimum density standards in residential zones, and increasing forecast infill participation rates for the 2019-2039 planning period as compared to historic rates. 2.1.1.1 Transit Oriented Development The City adopted Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District and Corridor regulations in 2000, which were applied to 435 acres and later expanded in 2013 to include an additional 125 acres. This measure has increased density and more livable community areas by allowing more diverse housing types, providing minimum parks and open space requirements for each dwelling unit, allowing lots to be clustered around large common open spaces and parks, and providing opportunities for mixed uses and multi-modal transportation options. The result in an average density of 7.9 to 12.8 units per acre within master planned TOD developments (i.e. Twin Creeks, Snowy Butte Station and Cascade Meadows). Expansion of the TOD District in 2013 on the City’s east side increased the planned minimum gross density for that area from 3.1 units per acre to 7.7 units per acre. 2.1.1.2 Minimum Density Prior to 2006 the City had a maximum density standard in its residential zones based on the assumption at the time that developers would favor larger numbers of units. This wasn’t the case. As shown in the Housing Element, adoption of minimum density standards contributed significantly to increasing the City’s average gross density from 3.77 units per gross acre (1889- 7.A.b Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 12 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 1979) to 8.42 units per gross acre (2006-2018).13 Although the increase for the time period is partly associated with increased demand for multifamily housing post-recession, it clearly shows that minimum density standards have been effective in increasing overall land use efficiency within the current UGB. Table 6, City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1889 through 1979 Table 7, City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1980-2018 Table 8, City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 2006-2018 13 Tables 6-9, Housing Element. Table 6. City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1889 through 1979 Land Use Classification SFR Detached SFR Attached Duplex Triplex Apartment Mobile Home Mobile Home Park Mixed Use Residential Assisted Living Total Developed Units Gross Density VLRes 45 - - - - - - - - 45 1.20 LRes 1,256 1 6 3 4 4 - - - 1,274 3.32 MRes 215 8 18 15 39 1 - - - 296 4.29 HRes 167 - 20 15 232 5 53 1 - 493 7.12 Total Units 1,683 9 44 33 275 10 53 1 - 2,108 3.77 Percentage of Total 80%0%2%2%13%0%3%0%0%100% Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI Number and Type of Dwelling Units Table 7. City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1980 through 2018 Land Use Classification SFR Detached SFR Attached Duplex Triplex Apartment Mobile Home Mobile Home Park Mixed Use Residential Assisted Living Total Developed Units Gross Density VLRes 30 - - - - - - - - 30 1.51 LRes 2,573 49 8 - - 5 76 - - 2,711 4.14 MRes 603 27 70 - 130 - - - 15 845 7.85 HRes 358 53 171 12 439 114 287 11 60 1,505 9.56 Total Units 3,564 129 249 12 569 119 363 11 75 5,091 5.42 Percentage of Total 70%3%5%0%11%2%7%0%1%100% Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI Number and Type of Dwelling Units 7.A.b Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 13 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Table 9, City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 2010-2018 Prior to annexing lands newly added to the UGB, the City will be amending the minimum densities in residential zoning districts to achieve the minimum average density set forth in the Regional Plan. Recommended minimum densities for zones associated with the proposed land use designations are listed in Table 10. These zones support a variety of housing types needed to respond to market demands and provide options that include but are not limited to the preferred housing types identified in the Housing Element. Table 10, Residential Land Use Classifications Zoning District Minimum Density/Gross Acre Maximum Density/Gross Acre Suggested Minimum Net Lot Size Suggested Maximum Net Lot Size Very Low Density Residential (VLRes) R-L 1 4 9,000 sq. ft. 35,000 sq. ft. Low Density Residential (LRes) R-1-6 6 8 4,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. R-1-8 5 6 6,000 sq. ft. 7,000 sq. ft. R-1-10 4 5 7,000 sq. ft. 9,000 sq. ft. Medium Density Residential (MRes) 7 10 3,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 7 10 3,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. High Density Residential (HRes) R-3 15 20 N.A. N.A. MMR 15 20 N.A. N.A. HMR 20 50 N.A. N.A. Source: City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element, 2018-2038. 2.1.1.3 Infill Participation Increase Historically, residential infill projects have accounted for a low percentage (6% of the land demand)14. Infill lots by their nature are more difficult to develop due to existing development constraints and cost. As part of the Residential Buildable Lands Inventory and Housing Element, the City committed to increasing the rate of infill participation in residential land use from 6% to 20%. This aligns with the City’s housing policies and a recently approved Housing Implementation Plan (HIP) that establishes a 5-year action plan to increase housing supply and encourage affordability. The City will be looking at regulatory changes to remove barriers and ease the approval process by enacting more clear and objective standards. The City recently updated its regulations to eliminate barriers to constructing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). 14 Residential Buildable Lands Inventory, 2019-2039. Table 9. City of Central Point Housing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 2010 through 2018 Land Use Classification SFR Detached SFR Attached Duplex Triplex Apartment Mobile Home Mobile Home Park Mixed Use Residential Assisted Living Total Developed Units Net Density Gross Density VLRes - - - - - - - - - - - - LRes 144 21 4 - - - - - - 169 6.32 5.06 MRes 94 17 12 - 71 - - - 15 209 11.51 9.21 HRes - 28 - - 82 - - - - 110 27.55 22.04 Total Units 238 66 16 - 153 - - - 15 488 9.98 7.99 Percentage of Total 49%14%3%0%31%0%0%0%3%100% Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI Number and Type of Dwelling Units 7.A.b Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 14 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Additional actions to be evaluated include incentives to promote housing infill projects through Urban Renewal and other programs. As a result of the actions taken to promote a more compact development form, there is limited capacity (i.e. 105 acres) to accommodate housing needs inside the current urban area. Consequently 305 gross additional acres are needed to meet the City’s 20-year housing needs. 2.1.2 Employment Lands The City evaluated its employment needs based on the requirements in OAR 660-009-0015.15 This requires reviewing national, state, regional and local economic trends, identifying types and numbers of sites needed to accommodate growth, inventorying vacant employment lands, and assessing the community’s potential for growth. Over the 2019-2039 planning period, the City is expected to see a 38% increase in its population accounting for 7% of the County’s forecast population growth. The City’s analysis assumes that job growth over the planning period will be proportional to the population capture rate (Table 11). Table 11, City of Central Point Job Capture Rate, 2019-2039 According to the Employment Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), the City has 633 acres of employment lands in the urban area.16 There are 61 commercial and 87 industrial acres available and suitable for development with most of the vacant acreage in the industrial category. Based on evaluation of parcel size by industry type, the Employment BLI shows that large, medium and small sites for office use, and large sites for retail use are deficient in the urban area. 15 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Economic Element, 2019-2039. Ordinance No. 5059. July 11, 2020. 16 The Employment BLI (Ordinance No. 2058) was prepared in accordance with OAR 660-024-0050(1) to inventory employment land available over a 20-year planning period in accordance with OAR 660-009-0015. City/County Estimated 2019 Estimated 2039 Average Popualtion Share, 2019-2039215 Central Point's Population217 19,101 26,317 Jackson County's Population216 219,270 264,951 Josephine County's Population218 86,423 97,377 Total Population of Both Counties 305,693 362,328 Central Point's Capture Rate of Job Growth 6.2%7.3%6.8% Source: 2019 PRC Coordinated Population Forecast, Jackson and Josephine Counties 7.A.b Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 15 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 3, Vacant Acreage by Percentage Distribution and Parcel Size The City is poised to experience growth across all sectors of the economy over the 20-year planning period and is especially well suited to accommodate growth in specialty foods, trucking and transportation, healthcare and retail services. In total, this City is expected to add 1,948 new jobs by 2039 (Table 12). Table 12, Central Point’s 20-year Job Forecast by Industry The City calculated land needs using the employee/acre ratio provided in the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) Industrial and Other Lands Analysis Guidebook.17 Based on comparison of needed acres with the buildable acres by employment sector, the City identified a need to add 23 gross acres including commercial and institutional/government uses to accommodate short-term employment growth and 93 gross acres by 2039 (Table 13). 17 According to the DLCD Industrial & Other Employment Lands Guidebook, there are typically 8-12 industrial sector jobs per acre, 14-20 commercial and service sector jobs, 6-10 institutional and government jobs per acre, and 6-10 other employment jobs per acre. Industry Sector Southern Oregon's 20-Year Job Forecast202 Central Point's Total Job Growth Capture at 6.8% of Regional Forecast (2039) Construction & Natural Resources 4,280 289 Manufacturing 1,900 128 Transportation & Utlilities 660 45 Wholesale Trade 200 14 Subtotal Industrial Jobs 7,040 476 Retail Trade 1,960 132 Financial 640 43 Services (professional, business, health, private education, hospitality, information)14,500 980 Subtotal Commercial/Services Jobs 17,100 1,155 Institutional/Government 1,640 111 Other 3,060 207 Total New Jobs 28,840 1,948 7.A.b Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 16 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Table 13, Central Point’s Employment Land Needs As part of this UGB Amendment, the City is proposing 35 acres of employment land, including large and medium sites for retail and office, as well as spatially appropriate employment lands to serve mixed- use/pedestrian friendly neighborhoods in CP-2B and CP-6A. 2.1.3 Parks & Open Space Lands Parks and recreation provide many community benefits to health and wellbeing, the economy, environment and overall quality of life. Accordingly, the City has set forth several objectives to provide high quality, diverse parks and open spaces to assure equitable access for all residents. The Parks Element articulates Central Point’s vision and objectives for parks and recreation, inventories the existing parks system, identifies gaps needed to attain parkland performance standards and sets forth policies needed to achieve the City’s long-term parks and recreation objectives. The UGB Amendment proposal aims to include parkland and open spaces consistent with the City’s identified land needs and policies to optimize parks and recreation benefits as the City grows over the 2019-2039 planning period. The Parks Element evaluates parkland needs within the current urban area and the City’s URAs. The analysis evaluates the existing parks system relative to the City’s preferred level of service standards as follows: Core parks target level of service standard is 3.5 acres per 1,000 residents. Core parks include Community and Neighborhood Parks: o Community Parks provide diverse facilities are designed for organized or intensive active recreation use, such as organized sports or similar sport activities. They are generally 10-40 acres in size and serve residents within a 2-mile drive, walk or bike ride. o Neighborhood Parks reflect traditional parks design concepts that provide for unstructured, unorganized play and limited active and passive recreation. They are typically 0.25 to 5 acres in size and serve residents within ½ mile. Open Space lands have no numeric level of service standard. Land acquisition for open space is typically associated with preserving sensitive natural areas and providing connections between neighborhoods and regional trail networks, such as the Bear Creek Greenway. At this time, the City has roughly 18 acres each of Community Park and Neighborhood Parks and 82 acres of open space lands. The City also has pocket parks, special recreation facilities (e.g. Joel Tanzi Skate Park, Civic Field, and Skyrman Arboretum) and 4.9 miles of trails that offer both active and passive forms of recreation for Central Point residents and visitors. Sector New Buildable Acres Needed by 2039 Gross Employment Acres Needed, 2019- 2039 Short-Term Gross Acres Needed, 2019-2024 Industrial - - - Commercial/Service 21 27 7 Institutional/Government 18 23 6 Other/Uncovered Employment 34 43 11 Total Employment 74 93 23 7.A.b Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 17 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Based on evaluation of forecast growth, the City needs approximately 55 acres of core parkland. Figure 4 shows the distribution of core park target acquisition areas including the CP-2B and CP-6A expansion areas. The City owns land in CP-4D planned to be developed as Boes Park. This will be a core park that must be brought into the UGB before funding and parks development can occur. Other core parks location will be generally consistent with the locations identified in Figure 4 with the exact location being determined as a function of development through the master planning process. Although no open space is identified as needed due to the absence of a numeric performance standard, the City proposes inclusion of open space parcels on Bear Creek in CP-2B and CP-3 to preserve sensitive natural areas and to take jurisdiction of Bear Creek Greenway lands that are currently surrounded by the City limits. Figure 4, Core Parkland Needs/Distribution Map Source: Parks Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 18 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 2.1.4 Public Facility Land Needs Public Facilities and services are necessary to accommodate the City’s growth in a timely, orderly and economic manner. The needs for water, stormwater, transportation and sewer services in terms of facility type, location, and capacity are defined in the City’s Master Plans for water, stormwater and transportation, and by Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVSS) for sewer. For the purposes of this UGB Amendment, land needs are reported as gross acreage including up to 25% for public facilities such as streets and schools.18 To better understand capacity issues, improvement needs and cost, the City hired Brown and Caldwell to evaluate the proposed UGB expansion areas on the water system, and Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis. The UGB expansion areas do not include improved storm drainage systems, so it will be necessary to complete facility planning for stormwater prior to annexation. RVSS evaluated sewer and concluded that the proposed expansion areas can be served by existing sewer infrastructure with a mainline extensions in CP-6A and CP-2B. 2.1.4.1 Water System Master Plan Update The City is in the process of updating its Water System Master Plan, which evaluates the existing storage, piping and distribution system relative to growth and performance standards for municipal water systems. Early in the planning process for the UGB Amendment, the City requested evaluation of high priority areas for inclusion in the UGB as part of the alternative boundary scenario planning (). Following a public process, the City Council selected a preferred alternative and adjustments were made to incorporate public comments and add land for employment use in CP-3. A more extensive technical analysis was conducted to identify potential system deficiencies and capital improvements needed to accommodate growth over the 2019-2039 planning period. Results of this analysis are provided in Technical Memorandum No. 2, which is attached to the City’s Location Analysis Report (Exhibit 5). The report found that when the City takes down the existing 1M Gallon water storage tank in town due to its age, its replacement will need to be upsized to 2M Gallons to accommodate growth inside the urban area and proposed UGB expansion areas. Additionally, piping and distribution improvements will be needed to maintain adequate fire flows. The improvements are being added to the Capital Improvement Project list and water financing plan, as necessary demonstrate that adequate water facilities and services are planned or available at the time of annexation. Expansion of the City’s water system will occur as a function of development, including construction facilities to serve new subdivisions and site developments and System Development Charges (SDCs) pay for the impact of development on the larger water system. 2.1.4.2 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering was hired to evaluate the impacts of the proposed UGB Amendment on existing and planned infrastructure. Although the requirement to comply with the State Transportation Planning Rule does not apply to UGB Amendments that retain County zoning designations until annexation, the City’s municipal code requires a TIA for any proposal that amends a comprehensive plan land use designation. Additionally, the TIA provides important information regarding the adequacy of state, county and some city facilities over the planning period and identifies mitigation that can be applied to assure the transportation network continues to meet applicable performance standards as the City grows. The TIA is provided as an attachment to the City’s Location Analysis Report (Exhibit 5). 18 OAR 660-024-0040(10). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 19 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions The TIA studied 25 existing intersections and 11 new intersections based on planned improvements and feedback received from Jackson County Roads, the Oregon Department of Transportation and City of Central Point Public Works Department. Based on the Study Area, City staff submitted a request to the Transportation Demand Analysis Unit (TPAU) evaluate alternative growth scenarios using the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Organization (RVMPO) Travel Demand Model. Following selection of a preferred alternative with amendments, TPAU performed additional analysis that was utilized by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, along with updated traffic counts, to prepare the TIA. The TIA analyzed existing year 2019 conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours and future year 2039 no build and build conditions during the p.m. peak hour to determine what impacts the proposed UGB expansion will have on transportation system. The findings of the analysis conclude that the proposed UGB amendment can be approved without creating adverse impacts to the transportation system with mitigation. Two intersections are shown to exceed their applicable performance standards under future year 2039 no build conditions. Three additional intersections exceed performance standards under future year build conditions. Traffic impacts and mitigation are summarized below: Future Year 2039 No-Build Mitigation 1) Gebhard Road/Pine Street. Addition of a third west bound through lane from Table Rock Road to Interstate 5 northbound ramps, and dual eastbound and south bound left turn lanes are recommended to help with corridor congestion. 2) Upton Road Scenic Avenue. Installation of a traffic signal or roundabout is recommended when warrants are met. Future Year 2039 Build Mitigation 3) Gebhard Road/Beebe Road. This new connection in the future is planned as a two-way, stop- controlled intersection in the City of Central Point Transportation System Plan (TSP). Beebe Road approaches stop and Gebhard approaches have free movement north and south. Eastbound movements on Beebe Road are shown to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) “F” which exceeds the City’s LOS “D” or better performance standard. Based on analysis of options, a roundabout is recommended to mitigate higher demand associated with increased traffic volumes and to blend with roundabouts planned to the north. 4) North Grant Road/Twin Creeks Crossing. This intersection is planned to become a 4-way intersection in the future with increased traffic generated from eastbound traffic moving from CP-6A. It exceeds both City and County performance standards as a two-way stop controlled intersection but meets both when modeled as an all-way stop controlled intersection. When warranted, it is recommended that stop signs be installed on all approaches. 5) Gebhard Road/Wilson Road. This intersection is currently a two-way stop-controlled intersection with stop signs on the Gebhard Road approaches and free movements on Wilson. In the future year, it exceeds County performance standards due to increased traffic volume to/from Wilson Road. The TIA shows that performance standards can be met by installing stop signs on Wilson Road when warranted to make this an all-way stop controlled intersection. As shown, the proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with the UGBMA and, although not subject to the TPR, can meet performance standards consistent with the City and County TSPs with mitigation. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 20 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 2.2 Location The City of Central Point UGB Amendment encompasses an area of approximately 444 acres (Figure 1, Central Point UGB Amendment Area). It includes lands within four (4) URAs, including 240 acres in CP- 6A, 145 acres in CP-2B, 23 acres in CP-4D, and 38 acres in CP-3 (Figure 3, Location Reference). There are 51 tax lots within the proposed UGB expansion areas with a total of 34 rural dwellings (Figure 6-9, Aerial Maps, Exhibit 3, Tax Lot Inventory). Figure 5, Proposed UGB Amendment Locational Reference 7.A.b Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 21 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 6, CP-2B UGB Expansion Aerial Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 22 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 7, CP-3 UGB Expansion Aerial Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 23 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 8, CP-4D UGB Expansion Aerial Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 24 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 9, CP-6A UGB Expansion Aerial 7.A.b Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 25 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 10, Current County Zoning Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 26 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 2.3 County Land Use and Zoning The current County land use is divided between two (2) general land use categories: Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) (86%) and Residential (12%). Table 14 identifies the current County zoning by acreage and percentage. Figures 7-10 shows the current County zoning. Table 14, Current & Proposed County Zoning County Zoning District Acreage Percentage Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) 380 86% Rural Residential (RR-5) 32 7% Rural Residential (RR-2.5) 20 5% Urban Residential (UR-1) 1 0% Existing Right-of Way 11 3% TOTAL 444 100% The City’s UGB Amendment request designates the proposed UGB Expansion Areas to be recognized as Urbanizable Land (UA) per the County Comprehensive Plan and retains the County’s zoning designations until such time lands are annexed into the City. During the interim time, the Urban Growth Boundary Amendment (UGBMA) will govern joint management of lands in the proposed UGB expansion areas (Exhibit 4). 2.4 Proposed City Land Use The proposed UGB Amendment will apply residential, commercial, civic, and parks and open space general land use designations and identify areas that will be part of a Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Area as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(8) and required by the Regional Plan Performance Indicator 4.1.6 (2.6 City Regional Plan Element). This term is used by the City synonymously with the term “Activity Center” per the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Table 15 identifies the proposed land use designations by acreage and percentage. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed land use pattern and Figure 11 delineates the proposed Activity Centers. Table 15, Proposed Land Use by Gross Acreage & Percentage Proposed Land Use Designations Totals Percentage Residential Very Low Density 1.0 0.2% Low Density 85.7 19.3% Medium Density 205.5 46.2% High Density 40.6 9.1% Total Residential 332.9 74.9% Employment General Commercial 17.5 3.9% Employment Commercial 0.0 0.0% Neighborhood Commercial 12.9 2.9% 7.A.b Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 27 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Industrial, General 0.0 0.0% Industrial, Light 0.0 0.0% Civic 4.9 1.1% Total Employment 35.3 7.9% Parks & Open Space Core Parks 56.3 12.7% Bear Creek Greenway 15.1 3.4% Open Space 5.0 1.1% Total Parks & Open Space 76.4 17.2% TOTAL GROSS ACREAGE 444.6 100.0% The following sections describe the land use designations as defined in the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element: 2.4.1 Residential Land Use There are four (4) residential land use classifications and nine (9) supporting zoning districts. The four (4) land use classifications, their zoning designation, and minimum and maximum densities are provided in Table 16. Table 16, Residential Land Use Classifications Land Use Classification Permitted Housing Types Associated Zoning Districts Suggested Minimum and Maximum Gross Densities VLRes (Very Low Density) Single-Family Detached R-L 1 to 4 LRes (Low Density) Single-Family Detached and Attached R-1-6 R-1-8 R-1-10 4 to 8 MRes (Medium Density) Single-Family Attached, Plexes and Apartments R-2 LMR 7 to 20 HRes (High Density) Single-Family Attached, Plexes, Apartments R-3 MMR HMR 20 to 50 Source: City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element. Ordinance No. 2043, March 8, 2018. The proposed UGB Amendment designates residential land use based on the minimum gross densities in Table 16. At the time of annexation, zoning districts will be assigned in conformance with this UGB Amendment proposal. 2.4.1.1 Very Low Density Residential (VLRes) The purpose of the VLRes classification is to encourage, accommodate, maintain and protect a suitable environment for residential living at very low densities on lands that are impacted by environmental constraints, or agricultural buffering needs. This land use designation accounts for just over 1% of the City’s residential land supply. It is supported by the Residential Low Density (R-L) zoning district. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 28 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions The proposed UGB expansion areas include 1 acre of VLRes lands in the CP-4D expansion area. This property is already developed with a single-family detached dwelling. Pending inclusion in the UGB this property will be eligible to add one (1) accessory dwelling unit (ADU). No further land development at this location is anticipated. 2.4.1.2 Low Density Residential (LRes) The LRes land use classification supports the need for low density housing and represents the City’s R-1 zoning district. The LRes classification represents the largest residential land use category, accounting for 60% of the City’s residential acreage. The purpose of this land use classification is to accommodate the demand for single-family attached and detached housing. In accordance with recent legislation, zoning regulations will be amended to allow duplexes on zones within the LRes land use classification. The minimum density is 4 dwelling units per gross acre (R-1-10), with a maximum of 8 dwelling units per gross acre. The UGB proposal includes roughly 84 acres within the LRes land use classification. Although it can support three (3) residential zones, the minimum gross density (4 units/acre) was applied to assure achievement of the minimum average gross density. At the time of annexation, the accompanying zone map amendment will meet the minimum gross density needed to provide at least 334 housing units. 2.4.1.3 Medium Density Residential (MRes) The MRes classification’s preferred location is within 1/2 mile of activity centers and/or transit facilities. The MRes classification allows for a mix of detached and attached dwelling units either owner and/or renter occupied, subject to compliance with the minimum and maximum density requirements Table 16. The MRes designation covers two zoning districts; the R-2 and the LMR districts. The LMR district is a performance based zoning district that applies to all new development within the UGB. The R-2 district applies to older areas of the City that are already developed. To avoid non-conforming issues properties in the R-2 retains separate development standards from the LMR district, but may in-fill, or redevelop using LMR standards. The proposed UGB Amendment includes roughly 197 acres of land within the MRes land use classification. Per the Land Use Element, these lands will be zoned Low Mix Residential at the time of annexation. The minimum average gross density for the MRes land use classification and LMR zone is 7 units per acre, which will provide at least 1,377 housing units. 2.4.1.4 High Density Residential (HRes) This land use classification supports high density housing. The HRes classification’s preferred location is within 1/2 mile of activity centers and/or transit facilities. The HRes classification supports three zoning districts; the R-3, the Medium Mix Residential (MMR), and the High Mix Residential (HMR) (Table 16). The only distinguishing factor between the R-3 and MMR zoning districts is that the R-3 district is typically in the older areas of the City and were developed under older standards, while the MMR and HMR are applied to new development within the UGB,TOD and CBD overlay. The HMR district is the City’s highest density residential zoning district, which was initially reserved for use in the TOD district/corridor, but is now allowed outside the TOD district/corridor. The proposed UGB Amendment includes about 38 acres of land within the HRes land use classification. Based on the minimum average gross density, this land can accommodate a minimum of 571 housing units if all of the land is zoned MMR. No R-3 zones will be allowed in the UGB per the Land Use Element. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 29 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 11, Existing and Proposed Activity Centers 7.A.b Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 30 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 2.4.2 Commercial Land Use The City’s commercial land use classification is comprised of three secondary classifications: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Employment Commercial (EC); and General Commercial (GC) The proposed UGB Amendment includes land use designations in the NC and GC classifications. 2.4.2.1 Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Neighborhood Commercial, provides for small neighborhood convenience retail and services needs of adjacent residential neighborhoods. To assure that Neighborhood Commercial districts are sized to service neighborhood needs. Neighborhood Commercial districts should be limited to approximately 3-5 acres with a typical service area of 3 miles. The NC district should be located along collector and/or arterial streets and designed to complement the retail and service needs of abutting residential neighborhoods. The design of this commercial district should be at a scale and architectural character that complements and functionally compatible with the neighborhood and emphasizes pedestrian and bicycle convenience. The UGB Amendment includes two (2) NC districts, including eight (8) acres in CP-2B and roughly 5 acres in CP-6A. Both proposed NC districts are located along Collectors and are intended to serve residential neighborhoods proposed for inclusion in the UGB, as well as existing residential neighborhoods within 3 miles. The proposed NC land use area in CP-2B is sited adjacent to a future east/west Collector between Upton and Gebhard Road and land owned and operated by the Rusted Gate Farm to the north. This group recently acquired approximately 154 acres within and adjacent to the CP-2B URA (Figure 12). By siting NC lands in proximity to Rusted Gated, the City aims to provide an opportunity for neighborhood scale retail, services, and other uses that are supportive of Rusted Gate Farm’s vision to create an agro-tourism hub. As an example, a cider house and restaurant may not be appropriate on County land in the Exclusive Farm Use. If sited in the City, there are options to create destination businesses that could be mutually beneficial to the Farm and urban environment. The proposed NC land use area in CP-6A is at the intersection of Taylor and Grant Road, just west of the Latter Day Saints Temple site. This NC land use area may provide opportunities for neighborhood scale professional offices, retail and service uses that may be more dynamic given the proximity to this Civic site and higher density, walkable residential neighborhoods. 2.4.2.2 General Commercial (GC) The GC classification is designed to accommodate commercial, business, and light industrial uses that are most appropriately located along or near major highways or arterials and are largely dependent of highway visibility and access. The UGB proposal includes roughly 18 acres of GC lands within the CP-3 UGB expansion area. This area was included to satisfy the need for commercial employment lands. It is the last infill GC commercial lands along the East Pine Street (County Arterial) corridor. Additionally the property owners have requested its inclusion in the UGB with the intent to develop the site with uses supported by the GC zone. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 31 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Figure 12, Rusted Gate Farm/CP-2B UGB Expansion Area Location Reference Map 2.4.3 Civic Land Use Lands designated for this use consist of a variety of uses considered to be public in nature or perform public services, particularly public schools, which account for the largest percentage of acreage in this classification. The proposed UGB includes roughly 5 acres of lands designated for Civic use along Gebhard Road, a Collector. 2.4.4 Parks and Open Space Land Use Parks and recreation land uses are addressed in the Parks Element. The Central Point UGB Amendment proposes roughly 55 acres of core parkland, 5 acres of open space and 15 acres of Bear Creek Greenway. 2.4.5 Proposed Land Use Conclusion As shown in this application, the City of Central Point has demonstrated need for land uses that cannot be accommodated within the current UGB. This determination is based on current population forecasts, buildable lands inventories, and analysis of housing, employment and parks. At full build-out, the City’s UGB will provide at least 2,886 dwelling units, of which 2,265 (78%) and 35 acres (100%) of commercial and civic lands within Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. This exceeds the City’s commitment to provide 39% of new housing units and 48% of new employment opportunities in Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas per the RVMPO Regional Transportation Plan. The Findings of Fact in Section 3 address the UGB Amendment relative to the applicable criteria. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 32 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 3 Findings, Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement The Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) between the City of Central Point and Jackson County governs how lands under County jurisdiction in the City’s UGB will be managed and sets forth requirements and procedures for Major and Minor Revisions to the UGB. The City’s proposed UGB Amendment is a Major Revision. The Findings and Conclusions addressing the procedures and requirements for Major Revisions to the UGB are set forth below. 3.1 Major Revisions Major revisions in boundary or policies will be considered amendments to both the City and County comprehensive plans and, as such, are subject to a legislative review process. A major revision shall include any boundary change that has widespread and significant impact beyond the immediate area, such as quantitative changes allowing for substantial changes in population or significant increases in resource impacts; qualitative changes in the land use itself, such as conversion of residential to industrial use, or spatial changes that affect large areas of many different ownerships. Any change in urbanization policies is considered a major revision. Major revisions will be considered by the City and County at periodic intervals in accordance with the terms of the mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreements between the County and each municipal jurisdiction. It is the intent of the governing bodies to review the urban growth boundary and urbanization policies for consistency upon completion of the City and County Comprehensive Plans. A request for major revision can be initiated only by the County or City governing bodies or their respective planning commissions. Individuals, groups, citizen advisory committees, and affected agencies may petition the County or appropriate City in accordance with the procedural guidelines adopted by the jurisdiction for initiating major legislative amendments. The party who seeks the revision shall be responsible for filing adequate written documentation with the City and County governing bodies. Final legislative action on major revision requests shall be based on the factors stated in each mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreement. Generally these are: A. Demonstrated need to accommodate unpredicted population trends, to satisfy urban housing needs, or to assure adequate employment opportunities; Finding, Major Revisions Requirement A: Section 2.1 of these Findings presents evidence from the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan that demonstrates the City’s land needs for housing, employment, Parks and Public Facilities. The proposed UGB Amendment responds to the needs for urban housing and employment opportunities, and provides for land use designations that provide for diverse housing types and employment uses needed to shifting market demands due to a variety of factors, including changes in population trends (Section 2.5). Conclusion, Major Revisions Requirement A: Consistent. B. The orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services; Finding, Major Revisions Requirement B: The City’s Location Analysis Report (Exhibit 5) describes the process for selecting lands proposed for inclusion in the UGB Amendment application, including but not limited to Goal 14 Location Factors. Factor 2 addresses orderly 7.A.b Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 33 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions and economic expansion of public facilities and services. The City applied proximity to stubbed water and sewer facilities as a rough indicator that facilities are available and able to connect to adjoining UGB lands. Subsequent analysis included coordinating with agencies and conducing technical analysis to assess capacity and needed improvements to expand public facilities to proposed growth areas. As provided in Section 2.1.4 and Exhibit 5, the selected lands proposed for UGB inclusion allow orderly and economic provision of facilities and services based on the following findings: The proposed UGB expansion areas connect disparate boundaries of Central Point’s existing UGB. This facilitates incremental extension of water and sewer facilities from stubbed locations as lands are annexed and developed. The City’s water system can accommodate growth up to the year 2039 with additional storage capacity added to a planned reservoir replacement project (i.e. 1.11M gallons to 2M gallons) and minor improvements to the City’s piping and distribution system. According to Rogue Valley Sewer Services, there is adequate capacity to serve forecast growth. At the time of development, it will be necessary to extend existing sewer mains to serve both the CP-2B and CP-6A UGB expansion areas. Proposed UGB locations in CP-2B, CP-3 and CP-6A utilize existing streets, including Gebhard Road, Taylor Road and Grant Road. These are existing Collectors proposed to be transferred from County to City jurisdiction and upgraded to urban standards at the time of annexation. This minimizes cost and provides a network of existing right-of-way. No new roads are proposed as part of CP-4D. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering prepared a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the UGB Amendment (Exhibit 5). Over the 2019-2039 planning period, traffic volumes will increase under no-build and build conditions. Two facilities will be impacted at the future year 2039 without the UGB Amendment and four facilities will be impacted at the future year 2039 due to the UGB Amendment. According to the TIA, impacts to all five (5) transportation facilities can be mitigated to accommodate growth and meet applicable City and County performance standards. There are no storm drains within the UGB expansion areas. Pending approval, the City will update its Stormwater Management Plan to include the expansion areas to assure facilities constructed for future development is adequate to treat and convey water runoff. Together, these findings show that the City’s proposed UGB location can provide incremental extension of facilities and services that will have capacity to provide services during the planning period with identified facility upgrades. Additionally, the proposed UGB location and expanded facilities position the City to expand its boundaries in the future if and when needed. Conclusion, Major Revisions Requirement B: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 34 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions C. Maximum efficiency of land uses within the current urbanizable area; Finding, Major Revisions Requirement C: Section 2.1.1 describes the City’s efforts to maximize land uses within the current urbanizable area that have resulted in longevity of the current UGB in accordance with ORS 197.296(9) (Table 5). Due to these efforts the City has not needed to add residential lands to its urbanizable area since the UGB was first established in 1983. At this time, the City needs more residential land (410 gross acres) than can be accommodated within the current UGB (105 gross acres). For employment lands, the City has a demonstrated need (93 gross acres) and has elected to include a lesser amount to satisfy short-term employment opportunity needs and provide spatially appropriate Neighborhood Commercial areas to serve future residential areas in the newly added UGB lands. The purpose of this is to promote infill and redevelopment, particularly within Central Point’s Central Business District, which is consistent with maximizing opportunities within the current urban area. Conclusion, Major Revisions Requirement C: Consistent. D. Environmental, energy, economic and social consequences; Finding, Major Revisions Requirement D: The City’s UGB Amendment request is needed to provide housing, jobs in commercial sectors, core parklands and associated public facility uses. Approval of the UGB Amendment will allow annexation of lands into the City once public facility and environmental planning has been completed. An analysis of Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences is in Exhibit 5. It identifies conflicting uses of urbanization, which result from conversion of rural lands into subdivisions, partitions and site developments that involve vegetation removal, fill and grade activities, infrastructure construction and associated increases in impervious surface area. In considering the UGB Amendment location, the City evaluated and weighted the benefits and consequences of land development. Generally, the City concluded that the proposed UGB Amendment location minimizes adverse impacts to the environment while providing benefits to society, the economy and energy by proposing a land use and transportation plan for the UGB expansion areas that accomplishes the following: Consolidates growth into locations that provide connectivity between existing and proposed neighborhood and community Activity Centers (i.e. Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas). These areas are required to provide multimodal transportation opportunities through complete street design that invites walking and cycling. These measures promote more efficient use of energy and resources while reducing vehicle 7.A.b Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 35 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions emissions and roadway pollution. Provides needed housing at a minimum average density that exceeds the average needed or the planning period. This helps assure a compact growth pattern that minimizes the need for expansion into surrounding farm land in the future. Additionally, higher densities around activity centers aim to be ‘transit-ready’ to support equitable transportation options and reduced reliance on single-occupied vehicles. Provides jobs in proximity to housing, including neighborhood scale commercial uses such as, retail shops, personal service uses, restaurants/cafes, etc. Providing local jobs and services promotes highly livable neighborhoods that foster social connections and economic productivity. Providing a land supply for needed housing helps provide stable and affordable housing options for Central Point residents. Currently, low housing supply and high housing cost is a major concern for Central Point and the region as increasing numbers of households are cost burdened or severely cost burdened. Addressing the supply side of the economic equation for housing is one measure that the City is taking to minimize the adverse impacts associated with housing concerns, including the following problems: o Decreased physical health and well-being due to inability to pay rent, moving frequently o Increased mental and physical health challenges for youth, including early drug use, increased teen pregnancy and depression. Youth in cost burdened households have lower educational attainment that peers in non-cost burdened households. o Increased crime, etc. Integrates parks and open space into master planned communities, including green spaces that include trees, which help to minimize stormwater runoff issues by intercepting and storing rainfall, remediating pollutants, absorbing and storing carbon dioxide, producing oxygen and helping to reduce the urban heat island effect.19 Green spaces and trees are also associated with increased property values, providing sensory diversity, improve mental health outcomes, and mitigate noise from traffic. Incorporates core parklands that provide active and passive recreation opportunities for residents and visitors. Recreation opportunities increase exercise for all ages, which is beneficial for physical and mental health. Also, recreation promotes formation of social networks through sports and play for kids, as well as adults. 19 According to the US EPA, the “heat islands” are created around the built environment and are typically hotter than surrounding rural lands by 1.8-5.4◦°F. Heat islands can affect communities by increasing summertime peak energy demand, air conditioning cost, air pollution, heat-related illness and mortality, water pollution. Trees and green spaces are one strategy available to increase shade and cooling through evapotranspiration. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 36 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Provides a Community Activity Center in the CP-3 expansion area, the last commercial infill area available near Interstate 5 and East Pine Street. Development of this site will increase impervious surface area through commercial development but job creation and economic productivity are needed to support the local markets and provide income for individuals and families that can help alleviate families’ ability to afford housing. Selection of non-central locations because the soils were higher priority for inclusion (i.e. CP-2B east of Gebhard) or where public facilities are available but agriculture uses preclude efficient accommodation of land needs (i.e. CP-2B north and west of Upton/Rusted Gate Farm properties, CP-1C mini-farms/rural estates, CP-6A exception lands and CP-6B) would question the City’s ability to efficiently and effectively address housing concerns, provide jobs and a land use scheme that would support compact, mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas. Selection of these lands would be contrary to the objectives to minimize sprawl, provide orderly and economic provision of services, and promote more active transportation opportunities. Based on the City’s spatial analysis and technical reports addressing traffic, sewer, and water, the City concludes the proposed UGB Amendment not only maximizes the benefits associated with ESEE consequences but provides an orderly provision of services that will foster future expansion into exception and higher priority lands based on soil classification. Costs incurred by the City to increase water storage capacity and improve piping distribution are commensurate with the benefits of the proposed plan to accommodate growth. Failure to amend the UGB as proposed at this time, would likely result in adverse outcomes to Central Point residents due to the increased prevalence of unaffordable housing and the social, economic and public health problems. Additionally, Central Point would continue to have a disconnected UGB boundary on the eastside. Including lands proposed in CP-2B provides east-west connectivity and links the existing Eastside Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District with the proposed neighborhood activity Center. As demonstrated herein and in Exhibit 5, the City conducted an analysis of alternative boundary locations that considered and weighed the benefits and pitfalls of expansion scenarios relative to state location criteria, the City’s ability to accommodate its land needs in balance with public facility needs, provide livable neighborhoods, meet Regional Plan Performance Indicators and generally improve the quality of life in Central Point as it grows over the next 20-years. Conclusion, Major Revisions Requirement D: The proposed UGB expansion areas reflect the maximum benefit and minimum adverse impacts associated with Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy consequences. . E. Compatibility of the proposed change with other elements of the City and County comprehensive plans; and, Finding, Major Revisions Requirement E: See Findings in Section 7 and 9. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 37 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion, Major Revisions Requirement E: Consistent. F. The other statewide planning goals. Finding, Major Revisions Requirement B: See Findings in Section 4. Conclusion, Major Revisions Requirement B: Consistent. MAJOR REVISION PROCEDURES Major revision proposals shall be subject to a mutual City and County review and agreement process involving affected agencies, citizen advisory committees, and the general public. The review process has the following steps: A. CAC and planning commissions review and make recommendations to the City Council and Board of County Commissioners; B. Proposal mailed to the affected agencies and property owners; and, C. Proposal heard and acted upon by City Council and Board of County Commissioners. Finding, Major Revision Procedures A-C: The City’s UGB Amendment application will be considered by the City and County at a duly noticed joint meeting of the City and County Planning Commissions and subsequently the City Council and Board of County Commissioners. The City of Central Point Citizen’s Advisory Committee met on October 13, 2020 at which time Committee members heard a presentation of the proposal and received public input. At the conclusion of the meeting, the CAC unanimously voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. A joint meeting of the City and County Planning Commissions was held on February 2, 2021. At that time, the Planning Commissions heard the staff report on the application and conducted a duly noticed public hearing. Following discussion and deliberations both Planning Commissions unanimously voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council (Resolution No. 887) and Board of County Commissioners to approve the Major Revision to the Central Point UGB as proposed. The Central Point City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on March 11, 2021 and the Board of County Commissioners has scheduled a public hearing on April 14, 2021. Conclusion, Major Revision Procedures A-C: The Central Point Major Revision application will be processed in accordance with these procedures and the requirements in the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance (LDO) and City of Central Point Municipal Code. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 38 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 4 Findings, Statewide Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement To develop a citizen’s involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Finding, Goal 1: The City’s Citizen Involvement Program is set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and CPMC 17.05. This program specifies that a broad spectrum of affected citizens be involved throughout preparation, implementation, monitoring and amendment of plans, including but not limited to a Citizen’s Advisory Committee. Procedures in CPMC 17.05 establish notification and involvement requirements relative to each application type (i.e. Type I, II, III, IV). The City involved the public throughout the planning and preparation for the proposed UGB Amendment application in public hearings, discussions and through the City’s newsletter and website (https://www.centralpointoregon.gov/cd/page/2019-urban-growth-boundary-amendment) (Table 17). Pending submittal of the UGB Amendment application (Type IV), the City will continue to promote awareness of the application, approval criteria, and involvement opportunities through multiple media while implementing legal notification requirements required by the City and County land development codes. Table 17, Summary of Citizen Involvement Meetings Meeting Description Citizen's Advisory Committee Planning Commission City Council Public Hearing: Housing Element (2017-2037) 8/1/2017 9/14/2017 Discussion: Parks Element 1/9/2018 Public Hearing: Parks Element 5/1/2018 5/24/2018 Discussion: Land Use Element 7/11/2017 12/5/2017 8/15/2017 Public Hearing: Land Use Element 1/2/2018 2/22/2018 Discussion: Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) 1/15/2019 1/8/2019 Public Hearing: Residential BLI 2/5/2019 2/28/2019 Discussion: Population Element 1/15/2019 1/8/2019 Public Hearing: Population Element 2/5/2019 2/28/2019 Discussion: Housing Element Update (2019- 2039) 1/15/2019 1/8/2019 Public Hearing: Housing Element Update (2019-2039) 2/5 - 3/5/2019 4/11/2019 Discussion: Employment BLI 5/14/2019 5/7/2019 Public Hearing: Employment BLI 6/4/2019 6/27/2019 Discussion: Economic Element 5/14/2019 5/7/2019 Public Hearing: Economic Element 6/4/2019 6/27/2019 Discussion: Urbanization Element 1/15/2019 1/8/2019 Public Hearing: Urbanization Element 2/5/2019 2/28/2019 Discussion: UGB Mapping 4/7/2019 4/2/2019, 5/7/2019 Discussion: UGB Amendment 9/3/2019 3/5/2019 Resolution of Intent to Submit UGB Amendment Application 10/10/2019 Conclusion, Goal 1: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 39 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Goal 2, Land Use Planning To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual basis for such decisions and actions. Finding, Goal 2: The City’s land use planning process and policy framework is provided in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and Central Point Municipal Code in Title 17. This UGB Amendment applied the general land use designations in the Land Use Element to proposed UGB expansion areas consistent with the land use policies for residential, commercial, civic, and parks and open space lands. As required by the Jackson County Map Designation Element, the City proposes that these lands continue to be recognized as Urbanizable Lands and County zoning retained until lands are annexed. Decisions and actions related to lands included in this UGB Amendment will be subject to review procedure and land use and development criteria set forth in the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance and City of Central Point Municipal Code Chapter 17.05, as well as policies in the UGBMA (Exhibit 4). The UGB Amendment application in itself does not modify or otherwise preclude application of the County and City policy framework or planning procedures. Conclusion, Goal 2: Consistent. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. Finding, Goal 3: The City’s proposed UGB Amendment includes lands within four (4) URAs adopted by the Regional Plan Element (“Regional Plan”) in response to the County’s adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan. The Regional Plan promotes development of compact urban form and includes lands that are close to existing UGB boundaries. Exhibit 5 describes the City’s location analysis, which included an evaluation of soils and land capability classifications. Central Point’s URAs consist of a high percentage of high value farmland that cannot be avoided and efficiently accommodate the identified land needs for housing, employment and parks. The proposed location was selected because it has the highest potential to provide housing and employment opportunities more quickly and with lower infrastructure cost. Despite the fact the City needed to select available and suitable lands that have higher land capability soil classifications, the City included 53 acres of land in Rural Residential (RR-5 and RR 2.5) and Urban Residential (UR-1) zones (Table 14). Other measures that help maintain and preserve agricultural lands include the City’s commitment to an average minimum gross density of 7.04 units/acre for the 2019-2039 planning period. Prior to annexation, the City will be required by the Regional Plan to amend its residential zoning codes to adopt minimum densities necessary to meet this standard. Additionally the City has adopted agricultural buffering standards in CPMC 17.71 that will apply to any new development proposals in the areas newly added to the UGB. Since the proposed amendment maintains County zoning until lands are annexed into the City, existing farm operations will continue if and when they elect to be included in the City limits. Conclusion, Goal 3: The UGB Amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goal to preserve and maintain agricultural lands by selecting lands in the URAs that provide a compact form at minimum densities as conditioned and by implementing agricultural mitigation measures per CPMC for all lands newly added to the UGB per CPMC 17.71. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 40 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Goal 4, Forest Lands To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state’s forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as a leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture. Finding, Goal 4: The proposed RUGB Amendment neither abuts nor includes forest zoned lands or lands suitable for commercial forestry use. Conclusion, Goal 4: Not applicable. Goal 5, Open Space Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. Finding, Goal 5: Pursuant to Goal 5, the City is required to adopt programs and regulations that protect natural resources and conserve scenic, historic and open space resources. Goal 5 resources that must be inventoried include: wetlands, riparian corridors, wildlife habitat, federal wild and scenic rivers, state scenic waterways, groundwater resources, approved Oregon recreational trails, natural areas, wilderness areas, mineral and aggregate resources, energy sources, and cultural areas. Local governments are also encouraged to inventory historic resources, open space and scenic view and sites. The City’s Environmental Management Element of the Comprehensive Plan is the City’s Goal 5 plan, which is implemented through regulations in the Central Point Municipal Code. The proposed UGB expansion areas are not included in the scope of the Environmental Management Element. Prior to annexation, the City proposes a condition of approval that the Goal 5 planning be completed to include the UGB expansion areas. This was not possible prior to submitting this UGB Amendment application due to the limited time between population forecast updates and the requirement in OAR 660-024-024-0040(1) and ORS 195.033. Notwithstanding, the City utilized the State Wetland Inventory (SWI) and National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and US Fish and Wildlife Maps to identify wetlands and habitat for salmon. The proposed UGB includes limited riparian corridors and in all cases, are proposed as Bear Creek Greenway or Open Space (Figure 2). The consideration of natural resources is addressed in Exhibit 5. Conclusion, Goal 5: As conditioned, the City will complete its Goal 5 planning prior to annexation of lands newly added to the UGB consistent with the goal to protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. Goal 6, Air Water and Land Resources Quality To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. Finding, Goal 6: Goal 6 requires that all waste and process discharges from existing and future development will not threaten to violate or violate applicable state or federal environmental quality statutes, rules and standards. There is no interpretive rule for Goal 6. The City finds that air, water and land resource quality will be addressed by the City’s land use, transportation and environmental programs that minimize, mitigate or avoid conflicts with Goal 6: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 41 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Land Use & Transportation Planning. The proposed UGB Amendment includes Mixed- Use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers that provide a concentration of commercial, service and civic uses in proximity to high density housing in neighborhoods that are designed to promote multiple transportation modes (i.e. walking, cycling, transit) and reduce automobile reliance. Reducing vehicle miles traveled promotes clean air and water by reducing emissions and roadway pollution. This is consistent with the RVMPO Alternative Measures to attain air quality standards. Compact Urban Form. By connecting the existing UGB boundaries the City is fostering a more concentric, efficient form that minimizes distance from newly added UGB areas to Central Business District and thereby reducing vehicle miles traveled into town. This helps reduce emissions and pollution on roadways that could enter the storm drain system. Stormwater Management. The City of Central Point has a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Phase II permit to discharge runoff into state and federal waterways. This permit requires the City to implement a program of activities and regulations that assure post-development runoff volume and pollutant loads are treated to match pre- development conditions. This program will be implemented as areas newly added to the UGB are annexed. Additionally, the City will update its Stormwater Management Plan to evaluate basin wide approaches to maintaining and improving water quality and runoff volumes. Floodplain Management. The City has a Floodplain Management program that aims to reduce flood risk while promoting natural floodplain values. The Flood regulations are provided in CPMC 8.24 and include higher standards that require floodway buffers to preserve riparian corridors. Open space lands added to the UGB will be subject to the City’s Floodplain Program. Urban Forestry Program. Central Point is a Tree City USA and implements regulations (CPMC 12.36, CPMC 17.75, and CPMC 17.67) and programs to increase the urban forest canopy in the City. Trees are shown to promote cleaner air and water (photosynthesis, through fall, evapotranspiration), cooler ambient air temperatures (shade from increased canopy) and increased soil quality (by increasing soil infiltration and beneficial soil organisms). The City will continue its program of requiring street trees, along street frontages and within parking areas development buffers. Additionally the City promotes awareness of tree benefits, hosts workshops, and organizes tree planting events. Together these activities will help promote clean air, water and soil as the City grows. Conclusion, Goal 6: The City’s existing land use and environmental programs will be implemented in the UGB expansion areas pending approval consistent with Goal 6. Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Hazards and Disasters To protect people and property from natural hazards. Finding, Goal 7: The City is in the process of updating its Natural hazard Mitigation Plan, which includes identification, risk assessment and mitigation actions for floods, earthquakes, severe weather events, wildfire, drought, and volcanic eruptions. Pending completion of this plan it will 7.A.b Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 42 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions be incorporated into the City’s Comprehensive Plan Environmental Element and implementing regulations and programs applied to the newly added UGB areas (See Goal 6, Floodplain Management Finding). The City’s hazard mitigation and floodplain management programs actively reduce risk through awareness, engagement and mitigation projects. Conclusion, Goal 7: Prior to annexation of lands within the proposed UGB, the City will complete its hazard planning as needed to update the Environmental Element and apply applicable regulations in the UGB expansion areas. Goal 8, Recreational Needs To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Finding, Goal 8: The UGB Amendment responds to the need to add land for parks and recreation to address current and future deficiencies as the City grows. The amount and location of land is consistent with level of service standards set forth in in the Parks Element for core parks (Section 2.1.3) and the Regional Plan Element land use distribution (e.g. Boes Park in CP- 4D, Bear Creek Greenway in CP-3). The proposal also includes open space and Bear Creek Greenway lands to facilitate continued trail use and maintenance in the City, and preservation of lands adjacent to Bear Creek. Conclusion, Goal 8: The UGB Amendment to include parks and open space lands is needed to meet the intent of Goal 8. Goal 9, Economic Development To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon’s citizens. Finding, Goal 9: The City’s Economic Element was prepared to evaluate economic opportunities for the 2019-2039 planning period in accordance with OAR 660-009. As shown in Section 2.1.3, the City’s forecast growth exceeds the urban area capacity to provide diverse employment opportunities to serve Central Point residents and additional lands are needed to accommodate both short- and long-term employment land needs in the commercial, institutional and other employment categories. The UGB Amendment responds to the Economic Element to provide sufficient lands in UGB to accommodate short-term land needs. It also provides for Neighborhood Commercial areas in CP-2B and CP-6A to serve expanding residential neighborhoods consistent with the Regional Plan Performance Indicator for Mixed- use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas and provide for more livable and connected community neighborhoods. By providing employment within walking distance of housing, the City will foster creation of jobs that are more accessible to members of the community who may not have an automobile. Conclusion, Goal 9: The city concludes that the proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with Goal 9 by implementing policies to add land needed for short-term and spatially appropriate employment opportunities. Goal 10, Housing To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 43 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Goal 10: The Housing Element of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan provides an analysis of housing needs for the Central Point urban area for the 2019-2039. It’s findings are summarized in Section 2.1.1 and indicate that the City needs 2,887 housing units to accommodate forecast growth. To provide the needed housing at a minimum average density of 7.04 units per gross acre per Regional Plan, 410 gross acres are needed. However, the City’s Residential BLI shows that the City can absorb 105 acres of growth necessitating only 305 additional residential gross acres. The Housing Element addresses housing preference and the City’s preferred mix of land use and housing types. The proposed UGB Amendment includes land in all general land use categories for residential uses needed to implement its Goal 10 plan. As shown in Table 10, a variety of zones and housing types are supported by each category. The City deems this flexibility appropriate and necessary to address housing preferences while responding market demand. Conclusion, Goal 10: The proposed UGB Amendment implements policies in the Housing Element to provide needed housing consistent with Goal 10. Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. Finding, Goal 11: The Public Facilities and Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan establishes a policy framework to guide and support the types and levels of urban services appropriate for the needs and requirements of the City’s urban area. The proposed UGB Amendment will add new areas that will require public facility and service extension. As provided in Section 2.1.4 and Exhibit 5, the City evaluated the availability of public facilities based on proximity, then capacity and improvement needs relative to the UGB growth scenario. This involved hiring consultants (Brown and Caldwell, Water System Master Plan/UGB Analysis, and Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, UGB Traffic Impact Analysis) and coordinating with Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVSS) to provide technical analysis of the existing and needed system. Based on these evaluations, the proposed UGB boundary can be served and meet system performance standards with improvements and extension of services and growth occurs incrementally from the existing UGB into the proposed areas to be added. Pending amendment of the Central Point UGB, it will be necessary to update public facility master plans to update the Public Facilities Element and program needed improvements into the City’s financial plan. The City proposes completion of its public facilities master planning/comprehensive plan update as needed to demonstrate adequate public facilities at the time of annexation. Conclusion, Goal 11: The City’s UGB Amendment considered the need to plan for the orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities in coordination with agencies and based on technical analysis. The City concludes the proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12, Transportation To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Finding, Goal 12: To comply with Goal 12, the City hired Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering to evaluate impacts of the proposed UGB on existing, planned and future transportation facilities identified in the City and County Transportation System Plans (TSPs), ODOT Interchange Area Management Plan for Exit 33, and Conceptual Transportation Plans for CP-2B, CP-3 and CP-6A. The analysis was based on technical reports produced by ODOT’s 7.A.b Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 44 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Transportation Analysis Unit (TPAU) that considered the traffic volume generated by the proposed UGB boundary and land use scenario. Reports were also provided for alternative boundary scenarios but the final TIA is based on the proposed UGB location. The TIA considers traffic generated at the base year 2019 and future year 2039 including no- build and build conditions. The analysis found that the proposal can accommodate forecast growth in the UGB expansion areas with mitigation (See Section 2.1.4.2 and Exhibit 5, TIA). The City is currently preparing to update its TSP pending adoption of the revised UGB boundary. The TSP update will incorporate the newly added areas and provide a system wide update that aligns with the recently updated County TSP and Active Transportation Plan (pending completion) and includes all identified mitigations as projects in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan for transportation infrastructure. Conclusion, Goal 12: The proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with encouraging a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Goal 13, Energy To conserve energy. Finding, Goal 13: By providing two new Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly areas in the proposed UGB, the City is promoting a compact, highly efficient, walkable land use and transportation plan. The ESEE analysis in Section 3 and Exhibit 5 show that this development pattern reduces energy consumption by promoting multimodal transportation options and locating jobs within walking distance of housing. This was also supported by ODOT’s TPAU in a Report provided for the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan (Appendix VI) that shows that nodal development minimizes congestion over other urban development forms. According to the Regional Plan, there are no identified energy resources in the Region located in the City’s URAs. Consequently, there are no impacts to energy resources in the proposed UGB. Conclusion, Goal 13: The City concludes that the proposed urban form and land use pattern with new Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas in CP-2B, CP-3 and CP-6A is consistent with the need to promote energy conservation. Goal 14, Urbanization To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities. Finding, Goal 14: The proposed UGB boundary was determined based on evaluation of Goal 14 location factors (Exhibit 5), which are not independent criteria but balanced to maximize efficient use of land and economic and orderly provision of public facilities and services, while mitigating impacts to agricultural land and minimizing consequences to the environment, economy, society and energy resources. A summary of these findings is provided in Section 3: Finding: Major Revisions, Requirement D. Conclusion, Goal 14: The City’s UGB Amendment proposal is consistent with the Urbanization Goal as set forth in Exhibit 5 and as demonstrated in Section 5 Findings for OAR 660-024 relative to Urban Growth Boundaries. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 45 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 5 Findings, Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-024, Urban Growth Boundaries OAR 660-024-0020, Adoption of Amendment of a UGB Section 660-024-0020 sets forth the applicable statewide goals and administrative rules that apply to UGB Amendments, as well as the mapping scale needed for evaluation. OAR 660-024-0020(1). All statewide goals and related administrative rules are applicable when establishing or amending a UGB, except as follows: (a) The exceptions process in Goal 2 and OAR chapter 660, division 4 is not applicable unless a local government chooses to take an exception to a particular goal requirement, for example, as provided in OAR 660-004-0010(1); Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(a): The City of Central Point is not requesting any exceptions provided in OAR Chapter 660, Division 4 as part of the UGB Amendment proposal. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(a): Not applicable. (b) Goals 3 and 4 are not applicable; Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(b): Goal 3 and 4 have not been applied to the proposed UGB Amendment per this item. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(b): Not applicable. (c) Goal 5 and related rules under OAR chapter 660, division 23, apply only in areas added to the UGB except as required under OAR 660-023-0070 and 660-023-0250; Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(c): The City will complete its Goal 5 planning prior to annexation of lands from the areas added to the UGB in accordance with OAR 660-023. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(c): Complies as conditioned. (d) The transportation planning rule requirements under OAR 660-012-0060 need not be applied to a UGB amendment if the land added to the UGB is zoned as urbanizable land, either by retaining the zoning that was assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary or by assigning interim zoning that does not allow development that would generate more vehicle trips than development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary; Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d): In accordance with the Urban Growth Boundary Agreement (UGBMA) between the City of Central Point and Jackson County, Urban Growth Policy 2 (Exhibit 4), the land added to the UGB pursuant to this UGB Amendment application shall be urbanizable land and will retain the County land use and zoning designations until such time the 7.A.b Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 46 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions land is annexed into the City Limits. This will assure that until annexation, when City zoning is applied, development will not generate more vehicle trips than allowed prior to amending the UGB. Notwithstanding the City prepared a Traffic Impact Analysis (included in Exhibit 5) to assess the impacts of the proposed growth on the state, county and local transportation facilities. The analysis concluded that growth can be accommodated without adversely impacting the transportation system with mitigation measures associated with six (6) intersections. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d): Although the standard does not apply, the City can show that the proposal is consistent with the TPR requirements. (e) Goal 15 is not applicable to land added to the UGB unless the land is within the Willamette River Greenway; Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(e): The City of Central Point is located is south western Oregon in the Upper Rogue Watershed, Bear Creek Basin, and is not adjacent or near the Willamette River Greenway. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(e): Not applicable. (f) Goal 16 to 18 are not applicable to land added to the UGB unless the land is within a coastal shorelands boundary; Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(f): The City of Central Point is located is south western Oregon in the Upper Rogue Watershed, Bear Creek Basin, and is not adjacent or near the coastal shorelands boundary. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(f): Not applicable. (g) Goal 19 is not applicable to a UGB Amendment. Finding OAR 660-024-0020(1)(g): Goal 19 has not been applied to the proposed UGB Amendment per this item. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(1)(g): Not applicable. OAR 660-024-0020(2). The UGB and amendments to the UGB must be shown on the city and county plan and zone maps at a scale sufficient to determine which particular lots or parcels are included in the UGB. Where a UGB does not follow lot or parcel lines, the map provide sufficient information to determine the precise UGB location. Finding OAR 660-024-0020(2): The City’s acknowledged UGB and proposed UGB Amendment maps (Figure 1 and 2), are at a scale sufficient to identify the parcels proposed for inclusion. Where proposed UGB boundaries are not along a property boundary, it is proposed at the street 7.A.b Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 47 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions centerline as shown. No properties are split by the proposal. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0020(2): Consistent. OAR 660-0024-0040, Land Need Section 660-024-0040 addresses the basis for determining land need for the City’s UGB, including housing, employment, transportation, and public facilities. This section also establishes safe harbors that may be applied relative to the land needs determinations. The City determined its lands needs based on the data and analysis in the following Elements of the Comprehensive Plan: Population Element (Ordinance No. 2030) – Adopts the most recent Portland State University Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County and Urban Areas and sets forth the number of persons per household based on historic trends in Central Point. Residential Buildable Lands Inventory, Land Use Element (Ordinance No 2053) – Adopts the updated inventory of available buildable lands for the 2019-2039 planning period. Housing Element (Ordinance No. 2057) – Adopts the City’s updated analysis of housing needs based on the PRC Forecast and Residential BLI. Employment Buildable Lands Inventory, Land Use Element (Ordinance No. 2058) – Adopts the updated inventory of available buildable lands for employment use based on use and parcel size. Economic Element (Ordinance No. 2059) – The Economic Element was prepared in accordance with Goal 9 and acknowledged by DLCD. It sets forth the City’s gross employment land needs over the short- and long-term, identifies the needed site types by use, and the City’s target markets for employment capture. Parks and Recreation Element (Ordinance No. 2045) - The Parks and Recreation Element sets forth the inventory of current parkland in the UGB and land in the URAs outside the UGB that are owned by the City, and identifies performance standards for core parks (i.e. community and neighborhood), and associated land needs to provide core park recreation opportunities for the 20- year planning period. All of the above elements of the Comprehensive Plan were adopted by the Central Point City Council and acknowledged by DLCD based on their compliance with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, and Oregon Revised Statues. As such the standards set forth in this section have been met and aside from OAR 660-024-0040(1-3) and (7), are not applicable at this time and not addressed further. OAR 660-024-0040(1). The UGB must be based on the appropriate 20-year population forecast for the urban area as determined under Rules in OAR 660, div 32, and must provide for needed housing, employment and other urban uses such as public facilities, streets and roads, schools, parks and open space over the 20-year planning period consistent with the land need requirements of Goal 14 and this rule. The 20-year need determinations are estimates which, although based on the best available information and methodologies, should not be held to an unreasonably high level of precision. Finding OAR 660-024-0040(1): The City’s Land needs are based on the most recent population forecast by the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) per OAR 577-050- 0030 through 577-050-0060, updated Residential and Employment Buildable Lands Inventories (BLIs), and corresponding analysis of housing needs in the Housing Element, employment opportunities in the Economic Element and parkland needs in the Parks Element of the Central 7.A.b Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 48 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Comprehensive Plan. The land needs identified in these documents have been acknowledged by DLCD as consistent with the land need requirements of Goal 14, which are set forth in Table 1. The City proposes inclusion of 332 gross acres for housing. Following deduction of existing right-of-way and environmental constraints, the ‘reasonably developable’ gross acreage is 320 acres. The 4.7% difference between the needed and proposed acreage is due to methodology, which calculates acreage using GIS shapefiles. An acceptable margin of error is typically between 4% and 8%. The proposed overage is within an acceptable margin of error and not significantly different from the acreage needed for housing. Acreage for employment lands is less than the need but includes sufficient short-term land supply needed for medium and large site employment lands per the Economic Element. The City’s proposal to include less commercial land that the identified long-term need is intentional and aimed at encouraging commercial infill and redevelopment in the Central Business District. The core parklands proposed are equivalent to the need. In the absence of a performance standard for open space, the City has proposed to include open space and Bear Creek Green way lands where adjacent to needed lands for continuity and to avoid future islands of County jurisdiction in the City. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0040(1): Consistent. OAR 660-024-0040(2). If the UGB analysis or amendment is conducted as part of a periodic review program, the 20-year planning period must commence on the date initially scheduled for completion of the appropriate work task. If the UGB analysis or amendment is conducted as part of a sequential UGB approval, the 20-year planning period will be established in the work program issued pursuant to OAR 660-025-0185. If the UGB analysis or amendment is conducted as a post-acknowledgement plan amendment under ORS 197.610 to 197.625, the 20-year planning period must commence either: (a) On the date initially scheduled for final adoption of the amendment specified by the local government in the initial notice of the amendment required by OAR 660-018-0020; or (b) If more recent than the date determined in subsection (a), at the beginning of the 20-year period specified in the appropriate coordinated population forecast for the urban area as determined under rules in OAR chapter 660, division 32, unless ORS 197.296 requires a different date for local governments subject to that statute. Finding OAR 660-024-0040(2): The UGB Amendment proposal is in response to independent evaluation of Central Point’s current UGB, forecast growth, and land needs. It is not in response to or part of a periodic review program. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0040(2): Not applicable. OAR 660-024-0040(3). A local government may review and amend the UGB in consideration of one category of land need (for example, housing need) without a simultaneous review and amendment in consideration of other categories of land need (for example, employment need). Finding OAR 660-024-0040(3): The City’s UGB Amendment is comprehensive including residential, employment, core parkland and associated public facility uses. As such the City is 7.A.b Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 49 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions not limiting the scope to one land use category as permitted by this rule. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0040(3): Not applicable. OAR 660-024-0040(7). The determination of 20-year land needs for transportation and public facilities for an urban area must comply with applicable requirements of Goals 11 and 12, rules in OAR chapter 660, divisions 11 and 12, and public facilities requirements in ORS 197.712 and 197.768. The determination of school facility needs must also comply with 195.110 and 197.296 for local governments specified in those statutes. Finding OAR 660-024-0040(7): Future public facilities, such as street rights-of-way, are included in the gross acreage total for each land use category. Notwithstanding, the City prepared technical assessments of public facility needs for water and transportation, to assure each system has adequate capacity and ability to meet required performance standards. RVSS conducted an assessment of its sewer system relative to the City’s proposed UGB location. An assessment of the storm drainage system was not conducted because there are no improved storm drains within the UGB expansion area. Prior to annexation,, the City will complete its public facility planning for the approved UGB areas, including updating its Stormwater Management Plan, Transportation System Plan (TSP), and Water System Master Plan as necessary to update identify needed improvements and include them in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Pending completion of these, the City will also update the Public Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan. School District #6 completed a Long Range Facility Plan in accordance with ORS 195.110. The plan was completed in September 2019 and concluded that the City has enough capacity with recently approved improvements to accommodate growth for the next 10-years. Additionally, the School District has property in the current urban area that is planned and zoned for school use, as well as another property in CP-2B adjacent to the existing and proposed UGB boundary on Upton Road. The latter was not included in this UGB application due to uncertainty of the schools plans for development of this site within the planning period. In the event the School District elects to proceed with development of the Upton Road property, the City is poised and ready to initiate a minor amendment to the UGB for inclusion. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0040(7): Complies as conditioned. OAR 660-024-0045, Regional Large Lot Industrial Land This section provides rules for determining need for large lot industrial land in Crook, Deschutes, or Jefferson counties. Since the City of Central Point is not located in the counties where these rules apply, they are not applicable and therefore not addressed further in these findings. OAR 660-024-0050, Land Inventory and Response to Deficiency This section provides direction relative to a local government’s evaluation of UGB adequacy to accommodate 20-year land needs, options available to address deficiencies, and requirements for amending the UGB. Finding OAR 660-024-0050: The City’s determination of land needs and its response to the identified deficiencies documented in the Comprehensive Plan Elements See Findings for OAR 660-024-0040). The City inventoried its residential and employment needs in the Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) and Employment BLI. The Residential BLI included vacant and 7.A.b Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 50 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions redevelopable lands, including infill and redevelopment lands. The BLI found that infill lands account for 67% of the vacant land supply. The City concluded that the reasonableness and likelihood of all infill lands being available for development within the 20-year planning period is questionable and places a significant burden on the City to efficiently and effectively address housing affordability. To determine the extent to which infill lands will reasonably participate in providing housing during the planning period, the City conducted a study of infill participation rates from 1996 to 2016. The City found that infill accounted for roughly 6% of residential acreage and 8% of dwelling units constructed during that time period. To promote increased infill, the BLI adopted a 20% infill participation rate for the 2019-2039 planning period, which more than doubles historic rates. To accomplish this, the City prepared and approved a Housing Implementation Plan (HIP) that identifies strategies for eliminating barriers to housing, promoting infill and increasing the residential land supply. Additionally, the City’s residential land supply has not been amended since the UGB was first established in 1983. Since that time, the City implemented several efficiency measures that has increased the longevity of the residential land supply (Table 5). The City’s proactive approach to implementing efficiency measures to-date contributes significantly to the fact the City’s UGB has not been amended for residential uses for 36-years. Employment lands were inventoried and land needs identified in the Economic Element. Although there is a demonstrated need for 93 gross acres of employment land, the City is proposing including 35 gross acres. The proposal aims to incentivize infill and redevelopment in the Central Business District and vacant commercial lands along East Pine Street and Biddle Road to promote compact and efficient use of land for commercial use. Given the deficiency of medium and large lots for office and retail use, the proposal does include medium and large sites in CP-3 and within neighborhood Activity Centers in CP-2B and CP-6A. The latter commercial areas are spatially appropriate to serve mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas as required in the Regional Plan. Conclusion, OAR 660-024-0050: Since the City’s inventories and analysis and response to needs are identified in the Comprehensive Plan Elements adopted by the City and acknowledged by DLCD, findings for OAR 660-024-0050 have already been satisfied and are not addressed further. OAR 660-024-0060, Metro Boundary Location Alternatives Analysis This section provides rules for how Metro conducts an alternative boundary analysis for UGB Amendments. Since Metro includes land area within Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington Counties and the City of Central Point is outside of this area, the rules in this section are not applicable and therefore not addressed any further in these findings. OAR 660-024-0065, Establishment of Study Area to Evaluate Land for Inclusion in the UGB Prior to evaluation and selection of land to be included in the UGB, the local government must establish a study area based on locational factors. This section sets forth the criteria for establishing a preliminary study area and adjustments that may be made to account for constrained land. OAR 660-024-0065(1). When considering a UGB amendment to accommodate a need deficit identified in OAR 660-024-0050(4), a city outside of Metro must determine which land to add to the UGB by evaluating alternative locations within a “study area” established pursuant to this rule. To establish the 7.A.b Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 51 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions study area, the city must first identify a “preliminary study area” which shall not include land within a different UGB or the corporate limits of a city within a different UGB. The preliminary study area shall include: (a) All lands inside the city’s acknowledged urban reserve; if any; (b) All lands that are within the following distance from the acknowledged UGB: (A) For cities with a UGB population less than 10,000: one-half mile; (B) For cities with a UGB population greater than 10,000: one mile; (c) All exception areas contiguous to an exception area that includes land within the distance specified in subsection (b) and that are within the following distance from the acknowledged UGB: (A) For cities with a UGB population less than 10,000: one mile; (B) For cities with a UGB population greater than 10,000: one and one-half miles; (d) At the discretion of the city, the preliminary study area may include land that is beyond the distance specified in subsections (b) and (c). Finding OAR 660-024-0065(1): As demonstrated in the City’s Location Analysis Report, the City established a Preliminary Study Area consisting of first priority Urban Reserve Area lands. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(1): Consistent. OAR 660-024-0065(2). A city that initiated the evaluation or amendment of its UGB prior to January 1, 2016, may choose to identify a preliminary study area applying the standard in this section rather than section (1). For such cities, the preliminary study area shall consist of: (a) All land adjacent to the acknowledged UGB, including all land in the vicinity of the UGB that has a reasonable potential to satisfy the identified need deficiency, and (b) All land in the city’s acknowledged urban reserve established under OAR chapter 660, division 21, if applicable. Finding OAR 660-024-0065(2): The City’s UGB Amendment application was submitted on July 15, 2020; therefore the study area criteria in OAR 660-024-0065(2) do not apply. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(2): Not applicable. OAR 660-024-0065(3). When the primary purpose for expansion of the UGB is to accommodate a particular industrial use that requires specific site characteristics, or to accommodate a public facility that requires specific site characteristics, and the site characteristics may be found in only a small number of locations, the preliminary study area may be limited to those locations within the distance described in section (1) or (2), whichever is appropriate, that have or could be improved to provide the required site characteristics. For purposes of this section: (a) The definition of “site characteristics” in OAR 660-009-0005(11) applies for purposes of identifying a particular industrial use. (b) A “public facility” may include a facility necessary for public sewer, water, storm water, transportation, parks, schools, or fire protection. Site characteristics may include but are not limited to size, topography and proximity. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 52 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding OAR 660-024-0065(3): The City does not have a demonstrated need for and is not proposing inclusion of industrial land. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(3):Not applicable. OAR 660-024-0065(4). The City may exclude land from the preliminary study area if it determines that: (a) Based on the standards in section (7) of this rule, it is impracticable to provide necessary public facilities or services to the land; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(a): As demonstrated in the City’s Location Analysis Report (Exhibit 5), the City applied exclusion of land based on impracticability of providing necessary public facilities in CP-1B during the 2019-2039 planning period. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(a):Consistent. (b) The land is subject to significant development hazards, due to a risk of: (A) Landslides: The land consists of a landslide deposit or scarp flank that is described and mapped on the Statewide Landslide Information Database for Oregon (SLIDO) Release 3.2 Geodatabase published by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) December 2014, provided that the deposit or scarp flank in the data source is mapped at a scale of 1:40,000 or finer. If the owner of a lot or parcel provides the city with a site-specific analysis by a certified engineering geologist demonstrating that development of the property would not be subject to significant landslide risk, the city may not exclude the lot or parcel under this paragraph; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(A): Since the preliminary study area is characterized by a generally flat topography, there is no risk of landslides and no landslide exclusions were applied. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(A): Not applicable. (B) Flooding, including inundation during storm surges: the land is within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) identified on the applicable Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM); Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(B): As demonstrated in the Location Analysis Report (Exhibit 5), the City deducted lands in the SFHA identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(B): Consistent. (C) Tsunamis: the land is within a tsunami inundation zone established pursuant to ORS 455.446; 7.A.b Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 53 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(C): The UGB Study area is not adjacent to or near the coast and is therefore not subject to tsunami hazards. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(C):Not applicable. (c) The land consists of a significant scenic, natural, cultural or recreational resource described in this subsection: (A) Land that is designated in an acknowledged comprehensive plan prior to initiation of the UGB amendment, or that is mapped on a published state or federal inventory at a scale sufficient to determine its location for purposes of this rule, as: (i) Critical of essential habitat for a species listed by a state or federal agency as threatened or endangered; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A)(i): Per the Location Analysis Report (Exhibit 5), the City excluded parcels with flood hazard impacts adjacent to streams listed as Critical or Essential Habitat for Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) Coho Salmon. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A)(i): Consistent. (ii) Core habitat for Greater Sage Grouse; or, Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A)(ii): There is no core habitat mapped for Greater Sage Grouse in the UGB Study Area. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A)(ii): Not applicable. (iii) Big game migration corridors or winter range, except for where located on lands designated as urban reserves or exception areas; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A)(iii): There are no mapped big game migration corridors or winter range mapped in the UGB Study Area. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A)(iii): Not applicable. (B) Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers and State Scenic Waterways, including Related Adjacent Lands described by ORS 390.805, as mapped by the applicable state or federal agency responsible for the scenic program; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(B): There are no federal Wild and Scenic Rivers, State Scenic Waterways or related adjacent lands in the Study Area 7.A.b Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 54 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(B):Not applicable. (C) Designated Natural Areas on the Oregon State Register of Natural Heritage Resources; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(C): There are no designated natural Areas on the Oregon State Register of Natural Heritage Resources in the UGB Study Area. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(C):Not applicable. (D) Wellhead protection areas described under OAR 660-023-0140 and delineated on a local comprehensive plan; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(D): No wellhead protection areas were identified within the UGB Study Area. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(D): Not applicable. (E) Aquatic areas subject to Statewide Planning Goal 16 that are in a Natural or Conservation management unit designated in an acknowledged comprehensive plan; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(E): No aquatic areas subject to Goal 16 are within the UGB Study Area. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(E): Not applicable. (F) Lands subject to acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulations that implement Statewide Planning Goal 17, Coastal Shoreland, Use Requirement 1; Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(F): See Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(C). Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(F): Not applicable. (G) Lands subject to acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulations that implement Statewide planning Goal 18, Implementation Requirement 2. Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(G): See Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(C). Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(G):Not applicable. (d) The land is owned by the federal government and managed primarily for rural uses. Finding OAR 660-024-0065(4)(d): There are no federally owned or managed lands in the UGB Study Area. Conclusion OAR 660-024-0065(4)(d): Not applicable. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 55 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 6 Findings, OAR 660-012-0060, Transportation Planning Rule-- Plan and Land Use Amendments Section 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Amendments sets forth requirements for evaluating whether or not certain projects will significantly affect existing or planned transportation. As stated in Finding OAR 660-12-0060(2), the City’s UGB Amendment is not subject to the requirements herein since the land proposed for inclusion in the UGB will retain the County zoning that is currently in effect. However, City policy and regulations for traffic analysis require that a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) be prepared to assess the impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on affected infrastructure. The following findings are provided to demonstrate how the City’s proposal aligns with the State’s requirements notwithstanding the exemption in OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d). OAR 660-012-0060(1). If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); Finding OAR 660-012-0060(1)(a): Per the TIA in Exhibit 5, the proposed UGB Amendment does not cause a change in or otherwise alter the functional classification of any existing or planned transportation facility identified in the City’s 2008 Transportation System Plan (TSP), 2017 Jackson County TSP, or the Exist 33 IAMP. Conclusion OAR 660-012-0060(1)(a): The proposed UGB Amendment does result in functional classification changes. (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or Finding OAR 660-012-0060(1)(b): The proposed UGB Amendment does not cause a change, or otherwise alter standards implementing the functional classification system as defined in the 2008 City TSP or 2017 Jackson County TSP. Conclusion OAR 660-012-0060(1)(b): The proposed UGB Amendment does not result in any change to standards. (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; 7.A.b Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 56 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): The TIA concludes that increased trips associated with the proposed UGB Amendment will not alter the types of travel or access that would cause an inconsistency with the functional classifications of existing or planned transportation facilities identified in City 2008 and County 2017 TSP. Conclusion OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): No changes in types of travel or access are shown. (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or, Finding OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B): The TIA for the proposed UGB Amendment evaluates City, County and State facilities relative to the minimum level of service (LOS) and volume to capacity (v/c) ratio performance standards set forth by each respective jurisdiction (i.e. City TSP, County TSP and Oregon Highway Plan Policy 1F and Table 6). Each document acknowledges that improvements will be needed to maintain the minimum level of service. The location, description, timing and cost of these improvements are identified in the City and County TSPs, and IAMP for Exit 33. The TIA concludes that under no build conditions there will be two intersections that will experience decreased performance, including: Gebhard Road/East Pine Street. This intersection is jointly managed by the City and County. The TIA identifies mitigation measures to maintain performance under the no-build and build conditions, including dual turn lanes for the westbound, eastbound and southbound approaches, as well as constructing a third westbound through lane from Table Rock to Interstate 5. These are shown to maintain all affected performance standards. Upton Road/Scenic Avenue. This is a City owned intersection. The TIA identifies mitigation improvements that will maintain the minimum LOS Standard at this location, including a roundabout or signalized intersection. And at build-out of the UGB, three additional intersections will require improvements to maintain performance consistent with minimum LOS standards: Gebhard/Beebe Road. As proposed in the UGB Amendment application, these roads are proposed for jurisdictional transfer from the County to the City. The TIA recommends a future roundabout at this location to mitigate increased traffic demand from UGB build out. N. Grant Road/Twin Creeks Crossing. Per the UGB Amendment application, this section of Grant Road is to be transferred to City jurisdiction. Per the TIA, at UGB build out it will be necessary to provide an all stop controlled intersection to effectively manage the increased traffic generated for the forecast development. This measure is sufficient to maintain an acceptable level of service per the City’s TSP. Gebhard/Wilson Road. This intersection involves both City and County streets, respectively. Per the TIA a 4-way stop will mitigate impacts from increased 7.A.b Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 57 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions traffic at full build-out of the UGB as necessary to meet the City and County performance standards. As shown in the TIA, the identified improvements are consistent with the performance standards identified in the City and County TSPs. It’s important to note that the City’s TSP plans improvements until the year 2030. Prior to annexation of lands approved for inclusion in the UGB, the City will update its TIA to include the new UGB boundaries. Conclusion OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B): No degraded performance prior to build out with identified mitigation improvements. (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. Finding OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(C): See Finding OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B). Conclusion OAR 660-012-0060(1)(C): No degraded performance with identified mitigation measures. OAR 660-012-0060(2). If a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rule. A local government using subsection (2)(e), section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor vehicles in response to this congestion. Finding OAR 660-012-0060(2): The TIA for the proposed UGB Amendment was prepared in accordance with City policies and regulations to evaluate the impacts of proposed growth on the transportation network. However, OAR 660-024-0020(1)(d) exempts UGB amendments from the Transportation Planning Rule requirements in OAR 660-012—0060 if the proposal retains zoning that was assigned prior to inclusion in the UGB or by assigning interim zoning that does not allow development that would generate more vehicle trips that development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the UGB. The City’s proposal amends the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to include City land use designations that will provide the basis for assigning City zoning designations at the time of annexation. During the interim, the City proposes that the County designate the UGB as Urbanizable Area and retain existing County zoning. Notwithstanding the exemption from the State Transportation Planning Rule, the TIA demonstrates that the planned function, capacity and performance standards of each impacted transportation facility can be maintained with mitigation consistent with OAR 660-012- 0060(2)(a). Furthermore, the City TSP update to include the UGB will satisfy the requirements of OAR 660-012-0060(2)(b) by including the identified mitigation measures in the finance plan for the planning period. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 58 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion OAR 660-012-060 (2): The proposed UGB Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule in this section but demonstrates compliance with the standards set forth herein. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 59 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 7 ORS 197.298, Priority of Land to be Included in the UGB 1. In addition to any requirements established by rule addressing urbanization, land may not be included within an urban growth boundary of Metro except under the following priorities: (a) First priority is land that is designated urban reserve land under ORS 195.145, rule or metropolitan service district action plan. (b) If land under paragraph (a) of this subsection is inadequate to accommodate the amount of land needed, second priority is land adjacent to an urban growth boundary that is identified in an acknowledged comprehensive plan as an exception area or non-resource land. Second priority may include resource land that is completely surrounded by exception areas unless such resource land is high-value farmland as described in ORS 215.710. (c) If land under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection is inadequate to accommodate the amount of land needed, third priority is land designated as marginal land pursuant to ORS 197.247 (1991 Edition). (d) If land under paragraphs (a) to (c) of this subsection is inadequate to accommodate the amount of land needed, fourth priority is land designated in an acknowledged comprehensive plan for agriculture or forestry, or both. 2. Higher priority shall be given to land of lower capability as measured by the capability classification system or by cubic foot site class, whichever is appropriate for the current use. 3. Land of lower priority under subsection (1) of this section may be included in an urban growth boundary if land of higher priority is found to be inadequate to accommodate the amount of land estimated in subsection (1) of this section for one or more of the following reasons: (a) Specific types of identified land needs cannot be reasonably accommodated on higher priority lands; (b) Future urban services could not reasonably be provided to the higher priority lands due to topographical or other physical constraints; or (c) Maximum efficiency of land uses within a proposed urban growth boundary requires inclusion of lower priority lands in order to include or to provide services to higher priority lands. 4. When a city includes land within the urban growth boundary pursuant to ORS 197.295 to 197.314, the city shall prioritize lands for inclusion as provided in ORS 197A.320. Finding ORS 197.298: The City’s proposed UGB Amendment includes lands within four (4) URAs established pursuant to ORS 195.145 in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, which was adopted by the City of Central Point as the Regional Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance No. 1964). Due to the adequacy of first priority lands, the City did not evaluate second, third or fourth priority lands identified in this section. The City evaluated alternative boundary locations relative to its land needs and state and local criteria (Exhibit 5). This included research of soil classifications within the study area, which found that the study area consists predominantly of Class 3 and 4 soils (non-irrigated). However, irrigation within the study area increases soil classifications of some of the lands to include some Class 1 and 2 soils (Figures 11- 14). As part of the alternative boundary analysis, two consolidated areas with Class 1 soils were eliminated from further reconsideration as part of this UGB Amendment, including lands in all lands in 7.A.b Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 60 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions CP-1C and land north and west of Upton Road in CP-2B.20 However, it was necessary to include some Class 1 and 2 soils to accommodate the City’s land needs to maximize land use efficiency and provide a public facility network that can serve higher priority lands in the future (i.e. CP-2B east of Gebhard Road, CP-2B west of Upton Road to include School District #6 property when needed). Service extension into CP-6A positions the City to expand services for possible future UGB areas to the north or south. Although the City considered and minimized inclusion of the highest capability lands, the proposed UGB Amendment was unable to avoid these entirely reflecting the fact that the City is surrounded by some of the valley’s most prime farmland. The Regional Plan acknowledged the significance of this challenge for Central Point and mitigates this through measures to increase land use efficiency. Conclusion ORS 197.298(2): The City’s proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with the priority of lands to be included in the UGB. 20 With this exception of a parcel owned by School District 6, all of these parcels were recently acquired by a non- profit group that created Rusted Gate Farm. According to the website (www.rustedgatefarm.org), Rusted Gate Farm includes five properties consisting of 154 acres. Their mission is to share outcomes from experimenting with traditional, alternative and innovative farm practices to identify a mix of income producing activities that will increase average farm income, promote environmental health, and insure long term financial security for small farms. Sixty-three acres of Rusted Gate Farm are within the CP-2B URA. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 61 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 8 Findings, Jackson County Comprehensive Plan Regional Plan Element: Performance Measures 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, 2.13, 2.17, 2.18, 2.20 Transportation System Plan: Policies 4.2.1-I, 4.2.1-P, 4.2.1-Q, 4.2.1-R, 4.2.1-S, 4.3.2-A, 4.3.2-B Urban Lands Element: Policy 1 Map Designations Element Regional Plan Element Progress following the acknowledgement of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan by the State of Oregon will be measured against a number of performance indicators to determine the level of compliance by participating jurisdictions with the Plan or the need to refine or amend it. The City’s Progress Report and Findings and Conclusions relative to compliance with the Regional Plan Element are set forth in Exhibit 7. Transportation System Plan (TSP) The Jackson County Transportation System Plan (TSP) provides goals and policies to guide development of the Jackson County transportation system. The County has three (3) overarching transportation goals addressing: Livability, Modal Components and Integration. Although most of the policies set forth in the Jackson County TSP address County specific items, the following seven (7) policies have been identified as applicable to the City and County coordination relative to the proposed UGB Amendment. Transportation Policy 4.2.1-I. In coordination with other jurisdictions in the region, the County will work with the Rogue Valley MPO to reduce reliance on automobile travel, consistent with the State- approved Alternative Measures to reduce per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the adopted RVMPO Regional Transportation Plan. Finding Transportation Policy 4.2.1-I: Alternative Measures in the Regional Transportation Plan include attaining 2020 benchmarks for dwelling units and jobs in Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(8). This is a development plan that encourages higher density mixed-use environments that increase the convenience of walking, bicycling, and transit. By reducing distances between housing, workplaces, retail businesses, and other amenities, Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas help to reduce vehicle miles travelled. Per the RTP, the region is targeting 49% of new housing and 44% of employment be provided in Mixed Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. To help attain this target, the City of Central Point benchmark is 39% and 48% for housing and employment, respectively. As shown in Exhibit 5, the City is has mapped its RVMPO Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers and is proposing to add three (3) additional areas (See Figures 20 and 21 in Exhibit 5) totaling roughly 395 acres (89% of the proposed UGB expansion area). On the employment side, the City is adding 18 acres in a Community Activity Center in CP-3, which will provide a walkable mixed-use destination for the Eastside TOD. The City is adding 17 acres of Neighborhood Commercial land in CP-2B and CP-6A Neighborhood Activity Center. As demonstrated herein, the City’s providing 89% of its housing in the URAs and 100% of employment in the URAs exceeding the 2020 benchmarks for this proposal. This action is consistent with the County’s policy to work with other jurisdictions and the RVMPO to reduce reliance on automotive travel. Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.2.1-I: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 62 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Transportation Policy 4.2.1-P. The County will continue to implement regional transportation goals and objectives by reflecting Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) policies in adopted county policy and adopting as part of its TSP all planned transportation improvements in the RTP for all regionally significant transportation facilities within the MPO areas of Jackson County. RTP policy or project updates that impact regionally significant County facilities will require amendment to the County TSP to maintain plan consistency. Finding Transportation Policy 4.2.1-P: Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering prepared a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the proposed UGB Amendment. The project scoping was conducted in coordination with Jackson County, ODOT and the City of Central Point to assure that all regionally significant facilities were included in the analysis. Per the TIA (Exhibit 5, Attachment E), the following intersections involving county infrastructure will be impacted: Future Year 2039 No-build: Gebhard Road (City) and East Pine Street (County) will require mitigation to alleviate congestion along the East Pine Street corridor from Table Rock Road to Interstate 5. The TIA evaluated mitigation measures and concluded that performance standards can be maintained by constructing dual eastbound and southbound left turn lanes, and adding a third westbound through lane on East Pine Street from Table Rock Road to the Interstate 5 interchange. Future Year 2039 Build: Gebhard (proposed for jurisdictional transfer to the City) and Wilson Road (County) will exceed the County’s performance standard due to an increase in traffic to and from Wilson Road. Adding stop signs on Wilson Road to make an All Way Stop Controlled intersection is shown to mitigate the impact. All other impacts involve City operated intersections, and each of these can be mitigated to meet the City’s performance standard. The TIA provides a high level analysis of traffic impacts based on the proposed UGB expansion areas based on existing and planned improvements per the City and County Transportation System Plan s(TSPs) and the Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for Exit 33. The County’s TSP was recently updated; however, the City’s TSP only addresses improvements to the year 2030 and requires reevaluation and updates to include areas newly added to the UGB. Pending approval of the UGB Amendment, the City will amend the TSP for the 2020-2040 planning period and coordinate with Jackson County and ODOT as necessary to address impacts and mitigation needed on regionally significant corridors in the County. Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.2.1-P: Pending adoption of the UGB Amendment, the City will complete an update of its TSP and coordinate with Jackson County to verify impacts and mitigation needed on East Pine Street and any other regionally significant corridors in the County as needed to update both the City and County TSPs so they are consistent. Transportation Policy 4.2.1-Q. The County will coordinate transportation and land use planning and decision-making with other transportation agencies and public service providers, such as ODOT, cities within the County, and emergency services agencies, when their facilities or services may be impacted by a County decision or there may be opportunities to increase the efficiency and benefits of a potential decision. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 63 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding Transportation Policy 4.2.1-Q: The County has coordinated with the City’s traffic engineering consultant to scope the TIA for the UGB Amendment application and to address questions and modeling assumptions throughout its development consistent with this policy. Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.2.1-Q: Consistent. Transportation Policy 4.2.1-R. The County will pursue jurisdictional road transfers that improve jurisdictional allocation of facility management responsibilities. Roads accepted by Jackson County in jurisdictional transfers should be paved rural roads for which the County has special maintenance expertise. The County should take all appropriate legal opportunities to negotiate jurisdictional transfer of County roads within urban growth boundaries and city limits. Finding Transportation Policy 4.2.1-R: The City and County have coordinated and determined that the following County roadways will be transferred to the City’s jurisdiction as part of the UGB Amendment application: Gebhard Road from Wilson to Beebe Road; Beebe Road from Hamrick to Gebhard Road; Grant Road from the north UGB boundary south to Beall Lane; and, Taylor Road from Silver Creek Drive west to the westerly boundary of the proposed UGB. The proposed jurisdictional transfer is consistent with this policy and the Urban Reserve Management Agreement (URMA). Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.2.1-R: Consistent. Transportation Policy 4.2.1-S. Unless a project is needed to address hazards or immediate safety needs, the County will only improve County roads within city limits if the project is part of a jurisdictional transfer agreement, and if the City or a third party agrees to cover at least half of the project cost and County funds are available to cover the remaining cost. Finding Transportation Policy 4.2.1-S: The proposed UGB Amendment does not involve County improvements on County road within the City limits. Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.2.1-S: Not applicable. Transportation Policy 4.3.2-A. The County will protect the function of existing and planned roadways as identified in the TSP and will ensure that all development proposals, plan amendments, and zone changes are consistent with the adopted TSP. Finding Transportation Policy 4.3.2-A: As shown in the TIA, the function of existing and planned roadways identified in the TSP can be maintained per the identified mitigation measures. Prior to annexation of lands from the expanded UGB, the City’s TSP update will provide a comprehensive analysis of the transportation network including City and County roadways for the 2020-2040 planning period. Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.3.2-A: Consistent. Transportation Policy 4.3.2-B. The County will consider the impacts on existing or planned transportation facilities in all discretionary land use decisions and, unless a waiver is granted by the Development Services Director and the County Engineer, shall require applicable development proposals, as defined in the Land Development Ordinance, to prepare a traffic impact study. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 64 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding Transportation Policy 4.3.2-B: The City had a TIA analyzed the impacts of the proposed UGB Amendment on existing and planned transportation facilities per the City and County TSPs and the IAMP for Exit 33. Conclusion Transportation Policy 4.3.2-B: Completion of the TIA is consistent with this policy and requirements in the LDO. Urban Lands Element, Policy 1 Goal 14, Urbanization, encourages urban centered growth by requiring that urban growth boundaries be drawn around existing urban areas. Development at urban densities may occur within that urban growth boundary, however, outside the urban growth boundary urban development is prohibited. Zoning, subdivision and other regulations, as well as limitations on the extension of public facilities and services further encourage urban centered growth. The concept of urban centered growth has generally grown from a disenchantment with the sprawling suburban type development patterns that often result in inefficient leap-frog development, a general physical and social decline of established urban centers, massive public capital investments in the automobile transportation network, air quality problems relating, in part, to the over reliance on the private automobile, a general loss of agricultural, forest and open space resource lands, and a general inefficiency in the utilization of energy resources. Urban- centered growth is a principal cornerstone of the comprehensive planning effort and serves to help implement many other major planning concepts spelled out in the Plan. Urban Lands Policy 1. Jackson County shall maintain a long-range commitment to the implementation of urban centered growth. Finding Urban Lands Policy 1: The City’s UGB Amendment proposal provides a needed land supply for housing, employment, parklands and associated public facility uses. Land needs and the proposed UGB expansion is based on forecast growth over the 2019-2039 planning period, which is expected to be primarily fueled by in-migration. Failure to accommodate Central Point’s land needs by adding land to the UGB would place a burden on other jurisdictions and rural lands to accommodate the forecast population growth, which is contrary to this Urban Lands policy. Providing areas for growth inside the City’s UGB that is highly efficient and includes Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas supports connectivity by closing gaps between existing urban area boundaries, as well as walking and bicycling and jobs in proximity to housing. Together these qualities of the City’s UGB Amendment proposal are consistent with addressing and minimizing the adverse impacts associated with suburban sprawl. Conclusion Urban Lands Policy 1: The City’s proposed UGB Amendment supports Jackson County’s commitment to promoting urban centered growth. Map Designations Element The County’s Map Designation Element defines and establishes criteria for map designations on the County’s General Land Use Map. The City of Central Point UGB Amendment proposes approximately 444 acres of urbanizable land to be reflected on the County and City maps based on the Urbanizable Area (UA) Map designation criteria. Urbanizable Area (UA) 1) Purpose: To provide for an efficient and economic transition for urbanizable land located within the urban growth boundary of a city, where the City and County have mutually adopted an intergovernmental agreement to transfer land development review authority from the County to 7.A.b Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 65 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions the City. The Plan designation recognizes that the County retains its legislative authority over unincorporated lands inside the urban growth boundary, thereby ensuring citizen interests will continue to be represented by their elected governmental body. Implementation of the land use plan adopted by the County, however, is contracted to the City in recognition that the urbanizable area will ultimately be the City’s responsibility and that coordination of public facilities and services is more efficiently managed by the City as an urban services provider. Changes to the land use program proposed by the City will continue to require County approval for application in the unincorporated urbanizable area. 2) Map Designation Criteria: A). A mutually adopted urbanization agreement must be adopted between Jackson County and the City that is consistent with the requirements of applicable Statewide Planning Goals and the Oregon Revised Statutes. B). Jackson County must adopt a generalized land use plan map and development ordinance to be applied in the urbanizable area that is consistent with the City’s adopted Land Use Plan. C). The urbanizable area between the municipal boundary and the urban growth boundary will be designated on the Countywide generalized Comprehensive Plan map as (UA). The mutually adopted zoning map for the urbanizable area will implement the Comprehensive Plan for the UA designated lands. D). Legislative amendments to the City’s general land use plan map that would change the City plan designation of unincorporated property must be approved by Jackson County to be applicable to the unincorporated area. Jackson County will be bound by the terms of the urbanization management agreement while the agreement is in effect, but retains the authority to rescind the management agreement in accordance with the terms of the intergovernmental agreement. 3) Establishment of Zoning Districts: Zoning districts must be mutually adopted to enable the City’s administration of the County adopted development ordinance. Finding Map Designation Element, Urbanizable Area: As provided in the Pre-Application Conference Summary of Facts, dated October 8, 2019, the Map Designation Element can be addressed by the Regional Plan Element and Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA). Accordingly, the City proposes to include roughly 444 acres in its UGB. The lands will be assigned land use designation on the City Comprehensive Plan General Land Use Map consistent with Figure 2. However, the lands within the proposed UGB will be recognized as Urbanizable Area per the UGBMA with County zoning applying until such time lands are annexed and zoned for urban uses. As part of this UGB Amendment proposal, the City is requesting an amendment to the UGBMA Policy 1(D) to limit the size of land divisions in the Urbanizable Area to no less than 40 acres. This is deemed necessary by the City to maintain large lot sizes more conducive to efficient accommodate of 7.A.b Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 66 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions land needs once lands are annexed. Pending adoption by the City and County, the revised UGBMA (Exhibit 4) will replace the existing document. No other changes are proposed outside of Policy 1(D). Per the UGBMA, Jackson County will be notified of annexations and associated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps consistent with Urbanizable Area items 2(D) and 3. Conclusion Map Designation Element, Urbanizable Area: The City’s proposed UGB Amendment is consistent with the Urbanizable Area policies in the Map Designation Element. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 67 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 9 Findings, Jackson County Land Development Ordinance LDO 3.7.3(D), Major Comprehensive Plan Map or Zoning Map Amendments Major map amendments may be made if one or more of the following apply: 1) Changes in economic or social conditions, or settlement patterns, require an adjustment in the configuration of land uses allowed in a 11 These criteria are superseded in Aggregate Resource plan and zone amendments by OAR 660-023- 0180. The applicable criteria in aggregate amendment cases is found in the Map Designation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, other elements of this Plan, and in other sections of this LDO. Jackson County, Oregon Chapter 3 Page 26 region or subregion of the County; 2) Development occurs at rates other than that contemplated by the Plan, making a major map amendment necessary; or 3) An error needs to be corrected or the Official Plan and Zoning Map needs to be brought into compliance, or more into compliance, with Statewide Planning Goals and related Oregon Administrative Rules or other relevant law. In designated Areas of Special Concern, such amendments will also comply with the relevant provisions of Chapter 7. Such amendments may have widespread and significant impacts. Map amendments outside urban growth boundaries and urban unincorporated communities that will result in a minimum residential lot size smaller than 10 acres require an exception to Statewide Planning Goal 14. Finding LDO 3.7.3(D): The City is initiating a Major Amendment to the County and City Comprehensive Plans due to forecast growth exceeding the land supply available for housing, employment (commercial) and core parks consistent with LDO 3.7.3(D)(2). Conclusion LDO 3.7.3(D): Consistent. LDO 3.7.3(E), Standards for Amending an Adopted Urban Growth Boundary, Urban Reserve Area, Urban Fringe, or buffer Area 12. In addition to the requirements contained in joint Urban Growth Boundary agreements and Urban Reserve Area agreements, all proposed boundary and area amendments must comply with applicable State Law, Statewide Planning Goals, the County Comprehensive Plan and any Regional Problem Solving documents adopted by the County. Finding LDO 3.7.3(E): As demonstrated in these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the City has addressed the criteria in the UGBMA, Statewide Planning Goals, County Comprehensive Plan and the mutually adopted Regional Plan Elements (Exhibit 7.) Conclusion LDO 3.7.3(E): Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 68 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 10 Findings, City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan General Policies The general goal of the Central Point Comprehensive Plan is “To determine future growth of the present City to the mutual benefit of the public by consideration of proper land use planning incorporating statewide goals and guidelines in the adoption of policies to ensure a logical, orderly planning process.” This goal is supported by the following nine general policies: 1. Provide for an orderly and reasonable expansion of the Central Point urbanizing area. Finding, General Policy 1: As demonstrated in the City’s Location Analysis (Exhibit 5) and Findings for the UGBMA (Section 3) and Goal 14 (Section 4) the proposed UGB Amendment provides for an orderly and reasonable expansion of the Central Point urbanizing area by providing a compact form that connects existing UGB boundaries. Conclusion, General Policy 1: Consistent 2. Encourage the enhancement of private property values and quality of life through compatible arrangement of land uses. Finding, General Policy 2: The UGB Amendment proposes an arrangement of land uses identified during the Conceptual Land Use Planning process for the URAs based on their compatibility and ability to provide a high quality of life as the City grows. At the time of annexation, City zoning will be applied. With the exception of lands in the VLRes and LRes categories, the zoning will utilize the City’s TOD standards (Section 17.67 Design Standards), which address land use compatibility concerns and contain specific standards (Section 17.67.050 Site Design Standards) to be addressed during the master plan (Section 17.66.030 Application and Review) or site plan process. When the residential codes are amended, the City will expand the master planning requirements and land use compatibility standards in the LRes (R-1) land use and zoning categories. Conclusion, General Policy 2: Consistent 3. Provide flexibility of residential neighborhoods and housing opportunities to meet the changing needs of a growing population. Finding, General Policy 3: The proposed UGB land use supports future zoning that allows a variety of housing types (Table 16) needed to respond to changing demographics, housing preferences and affordability needs. These will be further expanded when the City amends its residential land development codes prior to annexation. Conclusion, General Policy 3: As demonstrated in Section 2.4, the City proposes a land use pattern consistent with this policy. 4. Provide well balanced and convenient shopping opportunities for the residents of the Community. Finding, General Policy 4: Section 2.4.2 addresses the commercial land uses proposed as part of this UGB Amendment. By including Neighborhood Commercial Centers in CP-2B and CP-6A and community shopping opportunities in CP-3, the City is addressing the need to provide 7.A.b Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 69 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions spatially appropriate neighborhood scale shopping opportunities within walking distance of residential areas. Pending amendment of the UGB and annexation, the Neighborhood Commercial (C-N) zone will be applied (CPMC 17.32). The CP-3 expansion area includes General Commercial lands, which will be zoned General Commercial (GC) (CPMC 17.65) pending UGB Amendment. As shown in Section 2.4.2 and the referenced sections of the Municipal Code, both zoning designations provide a variety of shopping and service opportunities. Conclusion, General Policy 4: The location of proposed commercial land use designations and corresponding uses allowed by supporting zoning districts together provide well-balanced and convenient shopping opportunities as the City grows. 5. Provide ease of access and circulation throughout the Community through an improved circulation/transportation system, and properly planned extensions to that system. Finding, General Policy 5: Development within the proposed UGB expansion areas that are part of an Activity Center and as such will be subject to the master planning requirements of the TOD district, which will require that circulation and access to and from and any TOD project comply with TOD access standards (Section 17.67.040 Circulation and Access Standards). The only areas proposed outside an Activity Center are adjacent to existing streets (CP-2B, LRes Land east of Gebhard and CP-4D, existing VLRes and future Boes Park). At this time, zones associated with these land use designations are regulated in accordance with the Design and Development Standards in CPMC 17.75, which address access and circulation. Conclusion, General Policy 5: Consistent 6. Provide increased localized employment opportunities within the community through the expansion of the commercial and industrial base. Finding, General Policy 6: The proposed UGB Amendment includes 35 acres of commercial and civic lands to increase localized employment opportunities consistent with this policy. Conclusion, General Policy 6: Consistent. 7. Provide for the logical and most economical expansion of community facilities and services to accommodate the Plan’s proposed land uses and continued growth of the City. Finding, General Policy 7: Pending approval, the proposed UGB area will contain 75% of the City’s buildable residential acreage and 36% of the City’s commercial buildable acreage that is essentially surrounded by the City. Given the availability of nearby public facilities and the design and density standards of the proposed land use, the UGB expansion request represents both a logical and economic expansion and use of public facilities. This is further demonstrated in Section 3 UGBMA Findings, Section 4 Goal 14 Findings and Exhibit 5. Conclusion, General Policy 7: Consistent 8. Ensure the protection and enhancement of existing natural environmental features and productive agricultural lands through responsible land use planning and development controls. Finding, General Policy 8: See Statewide Planning Goal Findings in Section 4 for Goal 5 and 6. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 70 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion, General Policy 8: Consistent 9. Plan for a system of parks and recreation facilities, areas and opportunities that is accessible to all residents and in balance with growth and development. Finding, General Policy 9: The proposed UGB includes 55 acres of core parks,5 acres of open space and 15 acres of Bear Creek Greenway land. As shown in Section 2.1.3 and Findings for Statewide Planning Goal 8 in Section 4 and Parks and Recreation in Section 10, the City’s UGB Amendment implements its Parks Element to provide diverse, high quality recreation facilities and opportunities that are accessible to all segments of the population and commensurate with forecast growth. Conclusion, General Policy 9: Consistent Citizen Involvement The goal of the Citizens Involvement Element is derived from the Statewide Planning Goal No. 1, which is “to develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.” To attain this goal the City’s Citizen Involvement Element includes six policies. 1. The Citizen Involvement Program shall involve a “cross-section” of affected citizens in all planning phases and shall include a recognized Citizens Advisory Committee. 2. In order to assure effective communication with citizens, mechanisms shall be established, including such methods as newsletters, questionnaires, posters, and other available media, as appropriate. 3. Whenever possible, citizens shall be given the opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process, including (1) data collection, (2) plan preparation, (3) adoption, (4) implementation, (5) evaluation, and (6) revision. 4. The City will assure that all information used in the preparation of the Plan or related reports, is made available in an easy to understand form and is available for review at the community library, City Hall, or other location. 5. The City will be responsive to citizens or groups taking part in the planning process and all land use policy decisions will be documented in written form and available for public review. 6. Adequate human, financial and informational resources will be allocated for the citizens involvement program and such resources will be an integral component of the planning budget. Finding, Policies 1 - 6: See Finding Statewide Planning Goal 1 Finding. Conclusion, Policies 1 - 6: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 71 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Population Element The goal of the Population Element is to maintain population and demographic forecasts as the primary data source for developing and implementing plans and programs for management of the City’s growth. It includes four (4) policies. Population Policy 1 – Population Forecast. The population data presented in Table 1 is the acknowledged population forecast for the period 2019 through 2039 and is to be used in maintaining and updating the City’s Comprehensive Plan. It shall be the responsibility of the City to update the data presented in Table 1 based on the decennial U.S. Census. During the interim census periods adjustments to Table 1 will be based on the latest PRC Forecast (4-year cycle). Finding, Population Policy 1: The population forecast in Population Element Table 1 was utilized as the basis for updating the City’s Comprehensive Plan Housing, Economic, and Parks Elements. Together these elements set forth the City’s land acreage needs for housing, employment and core parks for the planning period 2019-2039. Conclusion, Population Policy 1: Consistent. Population Policy 2 – Average Household Size. For purposes of calculating household formation, the City will use an average household size of 2.5 for lands within the urban growth boundary. This figure will serve as the basis for determining the number of households expected to be formed throughout the planning period. It shall be the responsibility of the City to periodically monitor and, if necessary, update the average household size through data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Finding, Population Policy 2: In evaluating the City’s housing needs, the Housing Element utilized 2.5 persons per household as the average household size. This is shown in Tables 19 of the Housing Element, which summarize the City’s determination of housing needs based on population growth, household size, average gross density and the availability of buildable lands. Year Central Point Jackson County 2019 19,101 219,270 2020 19,714 235,066 2025 21,035 246,611 2030 22,920 257,256 2035 24,815 263,006 2039 26,317 264,951 Change 7,216 45,681 Source: 2018 PRC Coordinated Population Forecast, Jackson County TABLE 1. POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS CITY OF CENTRAL POINT AND JACKSON COUNTY 7.A.b Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 72 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion, Population Policy 2: Consistent. Population Policy 3 – Household Distribution. For purposes of calculating household formation, the City will use 70% as the percentage of households that are family households and 30% as Non- Family Households. These figures shall be used in maintaining and updating the City’s Comprehensive Plan. It shall be the responsibility of the City to periodically monitor and, if necessary, update the percentage of family households through data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Finding, Population Policy 3: The Housing Element addresses household characteristics as one of 6 indicators of housing needs. Family and non-family household distribution was evaluated consistent with the percentage allocations in Population Element Policy 3. Conclusion, Population Policy 3: Consistent. Population Policy 4 – Racial and Ethnic Diversity. The City acknowledges the changing racial and ethnic diversity of the community and will continue to develop the strategies and tools necessary to ensure that the benefits of growth meet the needs of all people within the community regardless of race or ethnicity. Finding, Population Policy 4: The proposed UGB Amendment adds lands necessary to accommodate growth and assigns land uses that will allow diverse housing and commercial employment types. Inclusion of activity centers (i.e. mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas) aims to provide walkable Table 19 Projected Residential Buildable Land Need 2019 to 2039 2018 Pop.1 19,101 2032 Forecast2 23,662 2039 Forecast3 26,317 Population Increase 7,216 Persons/HH4 2.50 Household Increase 2,887 Average Gross Density5 7.04 Needed Gross Residential Acres 410 Total Buildable Residential Acres6 105 Additional Needed Gross Residential Acres 305 1 Portland State University Population Research Center, Preliminary Estimate, 2018 2 Portland State University Population Research Center, Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2018-2068 3 Based on PSU Interprolation Worksheet 4 City of Central Point Population Element, 2017 - 2037 5 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element, 2015 - 2035 6 City of Central Point Buildable Lands Report, 2019 - 2039, Table 5. Infill Availability Adjusted Buildable Vacant Land by Comprehensive Plan 7.A.b Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 73 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions neighborhoods that provide opportunities for housing, employment, recreation and active transportation. Together these aspects of the UGB Amendment serve varying needs of Central Point’s population demographic, regardless of race and ethnicity, now and as the City grows. The proposed UGB Amendment does not impede or otherwise affect the City’s ability to develop and implement other strategies and tool necessary to ensure benefits of growth meet needs of all population segments. Conclusion, Population Policy 4: Consistent. Housing Element The Housing Element aims to assure that the City’s land use policies support a variety of housing types at densities and locations that provide and encourage opportunities of for the provision of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels commensurate with the financial capabilities of the City’s households. It also aims to open and maintain communication between private industry and local public officials in seeking an improved housing environment within the Greater Bear Creek Valley Region. It contains seven (7) goals and twenty-seven (27) policies. Housing Goal 1. To provide an adequate supply of housing to meet the diverse needs of the City’s current and projected households. Housing Policy 1.1. Continue to support new residential development at the new minimum residential densities. Finding, Housing Policy 1.1: Prior to annexation of any lands from the proposed UGB into the City limits, the City will update its residential land development codes as necessary to meet the minimum average density for the 2019-2039 planning period. This is a condition of the Regional Plan and the Regional Plan Element. Conclusion, Housing Policy 1.1: Complies as conditioned. Housing Policy 1.2. Develop a Housing Implementation Plan that is regularly updated based current market conditions. Finding, Housing Policy 1.2: The City adopted the Housing Implementation Plan (HIP) on December 13, 2018 (City Council Resolution No. 1560). The HIP sets forth a housing strategy for a 5-year period, 2019-2024. The proposed UGB Amendment implements Action No. 3.2.4 in the HIP, to include sufficient buildable residential lands in the UGB to accommodate the City’s housing needs and to plan in accordance with the approved Conceptual Land Use plans. Adoption of the proposed UGB Amendment furthers the goals of the HIP and does not interfere or otherwise conflict with the City’s policy to regularly update it based on current market conditions. Conclusion, Housing Policy 1.2: Consistent. Housing Policy 1.3. Provide an efficient and consistent development review process. Finding, Housing Policy 1.3: The City’s UGB Amendment application does not conflict or interfere with provision of an efficient and consistent development review process. Conclusion, Housing Policy 1.3: Not applicable. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 74 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Housing Policy 1.4. Work with regional partners to develop and implement measure that reduce upfront housing development costs. Finding, Housing Policy 1.4: The proposed UGB Amendment adds residential land needed to accommodate forecast growth during the 2019-2039 planning period. At present, there is a low supply of housing available that contributes to high cost. Although the UGB proposal doesn’t directly affect upfront cost, it provides a land supply that can better respond to market demand which supports any regional partnership to develop and implement measures that directly reduce upfront housing development cost. These efforts are not affected by the proposal. Conclusion, Housing Policy 1.4: Consistent. Housing Policy 1.5. Support UGB expansions and annexations that can be efficiently provided with urban services and that will in a timely manner meet the City’s housing needs. Finding, Housing Policy 1.5: The proposed UGB Amendment is designed to provide lands that can efficiently accommodate the City’s housing needs. This is demonstrated in the location analysis, which emphasizes the importance of connecting the east and west sides of the City in CP-2B while connecting this area with existing and future Activity Centers in the Eastside TOD and a School Activity Center on Upton Road to the west. The CP-6A expansion area connects the existing Twin Creeks TOD area with a new Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Center along Grant and Taylor Roads. Based on evaluation of the water system and sewer facilities by RVSS, all of these areas are serviceable by water and sewer. Taking all of these factors into account results in an area that can efficiently develop into livable neighborhoods that are walkable and connected to existing and future employment/service areas. Conclusion, Housing Policy 1.5: Consistent. Housing Policy 1.6. When properly mitigated to preserve the integrity of existing neighborhoods support higher density residential development within the Downtown and older surrounding residential areas, capitalizing on availability of existing infrastructure and supporting revitalization efforts. Finding, Housing Policy 1.6: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere or otherwise conflict with higher density infill developments within the downtown or older surrounding residential areas. Per the HIP and Residential BLI and Housing Elements, the City will be evaluating its land development codes following the UGB Amendment and prior to annexation to increase housing options and eliminate regulatory barriers to infill throughout the City, including the downtown and older areas of town. Conclusion, Housing Policy 1.6: Although the proposed UGB does not directly impact development in the downtown, its adoption and subsequent supporting code amendments support implementation of this policy and is therefore consistent with its intent. Housing Goal 2. To encourage the development and preservation of fair and affordable housing. Housing Policy 2.1. Through a Housing Implementation Plan explore and promote federal, state, and regional programs and incentives that support new affordable housing. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 75 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Housing Policy 2.1: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to explore and promote affordable housing programs. Conclusion, Housing Policy 2.1: Not applicable. Housing Policy 2.2. Support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan’s program addressing regional housing strategies, particularly as they apply to affordable housing. Finding, Housing Policy 2.2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan’s program addressing regional housing strategies, including affordable housing. Conclusion, Housing Policy 2.2: Not applicable. Housing Policy 2.3. Support regional efforts addressing homelessness, medical and social services for special need households. Finding, Housing Policy 2.3: The proposed UGB does not affect the City’s support for regional efforts to address homelessness or services for special needs households. Conclusion, Housing Policy 2.3: Not applicable. Housing Goal 3. To maintain a timely supply of vacant residential acres sufficient to accommodate development of new housing to serve the City’s projected population. Housing Policy 3.1. Provide a sufficient inventory of residential planned and zoned vacant land to meet projected demand in terms of density, tenure, unit size, accessibility, and cost. Finding, Housing Policy 3.1: The City’s UGB Amendment proposal responds to a current deficiency in housing and ability to accommodate additional housing over the 2019-2039 planning period. As demonstrated in the Housing Element, the City needs 410 gross acres of residential land at a minimum average density of 7.04 units/acre to provide 2,887 additional households by 2039. The Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) identifies 105 acres of buildable lands inside the current urban area leaving a need for 305 additional gross acres. The City’s UGB includes 332 gross acres/319 reasonably developable acres that are planned to include residential General Land Use Plan map designations that support a variety of housing types and at densities, sizes and price points to respond to demand over the planning period (Table 16). Based on the land use allocations and need to efficiently accommodate need, the minimum average density proposed exceeds the minimum commitment in the Regional Plan at 7.1 units per acre. The proposed UGB Amendment addresses the severity of the housing shortage and affordability concerns increasing its land supply and assigning land use designations that provide sufficient vacant acreage and support diverse housing types to meet forecast demand. Conclusion, Housing Policy 3.1: Consistent. Housing Policy 3.2. Throughout the 2019-2039 planning period the City’s new vacant residential land use mix shall support an average density of not less than 6.9 dwelling units per gross. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 76 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Housing Policy 3.2: Per the suggested minimum densities in the Land Use Element (Table 16), the proposed UGB Amendment proposes a land use mix that supports an average minimum density of 7.1 units per gross acre consistent with this policy. Conclusion, Housing Policy 3.2: Consistent. Housing Policy 3.3. Update the Housing Element’s vacant acreage needs every four-years consistent with the PSU Population Research Centers update of population. Finding, Housing Policy 3.3: The UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s schedule for updating the Housing Element. Conclusion, Housing Policy 3.3: Not applicable. Housing Policy 3.4. To avoid speculation the City shall, when expanding the UGB establish procedures that give priority to lands that will be developed in a timely manner and with a residential mix and density consistent with the Housing Element. Finding, Housing Policy 3.4: The Urbanization Element of the Comprehensive Plan adopted location criteria that establish the City’s priorities for selecting lands based on their ability to efficiently accommodate land needs identified in the Housing Element. These were applied when the City evaluated alternative boundary locations and selected a preferred alternative (Exhibit 5). Conclusion, Housing Policy 3.4: Consistent. Housing Policy 3.5. Monitor residential in-fill development activity and develop and enact programs that encourage the expanded use of in-fill as a component to the City’s residential land use inventory. Finding, Housing Policy 3.5: The UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s programs to expand infill development. Conclusion, Housing Policy 3.5: Not applicable. Housing Goal 4. To ensure that a variety of housing will be provided in the City in terms of location, type, price and tenure, according to the projected needs of the population. Housing Policy 4.1. Residential land use designations on the General Land Use Plan and the Zoning Map shall be compliant with the residential land use needs and housing types identified in the Housing Element. Finding, Housing Policy 4.1: The proposed land use designations for the UGB Amendment align with the land use and housing needs identified in the Housing Element. Pending approval of the City’s application, the proposed land use designations will be added to the General Land Use Plan Map in the Land Use Element. Conclusion, Housing Policy 4.1: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 77 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Housing Policy 4.2. Based on the findings of the Housing Implementation Plan incentivize housing types that are needed but not being provided in adequate numbers by the private sector market forces. Finding, Housing Policy 4.2: The UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to enact findings of the Housing Implementation Plan, including but not limited to incentives for underrepresented but needed housing types. Conclusion, Housing Policy 4.2: Not applicable. Housing Policy 4.3. In larger residential developments (in excess of 5 acres) encourage a mix of densities and housing types to accommodate a variety of households based on age and income levels. Finding, Housing Policy 4.3: The UGB Amendment proposal does not affect or otherwise preclude the City’s ability to regulate larger residential developments consistent with this policy and land development codes. Conclusion, Housing Policy 4.3: Not applicable. Housing Policy 4.4. Support programs that encourage the ability of older residents to age in place by making existing housing more age friendly and accessible. Finding, Housing Policy 4.4: The UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise preclude development and implementation of programs that encourage aging in place by making existing housing more age friendly. It does, however, create an opportunity for new housing to accommodate diverse needs. Conclusion, Housing Policy 4.4: Not applicable. Housing Goal 5. To ensure that municipal development procedures and standards are not unreasonable impediments to the provision of affordable housing. Housing Policy 5.1. As part of a Housing Implementation Plan periodically evaluate development procedures and standards for compliance with the goals of this Housing Element and modify as appropriate. Finding, Housing Policy 5.1: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise preclude the City’s ability to review and amend development procedures and standards for compliance with the Housing Element. Conclusion, Housing Policy 5.1: Not applicable. Housing Goal 6. To develop and maintain a Housing Implementation Plan that includes programs that monitor and address the housing affordability needs of the City’s low- and moderate-income households. Housing Policy 6.1. Support collaborative partnerships with non-profit organizations, affordable housing builders, and for-profit developers to gain greater access to various sources of affordable housing funds. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 78 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Housing Policy 6.1: The UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise preclude the City from supporting collaborative partnerships related to affordable housing programs. Conclusion, Housing Policy 6.1: Not applicable. Housing Policy 6.2. Support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan’s program addressing regional housing strategies. Finding, Housing Policy 6.2: The City participated in and continues to support the regional housing strategies program as evidenced by approval and implementation of the Housing Implementation Plan. The UGB Amendment application implements a strategy to provide a sufficient buildable residential land supply in the urban area. Supporting increased supply furthers the City’s efforts to address affordability concerns identified in the Housing Element. Conclusion, Housing Policy 6.2: Consistent. Housing Policy 6.3. Address the special housing needs of seniors through the provision of affordable housing and housing related services. Finding, Housing Policy 6.3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to address the special housing needs of seniors. Conclusion, Housing Policy 6.3: Not applicable. Housing Goal 7. To assure that residential development standards encourage and support attractive and healthy neighborhoods. Housing Policy 7.1. Encourage quality design throughout the City that acknowledges neighborhood character, provides balanced connectivity (multi-modal), and integrates recreational and open space opportunities. Finding, Housing Policy 7.1: The UGB Amendment does not directly affect design; however, it does include three (3) Activity Centers that are planned to be mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas (Figure 11). Per the Land Use Element and as described in Exhibit 5 under Goal 14 Factor 3, mixed-use/pedestrian friendly Activity Centers promote creation of complete and connected neighborhoods that provide multimodal transportation opportunities and mixed residential and commercial uses with parks and open space. Although this will be achieved through the development process, the City concludes that designating Activity Centers (i.e. mixed- use/pedestrian friendly areas) encourages the quality design envisioned by the Housing Element in this policy. Conclusion, Housing Policy 7.1: Consistent. Housing Policy 7.2. Provide flexible development standards for projects that exceed minimum standards for natural resource protection, open space, public gathering places, and energy efficiency. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 79 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Housing Policy 7.2: The UGB Amendment application does not affect or otherwise preclude the City’s ability to provide flexible development standards. Conclusion, Housing Policy 7.2: Not applicable. Housing Policy 7.3. Where appropriate encourage mixed uses at the neighborhood level that enhance the character and function of the neighborhood and reduce impacts on the City’s transportation system. Finding, Housing Policy 7.3: The UGB Amendment proposal includes two (2) Neighborhood Activity Centers designed to provide a mix of residential and neighborhood scale retail and service uses. These are located in CP-2B and CP-6A to provide connections between existing and planned Activity Centers and to connect the City’s UGB boundary. The City’s inclusion of Mixed- use/pedestrian friendly Activity Centers supports and encourages neighborhood level mixed use. Conclusion, Housing Policy 7.3: Consistent. Housing Policy 7.4. Support minimum parking standards for multiple family development served by public transit. Finding, Housing Policy 7.4: The UGB Amendment does not affect the minimum parking standards in the land development code. Conclusion, Housing Policy 7.4: Not applicable. Housing Policy 7.5. Maintain and enforce Chapter 17.71 Agricultural Mitigation ensuring that all new residential development along the periphery of the Urban Growth Boundary includes an adequate buffer between the urban uses and abutting agricultural uses on lands zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). Finding, Housing Policy 7.5: All lands within the proposed UGB expansion areas will be subject to Chapter 17.71 Agricultural Mitigation procedures and standards. The UGB proposal does not preclude the City’s ability to maintain and enforce the regulations in this Chapter. Conclusion, Housing Policy 7.5: Consistent. Economic Element The Economic Element provide s a framework for meeting the City’s economic goal to diversity its economic base. Economic Element Goals: 1. To actively promote a strong, diversified and sustainable local economy that reinforces Central Point’s “small town feel” and family orientation while preserving or enhancing the quality of life in the community as a place to live, work and play. Because this Economic Element concludes that there will be economic uncertainty in the short- term, it is important that Central Point work to diversify and strengthen its economy. By 7.A.b Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 80 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions continuing to analyze economic trends, Central Point will be able to continue growing strong throughout the 2019-2039 period. 2. To create meaningful incentives to encourage and support economic development. Central Point has historically been a bedroom community where people live but work elsewhere. In order to maintain a strong tax base and to ensure continued economic prosperity, Central Point must take an active role in encouraging economic development. 3. To encourage and promote the development, redevelopment, and enhancement of retail and office areas to achieve a vibrant shopping entertainment, living and working experience in the downtown area. This goal is important because Central Point needs a vibrant downtown in order to ensure future economic prosperity. Further, based on the current BLI and the project land use needs, Central Point is going to need targeted redevelopment strategies to encourage these types of activities in the future. 4. To encourage active communication and cooperation between the City, local and state agencies, and local businesses concerning economic development, education and workforce development. The city cannot reach its goals without the assistance of others. As a result, the City needs to be receptive to suggestions and aid from others and also needs to be active in communicating its needs and plans. 5. To encourage and support growth, particularly in the targeted industries (specialty food manufacturing, and trucking and warehousing sectors). These targeted industries are where the City could make strikes. It is important that the City help maintain and grow these industries now and in the future. 6. To maintain at all times an adequate supply of suitable short-term (five-year) employment lands. Central Point does not have an adequate short-term supply of lands for institutional/government and other employment types. As a result, the City should plan to add to the land supply in the near future. 7. To prepare and maintain a City of Central Point Economic Development Manual identifying and monitoring economic development strategies and programs available to the City. 8. Create a positive environment for industrial, commercial and institutional job growth and development by maintaining an adequate land supply; providing a local development review process that is predicable, responsive, and efficient; and delivering high quality public facilities and services. 9. Assure, through the UGB process, that adequate commercial lands are planned and designated for the development of pedestrian oriented neighborhood commercial centers to serve the City’s new residential neighborhoods. The Economic Element Goals are implemented through the following ten (10) policies: Economic Policy 1, Participation. The City shall participate on the regional and state level in the development and programming of alternative financial incentives and initiatives for economic development, including education and workforce development that are consistent with the City’s economic development goals. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 81 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Economic Policy 1: The City’s proposed UGB Amendment does not preclude or otherwise conflict with the City’s participation on the regional or state level in development and programming for financial incentives and initiative for economic development. Conclusion Economic Policy 1: Not applicable. Economic Policy 2, Refine Policies. The City shall continue to monitor and refine its land development and fiscal policies as they relate to economic development to ensure that the City’s economic development programming can be effectively implemented. Finding, Economic Policy 2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere with or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to monitor and refine policies relative to economic development. Conclusion Economic Policy 2: Not applicable. Economic Policy 3, Monitor Long-Term Consequences. Consider economic development incentives as an inducement to development only when it can be demonstrated that the short-term consequences are understood and found to be acceptable and the long-term consequences are determined to be beneficial to the City. Finding, Economic Policy 3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere with or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to consider or implement incentives for beneficial economic development. Conclusion Economic Policy 3: Not applicable. Economic Policy 4, Small Business. Central Point concludes that the City has experienced the loss of cottage industry and expanding small businesses due to a lack of vacant available employment related buildings (flex-space21) and the City cannot attract small businesses from elsewhere for the same reason. Finding, Economic Policy 4: The proposed UGB Amendment adds 35 acres of land for General Commercial and Neighborhood use, which increases the available land supply needed to construct more flex space that can be used for small business growth. Although the addition of employment lands do not result in the immediate construction of needed building space, the proposed UGB Amendment supports more of these activities as necessary to address the loss of cottage industry and expanding small businesses. Conclusion Economic Policy 4: Consistent. Economic Policy 5, Business Innovation. Encourage innovation, research, development, and commercialization of new technologies, products and services through responsive regulations and public sector approaches. Finding, Economic Policy 5: Business innovation activities by the City are not affected or impeded by the proposed UGB Amendment. Conclusion Economic Policy 5: Not applicable. 21 An industrial or commercial/office building designed to provide the flexibility to utilize the floor space in a variety of configurations. Usually provides a configuration allowing a flexible amount of office or showroom space in combination with manufacturing, laboratory, warehouse distribution, etc. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 82 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Economic Policy 6, Tolo Area. The City shall in collaboration with Jackson County continue planning the Exit 35 area—also called “Area CP-1B (Tolo)”—in the Regional Plan Element to capitalize on economic opportunities, especially for transportation-based economic activity and truck/rail freight support services. This area also contains the aeronautics manufacturing company Erickson Air Crane and serves aggregate uses; these uses have many specific and unique dimensions that should be carefully considered. Plans and land use regulations applicable to this area need to account for the site requirements of firms in these sectors. Because the area is currently constrained as a result of a lack of access to water, the City should begin planning how to make water more readily available so as to make these lands available for more economic development. Finding, Economic Policy 6: The CP-1B Tolo area is not being proposed for inclusion in the UGB since lands recently added to the UGB have not been annexed and water has not yet been extended to serve the area. The proposed UGB Amendment into other URAs for residential, commercial and parks uses does not affect the City’s ability to develop and implement plans in this area. Conclusion Economic Policy 6: Not applicable. Economic Policy 7, Monitor Regulations. The City shall periodically evaluate its regulations for employment related development, particularly as it relates to targeted industries, as well as compatibility with adjacent non-employment lands to ensure that regulations are consistent with applicable best practices. Regulations found to no longer be appropriate should be amended as soon as practicable thereafter. Finding, Economic Policy 7: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere with other otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to evaluate and update its land development regulations relative to employment uses. Conclusion Economic Policy 7: Not applicable. Economic Policy 8, Adequate Short-Term Supply. The City shall assure that, through its Capital Improvement Program, public facilities and transportation facilities are available and adequate in capacity to maintain a supply of competitive short-term buildable lands sufficient to meet employment needs within a 5-year period, particularly for the retail, specialty foods, professional health care and trucking sectors. Finding, Economic Policy 8: Pending approval of the UGB Amendment, the City will complete updates to its public facility plans to assure that there will be adequate facilities to serve growth over the 20-year planning period. As stated in this application and required by annexation regulations, the City will complete these plans prior to annexation of lands newly added to the UGB. Conclusion Economic Policy 8: Complies as conditioned. . Economic Policy 9, Prepare for Long-Term Needs. The City shall maintain a supply of competitive short-term employment lands in the medium and large site categories equivalent to the twenty-year demand for those categories. The supply of short-term employment land shall be reviewed and updated annually. When it is determined that the supply of land as measured in terms of the number of sites and/or acreage in the medium and large site categories is inadequate to serve the twenty-year land needs, then the City shall amend the UGB to include additional short-term (5-year) employment lands. Finding, Economic Policy 9: The proposed UGB Amendment adds 35 acres of employment lands, including 18 acres within the medium and large site office/service/retail category and 13 acres of 7.A.b Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 83 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions medium to large site neighborhood commercial that can accommodate the same uses. As demonstrated in Table _, this satisfies the City’s short-term employment land needs in these categories. Conclusion Economic Policy 9: Economic Policy 10, Pedestrian Oriented Neighborhood Commercial Centers. As the City expands the UGB it will include in the land use mix adequate commercial lands for the development of Pedestrian Oriented Commercial Centers designed to complement the physical character and encourage neighborhood pedestrian use. Adequacy of the acreage needed for Pedestrian Oriented Commercial Centers will be guided by the Regional Plan land use allocation. Finding, Economic Policy 10: The Regional Plan specifies the land use distribution for each of Central Point’s URA relative to the reasonably developable acreage. The City allocated its employment land uses in the Conceptual Land Use plans for each URA consistent with the targets in Regional Plan. Since the proposed UGB Amendment includes only a portion of the four (4) URAs, the acreages and percentage distribution of the commercial lands reflects what is spatially appropriate to serve the proposed Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas (i.e. Pedestrian Oriented Centers), including surrounding residential neighborhoods. Additional Pedestrian Oriented Centers will be included when there is a land need and as supported by the Regional Plan. Conclusion Economic Policy 10: Consistent. Parks Element The Parks Element sets forth six (6) goals and associated policies addressing: 1) Community Engagement and Communication, 2) Recreation Programming, 3) Parks and Open Space, 4) Trails and Pathways, 5) Design, Development and Management; and 6) Facilities Development Planning. The following two (2) policies apply to the UGB Amendment Proposal: 3.1, and 3.2 addressing parks and open space service standards, access and location. Parks and Open Space Policy 3.1. Provide a level of service standard of 3.5 acres per 1,000 residents of developed core parks (community, neighborhood and pocket parks). Finding, Parks and Open Space Policy 3.1: Per the Parks Element of the Central Point Comprehensive Plan, the City proposes inclusion of 55 acres of core park land including Boes Park in CP-4D and parks in CP-2B and CP-6A that will be generally located in accordance with Figure 4 with final locations determined as a function of development. Pending amendment of the UGB and build out, the City is positioned to meet its performance standard for core parks. Conclusion, Parks and Open Space Policy 3.1: Consistent. Parks and Open Space Policy 3.2 Strive to provide equitable access to parks such that all city residents live within one-half mile of a developed neighborhood park. Finding, Parks and Open Space Policy 3.2: Figure 4 identifies core parkland needs based on ¼, ½, and 1 mile walksheds. The proposed UGB Amendment aims to locate core parks within ½ mile of all city residents to provide equitable access. Conclusion, Parks and Open Space Policy 3.2: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 84 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Land Use Element The Land Use Element is responsible for managing and mapping the land use needs of the City as described in other Comprehensive Plan elements. The Land Use Element sets forth goals and policies for Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Civic, Parks and Recreation and Circulation land uses. Since this UGB Amendment does not include industrial lands, the policies for industrial lands are not addressed in these findings. Residential Land Use Policy 1: To continue to ensure that long-range planning and zoning reflects the need to locate the highest densities and greatest numbers of residents in closest possible proximity to existing and future activity centers. Finding, Residential Land Use Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment includes three (3) new Activity Centers (i.e. Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas), including Neighborhood Activity Centers in CP-2B and CP-6A and a Community Activity Center in CP-3. The Activity Centers in CP-2B and CP-3 are proximate to and connected to the existing Eastside Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District, an RVMPPO Activity Center. The Activity Center in CP-6A connects to the Twin Creeks TOD Activity Center. Land use designations proposed by the UGB Amendment are consistent with this policy to increases the number of people living near and within these Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. Conclusion, Residential Land Use Policy 1: Consistent. Residential Land Use Policy 2: To continue to update the Zoning Ordinance, as necessary to take advantage of planning innovation, best practices, and technological improvements that could have applications in Central Point to the benefit of the community. Finding, Residential Land Use Policy 2: As stated in this UGB Amendment application, the City proposes to amend its residential development codes to adopt minimum density consistent with the Regional Plan average minimum density commitment for the 2019-2039 planning period. Additionally, the City will consider new innovative housing types identified in the Housing Implementation Plan including Cottage Clusters. Although the City’s UGB proposal does not include these changes, the update to residential land use and development codes is required as a condition of annexation per the Regional Plan. Conclusion, Residential Land Use Policy 2: Complies as conditioned. Residential Land Use Policy 3: In areas where residential neighborhoods abut commercial or industrial areas, orient the residential structures and local streets away from these land uses to avoid any undesirable views and to strengthen neighborhood solidarity. Finding, Residential Land Use Policy 3: The UGB expansion areas include Neighborhood Commercial lands adjacent to residential zones as needed to create Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers. Orientation of streets and residential buildings will be determined following annexation as a function of the master planning process set forth in CPMC 17.66. The City will amend the code as needed to assure this process applies to all land within Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas, including lands in the Residential Low Density (LRes) land use designation. Conclusion, Residential Land Use Policy 3: Consistent. Residential Land Use Policy 4: In any area where development of one or more parcels may create obstacles to development of others, the initial developer shall develop a specific plan that would provide 7.A.b Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 85 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions for the future development of the entire area, including provision of adequate access to potentially landlocked properties. Finding, Residential Land Use Policy 4: Through Conceptual Land Use and Transportation Planning for the URAs, the City has identified significant street infrastructure. This includes a new east/west connection between Upton and Gebhard Road in CP-2B, extension of Beebe to Peninger, in CP-3, realignment of Gebhard Road and extension of Twin Creeks Crossing to the west in CP-6A. Once lands are annexed into the City limits, local street networks and property access will be determined through the master planning process in all areas planned to be within a Mixed- use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers. As provided in CPMC 17.66, master plans include a Circulation Plan not just for the area being planned but also for neighborhood connectivity. Although the proposed UGB Amendment does not directly affect the City’s ability to assure access to all properties through the development process, the master plan regulations in place will assure it complies with this standard. Conclusion, Residential Land Use Policy 4: Consistent. Commercial Land Use Policy 1: Maintain the zoning of all commercial areas of Central Point as necessary to comply with the Economic Element. Finding, Commercial Land Use Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect commercial lands inside the current urban area and does not prevent or otherwise interfere with the City’s maintenance of commercially zoned land. Conclusion, Commercial Land Use Policy 1: Not applicable. Commercial Land Use Policy 2: Undertake an in-depth study of the downtown business district and develop a comprehensive improvement plan that would include such considerations as traffic circulation and off-street parking, pedestrian and bicycle facilities and access, structural design guidelines, and guidelines for landscaping and signing. Finding, Commercial Land Use Policy 2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s plans to study the Central Business District. Conclusion, Commercial Land Use Policy 2: Not applicable. Commercial Land Use Policy 3: Encourage the development of shared commercial parking areas in the downtown area to be carried out by the local businesses with City assistance. Finding, Commercial Land Use Policy 3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect lands or development regulations in the Central Business District. Conclusion, Commercial Land Use Policy 3: Not applicable. Commercial Land Use Policy 4: Promote the planned integration of abutting commercial development for the purpose of more efficient customer parking, better design and landscaping, coordinated signing, and increased retail sales. Finding, Commercial Land Use Policy 4: Commercial development within the proposed UGB will be sited and regulated in accordance with development standards that implement the City’s policy to integrate abutting commercial developments. The UGB Amendment in and of itself does not affect the City’s development regulations. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 86 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion, Commercial Land Use Policy 4: Not applicable. Commercial Land Use Policy 5: For that section of Highway 99 between Beall Lane and the High School, implement the 99 Corridor Plan to improve the corridor, traffic circulation, and the overall visual and aesthetic character of the area. Finding, Commercial Land Use Policy 5: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise preclude the City’s ability to implement the Highway 99 Corridor Plan. Conclusion, Commercial Land Use Policy 5: Not applicable. Civic Land Use Policy 1: Ensure that any major public or quasi-public facility that is proposed to be located within a residential neighborhood is located along a collector or Arterial Street, is compatible with surrounding land uses, and does not contribute unreasonably to traffic volumes within the neighborhood. Finding, Civic Land Use Policy 1: Civic lands proposed in CP-2B are adjacent to Gebhard Road, a County Collector proposed for jurisdictional transfer as part of this UGB application. Pending annexation and development, the street will be upgraded to urban Collector standards. Conclusion, Civic Land Use Policy 1: Civic lands have been sited consistent with this policy. Civic Land Use Policy 2: Work with officials of School District #6 to develop and implement a school site acquisition program that is consistent with the long-range comprehensive plans of the City and the District. Finding, Civic Land Use Policy 2: School District 6 has a land bank for future school sites. Conceptual Land Use and Transportation Plans prepared for the URAs provide land use that is consistent with school uses for these sites. No sites are proposed as part of this UGB Amendment. Consequently, this application does not affect or otherwise preclude the City and School District #6 from continuing to work together on long-range planning and school site acquisition. Conclusion, Civic Land Use Policy 2: Not applicable. Civic Land Use Policy 3: Continue to emphasize the need for pedestrian and bicycle access to all public facilities and areas frequented by local residents. Finding, Civic Land Use Policy 3: The UGB Amendment proposal includes Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers that are by their nature designed to encourage safe, convenient and comfortable walking and bicycling facilities as part of the street network. Conclusion, Civic Land Use Policy 3: Consistent. Parks and Recreation Land Use Policy 1: Whenever possible, encourage the location of public park sites adjacent to public school sites to establish neighborhood educational/recreational “centers” that can benefit by joint utilization of both types of facilities. Finding, Parks and Recreation Land Use Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment includes 55 acres of land for parks. To avoid takings concerns, parks locations will be determined as a function of development during the master planning process consistent with the Parks Element and this policy. Conclusion, Parks and Recreation Land Use Policy 1: Consistent. Circulation Land Use Policy 1: Prior to inclusion of lands from the URAs into the UGB a traffic impact analysis shall be completed to determine level of service at time of development. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 87 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Circulation Land Use Policy 1: Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC prepared a Traffic Impact Analysis for the UGB Amendment. It shows that the level of service at the time of build out can meet the applicable performance standards/level of service for City, County and State transportation facilities with mitigation. It is included as an attachment to Exhibit 5. Conclusion, Circulation Land Use Policy : Consistent. Regional Plan Element The Regional Plan Element adopts the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, which established eight (8) URAs in Central Point and sets forth Performance Indicators to implement a regional growth management strategy. The UGB Amendment has been prepared consistent with the applicable performance indicators. The findings and conclusions for the Regional Plan Element are set forth in the Regional Plan Progress Report, Exhibit 7. Environmental Management Element The Environmental Management Element is comprised of eleven areas of environmental concern and six goals. Each of the eleven areas is guided by a series of implementation policies. The proposed UGB Amendment has been reviewed for compliance with each of these areas of environmental concern and their related policies as follows: 1. Air Quality a. Transportation Policies b. Industrial Policies c. Land Use Policies 2. Water Resources 3. Waste Water 4. Agricultural Lands 5. Mineral Resources 6. Open Space and Scenic Resources 7. Flood Hazard Reduction 8. Geologic Hazards 9. Soils and Engineering 10. Noise 11. Historic Resources Findings, Environmental Policies, Air Quality Air quality related environmental policies are presented in three parts; Transportation, Industrial, and Land Use. 1. Policies, Air Quality, Transportation (Number of Policies – 6) 1. The City of Central Point shall provide for employment, shopping, and recreational opportunities and public services in locations as close as practicable to new and existing residential uses. Finding, Air Quality Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment includes general land use designations that support a mix of uses in walking distance to higher density residential areas, including CP-2B, CP-3 and CP-6A. As shown in Figure 11, these are also designated as Mixed-use/Pedestrian friendly Activity Centers that by their definition aim 7.A.b Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 88 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions to support multiple modes of transportation and reduce vehicle miles traveled. . This is consistent with both the Regional Transportation Plan and the City’s Transportation System Plan Alternative Measure to increase the use of mixed-use/pedestrian-friendly development (see Findings, Transportation System Plan). Conclusion Air Quality Policy 1: Consistent 2. The City shall provide bicycle lanes as new streets are built or old streets are resurfaced, whenever possible, and promote the use of bicycles as an alternative to the family car. Finding, Air Quality Policy 2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect current street standards, which include provisions for bicycle lanes. Conclusion Air Quality Policy 2: Not applicable. 3. The City will consider local code revisions to require as much insulation as reasonably achievable in new development in order to reduce overall heating requirements. Finding, Air Quality Policy 3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect implementation of local codes regulating insulation. Conclusion, Air Quality Policy 3: Not Applicable 4. The City will continue to enforce existing rules pertaining to the open burning of construction and agricultural waste. Finding, Air Quality Policy 4: The proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect implementation of local codes regulating open burning. Conclusion, Air Quality Policy 4: Not Applicable 5. The City will continue to promote quality and appropriate location for new industrial development to ensure that it is adequately buffered, as necessary, and, whenever possible, is downwind from residences, parks, schools, etc. Finding, Air Quality Policy 5: The proposed UGB Amendment does not include, nor is it adjacent to industrially zoned lands. Conclusion Air Quality Policy 5: Not Applicable 6. The City will consider the adoption of an ordinance aimed at reducing the tracking of dirt and mud from construction sites onto public streets and highways. Finding, Air Quality Policy 6: The proposed UGB Amendment does not include, nor does it affect the City’s ability to regulate tracking of dirt and mud from construction sites onto public streets. Conclusion, Air Quality Policy 6: Not Applicable 2. Policies, Air Quality, Industrial (Number of Policies – 6) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 89 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions The proposed UGB Amendment does not include and is not adjacent to industrial lands; therefore the Industrial Air Quality policies do not apply and are not addressed further in these findings. 3. Policies, Air Quality, Land Use (Number of Policies – 3) 1. Land use policies will assist in minimizing conflicts among various land uses. Finding, Air Quality Land Use Policy 1: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not cause or otherwise aggravate conflicts between land uses. As lands are annexed into the City and zoning applied, new developments will be subject to land development procedures, criteria and standards that will address the relationship between proposed and existing land uses, and identify and mitigate conflicts as necessary to enhance neighborhood livability. Conclusion, Air Quality Land Use Policy 1: Consistent 2. Air quality improvements can be achieved indirectly through such energy conservation practices as conversion to solar heating, which would reduce reliance on wood heating, a major source of particulates. Finding, Air Quality Land Use Policy 2: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect development standards related to air quality. Conclusion, Air Quality Land Use Policy 2: Not applicable. 3. Central Point should plan future development to separate major air pollution sources from residential, educational, and recreational land uses. Finding, Air Quality Land Use Policy 3: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect development standards related to sources of air pollution. Conclusion, Air Quality Land Use Policy 3: Not Applicable 4. Environmental Policies, Water Resources (Number of Policies – 1) 1. Central Point should begin its own water conservation program immediately by (1) requiring low flow water devices for all new construction and (2) working with the Oregon State Extension Service (OSES), Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), and other agencies on programs to reduce water usage and waste. Finding, Water Resources Policy 1: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not supersede or otherwise modify current water conservation regulations/programs. Conclusion, Water Resources Policy 1: Not Applicable 5. Environmental Policies, Waste Water (Number of Policies – 8) 1. Support the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority’s efforts to expand sanitary sewer lines to areas of greatest need and coordination within Central Point’s Plan. Finding, Waste Water Policy 1: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not supersede or otherwise conflict with the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority’s (now known as Rogue Valley Sewer Services) planning, construction, and operation of the waste water system. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 90 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion Waste Water Policy 1: Not Applicable 2. Support expansion of the Medford Regional Treatment Plant’s capacity as necessary to meet increases in flows from increased population and industrial growth throughout the valley. Finding, Wastewater Policy 2: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not diminish the City’s support for the continued expansion of the Regional Treatment plant as necessary to meet increasing demand. Additionally, as shown in Exhibit 5, the City coordinated with RVSS and there is adequate capacity in the Regional Treatment Plan to treat wastewater generated by forecast growth in the proposed UGB. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 2: Consistent. 3. Discourage industrial development having unusually toxic effluent generation, unless the proposed industry in cooperation with the Regional Treatment Plant, provides all required pretreatment prior to discharge into sewer lines. Finding, Wastewater Policy 3: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not include, nor is it adjacent to industrially zoned/planned land uses. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 3: Not Applicable 4. Begin a program of sewer reconstruction to replace old deteriorated pipe and joints with new lines of appropriate size and capacity to serve existing needs and future demand. Finding, Wastewater Policy 4: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to reconstruct/replace old deteriorated sanitary sewer lines. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 4: Not Applicable 5. Support the Rogue Valley Council of Governments in its efforts to reduce non-point water pollution sources, including efforts in conjunction with the Bear Creek Greenway. Finding, Wastewater Policy 5: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to participate in programs to reduce non-point water pollution sources. Additionally the City has a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II permit from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). This permit allows the City to discharge non-point source pollution into Central Point’s waterways provided that certain standards are met, including but not limited to post-development non-point source pollution reduction requirements per the Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual. Following annexation, all new development proposals within the UGB expansion areas will be subject to the City’s Stormwater Management Program requirements to minimize and treat non-point source pollution. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 5: Consistent. 6. Since urbanization is not to occur prior to annexation to the City, new septic systems will be permitted within the urbanizable area only for agricultural and rural residential type uses that are located on lands suitable for such systems, with the understanding that the owner must convert to the City’s sewer system when urban growth reaches the property and facilities are available. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 91 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Wastewater Policy 6: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not supersede or otherwise modify current requirements to connect to a sewer system. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 6: Not Applicable 7. Support Jackson County and the State Department of Geology and Mineral Industries in their efforts to control pollution from mining, quarry operations and aggregate removal activities. Finding, Wastewater Policy 7: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not regulate, endorse, or otherwise support mining, quarry operation, or aggregate removal. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 7: Not Applicable 8. Complete the already initiated project of separating storm sewers from the sanitary system within the City and continue the separation in all new development. Finding, Wastewater Policy 8: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to continue efforts to separate the storm sewers from sanitary sewers system. Conclusion, Wastewater Policy 8: Not Applicable Policies, Agricultural Lands 6. General Policies (Number of Policies – 3) 1. Central Point will continue its existing policy of supporting agricultural land use as long as practicable, in accordance with the urbanization policies of this Plan. Finding, Agricultural General Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment includes land zoned for Exclusive Agricultural Use (EFU) in all of the proposed expansion areas. The ultimate conversion of these lands for urban use will occur only following request for and approval of annexation. Until that time, the City will continue to abide by the policies in the UGBMA that promote existing agricultural land uses through incentives and zoning until such time it is deemed by the owner to be economically infeasible to continue (Exhibit 4, UGBMA). The UGB Amendment does not change or interfere with the continued implementation of the UGBMA. Conclusion, Agricultural General Policy 1: Consistent 2. Every effort will be made to reduce urban/agricultural conflicts by: a. Discouraging “leap-frog” development that is inconsistent with urbanization policies dealing with the phasing of development. b. Providing appropriate buffers between urban land uses and intensive agricultural uses, with emphasis on the periphery of the Urban Growth Boundary. c. Supporting efforts by the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) and the Jackson County Soil and Water Conservation District (JSWCD) to promote Best Management Practices (BPM’s) reducing soil erosion and excessive irrigation runoff. Finding, Agricultural General Policy 2(a-c): The proposed UGB Amendment discourages leap frog development by selecting lands that are: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 92 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Adjacent or proximate to the existing UGB (all expansion areas); Connect existing UGB boundaries that are separated by rural and agricultural lands (CP-2B); Connect existing and future planned Activity Centers (CP-2B with the ETOD; CP-3 with the ETOD and CP-6A with Twin Creeks TOD.) Additionally land brought into the UGB as a result of this application will be subject to agricultural buffering standards set forth in CPMC 17.71, Agricultural Mitigation following annexation and at the time of development. Conclusion, Agricultural General Policy 2(a-c): Consistent 3. Because of the nature and intent of the Urban Growth Boundary decisions, agricultural policies will necessarily differ for lands inside and outside the established boundary. Finding, Agricultural General Policy 3: The proposed UGB Amendment is to include lands outside the City’s current UGB. Until annexation, these lands will be governed by the UGBMA between the City and County. Following annexation, they will comply with City policies to buffer against intensive agricultural uses including the Regional Plan Element’s agricultural buffering standards (see Findings, Regional Plan Element). Conclusion Agricultural General Policy 3: Consistent 7. UGB Agricultural (Number of Policies – 7) 1. Urban growth should first occur on vacant lands within the City limits. Annexations to Central Point should occur only after it can be demonstrated that the proposed land use is valuable to the City, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and will be properly serviced. In addition: a. Annexations should be contiguous to the City. b. Annexations should round out existing City limits irregularities that are presently causing some agricultural lands to be impacted from more than one direction. c. Annexations should reduce boundaries irregularities and should not be allowed to extend “urban arms” which could dramatically increase urban/agricultural conflicts. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 1(a-c): The proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect the City’s current urbanization or annexation policies. As demonstrated in these findings, the UGB amendment is needed to accommodate the City’s land needs for housing, jobs and parks and recreation since there is not adequate vacant buildable lands in the current UGB. Annexations will be subject to the City’s procedures and requirements for annexations per CPMC 17.05.100, Table 17.05.1. These regulations implement this policy and state requirements for annexation. Conclusion UGB Agricultural Policy 1(a-c): Consistent. 2. The policies pertaining to the phasing of growth and development within the UGB should be publicized and should indicate which areas should be developed first, etc. This will allow growers to plan their field improvements and ultimate conversions in a timely 7.A.b Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 93 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions manner, according to the phasing plans of the City. This will also help to keep land speculation to a minimum. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 2: The proposed UGB Expansion areas will be subject to the City’s annexation procedures and criteria per CPMC 17.05.100, Table 17.05.1 and state requirements for annexation per ORS 222.11 to 222.180. The UGB Amendment application does not affect or otherwise preclude compliance with these priorities or requirements. Conclusion, UGB Agricultural Policy 2: Consistent 3. No new roads will be constructed within the UGB which bisect existing agricultural lands, unless it can serve as a buffer between existing agricultural use and new urban development. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 3: Planned future road improvements in the proposed UGB expansion areas, including agricultural lands, will be constructed following annexation and as a function of development. Conclusion, UGB Agricultural Policy 3: Consistent 4. As Central Point grows to near total urbanization of lands within the UGB, consideration will be given to the establishment of a “permanent” buffer between urban and agricultural uses such as: a. Agriculture-related industry along portions of the boundary that are not planned for further urban expansion. b. Permanent open space or conservation areas, possibly designed for certain recreational activities, such as trails. c. Residential rear yard setbacks of a distance determined to be adequate to minimize urban/agricultural conflicts, where residential development backs up to agriculture lands. In some cases, a peripheral road may be appropriate to define portions of the UGB and provide access to both urban and farm areas. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 4(a-c): Agricultural lands inside the proposed UGB expansion areas will be subject to Agricultural Mitigation procedures and regulations established pursuant to the Regional Plan Element. These are contained in CPMC 17.71. Conclusion, UGB Agricultural Policy 4(a-c): Consistent 5. Agricultural uses will be strongly encouraged to remain in certain airport impact areas that are not suitable for urban development, particularly along runway approach corridors and safety or noise impact areas. Special consideration should be allowed in all areas east of Hamrick Road. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 5: The proposed UGB Expansion Areas are west of Table Rock Road and are not affected by airport impacted areas other than the general avigation area, which covers most of the City. Conclusion, UGB Agricultural Policy 5: Not applicable 7.A.b Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 94 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 6. Agriculture-related industry will be encouraged in locations having easy access to farmlands and with good transportation access to the freeway and railroad. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 6: The UGBMA between the City and County governs management of urbanizable lands in the UGB. As demonstrated in the UGBMA (Exhibit 4), the proposed UGB Amendment does not discourage agricultural-related uses within the UGB. To the contrary, the UGBMA states that ‘lands within the urbanizable area that currently support farm use shall be encouraged through zoning and tax incentives to remain as long as economically feasible.’ The UGBMA adds urbanizable land to the current urban area and retains County zoning until such time a property owner requests annexation and demonstrates compliance with the City’s annexation requirements. This is sufficient to encourage agricultural activities and industry in the proposed UGB. Conclusion UGB Agricultural Policy 6: Consistent. 7. Recognized farming organizations such as the Farm Bureau Farm Business Club, Fruit Growers League, Stockman’s Association and others will be notified when major development activities and growth policy decisions are being considered that could significantly affect continued agricultural productivity. Finding, UGB Agricultural Policy 7: The proposed UGB Amendment will not cause changes in land use policy that will impact agricultural productivity. Additionally, the City will provide notification of the proposed UGB Amendment consistent with the Land Use Application Review Procedures in CPMC 17.05 and any additional standards in the Jackson County LDO. Conclusion UGB Agricultural Policy 7: Not applicable 8. Mineral Resources (Number of Policies – 1) 1. In consideration of the existing and potential mineral resources within the Central Point UGB, the City’s intent to support viable mineral resource management is as follows: a. For lands within the City Limits, Central Point will consider applicable land use control through zoning and use permit conditions to protect the viability of good mineral resource management in proportion to the anticipated long term productivity of the site. Finding, Mineral Resources Policy 1a: The proposed UGB Amendment will not cause changes in land use policy that will impact mineral resource management. Conclusion, Mineral Resources Policy 1a: Not Applicable b. For lands within the UGB but outside the City limits, Central Point will cooperate with the County in the administration of its Aggregate Removal Ordinance and appropriate sections of the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan. Finding, Policy 1b: The proposed UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s relationship with the County relative to aggregate removal. Conclusion: Not applicable 7.A.b Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 95 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 9. Open Space and Scenic Resources (Number of Policies – 1) 1. To preserve the existing scenic qualities and amenities and to ensure that future growth and development results in an increasingly attractive community, in harmony with the natural environment. Finding, Open Space and Scenic Resources Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise preclude regulation of future development within the proposed UGB expansion areas to preserve open space and scenic resources. This will occur following annexation. Conclusion Open Space and Scenic Resources Policy 1: Not applicable. 10. Flood Hazard Reduction (Number of Policies – 2) 1. Central point will continue to support and fully comply with all applicable provisions of the FFIPAP, including: a. Establishing elevations for 100 year and 500 year flooding; b. Prohibit new construction within the 100 year flood areas unless the first occupiable floor is above the 100 year flood elevation, or flood control structures (dikes, etc.) are built to provide adequate protection to the development, and c. Prohibiting activities within the 100 year flood zone which in any way aggravates flood hazards by either filling available flood retention areas (thus displacing flood water on to other areas) or inhibiting the flow of natural drainage areas. Finding, Flood Hazard Reduction Policy 1(a-c): The proposed UGB Amendment includes limited lands within the 100-year flood zones. These are located on lands designated as Bear Creek Greenway and Parks and Open Space. All activities on these lands will be subject to the City’s flood hazard regulations (CPMC 8.24). The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise preclude the City’s ability to enforce these regulations once they are annexed into the City limits. Conclusion, Flood Hazard Reduction Policy 1(a-c): Not applicable. 2. Central point will continue to cooperate with Jackson County to provide the same degree of flood hazard reduction planning and implementation outside the City limits but within the UGB. Finding, Policy 2: The lands added to the UGB per this application will remain under the County’s jurisdiction until annexation. During the interim, Central Point will continue to coordinate with the County regarding any proposed development activities pursuant to the policies in the UGBMA relative to flood hazard reduction planning (Exhibit 4). Conclusion: Consistent. 11. Geologic Hazard (Number of Policies – 4) 1. In conjunction with the flood hazard reduction and established Greenway policies, Central Point will encourage all new construction to set back a minimum of 100 feet from 7.A.b Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 96 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions the primary floodway of Bear Creek and 50 feet back from the edge of banks along Jackson and Griffin Creeks, to ensure protection from slope stability problems in the UGB area. Finding, Geologic Hazard Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment does not waive, or otherwise modify, the setback standards from Bear Creek and Jackson and Griffin Creeks. Conclusion, Geologic Hazard Policy 1: Not Applicable 2. Central Point will encourage and support the expansion of the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority sewer lines wherever septic tank failures are evident. Finding, Geologic Hazard Policy 2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not preclude, or otherwise interfere with, the City’s continued support of the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority’s (now known as Rogue Valley Sewer Services) sanitary sewer system. Conclusion, Geologic Policy 2: Not Applicable 3. The City will require that a registered geologist review all projects proposed in areas subject to potential slope instability or stream bank erosion problems. Finding, Policy 3: The proposed UGB Amendment includes lands that are generally flat with slopes not greater than 3%. Notwithstanding the proposal does not preclude, or otherwise interfere with, the City’s policy of requiring a registered geologist’s review of projects within areas of potential slope instability or stream bank erosion. Conclusion: Not Applicable 4. The City will continue to utilize the Uniform Building Codes to govern the quality of construction of structures within the City limits, particularly in regard to Chapter 23 earthquake standards. Finding, Geologic Hazard Policy 4: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not supersede, or otherwise interfere with, the City’s continued use of the Uniform Building Code, or any replacement codes. Conclusion, Geologic Hazard Policy 4: Not Applicable 12. Soil and Engineering (Number of Policies – 2) 1. Central Point will continue to utilize the most recent soils data available in evaluation of the feasibility of new development. 2. For major projects (greater than two-stories, with the exception of single-family homes), a soils report prepared by a registered soils engineer will be required. Finding, Soil and Engineering Policies 1-2: The soil and engineering policies address the data and professional reports to be utilized for new development projects. The UGB Amendment adds land to Central Point’s urban area. However, no development may occur until lands are annexed, zoned and development approvals obtained. Consequently, the policies governing new development do not apply. Conclusion: Not applicable. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 97 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 13. Noise (Number of Policies – 4) 1. The City shall continue to collect and update noise information on all major noise sources affecting the community, including the I-5 Freeway, Highway 99, Expo Park, Southern Pacific Railroad, commercial and industrial operations and others. Finding, Noise Policy 1: Adoption of the proposed UGB Amendment will not preclude, or otherwise interfere with the City’s ability to collect and update noise information. Conclusion, Noise Policy 1: Not Applicable 2. The City shall work with the Department of Environmental Quality on noise-related issues and take advantage of that agency’s expertise and information on matters pertaining to new or revised noise ordinances for Central point. Finding, Noise Policy 2: Adoption of the proposed UGB Amendment will not preclude, or otherwise interfere with the City’s ability to work with the Department of Environmental Quality regarding noise issues, or noise related ordinances. Conclusion, Noise Policy 2: Not Applicable 3. The City shall require property owners to master plan the land use and design of new developments to control and minimize noise through such requirements as site orientation, buffering, distance separation, insulation, and other design features. Finding, Noise Policy 3: Development within the proposed UGB expansion areas will be subject to zoning restrictions, including noise related standards following annexation. Conclusion, Noise Policy 3: Consistent. 4. The City shall remain aware of airport expansion plans, changes in airport noise contours, and shall ensure that adequate land use safeguards and noise attenuation measures are in place prior to City expansion or development in areas that may be impacted by airport noise. Finding, Noise Policy 4: Development within the proposed UGB expansion areas will be subject to zoning restrictions, including noise related standards relative to the airport following annexation. Conclusion, Noise Policy 4: Consistent 14. Historic (Number of Policies – 5) There are no historic sites or structures that have been identified within the proposed UGB Expansion areas. Consequently the historic resource policies do not apply and are not addressed further in these findings. Public Facilities Element Public Schools (Number of Policies – 6) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 98 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 1. Continue to work closely with the local school district and toward compatibility of both City and District plans and programs. 2. Invite input from the School District on any issue or development proposal that may significantly affect the provision of educational services. 3. Ensure through the subdivision ordinance and plan review procedures that school capacities and future plans will adequately accommodate the service needs generated by the proposed residential development. 4. Assist the School District in new school site planning and encourage new sites to be located in residential areas, as shown on the Comprehensive Plan map and described in the “neighborhood concept” in the Housing Element. 5. Work with the County, School District #6, and other interested agencies to investigate the feasibility of establishing a facilities development charge to more equitably distribute the costs of additional facilities and services. 6. If a future need is generated for a community college in the Valley, appoint a representative from Central Point to the County’s citizens committee (proposed in the County’s Comprehensive Plan) and also investigate any potential sites in the Central Point area that might be suitable for such a facility. Finding, Policy 1 – 6: The City communicated with the School District throughout the UGB Amendment planning process from evaluating the City’s land needs to identifying a preferred alternative for the proposed UGB. School District 6 has prepared a Long Range Facilities Master Plan for a 10-year planning period and is evaluating enrollment to assess capital facility planning needs for the 20-year planning period. To that end, the School District has land banked two properties in the URAs and one inside the current UGB. In the event land must be brought in and a bond obtained, the City will continue to work with the School District to request a minor amendment to the UGB when needed and/or support efforts to secure funding for the education facility construction. Conclusion: Consistent Library Services (Number of Policies – 2) 1. Encourage the Jackson County Library System to improve library services in Central Point in accordance with local needs and planned growth. 2. Encourage the construction of a new library facility in Central Point that would replace the existing rented retail store facility, would provide adequate access and parking, and would be an educational and cultural asset to the Community, the library service area and the County’s library system. Finding, Policy 1 – 2: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the above policies. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 99 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion: Not Applicable Health Care (Number of Policies – 3) 1. Encourage the future expansion of Cascade Hospital, as illustrated on the Plan Map and construct the Hopkins Road extension to Highway 99 to provide better access to the hospital in the general vicinity. 2. Continue to encourage the development of a “Medical Office Park” north of the hospital site, as shown in the Land Use Element to provide for hospital-related medical offices and other facilities. Finding, Health Care Policies 1-2: Healthcare policies 1-2 address the City’s ongoing support for encouraging expansion of a hospital and medical office park inside the current UGB. The proposed UGB does not affect the ability to encourage land uses within the current UGB. Additionally, the Commercial Medical land use designation in the current UGB no longer exists. As such, policies 1-2 do not apply. Conclusion, Health Care Policies 1-2: Not Applicable 3. Continue to maintain a healthy community environment which includes adequate sewers, good quality water, clean air, and other factors that will contribute to the highest possible level of community health. Finding, Health Care Policy 3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect or otherwise interfere with standards for public facilities necessary to maintain public health. Conclusion, Health Care Policy 3: Not applicable. City Government and Facilities (Number of Policies – 6) 1. Continue to work toward the completion of the City Hall facility, including the Council Chamber. 2. When necessary, establish a separate Parks and Recreation Department to have responsibility for the planning, supervision and maintenance of those facilities. 3. Strengthen the Building Department to adequately meet the needs generated by increasing construction activity in the City. 4. Establish a separate Planning Department that would have responsibility for current planning and zoning administration as well as long-range planning, special studies, Comprehensive Plan amendments, and other panning activities, as needed. 5. Continue to use the Paterson & Stewart “City Hall Program Study” report as a guide for future staff additions and departmental adjustments. 6. Continue to provide adequate citizen involvement into the government processes and ensure that all citizens committees include active residents who will attend the meetings, 7.A.b Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 100 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions perform the work required by the committee, and help ensure the success of the City’s Citizen Involvement Program, described in Section I of the Comprehensive Plan. Finding, City Government and Facilities Policies 1-6: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies. Conclusion: Not Applicable Parks and Recreation (See Parks and Recreation Element) Communications (Number of Policies – 2) 1. Continue to provide for both public and private communication facilities, including telephone, radio, television, and others, as dictated by the local market and community needs. 2. Encourage the two coexisting local newspapers to remain in the community and to become more involved in the reporting of local government and community affairs issues, possibly through periodic news releases in addition to attendance at public meetings and community events. Finding, Policies 1-2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies. Conclusion: Not Applicable Police Department (Number of Policies – 4) 1. Continue to improve the level of services provided by the Police Department with adequate levels of funding for needed personnel and equipment. 2. Provide growth of the Department in approximate proportion to the population growth of the Community. 3. Seek ways to increase overall efficiency through the use of more energy-efficient and cost-effective patrol cars, participation in computer-assisted programs and information systems (such as SOJIS system), and other procedural alternatives. 4. Encourage the continuation of volunteer activities, especially in the public schools, that will have positive effects on crime prevention, public safety, and community support for police activities. Finding, Police Department Policies 1-4: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies. Conclusion, Police Department Policies 1-4: Not Applicable Fire Department (Number of Policies – 6) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 101 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 1. Continue to improve the level of services provided by the Fire Department with adequate levels of funding for needed personnel and equipment. 2. Provide for the growth of the Department in accordance to the changing needs of the Community, using the projected staff levels that were included in the Patterson & Stewart City Hall report. 3. Provide for the preparation, adoption, and implementation of a Fire Protection Master Plan for the Community, preferably within the next two years. 4. Ensure that all new development is adequately serviced by utilities that include adequate fire flows and sprinkler systems in new commercial and industrial development. 5. Take appropriate actions that will help to implement the goals and objectives of the Department. 6. Encourage the continuation of activities that will have positive effects on fire prevention, public safety, and community support of Fire Dept. activities. Finding, Fire Department Policies 1-6: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies. In fact, the Fire District recently expanded its facilities to include a Fire Station on Scenic Avenue near the midpoint between the CP-6A and CP-2B expansion areas. Conclusion, Fire Department Policies 1-6: Not Applicable Water Facilities and Services (Number of Policies – 7) 1. Continue to assure the separation of storm drains from sanitary sewers and re-establish the Parshall Flume to monitor non-sanitary flows into the sewer system. 2. Embark upon a program to implement the Water System Plan of the City, in accordance with the phasing and extension program outlined in the Plan. (Underway now) 3. Begin the Planning and necessary studies for the development of a second water storage reservoir. 4. Review the City’s financial position and water rate structure; and develop a financial plan to proceed with construction of Phase I recommended improvements, as outlined in the water System Plan. 5. Ensure that all new development bears the costs of water facility extensions and that such facilities are included in the development plans. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 102 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 6. Review all development proposals and ensure that they conform to the water system plan and that they can be adequately provided water services. 7. Include all major water facilities extension, development, and replacement plans in the proposed Capital Improvements Program of the City to ensure coordination and proper scheduling and financing. Finding, Water Facilities and Services Policies 1-7: Although the UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies, it’s important to note that the proposed UGB Amendment application coincides with an update to the City’s Water System Master Plan. As part of the update, the City evaluated the proposed UGB expansion area growth relative to the water system’s ability to serve future development. Pending completion of the Water System Master Plan, identified improvements to storage, piping and distribution will be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Program. As proposed, water planning will be complete prior to annexation of lands within the UGB expansion areas. Conclusion, Water Facilities and Services Policies 1-7: Not Applicable Sewer Facilities and Services (Number of Policies – 6) 1. Establish a plan for the replacement of sewer lines in the older section of the City, as described in this Element, and include the program in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. 2. Modify the City’s ordinances to include a specific penalty for refusing to hook up to the municipal sewer facilities when they are available at the property. (This is currently a requirement but is difficult to enforce.) 3. Support plans to increase the capacity of the Medford Treatment Plant to accommodate the needs of Central Point and the Bear Creek Valley. 4. Assure that all new developments bear the costs of sewer facilities and that such facilities are included in all development plans. 5. Ensure that all development plans for sewer facilities are in conformance with the City’s Comprehensive plan and will provide for the extension of facilities in accordance with planned growth. 6. Work with the Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority to ensure that the most appropriate and cost effective sewer systems are provided as new growth and development occur. Finding, Sewer Facilities and Services Policies 1-6: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies. Conclusion, Sewer Facilities and Services Policies 1-6: Not Applicable Public Streets (See Transportation System Plan Element) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 103 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Solid Waste Disposal (Number of Policies – 3) 1. Support the activities of Jackson County related to the provision of its Solid Waste Management Plan and provision of adequate sites for waste and hazardous substance disposal. 2. Coordinate the anticipated needs of the growing community with the capabilities of the City Sanitary and disposal sites it uses. 3. Support and encourage efforts toward resource recovery programs to encourage recycling and reuse of waste materials. Finding, Policies 1-3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect the City’s ability to pursue the above policies. Conclusion: Not Applicable Transportation Element The transportation system goals and objectives of the City’s Comprehensive plan are set forth in the City of Central Point’s 2008 Transportation System Plan (TSP). As illustrated in the following findings the proposed UGB Amendment is compliant with the goals and policies of the TSP. Chapter 3 – Land Use & Forecasting GOAL 3.1: TO EFFECTIVELY MANAGE THE USE OF LAND WITHIN THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA IN A MANNER THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH, AND THAT SUPPORTS, THE SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN (Number of Policies – 2) Policy 3.1.1: The City shall manage the land use element of the Comprehensive Plan in a manner that enhances livability for the citizens of Central Point as set forth in the Transportation System Plan. Policy 3.1.2: The City shall continuously monitor and update the Land Development Code to maintain best practices in transit oriented design consistent with the overall land use objectives of the City. Finding, Policies 3.1.1 – 3.1.2: The proposed UGB Amendment manages the City’s land use in a manner that provides for a more efficient use of land and improvements to neighborhood quality by providing a minimum average residential density of 7.1 units per gross acre Additionally, the proposed UGB Amendment addresses both the RTP and the TSP objective to increase the use of transit oriented development design by creating three (3) new Activity Centers (Figure 11). Conclusion: Consistent Chapter 5 – Transportation System Elements GOAL 5.1: TO MAXIMIZE, THROUGH TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES, THE EFFICIENCY, SAFETY, AND CAPACITY OF THE CITY’S EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND SERVICES (Number of Policies – 2) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 104 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 5.1.1: The City shall make every effort to maintain mobility standards that result in a minimum level of service (LOS) “D.” The City defines LOS D as the equivalent to a volume- capacity ratio of 0.9. Policy 5.1.2: The City shall facilitate implementation of bus bays by RVTD on transit routes as a means of facilitating traffic flow during peak travel periods. The feasibility, location and design of bus bays shall be developed in consultation between the City and RVTD. Finding, Policies 5.1.1 – 5.1.2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not propose changes, or limitations on the City’s goal and policies related to transportation systems management techniques. Through the designation of Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers in CP- 2B, CP-3 and CP-6A the proposal encourages multi-modal development, including standards and densities that could support transit use. Conclusion: Consistent GOAL 5.2: TO EMPLOY ACCESS MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES TO ENSURE SAFE AND EFFICIENT ROADWAYS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR DESIGNATED FUNCTION (Number of Policies – 2) Policy 5.2.1: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain, either within the zoning ordinance or the Public Works Standards and Details manual, access management standards based on best practices. Policy 5.2.2: The City shall implement the access management strategies presented in the Access Management Plan for Front Street (Highway 99)/Pine Street and the Central Point Highway 99 Corridor Plan. Finding, Policy 5.2.2 – 5.2.2: The proposed UGB Amendment does not propose changes or limitations that would interfere with or adversely affect the City’s goals and policies related to access management. Conclusion: Not Applicable GOAL 5.3: TO REDUCE THE DEMANDS PLACED ON THE CURRENT AND FUTURE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM BY THE SINGLE-OCCUPANT VEHICLE (Number of Policies – 2) Policy 5.3.1: The City shall serve as a leading example for other businesses and agencies by maximizing the use of alternative transportation modes among City employees through incentive programs. The City shall provide information on alternative transportation modes and provide incentives for employees who use alternatives to the single-occupant automobile. Policy 5.3.2: The City shall offer flexible schedules and compressed work-week options whenever feasible, as a way of reducing travel demand. The City shall encourage employees to telecommute, whenever feasible. Finding, Policy 5.3.1 – 5.3.2: The proposed UGB Amendment, complies with the Regional Plan Element, RTP and TSP Alternative Measures to increase percentage of housing units and jobs within Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas to promote multimodal transportation options and reduce vehicle miles traveled. Additionally, the UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s ability to implement workplace incentive programs or flexible schedules to accomplish reductions in the use of single-occupant vehicle travel to and from the workplace. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 105 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion: Consistent GOAL 5.4: To reduce the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Central Point Urban Area by assisting individuals in choosing alternative travel modes (Number of Policies – 4) Policy 5.4.1: The City shall encourage major employers to promote work arrangements providing an alternative to the 8-to-5 work schedule. These arrangements shall include, but are not limited to, employee flex-time programs, staggered work hours, and compressed work weeks. Policy 5.4.2: The City shall encourage major employers to promote telecommuting where feasible. Policy 5.4.3: The City and major employers shall encourage ridesharing by making ridesharing more convenient. Policy 5.4.4: The City shall encourage major employers to work with RVTD to adopt trip reduction goals designed to reduce site vehicular trip generation. Finding, Policy 5.4.1 – 5.4.4: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect, or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to implement the above policies. Conclusion: Not Applicable GOAL 5.5: Transportation demand management (TDM) measures promoted by the City shall be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan strategies aimed at reducing reliance on the single occupant vehicle (SOV) and reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita (Number of Policies – 1) Finding, Goal 5.5: The proposed UGB Amendment furthers the implementation of the RTP’s Alternative Measures 5 and 6 to increase the use of Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly areas. Conclusion: Consistent Chapter 6 – Transportation System Elements GOAL 6.1: TO MANAGE AUTOMOBILE PARKING WITHIN THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA AS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE REDUCTIONS IN PARKING SPACES CONSISTENT WITH STATE AND REGIONAL GOALS (Number of Policies – 3) Policy 6.1.1: The City shall manage the supply, operation, enforcement and demand for parking in the public right-of-way to encourage economic vitality, traffic safety, transportation system efficiency, and livability of neighborhoods. Policy 6.1.2: Except within the Central Business District, where on-street parking is considered an element of the Central Business District’s economic vitality, the provision for on-street parking is second in priority to the needs of the travel modes (i.e., vehicle, transit, bicycle, pedestrian) using the street right-of-way, and shall be removed when necessary to facilitate street widening. Policy 6.1.3: In those areas where demand exists, an adequate supply of off-street carpool and vanpool parking spaces shall be provided. The location of these spaces shall have preference over those intended for general purpose off-street parking. Finding, Policy 6.1.1 – 6.1.3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere, or otherwise adversely affect the City’s current or future goals and policies related to the provision of parking. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 106 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Following annexation, lands proposed for inclusion in the UGB will be subject to all parking related goals, policies, and development standards. Conclusion: Consistent GOAL 6.2: TO PROMOTE AND MANAGE THE PARKING NEEDS OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA IN A MANNER THAT REASONABLY BALANCES THE DEMAND FOR PARKING AGAINST THE USE OF TRANSIT, BICYCLE, AND PEDESTRIAN TRANSPORTATION MODES, WHILE MAINTAINING THE ECONOMIC VITALITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY (NUMBER OF POLICIES – 2) Policy 6.2.1: The City shall prepare, adopt and maintain parking standards that reflect best parking practices that further the parking goals of the City. Policy 6.2.2: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain effective development standards for paved off-street parking areas to include provisions for landscaping, planting strips, pedestrian walkways, curbs, and sidewalks. Finding, Policy 6.2.1 – 6.2.2: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere, or otherwise adversely affect the City’s current or future parking standards. Conclusion: Not applicable. Chapter 7 – Streets System GOAL 7.1: PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE STREET SYSTEM THAT SERVES THE PRESENT AND FUTURE MOBILITY AND TRAVEL NEEDS OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA, INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES (Number of Policies – 16) Policy 7.1.1: The City shall fulfill its system wide travel capacity needs through the use of multiple travel modes within the public rights-of-way. Finding, Policy 7.1.1: The proposed UGB expansion areas include Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers in CP-2B, CP-3, and CP-6A that are by definition (OAR 660-012- 0060(8)) designed to encourage the use of alternative modes of travel other than the automobile. Conclusion: Consistent Policy 7.1.2: The City’s street system shall contain a network of arterial and collector streets and highways that link the central core area and major industry with regional and statewide highways. Finding, Policy 7.1.2: The proposed UGB Amendment will not add to or eliminate any of the City’s currently designated arterial and collector streets. To the contrary, existing Collectors will be transferred from the County to City jurisdiction per the UGBMA and upgraded to urban standards at the time of development. These are identified in Section 1.1(3) of these Findings. Conclusion: Consistent. Policy 7.1.3: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain street design standards consistent with the policies of this TSP. Finding, Policy 7.1.3: The proposed UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s street design standards. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 107 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.4: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain standards that promote connectivity of the street system consistent with the Functional Classification Map. Finding, Policy 7.1.4: The proposed UGB Amendment will not add to or eliminate any of the City’s current standards addressing connectivity. Pending UGB Amendment the City’s design and development standards in CPMC 17.67 and CPMC 17.75 support connectivity of existing and future streets. Conclusion: Consistent Policy 7.1.5: The City shall actively pursue construction of I-5 interchange improvements at Pine Street. Finding, Policy 7.1.5: The proposed UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s obligation to pursue improvements to the I-5 interchange. Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.6: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain design standards for its streets to safely accommodate pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle travel as has been accomplished in the TOD Districts. Finding, Policy 7.1.6: The proposed UGB Amendment will not add, alter or otherwise affect the City’s street standards relative to the safe accommodation of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular travel. Conclusion: Not applicable. Policy 7.1.7: The City Standards and Details shall be the basis for all street design within the Central Point urban area. Finding, Policy 7.1.7: The proposed UGB Amendment does not add to or eliminate any of the City’s street standards and details. Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.8: Wherever possible the City shall incorporate safely designed, aesthetic features into the streetscape of its public rights-of-way. These features may include: street trees, shrubs, and grasses; planting strips and raised medians; meandering sidewalks on arterial streets; and, in some instances, street furniture, planters, special lighting, public art, or non-standard paving materials. Finding, Policy 7.1.8: The City’s street standards and details include standards that add aesthetic features into the streetscape. The City’s development standards in CPMC 17.67 and CPMC 17.75 include provisions for street frontage landscaping, street trees and other improvements in the right-of-way. Conclusion: Consistent Policy 7.1.9: When existing streets are widened or reconstructed they shall be designed to the adopted street design standards for the appropriate street classification where practical. Adjustments to the design standards may be necessary to avoid existing topographical constraints, historic properties, schools, cemeteries, problems with right-of-way acquisition, existing on-street 7.A.b Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 108 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions parking and significant cultural features. The design of the street shall be sensitive to the livability of the surrounding neighborhood. Finding, Policy 7.1.9: The proposed UGB Amendment will not supersede or otherwise alter the above policy. Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.10: The City shall work with federal, state and local government agencies to promote traffic safety education and awareness, emphasizing the responsibilities and courtesies required of drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. Finding, Policy 7.1.2: The proposed UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s ability to participate with federal, state or local governments in the promotion of traffic safety. Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.11: The City shall place a higher priority on funding and constructing street projects that address identified vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian safety problems than those projects that solely respond to automotive capacity deficiencies in the street system. Exceptions are those capacity improvements that are designed to also resolve identified safety problems. Finding, Policy 7.1.11: The proposed UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s ability to prioritize funding and constructing projects that address traffic safety problems. Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.12: The City shall select street improvement projects from those listed in the Central Point Transportation System Plan when making significant increases in system capacity or bringing arterial or collector streets up to urban standards. The selection of improvement projects should be prioritized based on consideration of improvements to safety, relief of existing congestion, response to near-term growth, system-wide benefits, geographic equity, and availability of funding. Finding, Policy 7.1.12: The proposed UGB Amendment will not affect the City’s policy on prioritizing street improvements. Prior to annexing lands, the City will update its TSP to address improvements needed to maintain applicable performance standards and accommodate the increased travel demand from forecast growth. These improvements will be prioritized in accordance with this policy. Conclusion: Consistent. Policy 7.1.13: To maximize the longevity of its capital investments, the City shall design street improvement projects to meet existing travel demand, and whenever possible to accommodate anticipated travel demand for the next 20 years for that facility. Finding, Policy 7.1.13: The proposed UGB Amendment includes a Traffic Impact Analysis that evaluates impacts of forecast growth over the 20-year (2019-2039) planning period. This evaluation has been coordinated with the TSP to assure that it will not significantly affect existing and planned transportation facilities (See Exhibit 5, Attachment “E”). Conclusion: Consistent 7.A.b Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 109 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 7.1.14: The City shall involve representatives of affected neighborhood associations, citizens, developers, surveyors, engineering and planning professionals in an advisory role in the design of street improvement projects. Finding, Policy 7.1.14: The proposed UGB Amendment does not propose any street projects. This will occur following requests to annex land from the proposed UGB Expansion Areas. Conclusion: Not Applicable Policy 7.1.15: The City shall require Traffic Impact Analyses as part of land use development proposals to assess the impact that a development will have on the existing and planned transportation system and to identify reasonable on-site and off-site improvements necessary to mitigate impacts. Finding, Policy 7.1.15: A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared for the UGB Amendment to determine if it would have a significant impact on State, County and major City transportation facilities. It was the determination of the TIA (Exhibit 5, Attachment “E”) that the forecast growth can be accommodated and maintain applicable level of service standards with mitigation. Conclusion: Consistent Policy 7.1.16: The City may require new development to pay charges towards the mitigation of system-wide transportation impacts created by new growth in the community through established Street System Development Charges (SDCs) and any other street fees that are established by the City. Finding, Policies 7.1.16: The proposed UGB Amendment does not alter or otherwise affect the City’s ability to require SDCs. Conclusion: Not Applicable Chapter 8 – Bicycle and Pedestrian System GOAL 8.1: TO PLAN FOR AND FACILITATE THE INCREASED USE OF BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION IN THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA BY ASSURING THAT CONVENIENT, ACCESSIBLE AND SAFE BICYCLE FACILITIES ARE PROVIDED (Number of Policies – 9) Policy 8.1.1: The City of Central Point recognizes bicycle transportation as a necessary and viable component of the transportation system, both as an important transportation mode, and as an air quality improvement strategy. Policy 8.1.2: The Bicycle Element of this plan shall serve as the Central Point Bicycle Master Plan. Policy 8.1.3: The City of Central Point shall progressively develop a linked bicycle network, focusing on, but not inclusive to the arterial and collector street system, and concentrating on the provision of bicycle lanes, to be completed within the planning period (20 years). The bikeway network will serve bicyclists needs for travel to employment centers, commercial districts, transit centers, schools, institutions and recreational destinations. Policy 8.1.4: The City of Central Point shall use all opportunities to add bike lanes in conjunction with road reconstruction and re-striping projects on collector and arterial streets. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 110 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 8.1.5: The City of Central Point shall maintain public improvement standards that assure that the design of all streets and public improvement projects facilitate bicycling by providing proper paving, lane width, traffic control, storm drainage grates, striping, signage, lighting, parking, etc. Policy 8.1.6: The City of Central Point shall prepare, adopt, and maintain on-site development standards that assure the provision of bicycle access, parking, racks and/or shelters in business developments, institutions, duplexes and multi-family developments and other locations where bicycle parking facilities are required. Policy 8.1.7: The City of Central Point shall support the local transit provider in their efforts to facilitate “bikes on buses” and bicycle facilities at transit stations and stops. Policy 8.1.8: Except within the Central Business District, the City of Central Point shall give priority to bicycle traffic over parking within public rights-of-way designated on the Bicycle Master Plan or otherwise determined to be important bicycling routes. Policy 8.1.9: The City shall require pedestrian and bicycle easements to provide neighborhood connectors and reduce vehicle trips. The City shall modify the street vacation process so pedestrian and bicyclist through access is maintained. Finding, Policies 8.1.1 – 8.1.9: The proposed UGB Amendment does not interfere, or otherwise adversely affect the City’s current or future goals and policies related to the improvement of bicycle facilities and safety. Through the designation of Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers, the City will support the expanded use of bicycle and pedestrian modes of development. Conclusion: Consistent GOAL 8.2: THE CITY WILL PROMOTE BICYCLE SAFETY AND AWARENESS (Number of Policies – 2) Policy 8.2.1: The City of Central Point shall actively support and encourage local and state bicycle education and safety programs intended to improve bicycling skills, observance of laws, and overall safety for both children and adults. Policy 8.2.2: The City shall consider the use of the media, bicycle committees, bicycle plans and other methods to promote use of bicycling for transportation purposes. Finding, Policies 8.2.1 – 8.2.2: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect, or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability implement the above policies. Conclusion: Not Applicable GOAL 8.3: TO FACILITATE A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF CONVENIENT, ACCESSIBLE AND SAFE SIDEWALKS AND WALKWAYS THAT WILL ENCOURAGE AND INCREASE PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL THROUGHOUT THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA (Number of Policies – 6) Policy 8.3.1: The City shall establish and maintain a Sidewalk Construction Program to complete the pedestrian facility network. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 111 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 8.3.2: Sidewalks and walkways shall complement access to transit stations/stops and multi-use paths. Activity centers, schools and business districts should focus attention on and encourage pedestrian travel within their proximity. Policy 8.3.3: The City of Central Point shall maintain standards that require sidewalk and pedestrian access and standards for improvement, i.e. crosswalks at signalized intersections and high volume pedestrian areas such as the Central Business District. All road construction or renovation projects shall include sidewalks. Policy 8.3.4: The City shall require pedestrian and bicycle easements to connect neighborhoods and reduce vehicle trips. The City shall modify the street vacation process so pedestrian and bicyclist through-access is maintained. Policy 8.3.5: Pedestrian walkway or accessway connections shall be required between adjacent developments when roadway connections cannot be provided. Policy 8.3.6: The City shall prepare a plan and implement a multi-use trail system, using linear corridors including, but not limited to: utility easements, rail lines, Bear Creek, Griffin Creek, Jackson Creek and other creeks that complement and connect to the sidewalk system. Finding, Policies 8.3.1 – 8.3.6: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect, or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to implement the above policy once lands are annexed into the City. . Conclusion: Not Applicable GOAL 8.4: TO ENCOURAGE EDUCATION SERVICES AND PROMOTE SAFE PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS INVOLVING PEDESTRIANS (Number of Policies – 3) Policy 8.4.1: The City of Central Point shall encourage schools, safety organizations, and law enforcement agencies to provide information and instruction on pedestrian safety issues that focus on prevention of the most important accident problems. The programs shall educate all roadway users of their privileges and responsibilities when driving, bicycling and walking. Policy 8.4.2: The City shall include in the Sidewalk Construction Program (Policy 9.1.1) inclusion of a street lighting system. Policy 8.4.3: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain standards for the separation of pedestrian traffic from auto traffic on streets and, where determined appropriate, in parking lots. Finding, Policies 8.4.1 – 8.4.3: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect, or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to implement the above policy once lands are annexed into the City. Conclusion: Not Applicable Chapter 9 – Public Transit System GOAL 9.1: IN COOPERATION WITH TRANSIT PROVIDERS, FACILITATE THE PROVISION OF A TRANSIT SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES CONVENIENT AND ACCESSIBLE TRANSIT SERVICES TO THE CITIZENS OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA (Number of Policies – 3). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 112 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 9.1.1: The City shall work with RVTD to encourage transit services that meet the City’s transit needs. Policy 9.1.2: To encourage accessibility and increased ridership, the City shall continue to encourage future transit-supportive land uses, such as mixed uses, multiple-family, and employment centers to be located on or near transit corridors. Policy 9.1.3: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain development standards and regulations facilitating accessibility to transit services through transit-supportive streetscape, subdivision, and site design requirements that promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, convenience and safety. Finding, Policies 9.1.1 – 9.1.3: The proposed UGB Amendment supports the expanded use of transit opportunities by designating three (3) mixed-use/pedestrian friendly area with a minimum average density of 7.1 units per gross acre and mixed use. The City envisions these areas to be ‘transit-ready’ should the need and opportunity arise to expand transit to serve CP-2B, CP-3 and/or CP-6A. Conclusion: Consistent GOAL 9.2: INCREASE OVERALL DAILY TRANSIT RIDERSHIP IN THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA, TO MITIGATE A PORTION OF THE TRAFFIC PRESSURES EXPECTED BY REGIONAL GROWTH (Number of Policies – 1). Policy 9.2.1: Through Transportation Demand Management efforts, the City shall work with Central Point employers and other government agencies to increase commuter transit ridership. Finding, Policy 9.2.1: The proposed UGB Amendment does not affect, or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to implement the above policy. Conclusion: Not Applicable Chapter 10 – Rail and Aviation System GOAL 10.1: TO PROVIDE EFFICIENT, SAFE, AND EFFECTIVE MOVEMENT OF GOODS, SERVICES AND PASSENGERS BY RAIL WHILE MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA (Number of Policies – 2). Policy 10.1.1: The City shall encourage both freight and passenger service as part of statewide rail transportation planning efforts. Policy 10.1.2: The City shall prepare, adopt, and maintain site development standards that mitigate railroad noise and vibration. Finding, Policies 10.1.1 – 10.1.2: The proposed UGB Expansion areas do not include and are not near, rail transportation services Conclusion: Not Applicable GOAL 10.2: TO PROVIDE EFFICIENT, SAFE, AND EFFECTIVE MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE AND GOODS VIA INTER-MODAL CONNECTIONS WITH THE ROGUE VALLEY INTERNATIONAL-MEDFORD AIRPORT (Number of Policies – 1). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 113 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 10.2.1: The City shall support the Rogue Valley Transportation District efforts to provide service to the Rogue Valley International Airport from established routes serving Central Point. Finding, Policy 10.2.1: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not affect, or otherwise conflict with the City’s ability to implement the above policy. Conclusion: Not Applicable Chapter 11 – Freight System GOAL 11.1: TO IDENTIFY AND MAINTAIN A TRUCK FREIGHT SYSTEM WITHIN THE CITY THAT SERVES THE CITY’S AND REGION’S FREIGHT NEEDS IN AN EFFICIENT AND SAFE MANNER, WITH MINIMAL ADVERSE IMPACTS ON ADJACENT LAND USES (Number of Policies – 3). Policy 11.2.1: The City shall cooperate with the RVMPO, Jackson County, ODOT and the City of Medford in the coordination of design, funding, and improvement of the freight system within the City that enhances freight movement, while improving the overall capacity of the City’s street system. Policy 11.2.2: The Freight System Map presented in Figure 11.2 shall be considered by the City as the official freight route system for the City of Central Point. The design and improvement of the street system designated on the Freight System Map shall accommodate large vehicles typical of freight movement. Policy 11.2.3: The City shall ensure access to truck freight via the local street system, with emphasis on maintaining and efficient and safe designated truck route system. Finding, Policies 11.1.1 – 11.1.3: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not modify or otherwise affect the City’s freight system goals and policies. Conclusion: Not Applicable Chapter 12 – Transportation System Financing GOAL 12.1: A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FOR THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN AREA THAT IS ADEQUATELY FUNDED TO MEET THE CITY’S CURRENT AND FUTURE CAPITAL, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS NEEDS (Number of Policies – 4). Policy 12.1.1: Transportation system development charges (SDCs), as defined by Oregon Revised Statutes and City ordinances, will be collected by the City to offset costs of new capacity development. The City will continue to collect SDCs as an important and equitable funding source to pay for transportation capacity improvements. Policy 12.1.2: For all Tier 2 projects the City shall require those responsible for new development to mitigate their development’s impacts to the transportation system, as authorized in the Central Point Zoning Ordinance and Oregon Revised Statutes, concurrent with the development of the property. Policy 12.1.3: The City shall continue to set aside one-percent (1%) of its allocation of State Highway Fuel Tax funds for creation of on-street bicycle, pedestrian and transit capital facilities. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 114 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Policy 12.1.4: When the City agrees to vacation of a public right-of-way at the request of a property owner, conditions of such agreement shall include payment by the benefitted property owner of fair market value for the land being converted to private ownership. Funds received for vacated lands shall be placed in a trust fund for the acquisition of future rights-of-way. Finding, Policies 12.1.1 - 12.1.4: The proposed UGB Amendment does not reduce, or otherwise adversely affect the City’s current or future funding methodologies for transportation capital, maintenance and operational needs. Conclusion: Not Applicable TRANSPORTATION GOAL 12.2: SECURE ADEQUATE FUNDING TO IMPLEMENT A STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM THAT WILL SUSTAIN A MAXIMUM SERVICE LIFE FOR PAVEMENT SURFACE AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES (Number of Policies – 3). Policy12.2.1: Assuming no changes in State funding mechanisms, the primary funding sources for street system maintenance activities shall be the City’s allocation of the State Highway Fuel Tax and allocation of fees supplemented by street maintenance fees. Policy 12.2.2: The City shall seek additional funding sources to meet the long-term financial requirements of sustaining a street maintenance program, including alternative modes of transportation. Policy 12.2.3: The City shall continue to participate in cooperative agreements with other State and local jurisdictions for maintenance and operation activities based on equitable determinations of responsibility and benefit. Finding, Policy 12.2.1 – 12.2.3: The proposed UGB Amendment does not reduce, or otherwise adversely affect the City’s current or future funding methodologies for transportation capital, maintenance and operational needs. Conclusion: Not Applicable TRANSPORTATION, GOAL 12.3: SECURE ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR THE OPERATION OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INCLUDING ADVANCE PLANNING, DESIGN ENGINEERING, SIGNAL OPERATIONS, SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, ILLUMINATION, AND CLEANING ACTIVITIES (Number of Policies – 2). Policy 12.3.1: Assuming no changes in State funding mechanisms, transportation system operations shall be funded primarily from the City’s allocation of the State Highway Fuel Tax. Other funding sources should be pursued to augment the financial requirements of providing adequate future system operations. Policy 12.3.2: The City shall continue to pursue federal, state and private grants to augment operations activities, especially in the planning and engineering functions. Finding, Policy 12.3.1 and 12.3.2: The Proposed UGB Amendment does not reduce, or otherwise adversely affect the City’s current or future funding methodologies for transportation planning, capital construction, maintenance and operational needs. Conclusion: Not Applicable 7.A.b Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 115 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Urbanization Element It is the goal of the Urbanization Element to “Provide for the orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use in accordance with the goals and policies of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan as necessary to accommodate projected urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, as necessary to provide for the City’s preferred future.” To achieve this goal the Urbanization Element sets forth nine (9) policies. Urbanization Policy 1. All urban level development shall conform to city standards, shall be consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan, and shall meet all requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance and Map. Finding, Urbanization Policy 1: The proposed UGB Amendment adds urbanizable land that is eligible for annexation provided annexation requirements in CPMC 1.03 can be met. At the time annexation and zoning is approved, the lands in the proposed UGB expansion areas will be subject to City standards. Until then, they will continue to be governed by County zoning standards and policies in the UGBMA. Nothing in this proposal precludes or otherwise interferes with the City’s ability to assure future urban level development will conform to applicable city standards, the comprehensive plan and zoning map. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 1: Not applicable. Urbanization Policy 2. Urban facilities and services must be adequate in condition and capacity to accommodate the additional level of growth, as allowed by the comprehensive plan, prior to and or concurrent with land use changes. Finding, Urbanization Policy 2: The City has evaluated water, transportation and sewer facilities to assure the proposed growth associated with the UGB can be accommodated by urban facilities and services. These assessments show this is possible with some upgrades, service extensions and mitigations. As proposed in Section 1.1, the City proposes to complete its public facility planning prior to annexation as necessary to demonstrate this policy is met and needed improvements are included in the City’s Capital Improvement Program. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 2: Complies as conditioned. Urbanization Policy 3. To maintain an inventory of buildable lands within the UGB in all land use classifications sufficient to accommodate the City’s most recent 20-year population projection. a. Vacant lands within the UGB that have farm or open space tax benefits are not classified as vacant until such time as the farm or open space tax benefits are removed. b. At the time of the population projection updates the City shall evaluate the need to expand the UGB. c. The calculation for Infill lands available for development shall be discounted based on their likelihood of developing during the planning period. A determination of the infill acreage likely to develop shall be maintained in the Buildable Lands Inventory, including the methodology of determining the term “likely.” Finding, Urbanization Policy 3: The City’s UGB Amendment is based on the most recent population forecast by Portland State University’s Population Research Center published on June 30, 2018. Following publication of updated data, the City updated the Population Element, Residential and 7.A.b Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 116 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Employment Buildable Lands Inventories, Housing Element, Parks Element, and Economic Element to re-evaluate land needs in accordance with this policy. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 3: Consistent. Urbanization Policy 4. Promote compact, orderly and efficient urban development by guiding future growth to vacant sites and redevelopment areas within the established areas of city and to urbanizable lands where future annexation and development may occur. Finding, Urbanization Policy 4: The proposed UGB Amendment promotes compact, orderly and efficient urban development by its location adjacent and proximate to the current UGB. Following approval of the UGB Amendment, annexations may occur provided the lands are contiguous to the current UGB or City Limits, public facilities are available or planned, requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule are met and zoning is applied consistent with the General Land Use Plan Map and Land Use Element polices. By their nature, annexation requirements provide a framework that assures incremental city expansion and subsequent urban level development as growth occurs. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 4: Consistent. Urbanization Policy 5. Promote efficient and economical patterns of mixed land uses and development densities that locate a variety of different life activities, such as employment, housing, shopping and recreation in convenient proximity; and that are, or can be made, accessible by multiple modes of transportation—including walking, bicycling , and transit in addition to motor vehicles— within and between neighborhoods and districts. Finding, Urbanization Policy 5: The City’s UGB Amendment supports efficient and economical patterns of mixed land uses through creation of three (3) Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers in CP-2B, CP-3, and CP-6A. At the time of annexation, City zoning will be applied consistent with the Land Use Element policies and the associated regulations will reinforce the City’s commitment to mixed-use, efficient land use development patterns that are accessible by multiple modes of transportation. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 5: Consistent. Urbanization Policy 6. Provide an adequate level of urban services including but not limited to public water, wastewater, stormwater management systems, environmental services and urban multi-modal transportation system as urban development occurs within the City’s UGB. Finding, Urbanization Policy 6: The proposed UGB expansion areas can provide an adequate level of public water, wastewater, stormwater, environmental and multimodal transportation services based on preliminary assessments and existing programs. Prior to annexation and eventual development, facility planning will be completed to formalize inclusion of mitigation and facility improvements needed to maintain all applicable performance standards. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 6: Consistent as proposed. Urbanization Policy 7. Maintain and reinforce the City’s small town image by emphasizing and strengthening the physical connections between people and nature in the City’s land development patterns and infrastructure designs. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 117 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions Finding, Urbanization Policy 7: By selecting lands that connect gaps in current UGB, as well as existing and planned Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Centers, the City’s UGB Amendment proposal supports physical connections between people and the small town image. Alternate locations that did not provide the proposed level of connectivity would have increased the distance of new residents from the City center and opportunities for walkable shopping, employment and recreation opportunities. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 7: Consistent. Urbanization Policy 8. Create opportunities for innovative urban development and economic diversification. Prior to expanding an urban growth boundary, local governments shall demonstrate that needs cannot be accommodated on land already inside the urban growth boundary. Finding, Urbanization Policy 8: The City has promoted a variety of innovative urban development and economic diversification programs through the measures identified in Table 5, Urban Renewal, and programs such as the Destination Business Boot Camp training. The City attributes the 36-year longevity of the current urban area to these measures and innovative programs. Combined with the findings of the Buildable Lands Inventory (Residential and Employment), Housing Element, Economic Element and Parks Element, only a portion of the City’s land needs for the 2019-2039 planning period can be met within the current UGB necessitating inclusion of additional lands. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 8: Consistent. Urbanization Policy 9. The City of Central Point General Land Use Plan (GLUP) Map and zoning designations for unincorporated urbanizable land, and all other city development and building safety standards, shall apply only after annexation to the city; or through a contract of annexation between the city, Jackson County and other involved parties; or after proclamation of an annexation having a delayed effective date pursuant to ORS 222.180(2). Finding, Urbanization Policy 9: The City proposes to retain County zoning until lands are annexed consistent with this policy. Conclusion, Urbanization Policy 9: Consistent. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 118 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions 11 Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC) 17.76, Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary Amendments 17.96.200 Initiation of amendments. A proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan or urban growth boundary may be initiated by either: A. A resolution by the planning commission to the city council; B. A resolution of intent by the city council; or, C. An application by one or more property owners, or their agents, of property affected by the proposed amendment. (Ord. 1989 §1(part), 2014; Ord. 1436 §2(part), 1981. Formerly 17.96.020). Finding CPMC 17.96.200: On October 10, 2019, the Central Point City Council passed Resolution No 1599, A Resolution Declaring the City Council’s Intent to Initiate an Amendment to the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and the Comprehensive Plan to add Land from the City’s Urban Reserve Areas (URAs) CP-2B, CP-3, CP-4D, and CP-6A for the City’s 20-year (2019-2039) Housing, Employment, Parks and Public Facility Needs. Conclusion CPMC 17.96.200: The proposed UGB Amendment was initiated by a resolution of intent by the City Council consistent with this section. 17.96.300 Major revisions and minor changes. Proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan, including urban growth boundary amendments, are categorized as either major or minor amendments as defined in Section 17.10.300. Proposals for major revisions shall be processed as a Type IV procedure per Section 17.05.500. Proposals for minor changes shall be processed as a Type III procedure per Section 17.05.400. Finding CPMC 17.96.300: CPMC 17.10.300 defines Major and Minor Amendments where Major Amendments are legislative policy decisions that establish by law general policies and regulations for future land use decisions, such as revisions to the zoning and land division ordinance that have significant and widespread impact beyond the immediate area. Since the UGB Amendment impacts a broad area and involves changing the Comprehensive Plan land use map, it is considered a Major Project and is subject to Type IV procedures per CPMC 17.05.500. This is consistent with and supported by the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement between the City and Jackson County that states, “Major revisions in boundary or policies will be considered amendments to both the City and County comprehensive plans and, as such, are subject to a legislative review process.” Conclusion CPMC 17.96.300: The City’s proposed UGB Amendment is a Major Revision that is being processed using Legislative, Type IV, procedures per CPMC 17.05.500 and the Jackson County Land Development Ordinance consistent with this Section. 17.96.400 Submittal timing of proposals. Applications for an amendment to the comprehensive plan, or urban growth boundary, may be submitted at any time. Once accepted proposals shall be scheduled by the city council by resolution of intent. The 7.A.b Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point UGB Amendment Page 119 of 119 Findings of Fact & Conclusions applications and review thereof shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 17.05 and all applicable laws of the state. Finding CPMC 17.96.400: The City Council accepted the City’s proposal (File No. CPA-19001) to amend the UGB on October 10, 2019 per Resolution No. 1599. At that time, the City Council directed staff to complete the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and submit to the County for joint review. It is the only amendment being submitted at this time. Conclusion CPMC 17.97.400: The City’s UGB Amendment application has been submitted according to the timing requirements of this section. 17.96.500 Approval criteria. A recommendation or a decision to approve or to deny an application for an amendment to the comprehensive plan, or urban growth boundary shall be based on written findings and conclusions that address the following criteria: A. Approval of the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals; Finding CPMC 17.96.500(A): See Findings in Section 4. Conclusion CPMC 17.96.500(A): Consistent. B. Approval of the request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan; Finding CPMC 17.96.500(B): See Findings in Section 10. Conclusion CPMC 17.96.500(B): Consistent. C. For urban growth boundary amendments findings demonstrate that adequate public services and transportation networks to serve the property are either available, or identified for construction in the city’s public facilities master plans (major and minor amendments); and, Finding CPMC 17.96.500(C): Based on preliminary reports, including analysis of the Water System, Traffic Impact Analysis, and RVSS sewer assessment correspondence included in Exhibit 5, public facilities and services can serve the proposed UGB areas with limited improvements. As conditioned, the City will complete updates to its public facility master plans prior to annexation to include the new UGB areas as necessary to identify improvements for construction on any lands that do not have services immediately available. Conclusion CPMC 17.96.500(C): Complies as conditioned. D. The amendment complies with OAR 660-012-0060 of the Transportation Planning Rule. Finding CPMC 17.96.500(D): See Section 6 Findings addressing OAR 660-012-0060. Conclusion CPMC 17.96.500(D): Consistent. 12 Summary Conclusion As evidenced by these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, including all references, exhibits and attachments thereto, the City of Central Point UGB Amendment application is consistent with the applicable state, county and city criteria governing Major Revisions to the UGB as conditioned. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) RESOLUTION NO. 1 -c q A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY COUNCIL'S INTENT TO INITIATE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CENTRALPOINT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY (UGB) AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADD LAND FROM THE CITY'S URBAN RESERVE AREAS URAs) CP-2B, CP-3, CP-4D, AND CP-6A FOR THE CITY'S 20-YEAR (2019-2039) HOUSING, EMPLOYMENT, PARKS AND PUBLIC FACILITY NEEDS . RECITALS: A. A proposed amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan or UGB may be initiated by a Resolution of Intent by the Planning Commission or City Council (CPMC 17.96.020(A)); and, B. The City is forecast to add 7,216 people to its Urban Area over the next 20-years Population Element), generating the need for new housing (Housing Element), employment opportunities (Economic Element) and park facilities (Parks Element) that cannot be absorbed by the available buildable land supply within the City's current UGB. C. ORS 197.296 and 197.712, requires the City to provide for needed residential, employment and urban facility needs through amendments to its UGB, changes to policy or both; and, D. Since the UGB was established in 1983 (Ordinance No. 1493), the City has implemented several measures to increase land use efficiency and livability consistent with ORS 197.296. At this time the City has determined there is limited ability to further increase efficiency of residential land use and development inside the current UGB. E. The Community Development Department has prepared a UGB/Comprehensive Plan Amendment application to add 444 acres of land in response to the identified need in accordance with ORS 197.296. F. The proposed amendment includes land from four (4) URAs based on public involvement and direction from the City Council (4/11/2019), Planning Commission 4/20/2019 and 5/7/2019) and the Citizen's Advisory Committee (4/9/2019) consistent with the City's Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) with Jackson County, and applicable state, county and city regulations; G. Initiation of the City's formal UGB Amendment application with Jackson County is consistent with the City Council goals to address housing supply and affordability, promote the City's economic interest, and create planned growth to serve the public necessity and convenience and general welfare. The City of Central Point resolves: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Section 1. By this resolution the City Council authorizes the Community Development Department to proceed with finalizing and submitting the UGB Amendment Application, including finalizing the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to include lands shown in Exhibit A. Section 2. The City Council authorizes payment of applicable planning application fees to Jackson County Development Services, as necessary to complete the application. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this \n day of ©G ,2S 201q Mayor Hank Williams ATTES : 11# City Recorder 0 7.A.b Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) MAPLOT ACCOUNT ACREAGE YEARBLT SITEADD 362W35D1900 10192893 0.91 1978 5133 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2606 10585336 5.01 0 5055 GEBHARD RD 372W043106 10588721 4.09 1972 4215 GRANT RD 372W09A300 10199111 9.58 1900 2815 TAYLOR RD 372W02D400 10998025 7.17 0 BEEBE RD 372W02D400 10195970 13.89 0 BEEBE RD 372W042900 10197518 30.97 1909 4419 GRANT RD 372W043101 10197542 1.80 1971 4269 GRANT RD 372W043300 10197591 33.86 2002 2744 TAYLOR RD 372W10BB400 10201387 1.65 1920 2495 TAYLOR RD 372W042802 10609338 8.85 1996 2864 TAYLOR RD 372W042800 10197494 10.00 0 2850 TAYLOR RD 372W043103 10197567 1.81 1971 4305 GRANT RD 372W043102 10197559 4.53 0 GRANT RD 372W09A500 10199138 9.88 1956 2900 HERITAGE RD 372W042801 10197500 0.83 1930 2874 TAYLOR RD 372W09A400 10199120 12.90 0 TAYLOR RD 372W043200 10197583 12.02 1965 4147 GRANT RD 372W02400 10195734 4.88 0 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2500 10192958 1.50 1947 5243 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2200 10192925 1.50 1993 5183 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2300 10192933 1.50 1977 5203 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2601 10192974 2.20 1900 5263 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2000 10192909 0.74 1947 5139 GEBHARD RD 362W351700 10192412 21.00 1890 5220 UPTON RD 362W35D2400 10192941 1.50 1945 5223 GEBHARD RD 362W351801 10192439 3.72 0 UPTON RD 362W351802 10977994 1.69 1947 5196 UPTON RD 362W35D2700 10192991 14.60 1920 955 WILSON RD 362W351600 10192404 7.00 1978 5230 UPTON RD 362W35D2604 10572660 5.38 1977 5123 GEBHARD RD 362W34D230 10192112 1.00 1972 2130 BOES AVE 362W35D2602 10192982 18.00 1975 5333 GEBHARD RD 362W35D1700 10192877 1.50 1928 5095 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2100 10192917 1.50 1940 5161 GEBHARD RD 362W35D1800 10192885 1.57 2006 5117 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2608 10988138 7.39 0 GEBHARD RD 362W351800 10192421 9.75 0 UPTON RD 362W35D1300 10192836 5.70 1941 5278 GEBHARD RD 362W35D2600 10192966 13.13 1977 5275 GEBHARD RD 372W043000 10197526 2.63 1963 4333 GRANT RD 362W351500 10192391 9.68 0 5294 UPTON RD 372W02D600 10195996 4.95 0 BEEBE RD 372W043105 10554126 7.73 1974 4201 GRANT RD City of Central Point UGB Amendment Tax Lot Inventory 7.A.b Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 372W043104 10197575 2.27 0 GRANT RD 372W02D501 10992858 1.47 0 BEEBE RD 372W02D500 10195988 12.19 0 BEEBE RD 372W09A100 10199098 40.73 1907 3817 GRANT RD 372W09A200 10199103 39.50 1960 2673 TAYLOR RD 362W34D240 10545898 20.88 0 3000 BOES AVE 372W02D700 10196009 1.88 0 796 HEAD RD 7.A.b Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OREGON (CITY) AND JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON (COUNTY) FOR THE JOINT MANAGEMENT OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY WHEREAS, under ORS 190.003 to 190.030, and 197.175, et seq. City and County are authorized to enter into intergovernmental agreements and are required to prepare and adopt Comprehensive Plans consistent with Statewide Planning Goals; and WHEREAS, under ORS 197 - State Land Use Goal 14, Urbanization, the "Establishment and change of the boundary shall be a cooperative process between a city and the county or counties that surround it"; and WHEREAS, City and County have adopted a Regional Plan which necessitates revisions to the previous agreement; and WHEREAS, City and County recognize the importance of providing an orderly transition of urban services from County to City jurisdiction and administration as the Urban Reserve transitions from a rural to an urban character; and WHEREAS, ORS 190.003, et seq. requires that an intergovernmental agreement relating to the performance of functions or activities by one unit of local government for another shall be adopted and shall specify the responsibilities between the parties; NOW, THEREFORE, the City and County adopt the following urban growth policies which shall serve as the basis for decisions pertaining to development and land uses in the area between the City limits of Central Point and its urban-growth boundary, and other lands that are of mutual interest or are of significant importance to Central Point's long-range growth and development. DEFINITIONS 1. Area of Mutual Planning Concern: A geographical area lying beyond the adopted urban growth boundary in which the City and County have an interest in terms of that area's types and levels of development, land uses, environment, agriculture, and other unique characteristics. The area is not subject to annexation within the current planning period but may be in the path of longer-range urban growth. Therefore, the City and County will fully coordinate land use activity within this area. 2. BOC: Jackson County Board of Commissioners. 3. Comprehensive Plan: State-acknowledged comprehensive plan adopted by City or County. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 2 4. Contract Annexation: A process whereby the City, County, and other involved parties enter into a contract that permits: A) The parties to administer urban land use regulations on the development of property following an annexation decision while the property remains under County jurisdiction; and B) The City to annex property developed to City densities and uses, with the improvement to appear on the County tax rolls prior to the effective date of annexation, resulting in a greater benefit to the tax base of the community. 5. Council: City of Central Point City Council 6. Develop: To bring about growth or create new opportunities for growth; to cause the expansion of available lands; to extend public facilities or services; to construct, alter or expand a structure; to conduct a mining operation; to make a change in the use of appearance of land; to divide land into smaller parcels; to create or terminate rights of access, etc. 7. LDO: Jackson County’s Land Development Ordinance. 8. Non-Resource Land: Land that is not subject to the statewide Goals listed in OAR 660-004-0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d). 9. Planning Services: Legislative activities, such as adoption and amendment of comprehensive plan text and maps, adoption and amendment of land use regulations, and quasi-judicial processing of land use actions. 10. Resource Land: Land that is subject to the statewide Goals listed in OAR 660- 004-0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d). 11. Subdivide or Partition Land: The act of dividing the legal ownership of land into smaller units, as set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes 92.010. 12. Urban/Public Facilities and Services: Basic facilities that are planned for and provided by either the private or public sector, and are essential to the support of development in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Such facilities and services include, but are not limited to, police and fire protection, sanitary facilities, public water and storm drain facilities; planning, zoning, and subdivision controls; health services; recreation facilities and services; energy and communication services; and community governmental services including schools and transportation. 13. Urban Growth Boundary: A site specific line on the Official Plan and Zoning Map of Jackson County, which identifies and encompasses urban and urbanizable lands within the County, including: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 3 A) URBAN LAND: Residential areas generally comprised of parcels smaller than one acre, or highly developed commercial and industrial areas which are within incorporated cities or which contain concentrations of persons who reside or work in the areas, including land adjacent to and outside cities, and which have supporting urban public facilities and services. B) URBANIZABLE LAND: Areas within an officially adopted urban growth boundary which are needed for the expansion of that urban area, and which have been determined to be necessary and suitable for development as future urban land and which can be served with necessary urban public facilities and services. 14. Urban Reserve Areas (URA): Land outside of a UGB identified as highest priority (per ORS 197.298) for inclusion in the UGB when additional urbanizable land is needed in accordance with the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 14. INTENT AND PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT The intent and purpose of this Agreement is for City and County to: 1. Enhance long-range planning in the Urban Growth Boundary and the Urban Reserve. 2. Maintain and improve coordination and communication between City and County. 3. Develop consistent policies and procedures for managing urban growth and development within the Urban Growth Boundary. 4. Minimize impacts to property owners, local governments and service providers related to the transition of property from within the Urban Growth Boundary to within the City Limits. URBAN GROWTH POLICIES 1. The City of Central Point shall have primary responsibility for all future urban level development that takes place within the City and urban growth boundary area. Additionally: A) All urban level development shall conform to City standards, shall be consistent with the adopted City Comprehensive Plan, and shall meet all appropriate requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance and Map. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 4 B) The term "urban level development" shall be generally defined, for purposes of this agreement, as any commercial or industrial development, and any residential development, partitioning, or subdivision that creates actual or potential densities greater than allowed by the City’s Residential Low-density District (R-L). The expansion or major alteration of legally existing commercial or industrial use shall also be considered urban level development. C) Urban level development proposals submitted through County processes must be accompanied by a contract to annex to the City. D) Prior to annexation of urbanizable lands, no land divisions shall be approved by the County which create lots less than forty (40) acres in size. E) Prior to annexation of urbanizable lands, no property shall be rezoned. This restriction advances the purposes and policies of the Regional Plan to make more efficient use of urbanizable land. 2. A change in the use of urbanizable land from a use designated on the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map to uses shown on the City Comprehensive Plan shall occur only upon annexation or contractual intent to annex to the City. Additionally: A) Development of land for uses designated in the Comprehensive Plan shall be encouraged on vacant or underdeveloped lands adjacent to or within the City limits prior to the conversion of other lands within the urban growth boundary. B) Urban facilities and services must be adequate in condition and capacity to accommodate the additional level of growth, as allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, prior to or concurrent with the land use changes. C) The City may initiate annexation and zone changes of lands outside the City limits and within the UGB that are under a County "Exclusive Farm Use" designation or otherwise enjoying farm-related tax incentives when such lands are needed for urban development. 3. City annexation shall only occur within the framework of the City's Comprehensive Plan and within the Urban Growth Boundary. 4. Except as provided in Policy 11 of this agreement, specific annexation decisions shall be governed by the City of Central Point. The City will provide opportunities for the County and all affected agencies to respond to pending requests for annexation with the response time limited to sixty days to minimize any unnecessary and costly delay in processing. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 5 5. The establishment of the Urban Growth Boundary does not imply that all lands within the Boundary must be annexed to the City. 6. Jackson County shall retain jurisdiction over any land use decisions, other than annexations, within the unincorporated urbanizable area, in conformance with these adopted policies. Additionally: A) The City shall be requested to respond to pending applications for land use changes in the unincorporated urbanizable area. If no response is received within fourteen days, the County will assume the City has no objections to the request B) The City will request that the County respond to pending applications for land use changes within the incorporated area which could affect land under County jurisdiction. If no response is received within fourteen days, the City will assume the County has no objections to the request. C) Recognizing that unincorporated areas within the Urban Growth Boundary could ultimately become part of Central Point, the City’s recommendations will be given due consideration. It is the intent of the County to administer a mutually adopted City/County policy in the urbanizable area until such time as the area is annexed. 7. Lands in the vicinity of the Seven Oaks Interchange, as delineated on Map 1 attached, are considered unique because of the transportation facilities present. The I-5 Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for Exit 35 addresses the unique characteristics of the area and recommendations from the plan will be incorporated into the City and County Comprehensive Plans. Portions of this area are in Central Point’s Urban Reserve while the remainder is designated an Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall be protected from premature development. Additionally: A) The County shall ensure that the area remains in a rural character so that a priority is placed on urban development within the UGB, as planned. B) The Seven Oaks Interchange Area of Mutual Planning Concern shall retain its present County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designation, or similar "rural" designation, until such time as the area can be shown to be needed for the City's urbanization, in accordance with the seven urbanization factors of Statewide goal 14 and the provisions of this agreement that pertain to City-initiated comprehensive plan amendments. 8. Lands in the vicinity of and including Forest/Gibbon Acres west of Table Rock Road, as delineated on Map 2 attached, are considered remote to Central Point at this time. Although located outside of any Urban Reserve, this area is designated 7.A.b Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 6 an Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall be protected from premature or more intense development. Additionally: A) The County shall ensure that the area remains in a rural character so that a priority is placed on urban development within the UGB and URAs, as planned. B) The Forest/Gibbon Acres Area of Mutual Planning Concern shall retain its present County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designation, or similar "rural" designation, until such time as the area can be shown to be needed for the City's urbanization or for inclusion in Medford or in White City should it incorporate. Inclusion in a planning area will occur in accordance with the seven urbanization factors of Statewide goal 14 and the provisions of this agreement that pertain to City-initiated comprehensive plan amendments. 9. Lands under the ownership of Jackson County between Gebhard Road and Interstate-5 north of Pine Street, including the Jackson County Expo (fairgrounds) and property in the ownership of Jackson County adjacent to the Expo as delineated on Map 3 attached, are designated an Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall be protected from uncoordinated land use development. Additionally: A) The County shall ensure that all land use planning that occurs will be coordinated with the City so that a priority is placed on urban development within the UGB and URAs, as planned. B) The Jackson County Expo Area of Mutual Planning Concern shall retain its present County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designation, or designations unique to the fairground master plan, until such time as the area can be shown to be needed for the City's urbanization, in accordance with the seven urbanization factors of Statewide goal 14 and the provisions of this agreement that pertain to City-initiated comprehensive plan amendments. C) During the first coordinated Periodic Review process for the Regional Plan, Jackson County shall consider including the land occupied by the Jackson County Expo to the City of Central Point Urban Reserve Area. D) The impacts of County development upon City and Regional infrastructure shall be assessed and mitigated in order to obtain a mutually beneficial outcome to both entities. 10. Lands within the urbanizable area which currently support a farm use shall be encouraged, through zoning and appropriate tax incentives, to remain in that use for as long as is "economically feasible". 7.A.b Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7 A) "Economically feasible", as used in this policy, shall be interpreted to mean feasible from the standpoint of the property owner. Implementation of this policy will be done on a voluntary basis. B) "Exclusive Farm" or other appropriate low-intensity rural zoning designation shall be applied to areas within the UGB by the County for the purpose of maintaining agricultural land uses and related tax incentives until such time as planned annexation and urban development occur. C) "Suburban Residential" or other zoning designations that would permit non-agricultural land uses to develop prematurely could result in obstacles to future planned and coordinated growth and, therefore, should be restricted to only those areas that are already developed to such levels. D) Agricultural zoning policies contained herein apply only to areas identified by the City or County as agricultural lands within the UGB, URA’s or Seven Oaks Area of Mutual Planning Concern and shall not be used as a standard to review other land use applications within these areas. 11. The City and County acknowledge the importance of protecting agricultural lands. Therefore: A) While properties are in agricultural use, the City will apply the below standards when adjacent lands are proposed for urban residential development: i. To mitigate the potential for vandalism, the development's design should incorporate the use of visible public or semipublic open space adjacent to the agricultural lands. ii. To mitigate nuisances originating from agricultural noise, odors, irrigation run-off, and agricultural spray drift, the development's design should incorporate: a. The use of landscaping and berms where a positive buffering benefit can be demonstrated. b. The orientation of structures and fencing relative to usable exterior space such as patios, rear yards and courts, such that the potential impacts from spray drift, dust, odors, and noise intrusion are minimized. c. The design and construction of all habitable buildings, including window and door locations, should be such that the potential impact of spray drift, noise, dust, and odors upon interior living/working areas will be minimized. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 8 d. Physical separation between agricultural lands and urban development shall be utilized to the greatest extent possible to minimize adverse impacts. Site design emphasizing the appropriate use of open space areas, streets, and areas not designed specifically for public recreation or assembly shall be considered. B) The City and County mutually agree herewith that the buffering standards established by the Jackson County Regional Plan and adopted by the City of Central Point have or can and will be met, prior to annexation or urban development of lands. C) The City and County mutually agree to involve affected Irrigation Districts prior to annexation or when contemplating urban development of lands. 12. The City, County, and other affected agencies shall coordinate the expansion and development of all urban facilities and services within the urbanization area. Additionally: A) Provisions for urban facilities and services shall be planned in a manner limiting duplication in an effort to provide greater efficiency and economy of operation. B) A single urban facility or service extended into the urbanizable area must be coordinated with the planned future development of all other facilities and services appropriate to that area, and shall be provided at levels necessary for expected uses, as designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 13. All County road construction and reconstruction resulting from new development, redevelopment, or land division, in the urbanizable area shall be to urban standards, except that the term "reconstruction" does not include normal road maintenance by the County. 14. Except for URAs, no other land or non-municipal improvements located outside the Urban Growth Boundary shall be permitted to connect to the water line serving Erickson unless it is first included in the Urban Growth Boundary or a “reasons” exception is taken to applicable Statewide Land Use Planning Goals which allows such connection. The owners of such benefited property must sign an irrevocable consent to annex to the City of Central Point. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 9 AMENDMENTS AND CORRECTIONS TO THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY The procedure for joint City and County review and amendment of urban growth boundary and urbanization policies are established as follows: MAJOR REVISIONS Major revisions in boundary or policies will be considered amendments to both the City and County comprehensive plans and, as such, are subject to a legislative review process. A major revision shall include any boundary change that has widespread and significant impact beyond the immediate area, such as quantitative changes allowing for substantial changes in population or significant increases in resource impacts; qualitative changes in the land use itself, such as conversion of residential to industrial use, or spatial changes that affect large areas of many different ownerships. Any change in urbanization policies is considered a major revision. Major revisions will be considered by the City and County at periodic intervals in accordance with the terms of the mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreements between the County and each municipal jurisdiction. It is the intent of the governing bodies to review the urban growth boundary and urbanization policies for consistency upon completion of the City and County Comprehensive Plans. A request for major revision can be initiated only by the County or City governing bodies or their respective planning commissions. Individuals, groups, citizen advisory committees, and affected agencies may petition the County or appropriate City in accordance with the procedural guidelines adopted by the jurisdiction for initiating major legislative amendments. The party who seeks the revision shall be responsible for filing adequate written documentation with the City and County governing bodies. Final legislative action on major revision requests shall be based on the factors stated in each mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreement. Generally these are: A) Demonstrated need to accommodate unpredicted population trends, to satisfy urban housing needs, or to assure adequate employment opportunities; B) The orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services; C) Maximum efficiency of land uses within the current urbanizable area; D) Environmental, energy, economic and social consequences; E) Compatibility of the proposed change with other elements of the City and County comprehensive plans; and, F) The other statewide planning goals. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 10 Major revision proposals shall be subject to a mutual City and County review and agreement process involving affected agencies, citizen advisory committees, and the general public. The review process has the following steps: A) CAC and planning commissions review and make recommendations to the City Council and Board of County Commissioners; B) Proposal mailed to the affected agencies and property owners; and, C) Proposal heard and acted upon by City Council and Board of County Commissioners. MINOR BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS Minor adjustments to an urban growth boundary line may be considered subject to similar procedures used by the City and County in hearing zoning requests. A minor amendment is defined as focusing on specific individual properties and not having significant impacts beyond the immediate area of the change. Application for a minor boundary line amendment can only be made by property owners, their authorized agents, or by a City or County governing body. Written applications for amendments may be filed in the office of the Jackson County Department of Planning and Development on forms prescribed by the County. The standards for processing an application are as indicated in the mutually adopted urban growth boundary agreement. Generally these are the same factors as for a major urban growth boundary amendment. CORRECTION OF ERRORS A. An error is generally considered to be a cartographic mistake, or a misprint, omission, or duplication in the text. They are technical in nature and not the result of new information or changing attitudes or policies. B. If the City Council and Board of County Commissioners become aware of an error in the map(s) or text of this mutually-adopted urbanization program, both bodies may cause an immediate amendment to correct the error, after mutual agreement is reached. C. Corrections shall be made by ordinance, following a public hearing conducted by both governing bodies, but hearings before the planning commissions shall not be required when an amendment is intended specifically to correct an error. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 11 REVIEW, AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. This Agreement may be reviewed and amended at any time by mutual consent of both parties, after public hearings by the Council and the Board of Commissioners. B. Any modifications to this Agreement will be consistent with City and County comprehensive plans and state law. C. Staff from City and County will attempt to informally resolve any disputes regarding the terms, conditions, or meaning of this Agreement. For any disputes not resolved through this informal process, the Council and the BOC will meet jointly in an attempt to resolve those disputes. Either party may request the services of a mediator to resolve any dispute. D. This Agreement may be terminated by either party subsequent to dissolution of a URA or an Area of Mutual Planning Concern. Such termination shall proceed through a properly noticed public hearing process. This agreement supersedes the prior agreement between the parties on the same subject matter approved by the County on _________________, 20___, and by the City on ______________, 20___. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT JACKSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ______________________________ _____________________________ Hank Williams, Mayor DATE Rick Dyer, Chair DATE APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ County Counsel ATTEST: ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ City Administrator Recording Secretary 7.A.b Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 1 of 53 Location Analysis Report City of Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Location Analysis Report The City’s location analysis for the proposed UGB Amendment is based on the priorities and evaluation/selection criteria set forth in ORS 197.298, OAR 660-024-0065 and OAR 660-024-0067. The following report describes and illustrates the City’s process and methodology for evaluating lands for inclusion in the proposed UGB Amendment. Attachments: Attachment “A” – Brown and Caldwell Technical Memo Re: High Priority UGB Areas Attachment “B” – Brown and Caldwell Technical Memo Re: UGB Expansion (Final) Attachment “C” – Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVSS) Alternative Boundary Sewer Assessment Attachment “D” – RVSS Final Boundary Correspondence Attachment “E” – Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis: CP UGB Amendment Step 1 – Establish the Study Area. With adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan as the City’s Regional Plan Element, the City has eight (8) Urban Reserve Areas (URAs). In accordance with ORS 197.298(1)(a), URAs are first priority lands for consideration when amending the UGB. Figure 1 shows the City’s URAs in relation to the current UGB and city limits. The location analysis for this UGB Amendment utilizes the GIS shapefiles for the City’s URAs, tax lots, and other state and federal datasets. Table 2 presents the acreage per the Regional Plan and acreage calculating using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) shapefiles, as well as land use distributions required by the Regional Plan for each URA. The difference in acreage between the Regional Plan and shapefile for the URAs is due to methodology and is insignificant. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 2 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 1. Preliminary Study Area: Central Point Urban Reserve Areas (First Priority for UGB Inclusion) Table 1. Preliminary Study Area Land Use and Gross Acreage URA Regional Plan Gross Acreage Shapefile Gross Acreage Land Use Allocation Residential Employment Parks/OS % Acres % Acres % Acres CP-1B 544 634 0% 0 100% 634 0% 0 CP-1C 70 78 100% 78 0% 0 0% 0 CP-2B 325 337 81% 273 13% 44 6% 20 CP-3 36 40 0% 0 42% 17 58% 23 CP-4D 83 111 1% 1 0% 0 99% 110 CP-5A 31 34 91% 31 0% 0 9% 3 CP-6A 444 470 76% 357 4% 19 20% 94 CP-6B 188 205 90% 185 10% 21 0% 0 TOTALS 1721 1909 48% 925 38% 734 13% 250 7.A.b Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 3 of 53 Location Analysis Report Step 2 – Adjust the Preliminary Study Area. State rules and statutes allow adjustments to the Preliminary Study Area based on finding that land in the study area is constrained due to public facility, natural hazard and environmental constraints as follows: Impracticability of providing necessary public facilities and services; Presence of significant development hazards (i.e. landslides, flooding, tsunamis); Presence of significant scenic, natural, cultural or recreational resources, including lands designated in an acknowledged comprehensive plan or federal inventory for: o Critical or essential habitat for threatened and endangered species per the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and/or core habitat for Greater Sage Grouse; o Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers and State Scenic Waterways; o Designated Natural Areas on the Oregon State Register of Natural Heritage Resources; o Wellhead protection areas; o Goal 16 aquatic areas in natural or conservation management unit designated in a comprehensive plan; o Resources subject to Goal 17 and 18 requirements, which are coastal resources and shoreland resources. Land ownership and management by the federal government is primarily for rural uses. Provided below is a summary of the City’s preliminary study adjustments in accordance with OAR 660-024- 0065(4) and (7), which applies exclusions eliminating lands that are impractical to extend public facilities or services, and lands that are subject to significant natural hazards (i.e. 1% annual chance flood) and environmental constraints (i.e. presence of critical or essential habitat for a species listed by a state or federal agency as threatened or endangered). Public Facilities Adjustment Provision of public facilities is a critical component of facilitating growth as the City expands. For purposes of refining the Preliminary Study Area, the state allows the City to exclude lands that are impractical to provide necessary public facilities and services. The term “impracticable” is defined in OAR 660-024-0065(7). The criteria are summarized below: Defined topographic constraints; Isolation from existing service networks that limits the likelihood that services can be extended during the 20-year planning period. This is based on evaluation of the likely amount of development that could occur during the planning period; the likely cost of facilities and services needed; and any substantial evidence showing how similarly situated land in the region has or has not developed over time. Presence of impediments to service including but not limited to: major rivers; topographic features with slopes exceeding 40% and vertical relief of 80-feet; freeways or rail lines; and significant scenic natural, cultural, or recreational resources that limit placement of facilities. Based on these criteria, the only lands deemed impractical to provide necessary public facilities and services is land in CP-1B because the land area is isolated from the City’s existing water system. Based on review of water infrastructure needs in the Water System Master Plan, the following impediments exist that make extension of the needed services unlikely to occur within the planning period: 7.A.b Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 4 of 53 Location Analysis Report Extension of service to serve CP-1B lands north of Interstate 5 requires a constructing new waterline beneath interstate, Bear Creek and the railroad. In addition to cost, Bear Creek is critical habitat for Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Salmon,12 which poses additional concern and process for avoiding/mitigating impacts to the species. The cost of necessary services to provide water is prohibitive. Analysis of the City’s water system and demand in this URA necessitates construction of a 2 million gallon storage tank to address issues with pressure, storage equalization and capacity and fire flow needs (Figure 2)3. The City amended its UGB in 2015 5o add 49 acres of land in this URA to accommodate a desired trucking/rail transport operation, including construction of corporate headquarters. Due to the benefit afforded by increased industry and family wage jobs, as well as financial assistance from the State, the City was able to partner on needed water service extension. However, following amendment of the UGB the trucking/rail transport industry abandoned their plans to annex and develop to urban standards. Without a destination for water services and jobs, the state grant was no longer available. This rendered the project cost prohibitive for the City to complete on its own. Figure 2 Water Infrastructure Capital Improvements Needed to Serve the Tolo UGB/CP- 1B URA Without resolution of the water service needs, any further extension of the UGB in the Tolo Area (i.e. CP-1B) is impracticable due to serviceability impediments and cost. Notwithstanding, the City does not have a 1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), “Coho Salmon – Protected.” https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/coho-salmon-protected 2 Federal Register, Volume 64 No. 86. Designate d Critical Habitat; Central California Coast and Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts Coho Salmon/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. https://archive.fisheries.noaa.gov/wcr/publications/frn/1999/64fr24049.pdf 3 Estimated cost of improvements in 2009 was roughly $4.2M. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 5 of 53 Location Analysis Report demonstrated need for industrial land.4 Combined with the above analysis, the City concludes that development of any additional lands in CP-1B is unlikely to occur during the 2019-2039 planning period. The Preliminary Study Area with the Public Facilities Adjustment is shown in Figure 2. Figure 3. Preliminary Study Area: Public Facilities Adjustment 4 Economic Element (2019-2039). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 6 of 53 Location Analysis Report Natural Hazard Adjustment The City adjusted lands in the URAs to eliminate lands subject to flood hazards in accordance with OAR 660- 024-0065(4)(b)(B). High risk flood hazard areas are referred to as the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and include Flood Zones A, AE, AO and AH identified on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Jackson County. The locations and acreages were determined using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The FIRM dataset for Jackson County was added and clipped to show only flood hazards within the UGB Preliminary Study Area shown in Figure 4. This area includes 86.63 acres of high risk flood hazard areas on 36 parcels. Eight (8) of these are fully impacted and twenty-eight (28) have partial impacts. The identified flood hazards were further evaluated based on the extent of impacts. Properties fully impacted by the SFHA have been eliminated from further consideration in the proposed UGB amendment unless they are part of the Bear Creek Greenway or are planned for parks or open space use. Based on this process, eight (8) properties were eliminated accounting for 20.55 acres in the CP-5A URA (Figure 5). Partially impacted parcels were also evaluated for inclusion in the UGB Preliminary Study Area. There are some parcels with partial impacts that are not feasible for inclusion in the Preliminary Study Area due to the following: Percentage impact on the property. Properties with greater than a 50% impact from high risk flood hazards were eliminated from the Preliminary Study Area. The City regulates flood hazards in accordance with Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC) 8.24. This chapter aims to avoid or mitigate flood hazards to reduce flood risk and consequently prohibits new land divisions with improvements in the SFHA unless an applicant can mitigate the hazards on the site. Due to the extensive engineering studies and work needed to comply with the requirements, it is unlikely that development of parcels with impacts greater than 50% will be as feasible as properties that are free of flood impacts. Due to the need for housing supply and affordability, properties with impacts greater than 50% of the property area were eliminated unless part of the Bear Creek Greenway or other open space area. Properties with less than 50% Impact but adjacent to Critical Habitat and/or Erosion Areas. There are three (3) streams listed as Critical Habitat for Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Coho (SONCC) salmon, including Bear, Jackson and Griffin Creek5. The City’s floodplain development regulations require compliance with all applicable federal and state regulations, including the Endangered Species Act. In light of these requirements and the City’s commitment to avoiding and minimizing hazards per CPMC 8.24, properties with partial impacts were eliminated from the Preliminary Study Area unless part of the Bear Creek Greenway or public ownership that could continue to retain the open space preservation benefits associated with floodplains, riparian corridors and Critical Habitat for Threatened or Endangered Species. Seventeen (17) properties/74.4 acres with partial impacts were eliminated from the Preliminary Study Area. Figure 6 is the annotated SFHA adjustment map showing the eliminated properties. Table 2 provides an inventory of high risk flood hazard area acreage based on the FIRM map shapefile obtained from FEMA. 5 SONCC salmon are listed as Threatened Species per the ESA. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 7 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 4. Preliminary Study Area: Flood Hazards 7.A.b Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 8 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 5. Preliminary Study Area Adjustment: Eliminate Fully Impacted Properties 7.A.b Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 9 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 6. Preliminary Study Area Adjustment: Annotated Flood Map for Partially Impacted Properties 7.A.b Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 10 of 53 Location Analysis Report Table 2. High Risk Flood Hazard Inventory: Flood Insurance Rate Map (OAR 660-024-0065(4)(b)(B) Flood Zone Floodway Acres URA UGBA UGBA Acres AE 4.01 CP-1C No 0 A 0.00 CP-1C No 0 A 4.68 CP-1C No 0 A 0.05 CP-1C No 0 AE FLOODWAY 0.05 CP-1C No 0 Total CP-1C Flood Acres: 8.78 0 Flood Zone AE 0.00 CP-2B Yes 0.00 AE 2.34 CP-2B Yes 2.34 AE FLOODWAY 1.01 CP-2B Yes 1.01 AE 0.01 CP-2B Yes 0.01 Total CP-2B Flood Acres: 3.36 3.36 Flood Zone AE FLOODWAY 0.26 CP-3 No 0 AE 0.10 CP-3 No 0 AE 1.42 CP-3 Yes 1.42 AE 4.92 CP-3 Yes 4.92 AE 0.07 CP-3 Yes 0.07 AE 0.01 CP-3 Yes 0.01 AE FLOODWAY 8.71 CP-3 Yes 8.71 AE FLOODWAY 0.01 CP-3 Yes 0.01 Total CP-3 Flood Acres: 15.51 15.15 Flood Zone AE 1.90 CP-4D Yes 1.90 AE FLOODWAY 10.88 CP-4D Yes 10.88 AE FLOODWAY 8.43 CP-4D No 0 AE 0.34 CP-4D Yes 0.34 AE 0.48 CP-4D No 0 AE 0.01 CP-4D No 0 AE 0.04 CP-4D No 0 AE 4.11 CP-4D No 0 AE 0.42 CP-4D Yes 0.42 AE 0.04 CP-4D Yes 0.04 Total CP-4D Flood Acres: 26.66 13.57 Flood Zone AE 0.04 CP-5A No 0 AE 1.02 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.00 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.04 CP-5A No 0 AE 11.56 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.12 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.00 CP-5A No 0 AE FLOODWAY 11.37 CP-5A No 0 AE 3.11 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.00 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.01 CP-5A No 0 AE 0.00 CP-5A No 0 Total CP-65A Flood Acres: 27.27 0 7.A.b Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 11 of 53 Location Analysis Report Flood Zone AE 0.11 CP-6A No 0 Total CP-6A Flood Acres: 0.11 0 A 4.28 CP-6B No 0 A 0.10 CP-6B No 0 A 0.53 CP-6B No 0 AE 0.02 CP-6B No 0 Total CP-6B Flood Acres: 4.93 0 TOTAL STUDY AREA FLOOD ACRES 86.63 32.09 Natural Resource Adjustment Following exclusion of lands with public facility and natural hazard constraints, the City inventoried wetlands listed on the National Wetland Inventories (NWI). Because identified wetlands are typically small (less than 1 acre) and interspersed throughout the study area, no properties were eliminated based on the inclusion of wetlands. Rather, the acreages were inventoried to account for constrained lands that are not reasonably developable. These are discounted from the gross acreage totals within areas proposed for inclusion in the UGB (Table 3). As shown in Table 3, the State and NWI identifies 18.68 acres of wetlands within the Preliminary Study Area. These are shown in Figure 7. No other resource lands were identified relative to establishing this study area as allowed by OAR 660-024-0065(4). Table 3. Central Point UGB Preliminary Study Area Wetland Inventory: National Wetland Inventory (OAR 660-024-0065(4)(c)(A) Wetland Classification Code Wetland Type Study Area Acres URA In UGBA UGBA Acres PABHx Freshwater Pond 0.57 CP-1C No 0 PEM1C Freshwater Emergent Wetland 0.66 CP-1C No 0 Total CP-1C Wetland Area 1.23 0 PABF Freshwater Pond 0.47 CP-2B Yes 0.47 PABHh Freshwater Pond 1.02 CP-2B Yes 1.02 PABHh Freshwater Pond 0.43 CP-2B Yes 0.43 PABHx Freshwater Pond 0.23 CP-2B No 0 PEM1C Freshwater Emergent Wetland 0.14 CP-2B Yes 0.14 PEM1C Freshwater Emergent Wetland 0.27 CP-2B Yes 0.27 PUBHx Freshwater Pond 0.27 CP-2B Yes 0.27 R4SBC Riverine 0.83 CP-2B No 0 R5UBH Riverine 0.05 CP-2B Yes 0.05 R5UBH Riverine 0.35 CP-2B Yes 0.35 R5UBH Riverine 0.02 CP-2B No 0.00 R4SBC Riverine 0.13 CP-2B Yes 0.13 PABHh Freshwater Pond 0.05 CP-2B No 0 Total CP-2B Wetland Area 4.29 3.15 PABHx Freshwater Pond 0.26 CP-4D No 0 7.A.b Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 12 of 53 Location Analysis Report PFOC Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland 2.47 CP-4D No 0 R5UBH Riverine 0.54 CP-4D Yes 0.54 Total CP-4D Wetland Area 3.27 0.54 PEM1Cx Freshwater Emergent Wetland 0.84 CP-6A No 0 PUBHx Freshwater Pond 0.13 CP-6A Yes 0.13 PUBHx Freshwater Pond 0.41 CP-6A Yes 0.41 R4SBC Riverine 0.65 CP-6A Yes 0.65 R4SBC Riverine 0.10 CP-6A Yes 0.10 R4SBC Riverine 1.09 CP-6A Yes 1.09 R4SBC Riverine 1.10 CP-6A Yes 1.10 R5UBH Riverine 0.05 CP-6A Yes 0.05 R4SBCx Riverine 1.00 CP-6A No 0 Total CP-6A Wetland Area 5.38 3.54 PUBFx Freshwater Pond 0.10 CP-6B No 0 PUBFx Freshwater Pond 0.16 CP-6B No 0 PUBHh Freshwater Pond 0.22 CP-6B No 0 PUBHx Freshwater Pond 0.13 CP-6B No 0 R4SBC Riverine 0.97 CP-6B No 0 R4SBCx Riverine 1.05 CP-6B No 0 PFOC Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland 1.11 CP-6B No 0 PEM1Cx Freshwater Emergent Wetland 0.78 CP-6B No 0 Total CP-6B Wetland Area 4.50 0 TOTAL ALL PRELIMINARY STUDY AREA WETLANDS: 18.68 7.23 7.A.b Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 13 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 7. Preliminary Study Area Adjustment: National and State Wetlands Inventory Resources 7.A.b Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 14 of 53 Location Analysis Report Study Area Conclusion The City’s UGB Study Area includes 1,120 acres of first priority lands within Central Point’s urban reserves (Table 4). This area is more than twice the acreage needed for housing, employment, parks and other uses (Table 5). Table 4. Preliminary Study Area Adjustments (OAR 660-024-0067(4) and (7) URA Shapefile Gross Acreage URA Acres added to UGB Study Area Exclusions Total Adjusted Study Area Acres Public Facilities Flood Hazards Wetland s Acres Acres Acres CP-1B 634 49 585 N/A N/A 0 CP-1C 78 0 0 8.8 1.2 67.99 CP-2B 337 0 0 3.4 4.3 329.35 CP-3 40 0 0 15.5 0.0 24.49 CP-4D 111 50 0 26.7 3.3 31.07 CP-5A 34 0 0 27.3 0.0 6.73 CP-6A 470 0 0 0.1 5.4 464.51 CP-6B 205 0 0 4.9 4.5 195.57 TOTAL S 1909 99 585 86.6 18.7 1120 Note: Wetland acres are identified for each URA but, due to interspersed nature and limited spatial impact, parcels were not eliminated from consideration. Acreages are tracked to determine developable acreage for UGB selection. Table 5. Summary of Land Needs Land Use Short Term Acreage Long-Term Acreage Residential 305 305 Employment Short Term 23 Long Term 93 Parks 55 55 TOTAL LAND NEED 2019-2039: 383 453 In accordance with OAR 660-024-0065(5), there is no need to include lower priority lands in the study area. With the study area established, the next step the City took was to apply coarse filters to identify alternative locations that can efficiently accommodate land needs and are likely to provide for orderly and economic public facility extension. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 15 of 53 Location Analysis Report Goal 14/Comprehensive Plan Locational Criteria OAR 660-024-0067(7) requires that the City evaluate the first priority lands in the study area for inclusion in the UGB first based on the Goal 14 locational criteria, then applicable criteria in the acknowledged comprehensive plan. The Goal 14 locational factors are considered and balanced when comparing alternative boundary locations and as such are not independent criteria. Goal 14 location factors s (OAR 660-024-0065 & 67/ORS 197A.320) include the following: 1. Efficient accommodation of identified land needs; 2. Orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services; 3. Comparative Environmental, Social, Economic and Energy (ESEE) consequences; and, 4. Compatibility of proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural and forest activities occurring on farm and forest land outside the UGB. The applicable urbanization locational factors in the Comprehensive Plan Urbanization Element are closely related to the Goal 14 location criteria (Table 6). Table 6. Location Analysis Matrix: Goal 14 & Central Point Factors Local Criteria: Urbanization Element Goal 14 Locational Factors Facto r 1 Facto r 2 Facto r 3 Facto r 4 Proximity to the City Limits or current UGB Boundary X Parcel size greater than 10 acres X Proximity to basic urban services X X Inclusion of or proximity to mixed-use/pedestrian-friendly areas; X Compatibility with nearby agricultural uses outside the proposed UGB X Proximity to transportation infrastructure X X Lands that have been master planned X Readiness for development X Proximity to City Center using a 'concentric growth pattern X X Due to the interrelated nature of the local criteria relative to the state Goal 14 criteria, they are integrated into the Goal 14 location analysis, which is based on quantitative and qualitative assessments of GIS data, public facility reports and studies, cost considerations and other technical/professional reports. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 16 of 53 Location Analysis Report Goal 14 Factor 1: Efficient Accommodation of Identified Land Needs Efficiency is defined by the Merriam Webster’s Dictionary as being, “capable of producing desired results with little or no waste (as of time or materials).” Applied to the UGB Amendment, efficient accommodation means that the lands selected will be capable of producing housing, jobs, and parks needed to support the City’s urban growth in a timely and cost effective manner. To achieve this, the City needs to select lands that are adequate in size and proximity to the current UGB and available public facilities. Parcel size is an important indicator of efficiency because larger parcels can be master planned to provide a mix of housing types at densities that are typically higher than small infill projects. Additionally, these lots allow for more cohesive and coordinated location of needed parks and extension of neighborhood streets and supporting infrastructure. Parcels that are closer in, or proximate to the current UGB and available facilities, will a avoid leap-frog development pattern. Another consideration is to avoid long stretches of streets, water lines, and sewer lines that are not supported by adjoining urban level development that would otherwise provide revenue for ongoing operation and maintenance. This scenario can place a significant cost burden on the City to pay for long-term operation and maintenance. Finally, the City has placed a higher priority on lands that have been master planned and are considered ‘development ready.’ The reason this is important to the City’s location analysis is that timely urban growth requires land owners who have a combination of interest and commitment to developing their land. To include lands that will sit vacant for the planning period does not advance the objective of providing the housing supply or jobs necessary to serve the needs of Central Point residents now or in the future. On the contrary, the low housing supply that exists in Central Point and elsewhere around the State, is helping fuel the rising cost of housing. Consequently, the City of Central Point has developed a Housing Implementation Plan (HIP) that aims to eliminate barriers to housing, as well as enact measures that directly lower cost or encourage construction. The proposed UGB Amendment is one strategy identified in the HIP to efficiently increase the City’s housing supply and affordability. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 17 of 53 Location Analysis Report Analysis of Alternative Boundary Locations At-a-Glance PRELIMINARY UGB BOUNDARY ANALYSIS PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE = STAFF ALTERNATIVE 1A Consolidated expansion that maximizes large parcels sizes in CP-2B and CP-6A while connecting existing and planned Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. Added a 10 acre parcel on Heritage Road to proposal to be included in the Taylor West Master Plan. FINAL PREFERRED UGB LOCATION ANALYSIS Goal 14 Factors/Local Criteria 1) Efficient Accommodation of Need, 2)Orderly and Economic Provision of Public Facilities, 3) Economic, Environmental, Social and Energy Consequences, and 4) Compatibility of proposed UGB uses with nearby agricultural and forest activities outside the proposed UGB. Map Conceptual Land Use and Transportation Plans Map Master Planned Parcels. Map Study Area based on parcel size. Map Study area based on adjacency and proximity to current UGB. Map Study area based on proximity to stubbed water and sewer facilities. COARSE FILTER ANALYSIS STAFF ALTERNATIVE BOUNDARIES 1A AND 1B Citizen’s Advisory Committee (CAC)/public input/recommendation to the City Council. Planning Commission/public input/recommendation to the City Council. City Council/public input/selection of the preferred alternative. FINE FILTER ANALYSIS Public Facilities Assessment a. Water b. Sewer c. Traffic d. Schools Mixed-Use Pedestrian Friendly Areas/Activity Centers Agricultural Compatibility UPDATE BOUNDARY TO INCLUDE CP-3 EMPLOYMENT AND OPEN SPACE LANDS Update the RVMP Travel Demand Model Run based on adjustments to the UGB. Hired Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the proposed UGB Boundary. Updated the Water Analysis to include revised UGB Boundaries. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 18 of 53 Location Analysis Report Conceptual Plans The Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan and Central Point Regional Plan Element (collectively referred to as the “Regional Plan”) set forth Performance Indicators to implement a regional growth management strategy that aims to accommodate a doubling of the population by 2060. The Regional Plan recognized the importance of preserving finite and valuable agricultural and forest resources, and the role of coordinated land use and transportation planning in achieving land use efficiency and livability. To accomplish this, the Regional Plan requires that participating cities develop conceptual land use and transportation plans that demonstrate compliance with land use distribution targets, minimum average density, and the need to meet the 2020 benchmarks for housing and jobs in Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas.6 Prior to initiating this UGB Amendment application, the City proactively prepared and approved Conceptual Land Use and Transportation Plans for the following URAs: CP-4D CP-1B CP-3 CP-5A/6A CP-2B To support selection of alternative boundaries, the City prepared land use concepts for CP-1C and CP-6B that met the land use distribution and minimum average density requirements in the Regional Plan. Since lands in these URAs were not selected for inclusion in this UGB Amendment due to concerns about efficient accommodation of need/agricultural compatibility (CP-1C) and distance from the current UGB/Central Business District (CP-6B), no further action was taken to approve them at this time. This decision was made to expedite the UGB Amendment as necessary to more efficiently accommodate the City’s land needs, especially for housing due to the supply and affordability concerns. The approved Conceptual Plans demonstrate compliance of each URA with the Regional Plan Performance Indicators and are herein incorporated by reference. Figure 8 illustrates all of the conceptual land use and transportation plans. 6 OAR 660-012-0060(8) defines Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. The idea is have a clearly defined area with medium to high density residential development mixed with a variety of commercial, civic and parks and open space uses. These areas are envisioned to provide housing and jobs within walking/bicycling distance and provide more connected and livable communities. The 2009 Regional Transportation Plan identified 2020 benchmarks as alternative measures to comply with the State Transportation Planning Rule. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 19 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 8, Central Point Conceptual Plans Master Planned Parcels Efficient accommodation of land needs is one of the Goal 14 location factors. The Urbanization Element of the Comprehensive Plan identifies master planning as an indicator that properties within a conceptual master plan are more likely to be annexed and developed more quickly and effectively. This is due to the fact that multiple property owners have coordinated to contemplate the form and content of urban level development, which suggests not just a willingness to be part of the UGB and ultimately the City but also commitment. Although several property owners have written to the City to request inclusion in the UGB, there is one group of property owners representing approximately 135 acres who have collaborated and prepared a conceptual master plan. The Taylor West Conceptual Master Plan envisions a mix of commercial and 7.A.b Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 20 of 53 Location Analysis Report residential uses around an interconnected network of trails, open space and public parks (Figure 9). Additionally, the plan envisions realignment of Grant Road through the property to correct the current off-set intersection. Figure 9, Taylor West Master Plan Concept When the City developed the Concept Land Use Plan for CP-6A, the Taylor West Master Plan provided a framework for land uses that will be part of a Mixed-use/Pedestrian Friendly Activity Center. For these reasons, the City deemed this a critical factor to efficiently accommodate demonstrated land needs. Consequently, parcels that are part of a conceptual master plan are considered as one unit for the purpose of the location analysis. Parcel Size The City needs land for housing, medium and large commercial employment uses, and core parks that are approximately 5-20 acres in size. Larger parcel sizes will more efficiently and effectively accommodate these lands needs than assembling smaller parcels under multiple ownerships to do the same. Although parcel size cannot be sole basis for inclusion in the UGB, this factor was applied early on in the preliminary location analysis to support efficient accommodation of land needs. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 21 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 10, UGB Study Area Parcel Size Map As shown in Figure 10, the largest parcels are concentrated in CP-2B and CP-6A for residential uses and CP-3 for commercial employment uses. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 22 of 53 Location Analysis Report Proximity to Public Facilities and Services Goal 14 Factor 2 is to provide for orderly and economic provision of public facilities services. A key indicator of orderly and economic provision of facilities is proximity to stubbed utility locations. Statewide Planning Goal 11 requires public facility plans to include water, sewer, storm drainage and transportation. The coarse filter analysis evaluated proximity to stubbed water and sewer facilities. Transportation networks were evaluated in a TIA prepared for the UGB Amendment for adequacy. There are no improved storm drains in the UGB Study Area. Prior to annexation, the City will complete the public facility planning by updating its TSP and Stormwater Master Plan to include the areas newly added to the UGB. The Water System Master Plan is currently being updated and includes the proposed UGB expansion areas (Attachment “B”). Proximity to Water The City mapped parcels based on their proximity to water services as a general indicator of orderly and economic provision of services. For this analysis, the City mapped properties within 500-ft of a stubbed water facility since these can be extended within existing and future City right-of-way (Figure 11). As shown there are concentrations of water service availability in CP-2B, CP-1C, CP-6A and CP-6B. However, not all of these areas are proximate to the current UGB nor do they adhere to a concentric growth pattern, which is more consolidated. Proximity to Sewer Similar to water, the City mapped parcels within 500-ft of stubbed sewer locations based on GIS data from RVSS (Figure 12). CP-6A, CP-6B, CP-1C and CP-2B have the greatest concentrations of parcels within 500-ft of stubbed utility locations. When water and sewer service availability shapefiles are combined, CP-6A emerges and the greatest concentration of land area that is close to both facilities that is adjacent to the current UGB. This is followed by lands in CP-1C and CP-2B (Figure 13-14). When the proximity distance is expanded to 1,000-feet, CP-2B and CP-6A emerge as the primary expansion area candidates (Figure 15). This coarse filter analysis provides a framework for the initial two (2) alternative boundary scenarios presented by staff. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 23 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 11, Proximate Water Facilities Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 24 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 12, Proximate Sewer Facilities Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 25 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 13, Proximate Water and Sewer Facilities Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 26 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 14, Annotated Water and Sewer Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 27 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 15, Coarse Alternative with Services within 1,000 feet 7.A.b Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 28 of 53 Location Analysis Report Alternative Boundary Scenarios Two (2) alternative boundary scenarios were prepared based on the coarse filter analysis that looked at master planned parcels/development readiness, parcel size, adjacency to the UGB and proximity to stubbed utility locations (Figure 10 and Figure 11). Figure 16, Staff Alternative 1A Staff Alternative 1A presents a more consolidated growth pattern and emphasizes inclusion of larger parcels sizes. It also provides connectivity between the existing UGB on the eastside of Interstate 5 with the urban area to the west of the Interstate. The CP-6A expansion are connects the Taylor West Mixed- Use/Pedestrian Friendly Area with the existing Twin Creeks Transit Oriented Development via Grant Road. Inclusion of lands in CP-4D brings City-owned parkland in the UGB as necessary to obtain funding to improve it as a needed core park. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 29 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 17, Staff Alternative 1B Staff Alternative 1B includes more diverse parcel sizes and represents a more dispersed growth pattern, which recognizes the importance of considering exception lands over high value farm lands. Preferred Alternative After reviewing the two (2) alternatives with the CAC, Planning Commission and City Council with public input at each level, staff was directed to pursue Staff Alternative 1A with an amendment to add roughly 10 acres south of the Taylor West Master Plan area. This parcel is on Heritage Road and the property owner and owners of Taylor West advocated for its inclusion and eventual participation in a master planned development at that location. Additionally, it was decided to include lands for commercial employment use in CP-3 as part of this application instead of a separate application. The commercial lands in CP-3 are the only commercial lands in the study area aside from those designated in CP-2B and CP-6A as part of Mixed Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. The Preferred UGB Location is shown in Figure 12. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 30 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 18, Preferred UGB Expansion Areas 7.A.b Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 31 of 53 Location Analysis Report Fine Filter Analysis Factor 2 – Orderly and Economic Provision of Public Facilities and Services Orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services has to do with selecting lands that give due consideration to assembling lands and associated services in a pattern that makes good use of resources. As discussed under Factor 1, this can be accomplished by selecting locations that are close to existing facilities and services to assure services are available and can be extended to serve new development. Orderly and economic provision of facilities and services can be met by utilizing existing street networks and upgrading to urban standards before extending new ones. Finally, it is necessary and appropriate to evaluate the impacts of forecast growth on existing system to assure that capacity is available to serve new residents. If significant system upgrades are needed to serve one area over another, the cost of growth in a particular area may be less beneficial when compared to another that may have ample capacity to serve anticipated growth. Since proximity and existing services were already discussed under Factor 1, this section focuses on assessments of the existing and planned street, water, sewer, and storm drainage systems. The City coordinated with agencies to assess the availability and capacity of key facility/service types to serve the City’s proposed UGB. The assessment provides a high level understanding of infrastructure needs as a precursor to updating public facility plans following amendment of the UGB and prior to annexation. Water Availability and Capacity The City retained Brown and Caldwell to evaluate the water system and update the Water System Master Plan. As part of this project, the City requested a preliminary investigation of high priority areas for UGB inclusion (Attachment _, Technical Memo No. 1 dated March 13, 2019). This memorandum demonstrates the City’s efforts to understand water concerns early in the UGB planning process. Following selection of a preferred alternative, including the addition of commercial lands in CP-3, the City requested a supplemental analysis specific to the current UGB proposal (Attachment _, Technical Memorandum No. 2 dated April 10, 2020). The water system analysis evaluated forecast growth relative to water supply, storage, pipe and pump station criteria needed to meet forecast demands. A key issue discussed is the need to replace the City’s 1M Gallon storage tank in town due to existing operational deficiencies. When this occurs, the City will have a storage deficiency. Any addition to the UGB will add to the deficiency. Based on the modeling, the City will need to construct a 2M Gallon tank to address existing conditions and forecast growth until 2040. The analysis concluded that water demands and storage needs can be met with nine (9) capital improvement projects, including replacing the existing 1M Gallon storage tank with a 2M Gallon tank and other distribution and piping projects. These are being added to the Water System Master Plan Capital Improvement/Financing Plan list as part of the current master plan update. Implementation of the plan will be a function of the priorities and funding per the Water System Master Plan. Construction of localized piping serving future development in the proposed UGB expansion areas will be development driven and completed in accordance with City standards. No further adjustments to the proposed UGB boundary was deemed necessary as a result of the Brown and Caldwell analysis. Sewer Availability and Capacity Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVSS) owns and operates the sanitary sewer system for the City of Central Point. The City engaged RVSS early on in the UGB planning process prior to selection of the 7.A.b Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 32 of 53 Location Analysis Report preferred alternative (Attachment _, RVSS Letter dated April 11, 2019). The preliminary sewer availability and capacity assessment concluded at that time that sewer could be provided to both alternative boundary scenarios (Figures 16 and 17). In CP-2B, development immediately adjacent to Gebhard Road can be served by an existing 15” line; however, development to the west and north will require extension of a new line from the Lower Bear Creek Interceptor (LCBI) 2,200-feet north along Upton Road to Wilson Road. Development in CP-6A is serviceable. It was noted in the RVSS letter that development south of Taylor can be served by extending the existing 21” line west along Taylor Road. A subsequent analysis in February 2020 (Attachment _, RVSS Email dated February 27, 2020) concluded that all of the Taylor West Master Plan area, including the property immediately north of Taylor can be served by the 21” line. Any development north of that location will require extension of the 15” main located immediately west of the railroad tracks on Scenic Avenue and/or 8” mains east of Jackson Creek in the Twin Creeks area. Based on the analysis provided by UGB, the proposed UGB location can be served by existing infrastructure immediately and with minimal cost along Gebhard and Taylor Roads. Both CP-2B and CP- 6A require sewer line extensions that will generate higher cost as development progresses, but the needed improvements will poise the City for future growth into both URAs. No further UGB boundary adjustments were deemed necessary based on the RVSS information. Traffic Impacts As part of the UGB location analysis, the City engaged a traffic engineer and the Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU) at ODOT to evaluate the alternative boundary scenarios and the preferred UGB location. TPAU ran the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Organization Travel Demand Model based on the no- build/build scenarios for the UGB Amendment in April 2019, July 2019 and November 2019 based on adjustments to the preferred UGB boundary. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering coordinated with ODOT, Jackson County and the City of Central Point Public Works Department from scoping through draft TIA completion. Traffic counts were acquired and used in conjunction with the RVMPO Travel Demand Model outputs to assess the impacts of growth on the existing and planned transportation system for no-build/build conditions in the current year (2019) and future year (2039). The TIA concludes that the transportation network can serve forecast growth with mitigation at five (5) study intersections (Attachment _, TIA). No modifications to the proposed UGB boundary were deemed necessary as a result of the findings in the TIA. Prior to annexation of lands within the UGB, the City will update its Transportation System Plan (TSP). At that time, the identified improvements will be incorporated in the Capital Improvement/Finance Plan as necessary to demonstrate availability of adequate transportation facilities. Storm Drainage Facilities A review of the UGB Study area reveled that there are no improved storm drainage facilities available. There are roadside ditches consistent with storm drainage in rural areas. Storm drains will be constructed as a function of new development. However, prior to annexation the City will complete a Stormwater Master Plan update to include the UGB expansion areas and develop a Capital Improvement Plan/financing plan for these areas. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 33 of 53 Location Analysis Report Educational Facility Capacity The City has communicated with School District #6 staff throughout the UGB Amendment planning process. In accordance with ORS 195.011, the District prepared a Long-Range Facility Master Plan in September 2019.7 The plan evaluates the adequacy of educational and operational facilities over the short- and long-term. Based on the Long-Range Facility Master Plan and correspondence with SD6, the District is implementing improvements that will provide capacity to serve 10-years of growth. Depending on the rate of growth in the UGB, the District may need to develop additional educational facilities to serve forecast growth. The District has a substantial land bank that includes three (3) properties that total approximately 36 acres. One property is within the existing UGB and is planned and zoned for school use. The remaining two (2) are within the City’s CP-2B and CP-6A URAs. The property within CP-6A fronts Scenic Avenue and is not included in this UGB Amendment proposal because it is not adjacent or proximate to the existing or proposed UGB boundary. The property in CP-2B is located on Upton Road adjacent to the existing and proposed UGB Boundary. It was initially included in early iterations of the UGB boundary, but removed due to property acquisition immediately north and west of the site by Rusted Gate Farm and uncertainty of the School District’s plans for this site given the growth of intensive active farming practices on the Rusted Gate Farm. In the event SD6 needs the land and selects this site for future school use, the City will initiate a minor amendment to the UGB for Civic lands. Factor 3: Comparative Environmental, Social, Economic and Energy (ESEE) Consequences Goal 14, Factor 3 requires evaluation advantages and disadvantages of the proposed UGB location relative to economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences. As shown in Table 6, there are several criteria that can apply to this factor. Mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas have not been discussed yet and these areas have benefits to the environment, economy, society and energy. A discussion of the Activity Centers is followed by findings for the ESEE consequences. Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas/Activity Centers An important consideration related to urban form and the Regional Plan’s Performance Indicators is the concept of activity centers. As used in this Land Use Element the term “activity center” is interchangeable with the term Transit-Oriented/Mixed-Use Pedestrian-Friendly areas. Both terms represent the development of a place(s) that encourages higher density mixed-use environments that are neighborhood oriented and designed to increase the convenience of walking, bicycling, and transit. The concept of activity centers is a key component to the City’s success in the retention and creation of neighborhoods and community identity necessary to support the City’s small town atmosphere8, and ultimately creates an environment that supports transit use. There are two types of activity centers; the activity centers that serves a residential neighborhood; and activity centers that serve the broader community’s retail and service needs. As used in the Land Use Element activity centers are described as: • Areas of development that contribute to achieving mixed-use, pedestrian friendly development, that vertically or horizontally supports mixed-use; • Neighborhood commercial/employment centers; 7 Central Point School District Long Range Facility Planning Report, BRIC Architecture, Inc. September 2019. 8 City of Central Point Forward Fair City Vision 2020, a City Wide Strategic Plan, 2007 7.A.b Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 34 of 53 Location Analysis Report • Parks and schools; and • Downtown areas/central business district. Benefits of activity centers include:[3][4] Greater housing variety and density, more affordable housing (smaller units), including life- cycle housing (starter homes to larger homes to senior housing); Reduced distances between housing, workplaces, retail businesses, and other amenities and destinations; More compact development, land-use synergy (e.g. residents provide customers for retail which provide amenities for residents); Stronger neighborhood character, sense of place; and Walkable, bikeable neighborhoods, increased accessibility via transit, both resulting in reduced transportation costs. The Regional Plan establishes the following Performance Indicator relative to Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas: For land within a URA and for land currently within a UGB but outside of the existing City Limit, each city shall achieve the 2020 benchmark targets for the number of new dwelling units9 and employment10 to be located in mixed-use/pedestrian-friendly areas as identified in the 2009 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) or most recently adopted RTP11. Beyond the year 2020, cities shall continue to achieve the 2020 benchmark targets, or if additional benchmark years are established, cities shall achieve the targets corresponding with the applicable benchmarks. Measurement and definition of qualified development shall be in accordance with adopted RTP methodology. The requirement is considered met if the city or the region overall is achieving the targets or minimum qualifications, whichever is greater. This requirement can be offset by increasing the percentage of dwelling units and/or employment in the City Limit. The City has mapped the Activity Centers in the current Urban Area and tracks housing and employment uses in the Buildable Lands Inventory (Figure 19). As part of the UGB Amendment, the City is proposing three (3) additional Activity Centers, including two (2) Neighborhood Activity Centers in CP-2B and CP- 6A, and one (1) Community Activity Center in CP-3 (Figure 20). The concept for each of these Activity Centers is to provide connections with existing Activity Centers to promote a more cohesive and livable community by linking mixed-use, walkable neighborhoods (Figures 22 and 23) 9 Alternative Measure No.5 requires that 39% of all new residential dwelling units shall be located in mixed use/pedestrian-friendly areas. 10 Alternative Measure No.6 requires that 48% of all new employment shall be located in mixed use/pedestrian- friendly areas. 11 RVMPO Alternative Measures Activity Centers, 2017 7.A.b Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 35 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 19, Central Point Urban Area Activity Centers 7.A.b Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 36 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 20, Proposed Activity Centers 7.A.b Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 37 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 21, CP-5A/6A Activity Center Concept 7.A.b Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 38 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 22, Eastside Activity Center Concept Environmental Environmental consequences are based on evaluation of lands in the study area relative to the impact of future urban level development on environmental resources (e.g. water quality, wildlife and fish habitat, etc). As shown in this report, the City eliminated lands within high risk floodplains, including all parcels with flood impacts adjacent to streams listed as habitat for Southern Oregon/North California Coast Coho salmon. Additionally the City inventoried all wetlands included in the Oregon State and National Wetlands Inventories to assure these lands are deducted from the gross acreage. These measures eliminate conflicts with sensitive resources in the floodplain and establish a means to eliminate or limit impacts to wetland resources. Environmental consequences of the City’s UGB Amendment are generated by the future conversion of rural lands to an urban form. The nature of urbanization includes the transformation of the landscape from open fields and forested areas to impervious areas with streets, sidewalks, homes, commercial and industrial centers. Central Point’s UGB Amendment will add 444 acres of land for future residential, commercial, and parkland use subject to City standards. In consideration of these consequences the City did the following: Minimized land need through increased infill participation. The Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (“Residential BLI”) provides an accounting of buildable lands that are available, suitable, necessary and likely to develop over the next 20-yearsin accordance with OAR 660-008- 0005(2). The Residential BLI reports that an extraordinarily high percentage of the buildable lands supply (67%) is Infill land (OAR 660-024-0050(2)(a)). These parcels are small in size, comprised of many individual property owners with varying risk tolerance and skill levels relative to real estate development. For this reason, the Residential BLI concludes it is unreasonable and unlikely to assume that all infill lands will develop during the planning period. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 39 of 53 Location Analysis Report It further defines the infill participation rate for the planning period by evaluating the rate of infill in the City between 1996 and 2016. Although this time period included both boom and bust development times for the City, the rate of infill participation was only 8% of the housing units and 6% of the residential land supply. The Residential BLI and the Housing Element (Exhibit F) apply a 20% infill adjustment for the residential land supply. This increase considers the City’s commitment to promoting infill and redevelopment within the current UGB to minimize need for additional lands. Selected UGB locations that are consolidated relative to existing developed areas; and away from sensitive areas to the extent possible. The UGB locations applied state location factors in OAR 660-024-0065, including elimination of high risk flood hazard areas. In this evaluation, the City considered not only how much of a property was impacted (fully or partially) but also whether the flooding source provides significant or critical habitat for listed species and if it is known to experience erosion or other conditions. These conditions can be exacerbated by nearby urban development impacts on flow volume and timing, as well as pollutant inputs and loss of riparian cover. These changes can impact habitat for listed and other species. Floodplain areas eliminated in the City’s location analysis included lands along Griffin and Jackson Creeks, both of which are listed as Critical Habitat for Southern Oregon/Northern Coast Coho (SONCC) salmon. In addition to the State location factors, the City applied local Goal 14 criteria that aim to provide a consolidated, concentric growth pattern. In applying this approach the City prioritized lands that are closer to the Central Business District and other activity centers within the current UGB. Through this approach the City is closing existing gaps between the east and west sides of town. From an environmental consequences perspective, this lends itself to taking advantage of existing transportation infrastructure (i.e. reducing resource consumption for street construction and need for additional impervious surface area), and reducing vehicle miles traveled from UGB expansion areas. Alternative locations further out, such as the east side of CP-2B or the south portion of CP- 6A or into CP-6B would have increased travel distances for new homes and businesses in Central Point. Proposed a land use pattern that is compact and supportive of Transit Oriented Development. Effective growth management since the late 1990s and early 2000s has included use of Transit Oriented Development (TOD), higher densities, access to diverse housing types and provision of parks and open spaces that provide multiple benefits. These include active and passive recreation, opportunities for passive stormwater quality/quantity management, and integration of natural benefits into urban areas. As the City contemplated expansion of the existing UGB into its URAs, the City did so with forethought through conceptual land use and transportation planning that includes extension of successful growth management practices to proposed UGB areas. Concept Plans approved by the City and Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) promote efficient land use, mixed-use/pedestrian friendly development and multimodal transportation options. This is seen in designation of neighborhood activity centers in CP-2B and CP-6A, which aim to provide neighborhood level service and employment opportunities that accessible in proximity to surrounding residential lands; extension of existing transportation networks planned for transit to areas that will be 7.A.b Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 40 of 53 Location Analysis Report ‘transit-ready’ should the opportunity arise. Adding commercial lands along East Pine Street in CP-3 provides additional employment opportunities in an area in close proximity to existing employment centers and serves as a community activity center. Through efficient and well planned land uses, the City’s UGB Amendment has proposed a consolidated land use pattern that minimizes environmental impacts and promotes community wellbeing by: o Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle-related particulate pollution by reducing dependence on vehicle dependence and making walking, biking and transit more viable; o Reducing vehicle miles traveled by locating the UGB expansion areas in proximity to the existing UGB and existing and proposed activity centers. o Compact urban form and increased parks and open space reduces impervious surfaces and provides opportunities for passive treatment to improve water quality through infiltration. The City finds that its UGB Amendment proposal avoids and limits uses that conflict with highly sensitive environmental resources. Additionally this UGB Amendment proposal intentionally selected lands to minimize sprawl, promote multiple transportation modes, and provide a consolidated growth pattern that is more conducive to minimizing adverse environmental impacts. Social Social consequences weigh and balance the impacts of the UGB location and future land use pattern on society, including but not limited to education, recreation, public health, aesthetics, etc. Housing supply and affordability represent a significant concern in Central Point and the region. There is a growing amount of research indicating that unstable housing and affordability are two pathways that increase negative health outcomes in a community.12 Housing stability has to do with moving frequently, falling behind on rent, being without housing, etc. Unstable housing can be due to supply and affordability issues and has significant adverse outcomes for youth including physical and mental health problems. Stable housing on the flipside has been shown to have the reverse effect, including documented reduced healthcare expenditures. Affordability has been and continues to be a significant issue in the City. Households that are cost burdened pay more than 30% of gross household income on housing expenses. This can cause financial stress that limits ability to pay the bills, reduce access to food, medications and other essentials. The consequences of unaffordable housing not only directly impact health outcomes, but can place a burden on families, educational attainment and more. This UGB Amendment includes land needed to supply housing for the 2019-2039 planning period. Providing adequate land supply may be one factor that drives up the cost. Additionally, the City’s zoning codes provide options for flexible housing types to respond to market demands and various income level needs. The residential codes will be amended prior to annexation to further increase housing options and eliminate regulatory barriers to efficient housing production. The UGB Amendment also includes 55 acres for core parkland to provide active and passive recreation for Central Point residents and visitors. Recreation enhances livability of a community, promotes physical wellness, can provide aesthetically pleasing places while restoring or preserving natural landscape qualities. Additionally, the UGB proposal includes lands in the Bear Creek Greenway and other open space lands that can become part of trail networks. 12 “Housing And Health: An Overview of The Literature,” Health Affairs Health Policy Brief, June 7, 2018. DOI: 10.1377/hpb20180313.396577 7.A.b Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 41 of 53 Location Analysis Report Inclusion of mixed-use/pedestrian friendly activity centers recognizes the importance of providing jobs, services and housing in neighborhoods that are walkable, bikable and supportive of transit now or in the future. These Activity Centers are located in a manner that connects existing urban areas that are currently separated by rural lands and Interstate 5. Creation of connected, mixed-use/pedestrian friendly neighborhoods has been shown by researchers to increase safety for school aged children and improve health outcomes. Additionally there are improved education outcomes and increased social capital from diverse Activity Centers like the ones proposed as part of this UGB Amendment. Had the City selected lower density lands east of Gebhard Road in CP-2B, for example, the City would have increased low density housing but not been able to provide for a centrally located Activity Center that is adjacent to school property, existing infrastructure that will be improved to urban standards with bike lanes and sidewalks resulting in a more disconnected, sprawling development pattern more conducive to driving, minimal diversity and inability to efficiently provide housing needed to help lessen financial and emotional stresses that can lead to physical and mental health outcomes, negative impacts on families, crime, and educational attainment. Failure to amend the UGB as proposed at this time, would likely result in adverse outcomes to Central Point residents due to the increased prevalence of unaffordable housing and the social, economic and public health problems. Additionally, Central Point would continue to have a disconnected UGB boundary on the eastside. Including lands proposed in CP-2B provides east-west connectivity and links the existing Eastside Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District with the proposed neighborhood activity Center. Economic Economic impacts of growth are incurred by increased cost due to infrastructure improvements, including: Hiring consultants to help update inventories and studies needed to update the Environmental and Public Facilities Element to include newly expanded UGB areas; Upgrading the City’s water storage from 1M Gallons to 2M Gallons to serve the forecast population and associated piping and distribution improvements to provide adequate flow; Extending the LCBI in CP-2B north along Upton Road 2,200-ft to serve most of the future development in this area, as well as future expansion areas including but not limited to the School site on Upton road; Extending the 15” sewer main on Scenic Avenue and/or under Jackson Creek from Twin Creeks to serve the north expansion area in CP-6A. Although the City and development community will incur additional cost from the proposed UGB expansion, the location of the proposal provides a framework that will support future growth in CP-6A to the north and/or south, and in CP-2B to the east of Gebhard or west of Upton to include the School site. It is unlikely that any other properties west of Upton will be included in the UGB due to recent acquisition by a farm operation that has declared its intent to preserve the farm through a conservation easement. Although this eliminates large parcels that would have otherwise supported efficient accommodation of housing and orderly and economic provision of services, the City has designed its UGB Amendment land use plan to provide opportunities for collaboration with the farm’s vision of creating an agro-tourism hub, which could include housing, a cider house/restaurant and supporting uses. These uses are appropriate for the urban area and would likely be limited in the County, which is why the City located commercial lands in proximity to property owned by the farm. This could provide benefits to 7.A.b Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 42 of 53 Location Analysis Report the local economy by furthering investment in specialty foods, an existing niche market for Central Point while supporting ongoing farm activity and investment in the region. In CP-6A, the City has proposed a Neighborhood Activity Center near the intersection of Grant and Taylor, which will be realigned to eliminate the current off-set intersection, which is substandard and a safety concern. The Neighborhood Activity Center is across the street from a religious center, which could promote synergy with the commercial uses and surrounding residential neighborhood. Selection of lands without Activity Centers that are not in a concentric growth pattern increase energy consumption and do not improve local economic conditions in residential areas. Had the City proposed an alternative, dispersed growth pattern, it would further sprawl and be contrary to the need to extend facilities and services in an orderly and economic manner. The costs of such expansion would outweigh benefits, especially considering that lands omitted in this proposal are not conducive to efficient accommodation of the City’s land need at this time. Energy Energy consequences weigh and balance the impact of alternative growth scenarios on transportation connectivity, efficient land development and energy consumption. Central Point’s location analysis includes Neighborhood and Community Activity Centers that will utilize master planning as a key mechanism for assuring development proposals are coordinated and include a well-planned network of transportation infrastructure, parks and open space together with housing and commercial uses. This has several benefits to energy versus a growth pattern that included lands without Activity Centers and that do not provide connectivity between existing boundaries of the Central Point UGB (i.e. east-west in CP-2B). These include: A more consolidated growth pattern that connects existing and planned Activity Centers. By connecting the urban area, future development will include multimodal transportation options that is within and between neighborhoods. This provides opportunities to minimize vehicle miles traveled, which reduces consumption of oil, gas and other resources associated with automotive travel. Integration of parks and open spaces will include trees and areas. According to the US EPA, trees provide several benefits including reducing the urban heat island effect. The urban heat island effect occurs in the built environment and can have ambient air temperatures that are 1.8° to 5.4° greater than surrounding rural areas. This increases the need for air conditioning, which drives up energy usage and cost for residents and businesses, not to mention increased health concerns associated with heat-related illness. The City’s proposal minimizes energy consumption by bringing in centrally located lands that fill gaps in the current urban area and promote connectivity. This proposal lends itself to future expansion that can build out from the centrally located UGB expansion areas proposed as part of this application. Factor 4: Compatibility of proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural and forest activities occurring on farm and forest land outside the UGB When the City participated in the Regional Problem Solving Process, alterative boundaries including the established URAs were evaluated for agricultural compatibility based on soil classification and existing uses/zoning. It was concluded that Central Point has limited options to avoid high value farmlands, which comprise a substantial portion of the UGB Study Area. Notwithstanding, the City considered the UGB location relative to soil quality based on the Land Capability Classification System as necessary to comply with ORS 197.298. This section of the ORS establishes priorities for including lands in the UGB, including when it is acceptable to include lower priority lands over higher priority lands. In general lower 7.A.b Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 43 of 53 Location Analysis Report priority (higher capability soils) may be included in the UGB when higher priority lands are inadequate to efficiently accommodate land need, public facilities cannot be reasonably provided due to physical constraints (e.g. topography, parcel configuration, etc.) and maximum efficiency of land uses require inclusion of lower priority lands to include or provide services to higher priority lands. The City evaluated land capability based on non-irrigated and irrigated soil classifications for the entire study area. Our findings for each URA are summarized below. CP-1C The CP-1C URA was identified early in the UGB planning process as a good candidate for inclusion in the City’s UGB Amendment application. This was due to the availability of public facilities and services and adjacency to the current UGB. Through the planning process, the Planning Commission expressed concerns due known improvements to properties that have resulted in creation of mini-farm estates. In consideration of the City’s land need and local knowledge the Planning Commission thought and the City Council agreed that higher intensity urban development is not likely to occur at the level needed during this 20-year planning period. Further investigation of soil types and land capability support this determination based on the presence of substantial Class 1 and 2 soils (irrigated). Consequently it was removed from the preferred UGB boundary being proposed as part of the current application. Figure 23, CP-1C Non-Irrigated Soil Capability Classification 7.A.b Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 44 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 24, CP-1C Irrigated Land Capability Classification 7.A.b Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 45 of 53 Location Analysis Report CP-2B As shown in Figures 26 and 27, the land capability for CP-2B increases substantially with irrigation. Lands east of Gebhard are higher priority for inclusion in the UGB based on the presence of lower class 3 and 4 soils at this location. However, the City weighed the soil quality with the need to provide housing and supporting economic and orderly public facilities extension. Aside from the fact that the areas west of Gebhard don’t further the City’s goal to connect the east and west sides of Central Point and provide increased livability by connecting existing and proposed Activity Centers, this area is difficult to serve with street infrastructure due to the presence of elongated parcels. As shown in the City’s Concept Plan, an east/west Collector is envisioned to provide access needed to develop this area. Street construction is a function of development and the high number of property owners calls into question the ability of this area to efficiently accommodate the City’s land need. Based on these challenges and the availability of larger parcels west of Gebhard, the City selected lower priority lands in CP-1B. This was deemed necessary to advance efficiently accommodate housing and neighborhood employment, providing economic and orderly provision of streets via existing Collectors (Gebhard, Upton and Wilson) while achieving livability goals and Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Area targets. This determination is consistent with ORS 197.298(3). Figure 25, CP-2B Non-Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 46 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 26, CP-2B Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 47 of 53 Location Analysis Report CP-3 The CP-3 URA is the only location within the UGB Study Area that provides for commercial uses (e.g. retail, personal service, office) that serve the greater community and not just a residential neighborhood. As shown in Figures 28 and 29, irrigation upgrades the land capability from having moderate restrictions to none at all. Given the City’s need for medium and large office and retail sites, and the fact that this is the only available land to serve this purpose and it has available water and sewer services is the basis for its selection for inclusion in the UGB per ORS 197.298(3). Figure 27, CP-3 Non-Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 48 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 28, CP-3 Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 49 of 53 Location Analysis Report CP-4D This URA is proposed for inclusion in the UGB because most of it consists of land owned by the City that is planned to be a community park that provides a combination of active and passive recreation opportunities. The soil classification renders is a low priority for inclusion in the UGB; however, is it not being actively farmed, and is in a location where parklands are needed and appropriate given its proximity to the Bear Creek Greenway and riparian areas. Figure 29, CP-4D Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 50 of 53 Location Analysis Report CP-6A The CP-6A URA is intermixed with class 2 and 3 soils (irrigated) that have moderate to minimal restrictions for farm use. The spatial distribution of higher capability soils precludes isolation of higher priority lands from lower priority lands. To accommodate the maximum numbers of housing and jobs, while addressing public facility needs and Performance Indicators for Mixed-Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas, the City has elected to include a concentration of large parcels north and south of Taylor Road in CP-6A. Inclusion of smaller sized parcels in CP-2B on higher priority (lower capability soils) This determination is consistent with ORS 197.298(3). Figure 30, CP-5A/6A Non-Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 51 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 31, CP-5A/6A Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map CP-6B This URA has similar soils as CP-6A but was not included in the UGB proposal due to the distance from the current UGB and the need to provide a consolidated, efficient land assembly for future urban use. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 52 of 53 Location Analysis Report Figure 32, CP-6B Non-Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map Figure 33, CP-6B Non-Irrigated Land Capability Classification Map 7.A.b Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point UGB Amendment Page 53 of 53 Location Analysis Report As demonstrated herein, the City considered and weighted the land capability/soil quality relative to the City’s land needs. Lands selected for inclusion minimize lower priority soils to the extent possible while taking into account and balancing the need for lands that will efficiently accommodate land need, can provide for the orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services, and advance the City’s livability objectives including compliance with Performance Indicators set forth in the Regional Plan. To safeguard agricultural uses outside areas brought into the UGB from the URAs, Central Point adopted agricultural mitigation measures in Chapter 17.71 of the Central Point Municipal Code. These rules aim to mitigate the potential for conflict between farming activities and urban uses. As new developments in the areas newly added to the UGB are proposed, the City requires an Agricultural Impact Assessment Report to provide evidence of surrounding agricultural intensity and the sufficiency of proposed mitigation measures to comply with the City’s regulations. We conclude that the City’s analysis of alternative boundary locations is consistent with the priorities set forth in ORS 197.298 and Agricultural Mitigation Standards in CPMC 17.71 will assure compatibility of future urban uses located adjacent to agricultural uses. Location Analysis Conclusion The City’s UGB Amendment proposal is based on the priorities for including land in the UGB per ORS 197.298 and OAR 660-24-0065 and OAR 660-024-0067. As demonstrated herein, the City conducted an analysis of alternative boundary locations that considered and weighed the benefits and pitfalls of expansion scenarios relative to state location criteria, the City’s ability to accommodate its land needs in balance with public facility needs, provide livable neighborhoods, meet Regional Plan Performance Indicators and generally improve the quality of life in Central Point as it grows over the next 20-years. Based on the City’s spatial analysis and technical reports addressing traffic, sewer, and water, the City concludes the proposed UGB Amendment efficiently accommodates the identified land needs, provides an orderly and economic extension of public facilities and services, maximizes the benefits associated with ESEE consequences while minimizing conflicting uses to the extent possible over any other location in the UGB study area. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Technical Memorandum Limitations: This is a draft memorandum and is not intended to be a final representation of the work done or recommendations made by Brown and Caldwell. It should not be relied upon; consult the final report. This document was prepared solely for Central Point in accordance with professional standards at the time the services were performed and in accordance with the contract between Central Point and Brown and Caldwell dated 12/18/18. This document is governed by the specific scope of work authorized by Central Point; it is not intended to be relied upon by any other party except for regulatory authorities contemplated by the scope of work. We have relied on information or instructions provided by Central Point and other parties and, unless otherwise expressly indicated, have made no independent investigation as to the validity, completeness, or accuracy of such information. 6500 SW Macadam Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97239 T: 503.244.7005 Prepared for: Central Point Project Title: Water System Master Plan Update Project No.: 152988 Technical Memorandum [No. 1] Subject: High-Priority Evaluations Date: March 13, 2019 To: Matt Samitore, Public Works Director From: Jacob Young, Project Manager Prepared by: Name and Title, License No., Expiration Reviewed by: Name and Title 7.A.b Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations ii DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Table of Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................ ii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................................. iii Section 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Shops Tank/Pump Station Analysis ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Taylor-West Expansion Analysis ................................................................................................................... 1-1 Section 2: Model Update....................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Model Facilities Update ............................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Demand Update ........................................................................................................................................... 2-4 2.2.1 Existing Demand ............................................................................................................................. 2-4 2.2.2 Future Demands ............................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.3 Demand Allocation ......................................................................................................................... 2-7 2.2.4 Diurnal Pattern ................................................................................................................................ 2-8 2.2.5 Fire Flow Demands ......................................................................................................................... 2-9 Section 3: Level of Service Goals ......................................................................................................................... 3-1 Section 4: System Evaluation ............................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Storage Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Possible Pump Station Sites ........................................................................................................................ 4-2 4.3 Model Analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 4-4 4.4 Recommended Projects ............................................................................................................................... 4-6 4.5 Cost Estimates .............................................................................................................................................. 4-6 Section 5: Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 5-1 References ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 List of Figures Figure 1. Existing Water System Map................................................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2. Existing System Hydraulic Schematic ................................................................................................... 2-3 Figure 3. Planned Future Service Area................................................................................................................. 2-6 Figure 4. Projected Demand Growth .................................................................................................................... 2-7 Figure 5. Diurnal Pattern ....................................................................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 5. Possible Pump Station Sites ................................................................................................................. 4-3 Figure 6. 2040 MDD Tank and Pump Station Model Results ............................................................................ 4-4 Figure 7. Map of 2040 MDD Model Results ........................................................................................................ 4-5 7.A.b Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations iii DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx List of Tables Table 1. Total Existing Demand ............................................................................................................................ 2-4 Table 2. Total Future Demand .............................................................................................................................. 2-7 Table 3. 2040 Build-Out Demand Area ................................................................................................................ 2-8 Table 4. Fire Flow Demands ................................................................................................................................. 2-9 Table 5. Design Criteria ......................................................................................................................................... 3-1 Table 6. Existing System Storage Analysis ........................................................................................................... 4-1 Table 8. Project List ............................................................................................................................................... 4-6 Table 9. Project Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 5-1 7.A.b Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 1-1 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Section 1: Introduction The City of Central Point (City) is in the process of updating the water system master plan, last completed in 2009. This technical memorandum (TM) summarizes early high-priority evaluations with the goal of providing the City with budgetary costs and project concepts in time for their 2-year budget cycle meetings in March of 2019. The scope of work for these evaluations includes the following tasks: · Update the City’s existing water model network with the latest piping and facilities from GIS · Update existing and future water demands from the latest population projections and water use infor- mation · Evaluate the need for and options for replacing the Shops tank and pump station (PS) · Evaluate the water system capacity to deliver water to the Taylor-West urban growth boundary (UGB) ex- pansion area · Develop preliminary costs for improvements needed for the Shops tank/PS replacement and supplying the Taylor-West area · Document the results in a TM (this document) The two primary analyses are described in more detail below. 1.1 Shops Tank/Pump Station Analysis The City has historically obtained water from the Medford Water Commission (MWC) through three master meter station (MMS) locations, Beall, Hopkins and Vilas. The Shops tank, which is supplied by the Hopkins MMS via an altitude valve is currently used to supply a portion of the City’s fire flow, operational, and emer- gency storage. The Shops pump station is used to pump flow from the Shops tank to the hydraulic grade of the distribution system. The City plans to demolish the Shops tank due to structural deficiencies and is look- ing for alternate sites to provide the required pumping capacity to meet system demands. This analysis will evaluate options to supply the system under the following two alternatives, for existing and 2040 conditions: 1. Supply all City demands from the Vilas and Beall MMSs by installing a pump station near the Beall MMS. This is the preferred alternative and will be evaluated first. 2. If it is not possible to supply the system through Vilas and Beall alone, evaluate alternate pump sta- tion sites near the Hopkins MMS. 1.2 Taylor-West Expansion Analysis The City is currently planning a UGB expansion, which will include growth through the year 2040 based on projected population increases for the City. Taylor-West is a 90-acre expansion area on the west side of town along Taylor Road that is expected to be developed within this timeframe. The high priority evaluation for Taylor-West will evaluate the distribution system using the hydraulic model to determine its capacity to de- liver water to the Taylor-West expansion area under peak demand and under fire flow conditions, both for existing and 2040 demand scenarios. Any deficiencies discovered in the distribution system that are not ad- dressed by an existing CIP project (from the 2009 master plan) will be identified. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 2-1 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Section 2: Model Update The City has made several improvements to their water system since the last system-wide model update completed by Brown and Caldwell (BC) for the 2009 master plan. Due to the recession, the City has also ex- perienced reduced growth that did not match previous projections. Model facilities and demands were up- dated to match current conditions and the most recent population projections. Model calibration was not included in this scope of work for the high-priority evaluations but will be completed subsequently as a part of the Water System Master Plan Update. 2.1 Model Facilities Update To effectively capture recent improvements to the City’s water system, City-wide GIS data of the water sys- tem pipes were provided by City staff and used to update the City’s water system model. The control strategy currently used by the City and reflected in the model is described below. These controls will be revisited during the model calibration process. · Vilas – The Vilas facility consists of the Vilas MMS, 2.5 MG tank, and a pump station. This facility was designed to operate in three ways, depending on the available hydraulic grade from MWC and demand within the City. - When hydraulic grade from MWC is sufficient, the MMS supplies the distribution system directly and is controlled using a pressure setting of 85 psi. - The pump station has two variable speed pumps. These pumps draw water directly from the MMS and the pump speed is varied to maintain a discharge pressure of 90 psi with a pump speed limit such that the pump station flow does not exceed the City’s contract limits. The flow limit is set to 2,100 gpm. - The 2.5 MG tank is filled via a flow control valve with a limit of 1,000 gpm. Two constant speed pumps are designed draw from the tank during peak demand periods to serve the system. These pumps are controlled to operate from 5 am to 10 am and from 6 pm to 9 pm. · Hopkins and Shops – MWC water from the Hopkins MMS can enter the system in two ways, directly into the system through a control valve with a pressure setting of 84 psi, or through the Shops tank and pump station. Flow from Hopkins serves the Shops tank through a direct pipe with an altitude valve. The Shops pump station pumps from the tank to the hydraulic grade of the system. · Beall – The Beall MMS serves the distribution system directly and is controlled using a pressure reduc- ing valve with pressure setting of 79 psi. Existing water system facilities are shown in Figure 1 and the existing water system hydraulic schematic is shown in Figure 2. The Shops tank is shown with a dashed outline in the schematic to indicate that it will be demolished in the near future. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 2-2 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Figure 1. Existing Water System Map 7.A.bPacket Pg. 236Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 2-3 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Figure 2. Existing System Hydraulic Schematic 7.A.bPacket Pg. 237Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 2-4 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx 2.2 Demand Update Existing and future water system demands were updated prior to completing the high priority evaluations. Demand scenarios were developed for maximum day demand (MDD) and average day demand (ADD). This section describes the data sources and the process used to develop updated system demands. Data sources available for the demand update included: · Population projections from 2018-2068 Coordinated Population Forecast (Portland State University, 2018) · City billing records · Customer meter locations · Parcel land use type · Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) records · Vacant lands and UGB expansion areas The framework for the demand update is outlined here and described in more detail in the following sec- tions: 1. Existing Demand – Establish existing system per capita usage based on total supply flow records from MWC and existing population. 2. Future Demands – Project existing demand increase to the 2040 planning horizon based on popula- tion increase. This population based future demand total will be allocated in the model in the next step. 3. Future Demand Allocation – Allocate demands to vacant lands and expansions areas based on exist- ing unit use rates per land use type. Once demands are allocated in the model, scale up system wide demands to match the future demand calculated in Step 2. 2.2.1 Existing Demand SCADA records of total supply flow from MWC for July 2013 through December 2018 were used to deter- mine the existing ADD and MDD. Discrepancies in the total demand for low flow months in 2018 led to the selection of the 2017 year as the basis for total existing ADD and MMD. The historical system MDD was also determined by selecting the day of maximum demand from the entire 2013-2018 period. Table 1 lists total system demands for each year. A demand of 144 gallons per day (gpd) per person was calculated from the 2017 water demand and population data. Table 1. Total Existing Demand Year Demand (mgd) Demand (gpm) ADD-to-MDD Scaling Factor ADD MDD ADD MDD 2013 1 2.59 5.62 1,794 3,904 2.18 2014 2.42 6.15 1,683 4,270 2.54 2015 2.57 6.15 1,786 4,269 2.39 2016 2.69 6.83 1,871 4,742 2.53 2017 2.73 6.16 1,895 4,275 2.26 2018 3.12 6.13 2,166 4,259 1.97 1. Only 6 months of data was available for 2013, starting in July 7.A.b Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High Priority Evaluation 2-5 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx 2.2.2 Future Demands The future service area includes the City’s established urban growth boundary (UGB) and 20-year expansion areas which are expected to be brought into the UGB. Demands were calculated for the future service area of the water system for buildout of the anticipated UGB expansion in 2040. Figure 3 shows the planned ser- vice area of the City system. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 2-6 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Figure 3. Planned Future Service Area 7.A.bPacket Pg. 240Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 2-7 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Year 2040 demands were based on population projections and the existing per capita demand. Based on the 2017 population of 18,929 and ADD of 2.73 mgd, the existing use rate is 144 gpd per person. Using this use rate, the 2040 total system ADD was calculated from the projected 2040 population of 26,707. An ADD to MDD scaling factor of 2.53 calculated from the 2016 water demand as described above was used to pro- ject the MDD from ADD for each horizon. 2040 demands are summarized in Table 2 and shown in Figure 4. Table 2. Total Future Demand Year Population Projection1 Demand (mgd) Demand (gpm) ADD MDD ADD MDD 2020 19,714 2.84 7.20 1,973 5,001 2030 22,920 3.30 8.37 2,294 5,814 2040 26,707 3.85 9.76 2,673 6,774 1. Source: Portland State University, 2018 Figure 4. Projected Demand Growth 2.2.3 Demand Allocation In the year 2040, the total system demand in the model is based upon population projections. The allocation of that demand is determined through application of unit use rates to UGB expansion areas, undeveloped land, vacant land, and under-developed land. The unit use rates were calculated for each land use type using the 2017 average day demands calculated from billing data for currently developed lands within the City. After using the unit use rates to apply de- mands to the 2040 build-out land use condition, they were scaled to meet the population-based demand projection. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High Priority Evaluation 2-8 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx The City planning department provided a breakdown of zoning within the UGB, vacant lands, undevel- oped/underdeveloped lands, and land use for expansion areas which was used in this analysis. Table 3 lists the unit use rates per land use category based on 2017 existing condition average day demands. Table 3. 2040 Build-Out Demand Area Land Use Area (acres) Unit use rate (gpm/ac) Unit use rate (gpd/ac) Bear Creek Greenway (BCG) 72 No demand No demand I-5 Highway (I5) 36 No demand No demand Commercial: medical district (C-2(M)) 12 0.67 967 Tourist and office (C-4) 58 1.16 1,668 Thoroughfare commercial (C-5) 5 0.35 500 Civic 92 0.88 1,269 Neighborhood commercial (CN) 6 0.32 456 Employment commercial (EC) 26 0.97 1,392 General commercial (GC) 49 0.87 1,258 High mix residential/commercial (HMR) 26 1.27 1,834 Low mix residential (LMR) 85 1.46 2,098 Industrial (M-1) 61 0.06 88 General industrial (M-2) 36 0.10 147 Medium mix residential (MMR) 36 1.60 2,307 Open space (OS) 60 0.70 1,009 Single-family residential: 10,000 (R-1-10) 28 1.34 1,928 Single-family residential: 6,000 (R-1-6) 365 1.25 1,798 Single-family residential: 8,000 (R-1-8) 393 1.25 1,803 Two-family residential (R-2) 106 1.40 2,012 Expansion Areas 1.20 1,734 Medium Density Residential 0.31 451 High Density Residential 1.53 2,203 2.2.4 Diurnal Pattern The daily water use pattern, or diurnal pattern, represents the fluctuation in demand over a given day. For the purposes of the high priority evaluation, the diurnal pattern developed for the City in the 2009 Water Sys- tem Master Plan was used. The diurnal pattern will be revisited during model calibration. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High Priority Evaluation 2-9 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Figure 5. Diurnal Pattern 2.2.5 Fire Flow Demands Fire flow demands are used to evaluate the system capacity to supply adequate water for fire suppression. Each land use type in the City’s planning information was assigned a fire flow demand. Table 4 lists the as- signed fire flow rates for both existing and future system evaluations. These estimates are based on general information provided by the fire district. The City did not provide fire demands for any structures within the system service area that exceeded the demands listed in Table 4. Table 4. Fire Flow Demands Land use Fire flow (gpm) Duration (hr) City Lot Type Code Industrial 3,500 3 HI, LI Institutional (public) 3,500 3 PUBLIC Commercial 2,500 3 GC, HC, LC Mixed use 2,000 2 MU, LMR, HMR Multifamily residential 1,500 2 MFD, MFR, MH, MHP Single-family residential 1,000 2 SFR 7.A.b Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 3-1 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Section 3: Level of Service Goals A summary of the level of service goals that were applied as design criteria in this evaluation are summa- rized in Table 5. These were adopted from the previous master plan. Table 5. Design Criteria Requirement Value Pressure Minimum operating Maximum operating Minimum during a fire 35 psi 120 psi 20 psi Velocity Maximum for new pipe Maximum for existing pipe 5 ft/s 6 ft/s Storage Equalization volume Fire volume Emergency volume To serve demand in excess of supply to the tank service area for MDD Supply the largest needed fire flow for the service area for the required duration. 1/3 of MDD Pump Stations Pumps should be sized to meet the minimum capacity requirement with the largest pump out of service. ft/s = feet per second psi = pounds per square inch 7.A.b Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 4-1 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Section 4: System Evaluation The evaluation included a storage analysis, evaluation of possible pump station and storage sites, and evalu- ation of pressures and velocities in the distribution system to serve future growth areas. Recommended pro- jects and estimated costs are also included in this section. 4.1 Storage Analysis The water system storage capacity was evaluated to determine how the system will be affected by the demo- lition of the Shops tank and the expected growth in demand. The volume of required storage for a water sys- tem typically consists of three components: (1) equalization, (2) fire, and (3) emergency storage. Equalization storage is the volume of water required to meet demands that are greater than the average daily demands and is determined using the diurnal pattern. Fire storage is reserved to supply the largest fire demand for the duration of a fire event. Emergency storage is reserved to provide water during events such as power outages, maintenance, natural disasters, facility failures, etc. Table 6 shows the storage analysis for the ex- isting and 2040 scenarios. Table 6. Existing System Storage Analysis Planning Horizon Existing Storage Capacity (MG) Required Storage Volume (MG) Excess Storage (MG) Fire Equalization Emergency Total Existing Tanks Without Shops 2017 5.69 0.63 1.88 2.30 4.81 0.88 -0.11 2040 0.63 2.65 3.25 6.53 - 0.83 -1.83 In the current demand condition without the 1 MG Shops tank in service the City would have a storage defi- ciency of 0.11 MG. In 2040, the storage analysis shows that the City will need an additional 1.83 MG of stor- age capacity. To alleviate this deficiency, the City would like to install a 2 MG tank adjacent to the existing Old Stage tank that can meet storage requirements through 2040 and beyond. Alternative sites considered for the proposed tank included sites directly west of the new Taylor-West Development or pump-storage sites adjacent to the pump station site alternatives in Section 4.2. The sites west of Taylor-West would have re- quired a costly transmission main extension, re-zoning, and included some of the highest land prices in the area. Pump-storage sites are less favorable compared to elevated storage because of the long-term energy costs of pumping from the tank hydraulic grade to system pressure. The model analysis discussed in Section 4.3 indicates that adding a tank at the existing Old Stage tank site can be done without significant transmis- sion main capacity improvements through 2040. The City has had problems maintaining chlorine residual in the existing Old Stage tank in the past. Adding 2 MG of storage to the system will likely result in an increase in water age and a decrease in chlorine residual. Along with the installation of a new 2 MG tank, tank mixing equipment or a chlorine booster station could be installed at the Old Stage tanks to maintain adequate chlorine residual in the water. If the Shops tank and pump station are demolished prior to installation of a new storage facility, the Vilas pump station becomes even more critical. The installation of a planned emergency generator at the Vilas pump station was discussed with the City. The electrical facilities to support the emergency generator were installed during construction of the Vilas pump station, but the generator has not yet been installed. Installa- tion of the generator could mitigate the risk of demolishing the Shops tank by providing power to the Vilas pumps during a power outage, which would allow the City to utilize the capacity of the Vilas storage tank. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High Priority Evaluation 4-2 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx 4.2 Possible Pump Station Sites Possible sites for pump stations near the MWC transmission line were discussed with the City in March 2019 and are shown on Figure 5 and listed with their parcel number below. · Medical facility parking lot (372W11C8200): This is the City’s preferred location for a new pump sta- tion. The City has had preliminary discussions with the property owner and the site exceeds the required parking capacity for the existing medical facility, leaving room for a structure in the southwest corner. · Tractor sales site (372W11CD1300): This is a possible site with some open space. The City has dis- cussed this option with the property owner who is open to it, though it would require additional piping across Hwy 99 and to the site. · Boise Cascade (372W14300): Boise Cascade owns a large parcel adjacent to the existing MMS that is currently in agricultural use. If this site were used the pump station would be located as close to the MMS as possible without impacting a large black walnut tree, which is a protected heritage tree. · Bursell Rd home site (372W11AC6600): This property is currently for sale at a reasonable price near Hopkins MMS and the 16-inch MWC transmission main on Hopkins Road. · Glengrove Wayside Park (372W12BC1200): This parcel is a City-owned park near the 36-inch MWC transmission main. Space is limited due to a small waterway that runs through site and requires 25-foot offset from top of bank. · Forest Glen Park (372W12CB10400): This parcel is a City-owned park near the 36-inch MWC transmis- sion main. The City is currently planning a playground upgrade at this site. The site is constrained by wet- lands on the west side of park. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 4-3 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Figure 5. Possible Pump Station Sites7.A.bPacket Pg. 247Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 4-4 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx 4.3 Model Analysis Model analysis included an evaluation of the system under the 2040 MDD conditions. The model analysis began by determining if it is possible to meet peak demands in 2040 with a pump station at or near the Beall MMS. Facilities and control modifications made in the model included: · 3,150 gpm pump station at Beall (constant flow) · New 2 MG storage tank at the Old Stage site · Modification of Vilas controls to limit pumping capacity in the system to the average of MDD in 2040 · Removal of the Shops tank and pump station · Addition of skeleton piping networks in the proposed growth areas (to be developer built) · Addition of Project M-1 from the 2009 Master Plan to connect the Beall MMS to the City’s distribution main in Highway 99 Figure 6 shows the water level in the Old Stage tanks and the expected velocity in the Old Stage transmis- sion pipe over a 3-day period. The City has experienced water age issues with the existing Old Stage tank and expressed concerns with the current lack of a dedicated inlet/outlet main to the tank. Maximum veloci- ties do not indicate the need for a second transmission main to the Old Stage tank and the Master Plan Up- date will further evaluate options to improve water age/quality issues at the Old Stage site. Figure 6. 2040 MDD Tank and Pump Station Model Results Figure 7 shows a map of the 2040 MDD model results. For growth areas, the model analysis shows suffi- cient capacity within the distribution system to service future demands without piping upgrades to meet de- sign criteria for fire flow. There were no peak hour or fire flow pressure deficiencies caused by the addition of the Taylor-West development. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 Old Stage Tank (% Full)Velocity (ft/sec)Hour 16-inch Tranmission Main to Old Stage Velocity (ft/s)Old Stage Tank 7.A.b Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 4-5 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Figure 7. Map of 2040 MDD Model Results 7.A.bPacket Pg. 249Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 4-6 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Based on the model results, 2040 demands and storage needs can be met with the addition of a pump sta- tion at or near the Beall MMS, installation of project M-1 from the 2009 master plan, and installation of a new 2 MG tank at the Old Stage site. The existing transmission pipe out to the Old Stage tank has adequate capacity to convey expected flows for 2040. However, by 2040 this pipeline and other pipes in the system will be on the verge of needing up- grades with velocities approaching 6 ft/s. These areas will be evaluated further for the master plan update. 4.4 Recommended Projects This section summarizes recommended projects for the City’s water system in order to develop the Taylor- West growth area and decommission the existing Shops tank and pump station. These projects are shown on Figure 7. · Backup power at Vilas Pump Station – Install emergency power generator prior to demolition of Shops tank so that Vilas storage can be utilized in the event of an emergency. · Beall Pump Station – Install a new pump station with a firm 2040 capacity of 3,150 gpm to provide ad- equate hydraulic grade to the system. This pump station will likely be phased and/or operated on VFD controls to transition between existing and future demands. · Beall Piping Upgrades – Install project M-1 from the 2009 Master Plan, which includes 590 linear feet of 12-inch diameter pipe with one railroad crossing and one Hwy 99 crossing, and 170 linear feet of 16- inch diameter pipe. This project helps to alleviate velocities exceeding 6 fps as water is conveyed from the Beall Pump Station to the north and east areas of the distribution system. · 2 MG Old Stage Tank – Install a 2 MG tank adjacent to the existing Old Stage tank to meet storage ca- pacity requirements after the Shops tank is demolished. The Master Plan Update will further review wa- ter age and chlorine residual concerns at this location. 4.5 Cost Estimates Cost estimates provided in Table 8 are based on a budgetary, planning-level, and engineer’s opinion of prob- able costs in 2019 dollars. The cost estimate is considered a Class 4 estimate as categorized by the Associ- ation for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACE) criteria. It is an opinion of probable costs provided for budgeting purposes appropriate to the conceptual design level provide in this TM, and is not intended to provide the actual cost of materials, construction, or professional services. The expected accu- racy for a Class 4 estimate can range from -30 to +50 percent depending on the basis of the cost estimate. These estimates are subject to change as more project detail is developed for the Master Plan Update. Unit costs were developed from Brown and Caldwell’s recent project experience in the area, bid tabs pro- vided by the City from the Vilas Water Storage Reservoir and Pump Station Project (bid in August 2011), and from recent piping installation projects within the City. The costs include a 30% contingency on construction cost and 15% for engineering and services during construction. Prior to securing funding for these projects it is recommended that the project design and costs be developed in more detail. Table 8. Project List Project Budgetary Cost Estimate Backup Power at Vilas Pump Station $150,000 Beall Pump Station $5,008,000 Beall Piping Upgrade $1,765,000 2-MG Old Stage Tank $4,967,000 7.A.b Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 5-1 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx Section 5: Summary This TM included documentation of the model facilities and demand update that were completed prior to evaluation of high-priority projects with the goal of providing the City with budgetary costs and project con- cepts in time for their 2-year budget cycle meetings in March of 2019. Model calibration was not included in the scope of these evaluations and will be completed along with a comprehensive evaluation of the City’s water distribution system in the next phase of the Water Master Plan Update to follow this TM. Based on the model results, 2040 demands and storage needs can be met with the projects summarized in Table 9. Table 9. Project Summary Project Description Budgetary Cost Estimate Backup Power at Vi- las Pump Station Install emergency generator at the Vilas pump station site prior to demolition of the Shops tank. $150,000 Beall Pump Station Install Beall Pump Station with a combined capacity of 3,150 gpm. Review pump station staging during Master Plan Update. $5,008,00 Beall Piping Up- grade Install Project M-1 from the 2009 Master Plan. Includes: • 590 LF of 12-inch diameter pipe with one railroad crossing and one Hwy 99 crossing. • 170 LF of 16-inch diameter pipe along Beall Lane $1,765,00 2-MG Old Stage Tank Install a new 2 MG at the Old Stage tank site with a base eleva- tion of 1451.75 feet, diameter of 122 feet and a maximum height of 24 feet. Measures to address water age concerns TBD. $4,967,000 Issues identified in this high-priority evaluation that were not included as projects in Table 9, but will be ad- dressed in the Master Plan Update include: · Phasing of capacity at Beall Pump Station · Water Age/Quality at Old Stage Tank · Transmission mains with velocities approaching 6 fps that are on the verge of needing to be up- graded in the 2040 scenario. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) High-Priority Evaluations 1 DRAFT for review purposes only. Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-High Priority Evaluation DRAFT 06.docx References Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs, 2018 - 2068, Population Research Center, Portland State University, June 30, 2018. City of Central Point Water System Master Plan, Brown and Caldwell, December 2009 7.A.b Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Technical Memorandum Limitations: This document was prepared solely for Central Point in accordance with professional standards at the time the services were performed and in accordance with the contract between Central Point and Brown and Caldwell dated 12/18/18. This document is governed by the specific scope of work authorized by Central Point; it is not intended to be relied upon by any other party except for regulatory authorities contemplated by the scope of work. We have relied on information or instructions provided by Central Point and other parties and, unless otherwise expressly indicated, have made no independent investigation as to the validity, completeness, or accuracy of such information. TM-UGB Expansion FINAL.docx 6500 SW Macadam Avenue, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97239 T: 503.244.7005 Prepared for: Central Point Project Title: Water System Master Plan Update Project No.: 152988 Technical Memorandum No. 2 Subject: Urban Growth Boundary Expansion Date: April 10, 2020 To: Matt Samitore, Public Works Director From: Janice Bell, Project Manager Prepared by: Janice Bell, P.E., OR81010PE, Exp 12/31/2022 7.A.b Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion ii Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-UGB Expansion FINAL.docx Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Section 2: UGB Expansion Areas ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Taylor-West (CP-6A) ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Peninger Road (CP-3) ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Boes Avenue (CP-4D) ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.4 Green Valley (CP-2B) ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Section 3: Level of Service Goals ............................................................................................................................ 5 3.1 Reference Documents .................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Supply Criteria ................................................................................................................................................. 5 3.3 Storage Criteria ................................................................................................................................................ 6 3.4 Pipe Criteria ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 3.5 Pump Station Criteria ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Section 4: System Evaluation ................................................................................................................................ 10 4.1 Storage Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 10 4.2 Supply Analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 11 4.3 Model Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 12 4.3.1 Old Stage Transmission ................................................................................................................... 15 4.3.2 Recommended Projects .................................................................................................................. 15 4.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 16 Attachment A: Urban Growth Boundary Amendment .......................................................................................... A-1 Attachment B: Wholesale Water Service Agreement .......................................................................................... B-1 7.A.b Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion iii Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. TM-UGB Expansion FINAL.docx List of Figures Figure 1. Planned future service area ..................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Required equalization storage ................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 3. 2040 supply analysis ............................................................................................................................. 11 Figure 4. Fireflow .................................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5. Velocity and minimum pressures .......................................................................................................... 14 Figure 6. 2040 MDD tank and pump station model results ............................................................................... 15 List of Tables Table 1. Supply Criteria ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Table 2. Storage Criteria .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 3. Pipe Criteria ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Table 4. Pump Station Criteria ................................................................................................................................. 9 Table 5. Existing System Storage Analysis ............................................................................................................ 10 Table 6. Project Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 16 7.A.b Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 1 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Section 1: Introduction The City of Central Point (City) is in the process of amending its Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to accommodate future growth through the year 2040. The incorporation of additional land into the City’s UGB will support the projected population increase by adding the following acreages per land use classification: • 324.8 acres of residential • 34.7 acres of employment • 54.9 acres of core parks • 5 acres of open space • 15.1 acres of Bear Creek Greenway • 11.5 acres of right of way Brown and Caldwell (BC) is currently updating the City’s water system master plan, which includes evaluating the existing infrastructure, and identifying future needs and projects beneficial to the city’s growth. As part of this effort, the anticipated UGB expansion and its impact to the expansion of the current water system infrastructure was evaluated. The following water system master planning tasks have been completed to date: • Update water system demands. • Analyze storage needs. • Perform hydraulic system testing and model calibration. • Establish level of service criteria for evaluation. • Evaluate system per established level of service criteria. The Master Plan Update is currently in the capital project development phase and major pipeline and facility improvements have been identified but have not been developed in detail. Because the City’s timeline for expanding the UGB precedes the completion date of the Master Plan Update, this technical memorandum (TM) has been developed to support the City’s UGB expansion application. Section 2: UGB Expansion Areas The following UGB expansion areas, identified in Attachment A to this TM, were examined in conjunction with the City’s current InfoSWMM water system model: • Taylor-West (CP-6A) • Peninger Road (CP-3) • Boes Avenue (CP-4D) • Green Valley (CP-2B) Figure 1 below shows the location of expansion areas relative to the City’s existing water system. The following subsections discuss each of the four UGB expansion areas. 2.1 Taylor-West (CP-6A) The proposed Taylor-West expansion consists of approximately 236 acres that will be developed into a mix of residential parcels (low-, medium-, and high-density) as well as commercial uses. This expansion area is 7.A.b Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 2 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. located on the west side of town and will be connected to the existing distribution system along Taylor Road, Grant Road, and Twin Creeks Crossing. A skeleton network of 12-inch-diameter distribution system pipes were added to the water system model to represent development in this area and allocate system demands. Actual piping within the expansion area will be developer built and configured to meet City standards. 2.2 Peninger Road (CP-3) The proposed Peninger Road expansion area consists of approximately 34 acres of commercial, greenway, and parks and open space land use. This expansion area is served by an existing 16-inch transmission main that extends from Beebe Road across Bear Creek to the existing 12-inch pipeline on Peninger Road. A new developer-built, 12-inch-diameter distribution pipe is also planned to add a parallel pipeline from the Bear Creek crossing to Peninger Road along the proposed alignment for the extension of Beebe Road. 2.3 Boes Avenue (CP-4D) The Boes Avenue expansion area consists of approximately 23 acres proposed primarily for parks and open spaces, with the exception of one, low-density residential lot. This lot is located at the end of the existing 8-inch-diameter distribution pipe on Boes Avenue. No additional distribution or transmission piping is anticipated as a result of this expansion area. 2.4 Green Valley (CP-2B) The proposed Green Valley expansion area consists of approximately 163 acres located in the northern portion of the city. It is expected to be developed into a mixture of low-, medium-, and high-density residential land use parcels. This area will be connected to the existing distribution system along Gebhard Road and extend up to Wilson Road to the north and Upton Road to the west. A skeleton network of 12-inch-diameter distribution system pipes were added to the water system model to represent development in this area and allocate system demands. Actual piping within the expansion area will be developer-built and configured to meet City standards. It is expected that this area will develop along Gebhard Road first and move west as infrastructure to support development in this area is progressively built out by developers. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 3 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Figure 1. Planned future service area 7.A.b Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 5 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Section 3: Level of Service Goals A description of level of service goals and other criteria to be used for evaluating the existing drinking water system and for the design of future improvements in the model is presented in this section. It lists the specific capacity, operations, and reliability requirements for supply, piping, pumping, and storage facilities. The criteria were developed to ensure the desired level of service to each customer served by the City and to maximize the efficiency of the future system. 3.1 Reference Documents The criteria presented herein are based on state regulations and industry standards. Where not otherwise established, criteria are based on engineering experience. The following documents were reviewed to develop the criteria: • Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 333-061 (OAR, 2018): This document provides the Oregon State regulations for drinking water. • Recommended Standards for Water Works (WSC, 2018): This document, frequently referred to as the Ten State Standards, is produced by the Water Supply Committee of the Great Lakes-Upper Mississippi River Board of State and Provincial Public Health and Environmental Managers. It is widely accepted in the industry as a standard for the evaluation and design of water systems. • Manual of Water Supply Practices, M32, Computer Modeling of Water Distribution Systems (AWWA, 2012): This document was referenced where criteria were not provided by the documents listed above. • Water Distribution System Facility Plan, Medford Water Commission (MWC, 2017): This document includes the criteria used by the Medford Water Commission (MWC) for the evaluation and design of water distribution system facilities. 3.2 Supply Criteria The City obtains its water through a wholesale agreement with MWC (provided in Attachment B) which establishes maximum flow rates based on time of year and day to be supplied to the City Master Meter Stations (MMSs). The City is responsible for limiting total demand on the MWC system to that flow rate, and MWC is responsible for ensuring that there is adequate capacity, water quality, and reliability in its system supply facilities. The wholesale agreement with MWC is renewed every 5 years, and the maximum flow rate specified in the agreement is based on the estimated average of maximum day demand (MDD) for the City during the 5-year term of the agreement. The total maximum flow rates to the City specified in the current agreement dated October 2016 are as follows: • October through April − 1,833 gallons per minute (gpm): 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. − 3,255 gpm: all other times • May through September − 4,958 gpm: 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. − 5,700 gpm: all other times The assumed contract supply used to evaluate the 2040 MDD scenario was MDD from 5 a.m. – 11 a.m. and 15 percent above MDD at all other times. To ensure that elevated storage reservoirs in the city can be used appropriately to serve peak hour demand (PHD), water must be supplied to the city system at a hydraulic grade that is consistently at or above the overflow elevation of the elevated storage. However, during the summer months the incoming hydraulic 7.A.b Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 6 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. grade line from MWC falls below this threshold. To limit the city’s incoming supply to the average of MDD, the City recently constructed the Vilas storage reservoir and pump station, which provides pumped ground storage to supplement supply from the elevated 2-MG Old Stage reservoir during PHD. The goal of this system was to fill Vilas reservoir during off-peak times from the Vilas MMS and pump from storage to meet peak hour demands. Supply criteria are summarized in Table 1. Table 1. Supply Criteria Criteria Value\Description Reference Current Rate of Supply • October through April • 1,833 gpm from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. • 3,255 gpm all other times • May through September • 4,958 gpm from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. • 5,700 gpm all other times MWC, 2016 2040 Rate of Supply • October through April • 2,500 gpm from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. • 4,450 gpm all other times • May through September • 6,774 gpm from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. • 7,790 gpm all other times City Head Maintain the hydraulic grade of the system supply high enough to recharge elevated storage reservoirs during MDD. City Redundant Capacity Meet capacity requirements with the largest producing pump out of service. WSC, 2018 Power Supply At least two independent power sources or a standby/auxiliary source should be provided (e.g., generator). WSC, 2018 3.3 Storage Criteria The volume of storage required for a service area typically consists of three components: equalization, fire, and emergency storage. Key characteristics of each storage type are described below. • Equalization storage is used to meet demands when they exceed supply to the system (e.g., during peak demand periods). Figure 2 below shows the City’s current diurnal demand pattern versus supply along with current contract limits. Supply is assumed to be equal to the average of MDD and is constant throughout the day. The equalization storage is equal to the diagonal pattern area indicating supply from reservoirs. • Fire storage is reserved to supply fire demand for the duration of a fire event. • Emergency storage is reserved to provide water during events such as power outages, standard maintenance procedures, natural disasters, facility failures, etc. Table 2 below summarizes the standards for determining the total volume needed to meet the three required components of storage capacity and includes guidance on storage reservoir operations. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 7 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Figure 2. Required equalization storage Table 2. Storage Criteria Criteria Value\Description Reference Capacity Equalization Volume to serve demand in excess of supply to the reservoir service area for MDD MWC, 2018 Fire Volume required to supply the largest needed fire flow of the service area for the required fire flow duration WSC, 2018 Emergency Volume is one-third of MDD MWC, 2018 Operations Water quality Excessive storage capacity should be avoided to prevent water quality issues. WSC, 2018 Controls Use adequate controls to prevent unintentional overflow or draining of the storage reservoirs (e.g., pump controls, altitude valves). WSC, 2018 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE MDDHOUR OF DAY System Supply Supply from Reservoirs MDD Pattern Contract limit 7.A.b Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 8 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. 3.4 Pipe Criteria Water system piping is categorized as transmission or distribution piping. Transmission piping conveys water between major facilities such as wells, pump stations, and reservoirs and from those facilities to the distribution system. Distribution piping provides local distribution of water to individual user service laterals. Table 3 lists the capacity and reliability criteria for evaluating and designing the water system piping. Table 3. Pipe Criteria Requirement Value\Description Reference Diameter As calculated to meet pressure, velocity, and head loss requirements for all flow conditions. Employ a minimum of 8 inches for distribution lateral mains in residential areas, and a minimum 12 inches in multiple- dwelling, commercial, and industrial areas. City Pressure Maximum operating Minimum operating Minimum during a fire 120 psi 35 psi 20 psi City Velocity Maximum for design pipe a Maximum for existing pipe 5 feet per second (fps) 10 fps AWWA, 2017 Fire flow performance b Residual pressure 20 psi during MDD for designated fire flow demands1 ICC, 2018 Maximum head loss for MDD c Transmission pipe (design) Distribution pipe (design) 2 feet/1,000 feet 6 feet/1,000 feet AWWA, 2017 Reliability Transmission Provide redundant supply lines to hydraulically isolated areas wherever feasible. WSC, 2018 Distribution Wherever possible, dead ends shall be minimized by looping. Where dead ends are installed, or low points exist, blow-offs of adequate size shall be provided for flushing. Location Wherever possible, distribution pipelines shall be located on public property. Where pipelines are required to pass through private property, easements shall be obtained from the property owner and shall be recorded with the County Clerk. OAR, 2018 a. AWWA recommends a maximum of 5 fps to avoid high head loss. The cost of adding piping to meet this criterion may exceed the benefit; therefore, this criterion is provided by way of recommendation rather than requirement. b. Fire flow demands listed in Section 3 of the City’s water master plan. c. AWWA recommends these criteria to avoid high operating costs. The cost of adding piping to meet these criteria may exceed the benefits; therefore, these criteria are provided as recommendations rather than requirements. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 9 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. 3.5 Pump Station Criteria Two types of pump stations were considered in this study: pump-storage and booster. Pump-storage stations pump from a storage reservoir directly to the distribution system and are frequently used to serve PHD. Booster pump stations add energy, or head, to maintain a flow rate and/or a hydraulic grade within a water system which is served by one or more elevated storage reservoirs. Pump-storage stations are often viewed less favorably when compared to elevated storage because of the long-term energy costs of pumping from the tank hydraulic grade to system pressure. The current Shops pump station is a pump-storage type located at the Public Works Department maintenance shops. The current Vilas pump station has the capability to pump from the existing Vilas storage reservoir using reservoir pumps 4 or 5 or to boost grade from the Vilas Master Meter Station using supply pumps 1 or 2. Table 4 summarizes the evaluation and design criteria for the existing and future pump stations. Table 4. Pump Station Criteria Criteria Value\Description Reference Minimum capacity Pump-storage Designated portion of PHD (PHD minus the flow rate from elevated storage reservoirs in the system). Engineering judgment Booster Supply the peak demand against the required distribution system pressure. WSC, 2018 Reliability a Redundancy Areas served by pumps should have a minimum of two supply pumps. WSC, 2018 Redundant pump sizing Pumps should be sized to meet the minimum capacity requirement with the largest pump out of service (redundant fire pumps are not necessary). WSC, 2018 Power supply At least two independent power sources or a standby/auxiliary source (e.g., generator) should be provided. WSC, 2018 Suction reservoirs Wherever possible, booster pumps shall take suction from reservoirs to avoid the potential for negative pressures on the suction line which can result when the pump suction is directly connected to a distribution main. OAR, 2008 Operations a Minimum suction pressure Pumps that take suction from distribution mains for the purpose of serving areas of higher elevation shall be provided with a low pressure cut-off switch on the suction side set at no less than 20 psi. OAR, 2008 Control settings Provide adequate range between high/low pressure or reservoir level settings to prevent excessive cycling of the pump. WSC, 2018 Pressure zones served Pump stations will lift water a maximum of two pressure zones (serving additional pressure zones results in wasted energy). Engineering judgment Location Elevation Pump stations will be located a minimum of 3 feet above the 100-year flood elevation, or 3 feet above the highest recorded flood. WSC, 2018 a. All three types of pump stations. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 10 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Section 4: System Evaluation BC’s system evaluation included a 2040 storage analysis, supply analysis, evaluation of a new pump station near the Beall MMS, and evaluation of pressures and velocities in the distribution system to serve future growth areas. The results of this evaluation are summarized in the sections below. 4.1 Storage Analysis The City currently operates three storage reservoirs: Vilas and Shops, both ground-storage and Old Stage which is an elevated storage reservoir. The City plans to demolish the Shops reservoir as a result of seismic stability and condition concerns. The water system storage capacity was analyzed using the criteria presented in Section 3.3 of this TM to determine how the system will likely be affected by the demolition of the Shops tank and the expected growth in demand. Table 5 provides the storage analysis for the current and 2040 scenarios. Table 5. Existing System Storage Analysis Planning Horizon Existing Storage Capacity (MG) Required Storage Volume (MG) Excess Storage (MG) Fire Equalization Emergency Total Existing Tanks Without Shops 2017 5.69 0.63 1.88 2.30 4.81 0.88 -0.11 2040 0.63 2.65 3.25 6.53 - 0.83 -1.83 Under the current demand condition, without the 1 MG Shops tank in service, the City would have a storage deficiency of 0.11 MG. In 2040, the storage analysis shows that the City will need an additional 1.83 MG of storage capacity. To alleviate this deficiency, the City is planning to install a 2 MG tank adjacent to the existing Old Stage tank that can meet storage requirements through 2040 and beyond. Alternate locations considered for the proposed tank included sites directly west of the new Taylor-West Development or pump-storage sites located along Hopkins Road. The sites west of Taylor-West would have required a costly transmission main extension, re-zoning, and included some of the highest land prices in the area. The model analysis discussed in Section 4.3 below indicates that adding a tank at the existing Old Stage tank site can be completed without significant transmission main capacity improvements through 2040. The City has had problems maintaining chlorine residual in the existing Old Stage tank in the past. Adding 2 MG of storage to the system will likely result in an increase in water age and a decrease in chlorine residual. Along with the installation of a new 2 MG tank, tank mixing equipment or a chlorine booster station could be installed at the Old Stage tanks to maintain adequate chlorine residual in the water, which is currently being evaluated as a part of the master plan water quality evaluation. If the Shops tank and pump station are demolished prior to installation of a new storage facility, the Vilas pump station becomes even more critical. The Vilas facility provides the space and electrical infrastructure needed to support the future installation of a generator and to improve system resiliency. The City recently ordered the planned emergency generator and intends to complete the installation of a backup power generator this year. Installation of the generator will allow the City to use the capacity of the Vilas storage tank in the event of a power outage. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 11 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. 4.2 Supply Analysis A supply analysis was performed to determine available flow from existing and proposed reservoirs to meet peak demand and the ability of off-peak supply sources to provide enough hydraulic grade to refill reservoirs during off-peak times. The City’s 2019 MDD demand diurnal curve was used to complete the 2040 MDD supply analysis, which indicates that the PHD during 2040 MDD is 15,510 gpm. Figure 3 shows the anticipated supply breakdown in the 2040 scenario. Figure 3. 2040 supply analysis Proposed improvements to the system supply include the following projects: • Construct a 4,460 gpm pump station with variable frequency drives at Beall • Upgrade the Vilas pump station to provide a reservoir pump firm capacity of 6,200 gpm. This will require installation of a fifth pump in the available space within the pump station. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 12 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. 4.3 Model Analysis The model analysis included an evaluation of the system under the 2040 MDD conditions. The following modifications were made to the model to represent expected future conditions: • Removal of the Shops tank and pump station and reliance on Hopkins during MDD. • Construction of a new 2 MG storage tank at the Old Stage site. • Construction of a new 4,460 gpm pump station with VFDs near the Beall MMS. • Modification of Vilas pump station controls to supply to the average of MDD in 2040. • Completion of a network of 12-inch-diameter distribution piping within expansion areas (developer built). System piping was reviewed with the above facilities in place to determine needed improvements to meet level of service criteria. Figures 4 and 5 below show model results from this analysis. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 13 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Figure 4. Fireflow 7.A.b Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 14 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Figure 5. Velocity and minimum pressures 7.A.b Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 15 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. 4.3.1 Old Stage Transmission Pipeline The transmission capacity of the pipeline to the existing and proposed Old Stage tanks was reviewed in detail because the City has experienced water age issues with the existing Old Stage tank and expressed concerns with the current lack of a dedicated inlet/outlet main to the tank. Figure 6 shows the water level in the Old Stage tanks and the expected velocity in the Old Stage transmission pipe over a 3-day period. Maximum velocities do not indicate the need for a second transmission main to the Old Stage tank and updates to the master plan will further evaluate options to improve water age/quality issues at the Old Stage site. Figure 6. 2040 MDD tank and pump station model results Results of the fire flow, velocity, and minimum pressure evaluations during MDD indicated the need for additional system transmission to maintain level of service criteria, as described below. 4.3.2 Recommended Projects BC recommends that the City perform the following improvements projects to successfully develop the expansion areas and decommission the existing Shops tank and pump station. • Backup power at Vilas Pump Station. Install emergency power generator prior to demolition of Shops tank so that Vilas storage can be used in the event of an emergency. This project is currently underway. • Beall Pump Station. Install a new pump station with a firm 2040 capacity of 4,460 gpm to provide adequate hydraulic grade to the system. This pump station will likely be phased and/or operated on VFD controls to transition between existing and future demands. • 2 MG Old Stage Tank. Install a 2 MG tank adjacent to the existing Old Stage tank to meet storage capacity requirements after the Shops tank is demolished. The Master Plan Update will further review water age and chlorine residual concerns at this location. • Vilas Pump Station. Upgrade the Vilas pump station to provide a reservoir pump firm capacity of 6,200 gpm. This will require installation of a fifth pump in the available space within the pump station. • Vilas Road Pipeline. Install a parallel 16-inch-diameter pipeline on Vilas Road from Singing Grass Lane to 230-feet north of the park entrance. This can be installed as a parallel line or a pipe replacement 7.A.b Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 16 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. project with equivalent capacity. This pipeline is needed once the Vilas pump station upgrade is completed. • Peninger Crossing Pipeline. Install 1,600 feet of 16-inch-diameter piping on Peninger Road at the Interstate-5 crossing. This pipeline provides additional east-west conveyance capacity and would replace the existing 12-inch-diameter pipeline that currently hangs from the crossing in a sleeve. An alternative to this alignment is located 1-mile to the north along Upton Road. The Upton Road alignment is 2,050 feet and would require a trenched alignment which would significantly increase the cost of this alternative. The benefit of the Upton Road crossing is improved resiliency of adding a new crossing on the north side of the system. • South Haskell Piping. Install 1,230 feet of 12-inch-diameter piping to complete the South Haskell Connection and replace the existing 6-inch crossing with a 12-inch-diameter pipeline. This improvement will complete a new 12-inch-diameter route which provides additional connectivity between the east and west sides of Highway 99 and reduces reliance on older asbestos concrete piping on Malabar Street. • Beall Lane Piping. Install 1,160 feet of 16-inch-diameter piping between Malabar Street and Snowy Butte Lane. This pipeline will replace the last remaining section of 12-inch-diameter AC piping along Beall Lane. Install 710 feet of 20-inch-diameter piping between the new Beall Pump Station to South Haskell Street. • Fireflow Improvements. Fireflow deficiencies were identified within the existing system which will require small diameter piping improvements. There are no transmission piping projects required as a result of the expansion areas. 4.4 Summary This TM summarizes the City’s proposed UGB expansion and evaluates the ability of the City’s existing water system to serve these expansion areas and projected increases in demand while meeting level of service criteria. Based on the model results, 2040 demands and storage needs can be met with the projects summarized in Table 6. Table 6. Project Summary Project Description Backup Power at Vilas Pump Station • Install emergency generator at the Vilas Pump Station site prior to demolition of the Shops tank. Project is currently underway. Beall Pump Station • Install Beall Pump Station with a combined capacity of 4,460 gpm. 2 MG Old Stage Tank • Install a new 2 MG tank at the Old Stage tank site with a base elevation of 1,451.75 feet, a diameter of 122 feet, and a maximum height of 24 feet. • Complete measures to address water age concerns TBD. Vilas Pump Station • Install 5th pump at pump station to provide a reservoir pump firm capacity of 6,200 gpm. Vilas Road Pipeline • Install a parallel 16-inch-diameter pipeline on Vilas Road from Singing Grass Lane to 230 feet north of the park entrance. Peninger Crossing Pipeline • Install 1,600 feet of 16-inch-diameter piping on Peninger Road at the Interstate-5 crossing. South Haskell Street Piping • Install 1,230 feet of 12-inch-diameter piping to complete the S. Haskell connection and replace the existing 6-inch crossing with a 12-inch-diameter pipeline. Beall Lane Piping • Install 1,160 feet of 16-inch-diameter piping between Malabar Street and Snowy Butte Lane. • Install 710 feet of 20-inch-diameter piping between the new Beall Pump Station to S. Haskell Street. Fireflow Improvements • Fireflow deficiencies were identified within the existing system which will require small diameter piping improvements. There are no transmission piping projects required as a result of the expansion areas. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Urban Growth Boundary Expansion 17 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. A detailed discussion of model demand allocation and model calibration is provided in the water Master Plan Update. Issues identified in this evaluation that were not included as projects in Table 6, but will be addressed in the Master Plan Update include: • Conceptual sizing of Beall pump station • Water age/quality at Old Stage tank • Seismic risk analysis and hazard mitigation plan 7.A.b Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UGB Expansion Evaluation for Drinking Water System A-1 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Attachment A: Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Proposed UGB Land Use 7.A.b Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City LimitsProposed CP-6A Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential CommercialProposed CP-3 Land Use General Commercial (GC) Bear Creek Greenway (BCG) Parks and Open Space (OS)Proposed CP-4D Land Use Parks and OS Residential Very LowProposed CP-2B Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential Neighborhood Commercial Civic Proposed UGB Land UseCentral Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UGB Expansion Evaluation for Drinking Water System B-1 Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the beginning of this document. Attachment B: Wholesale Water Service Agreement 7.A.b Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) WHOLESALE WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT (Agreement), made and entered in duplicate to commence on the first day of October, 2016, between the City of Central Point, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, acting as purchaser (Central Point), and the City of Medford, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, acting by and through its Board of Water Commissioners, acting as vendor (MWC), together referred to as the Parties. RECITALS: 1) MWC is an entity established under the Home Rule Charter (Charter) adopted by the citizens of the City of Medford, comprised of five citizens appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council, to manage the Water Fund for the purpose of supplying inhabitants of the City of Medford with water; and 2) Under Section 19 of the Charter, the MWC is authorized to sell water and/or supply facilities outside the legal boundaries of the City of Medford, only if said water and/or supply facilities are surplus to the needs of the inhabitants of the City of Medford, and meet certain conditions of MWC Resolution No. 1058; and 3) Under the Charter, the MWC is authorized to set rates for City of Medford inhabitants, and to make all necessary rules and regulations for the sale, disposition and use of water and water service from the City of Medford water system, and the MWC has adopted such rules and regulations; and 4) Per the MWC's projections, reports and plans, the MWC finds it has surplus water and supply facilities capacity available in its system to serve Central Point; and 5) Central Point desires to purchase surplus treated and transported water from MWC from October through April, and purchase surplus supply facilities treatment and transport services for Central Point's own water appropriated under Central Point's own state -issued water rights from May through September; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual promises herein, the Parties mutually agree as follows: Water Service Agreement—City of Central Point Page 1 of 7.A.b Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) AGREEMENT: ARTICLE 1. SCOPE OF SURPLUS WATER SUPPLY AND SERVICE Subject to Article 3 of this Agreement, MWC agrees to supply surplus water up to a combined from all connections) maximum of 1833 gallons per minute (GPM) for the months of October through April, and surplus facilities capacity to treat and transport water up to a combined from all connections) maximum of 4958 GPM for the months of May through September. Central Point agrees to provide sufficient water storage as part of its water system to assure that the maximum rate of withdrawal in GPM by Central Point is not exceeded with the following exceptions. During the 5 year term of this agreement the following conditions will be complied with: The above flow rates will not be exceeded between the hours of 5 am and 11 am. During all other hours the maximum flow rate will not exceed 5700 gallons per minute (GPM) in the summer and 3255 gallons per minute (GPM) in the winter. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event this agreement is renewed in October 2021, the maximum flow rates specified in this article may be recalculated by MWC based on future total source supply and future 2020 maximum month demand percentages, and such flow rates will be required over an entire 24 hour period. Upon written request by Central Point, this Agreement may be amended to provide supplemental supply and service to Central Point if MWC determines that it has surplus capacity for Central Point's use, and Central Point agrees to reimburse MWC the reasonable cost of providing such supplemental supply and service. ARTICLE 2. CENTRAL POINT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EMERGENCY Upon notice to MWC by Central Point of a distribution system emergency, MWC will use its best efforts to provide supplemental water supply or services during the emergency. For purpose of this agreement, "distribution system emergency" means: Any human or natural caused event that disables or impairs the distribution system such that its use constitutes an immediate threat to human life or health. ARTICLE 3. MWC CONNECTIONS MWC owns and is responsible for the construction, extension, maintenance, and operation of the MWC system up to the point of and including the master Central Point meter(s). Central Point shall pay all costs of connections to the MWC system including initial metering, initial and ongoing backflow protection, and annual testing of the backflow device, all in accordance with MWC standards. MWC shall monthly read and annually test the master meter(s) and provide readings and test results to Central Point. Water Service Agreement— City of Central Point Page 2 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point's water supply is provided by the following master meter(s) with backflow connections to MWC: 10" Turbine Meter on Beall Lane, Central Point, Oregon 10" Turbine Meter on Hopkins Road, Central Point, Oregon 10" Compact Fireline Meter on Vilas Road, Central Point, Oregon Temporary emergency connections to MWC with prior approval can be provided at the following location(s): N/A The following special conditions concerning connections to MWC apply: MWC agrees Central Point may serve the Seven Oaks Interchange "Area of Mutual Planning Concern". ARTICLE 4. MWC REGULATIONS Water service under this Agreement shall be in accordance with Section 30 SURPLUS WATER and Section 31 PROVISIONS RELATING TO UTILITY AND MUNICIPAL CUSTOMERS of the MWC Regulations Governing Water Service (Regulations), as now in effect or as may be amended. If there is any inconsistency between this Agreement and the Regulations, the Regulations control. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein is intended to relieve MWC of its obligation to supply surplus water in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, except as dictated by Federal/State regulations outside the control of MWC. The Parties acknowledge that implementation of this Agreement and the Regulations are subject to federal or state directives. MWC shall promptly provide Central Point a copy of any amendments to the Regulations. ARTICLE 5. URBANIZATION POLICY Central Point agrees to provide water and services to customers within Central Point city limits, or as otherwise approved by MWC in MWC Resolution No. 1058, as may be amended. Central Point may provide water and services outside of city limits, but within its urban growth boundary, provided that the property requesting service has signed an irrevocable consent to annex to Central Point, or as otherwise approved in writing by MWC. The current general water service map covering city limits and urban growth boundaries for Central Point is Water Service Agreement — City of Central Point Page 3 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A. Central Point shall promptly notify MWC and provide a revised map as city limits and urban growth boundaries are modified. ARTICLE 6. MEETING FUTURE WATER DEMANDS Water and water services provided by MWC under this Agreement are pursuant to water rights held by the MWC and Central Point. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to confer upon either party a legal or beneficial interest in each other's water rights, or to prevent either party from seeking additions or alterations to their water rights as deemed necessary. Central Point shall acquire and maintain such water rights as needed to meet the demand within its service area during the months of May through September. Central Point may use the MWC intake facility, located at the intersection of Table Rock Road and the Rogue River in White City, as the designated point of diversion for Central Point water rights. MWC shall cooperate in the perfection of any Central Point water rights. Central Point currently holds water rights with a diversion point on the Rogue River at the MWC Intake Facility site at the rate of 4.176 cubic feet per second and/or volume of 1113.6 acre feet. Delivery of such Central Point water through MWC facilities shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as delivery of surplus MWC water. MWC shall measure and record at its Robert A. Duff Water Treatment Plant the amount of water withdrawn from the Rogue River by MWC and its municipal water service customers under each oftheir respective water rights. In its monthly water service invoice, MWC shall provide water use data for Central Point. Central Point shall provide MWC updated demand projections. ARTICLE 7. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Pursuant to Resolution No. 774, MWC has established Water System Development Charges SDCs) and supporting methodology to finance future MWC transmission and treatment facilities expansions. SDCs apply to all new customers, including customers of municipal wholesale customers served by MWC. Central Point shall collect SDCs set by MWC from new Central Point customers. MWC reviews the SDCs annually and reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to modify or replace the SDCs with a different financing mechanism for system improvements. All SDCs collected by Central Point will be held in a separate account and forwarded to MWC along with an accounting of the number and sizes of the services installed. Central Point shall provide MWC with a copy of the section within the annual Central Point audit that shows accounting of MWC SDCs collected during the audited year. MWC shall, in turn, provide Central Point an annual accounting of all SDCs collected. Water Service Agreement— City of Central Point Page 4 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) MWC utilizes a utility basis for determining the water usage rate it charges Central Point. Under this rate analysis, Central Point is required to pay a return on investment for its share of the facilities paid for by MWC. Facilities funded by SDCs shall not be included in the return on investment portion of the rate analysis. MWC shall render technical assistance to Central Point in determining SDCs. MWC shall defend Central Point against any legal action or appeals which may arise over the development, methodology, or implementation of the SDCs. Central Point shall cooperate and support MWC in the defense, but shall not be obligated to incur any monetary obligation in such defense. Upon termination of this Agreement, the following refund policy shall apply: a) MWC shall return to Central Point its prorated share of the unexpended balance of the SDCs fund. This prorated share shall be based upon the actual unexpended SDCs collected by Central Point for the specific facilities funded by the SDCs, plus the interest earned. b) MWC shall return to Central Point a prorated share of the depreciated plant value of the specific MWC facilities funded by the SDCs and already installed. The prorated share shall be a percentage based upon the total amount of SDCs paid by Central Point divided by the total SDCs collected and used to fund the facility, not including interest earned during the years in which the SDCs were collected. c) In order to avoid a financial hardship, MWC shall develop a reasonable schedule of up to five (5) years for repayment of the depreciated value of the specific MWC facilities funded by the SDCs. d) At the request of Central Point, the MWC shall provide an accounting of the refunds made pursuant to this section. ARTICLE 8. PAYMENTS TO MWC Central Point shall pay monthly for all water and services provided by MWC at MWC's scheduled wholesale rates then in place. Payment shall be made within ten (10) days after the meeting of the Central Point's Council following receipt by Central Point of a statement of charges from MWC. MWC reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to change (with prior written notification of a rate study review) said rate at any time upon sixty (60) days written notice to Central Point, following rate procedures and protocols in the MWC Regulations. ARTICLE 9. TERM OF AGREEMENT Water Service Agreement — City of Central Point Page 5 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) This term of this Agreement shall be five (5) years from its commencement. Central Point may, at its option, extend the term for three additional five-year periods, which periods would run through October of 2026, 2031, and 2036 respectively. Extensions shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as this Agreement. Written notice of the election to exercise a five-year extension of this Agreement must be given to MWC not later than January 15S of the year in which the Agreement would otherwise expire. If Central Point fails to provide MWC such notice, this Agreement shall be deemed canceled at the end of the term then in effect. MWC shall continue service for a reasonable period, determined in MWC's sole discretion, to allow Central Point to secure other sources of water. Provided, however, Section 19 of the Charter of the City of Medford limits the term of water service contracts to 20 years and, therefore, the obligations of MWC under this Agreement, including renewal periods, shall not exceed that period of time. ARTICLE 10. ASSIGNMENTS Central Point shall make no assignment of this Agreement without written permission from MWC. Any approved assignee or successor shall agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. ARTICLE 11. WATER CURTAILMENT PLAN During periods of drought or emergency, Central Point shall be subject to the MWC Water Curtailment Plan, per MWC Resolution No. 1345, unless Central Point has in effect a state - approved and adopted Water Curtailment Plan at least as stringent as that of MWC. In the event of a conflict between the Central Point plan and the MWC plan, the MWC plan shall control. The MWC shall give Central Point as much advance warning as possible prior to curtailment of water supplies. The level of curtailment shall be determined by MWC based on the severity of the anticipated shortage. Central Point shall be responsible for enforcing the MWC curtailment plan or the above mentioned Central Point plan in its service area. MWC will require and apply emergency curtailment of water use in an equitable, fair, and consistent manner consistent with Resolution 1345. Continued service during periods of emergency shall neither be construed as a waiver nor limitation of any kind on any water rights held by MWC, or a waiver or curtailment of any water rights held by Central Point, nor as affecting any other terms in this Agreement. ARTICLE 12. ANNUAL WATER QUALITY REPORTING MWC will gather annual water quality data and prepare informational reports as required under state Consumer Confidence Reporting (CCR) rules. These CCR reports will include water Water Service Agreement — City of Central Point Page 6 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) quality information for MWC and all participating municipal water customers. Annual costs involved will be proportionally shared among participating municipal water customers and billed separately to each. Statistical data necessary to create the CCR report for the prior year must be provided by Central Point to MWC no later than April 1st of each year. If bulk mailing is the primary distribution method utilized, Central Point shall also provide MWC with postal routes covering their respective service areas by April 1st of the delivery year. MWC reserves the right to utilize other approved delivery methods (e.g.; electronic), which may impact responsibilities for Central Point. In the event that Central Point receives water into its system that is supplied by an entity other than MWC, the composite MWC report for that year will not include data for Central Point. Central Point shall be responsible for preparation of its own annual CCR, and MWC will provide MWC data by April 1st of the delivery year. MWC maintains water quality test points throughout the MWC system and one specifically at the master meter location(s) of Central Point. These test points are used to collect water samples for meeting required state water quality parameters on a weekly, monthly, and annual basis. All information collected is of public record and is accessible through state or MWC databases. Responsibility for water quality is transferred to Central Point at the point of the master meter location(s), except where water quality problems are attributable to MWC. ARTICLE 13. MUTUAL INDEMNITY To the extent allowed by law, Central Point and MWC shall each defend, indemnify and hold the other, and their officers, employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims, suits, actions, or losses arising solely out of the acts and omissions of the Party's own officers, employees, or agents while acting under this agreement. ARTICLE 14. PARTIAL INVALIDITY If any term, covenant, condition, or provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof shall remain in force and effect, and shall in no way be affected, impaired, or invalidated thereby. ARTICLE 15. INTEGRATION This Agreement represents the entire understanding of MWC and Central Point as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect Water Service Agreement — City of Central Point Page 7 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) with respect to those matters covered herein. This Agreement may not be modified or altered except in writing signed by both parties. ARTICLE 16. DEFAULT For purposes of this Agreement "default' means failure to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement. If either party determines that a default has occurred, it shall provide the other party written notice of the default, which such party shall have thirty days in which (a) to cure the default, (b) show that the default is of such a nature that it cannot be reasonably cured within thirty days, or (c) show that no default occurred. MWC and Central Point will work in good faith to amicably resolve the default. If after thirty days of the notice of default, MWC determines, in its sole discretion, that Central Point is unable or unwilling to cure the default within a reasonable time, MWC may impose escalating penalties as follows: (a) ten percent surcharge for a period of thirty days; (b) twenty percent surcharge for the next thirty days; and (c) termination of this Agreement. Such penalties are in addition to any other remedies at law or equity that maybe available to MWC. Failure to issue notice of default or to enforce its remedies under this Article 16 shall not preclude MWC from taking such action for future defaults. If after thirty days, Central Point determines, in its sole discretion, that MWC is unable or unwilling to cure the default within a reasonable time, Central Point may terminate this Agreement and pursue any other remedies at law or in equity that may be available to Central Point. ARTICLE 17. FORCE MAIEURE Neither party hereto shall be liable for delays in performance under this Agreement by reason of fires, floods, earthquakes, acts of God, wars, strikes, embargoes, necessary plant repairs or replacement of equipment, of any other cause whatsoever beyond the control of such party, whether similar or dissimilar to the causes herein enumerated. This clause does not include causes related to water supply and demand planning or failure to engage in such planning. ARTICLE 18. DISPUTE RESOLUTION If a dispute arises out of or relates to this contract, and if the dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, the parties agree first to try to settle the dispute by non-binding mediation before Water Service Agreement — City of Central Point Page 8 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) resorting to litigation or other process. The parties agree to share equally the costs of mediation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be signed by their proper officers on the dates noted below. THE CITY OF MEDFORD BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS Leigh Jo ns4k Chair w COca Karen Spoonts, City Re rder Date THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Maya, City Recorder q LE Date Water Service Agreement— City of Central Point Page 9 of 9 7.A.b Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) C:\USERS\NICK\DESKTOP\CP UGB_4-11-2019\UGB EXPANSION_4-11-2019.DOC ROGUE VALLEY SEWER SERVICES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location: 138 West Vilas Road, Central Point, OR - Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3130, Central Point, OR 7502-0005 Tel. (541) 664-6300, Fax (541) 664-7171 www.RVSS.us April 11, 2019 Stephanie Holtey City of Central Point Planning Department 155 South Second Street Central Point, Oregon 97502 Re: City of Central Point UGB Expansion Alternatives Stephanie, At the request of the City of Central Point, RVSS has addressed serviceability of two residential Urban Growth Boundary expansion options within the RVSS service area. In this letter, the two options will be referred to as alternatives 1A and 1B as presented by the City. Exhibits are attached and labeled for reference. In general, existing sewer facilities are not located within the expansion areas. However, in all cases, existing sewer is located adjacent to and/or runs along the fringes of the expansion areas. Developer driven sewer extensions would be required to service individual parcels or developments. The far downstream reaches of the RVSS sewer system extended to the Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant are assumed to have adequate capacity to service the proposed expansion. However, each expansion area will require an individual analysis of the existing topography and capacity of the adjacent sewer system. Below is a very rough outline of the proposed alternatives as they relate to sewer serviceability. Alternative 1A Existing topography for the northeast expansion area generally drains west toward Upton Road. The area is bounded by 8” sewer along Gebhard Road to the east, 15” sewer along the southern boundary of the expansion area, and the 42” Lower Bear Creek Interceptor (LBCI) to the southwest. The existing topography and system capacity make connection to the 8” sewer along Gebhard Road feasible only for short extensions serving small portions of the overall area. The existing 15” sewer to the south currently serves the subdivisions to the east and only has adequate capacity to serve adjacent development. A sewer extension from the LBCI north 2,200’ along Upton Road to the intersection of Wilson Road is the optimal solution for the majority of this area. Existing topography for the west expansion area generally drains north. Adjacent available sewer consist of a 21” main at the intersection of Taylor Road and Grant Road and a 15” main near Scenic Avenue just west of the railroad tracks. There are also various sections of 8” sewer north of Taylor Road and east of Jackson Creek within the Twin Creeks development. The area south of Taylor Road can be served by an 7.A.b Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) C:\USERS\NICK\DESKTOP\CP UGB_4-11-2019\UGB EXPANSION_4-11-2019.DOC extension of the 21” sewer west along Taylor Road. The area north of Taylor Road can be served by a 3,500 ft extension of the 15” main west along Scenic Avenue then north along Grant Road to the intersection of Bransom Road. Any of the 8” mains east of Jackson Creek could be extended, but would require a bore crossing of Jackson Creek and could only serve a portion of the proposed area. It is also uncertain if these sewer lines have adequate depth to cross the creek. Alternative 1B Sewer Service for this alternative is generally consistent with Alternative 1A. The exception is the small area north of Scenic Avenue east of the railroad and the area west of Grant Road north of Beall Lane. Service for both areas is not an issue as there are existing mains along the adjacent sections of Scenic Avenue and Grant Road. As mentioned above, exhibits are attached for clarification. Please contact me with any further questions. Sincerely, Nicholas R. Bakke, PE District Engineer 7.A.b Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 876 877 863 165 941 862157 E Residential UGB Amendment Project Staff Alternative--TAZ Not part of a Master Plan, Doesn't Meet Proximity Factors Staff Alternative eliminates these lots to focus on connectingeast side with SD6 Activity Center CP-1C Lots eliminated inStaff Alternative because:1) Needs master plan to address circulation and access 2) Focus on east side connectivity Boes Park (City-owned)School District 6 Property(Activity Center) Questionable Future:May be in negotiation forcontinued agriculture use.Eliminated to focus on connectionbetween Gebhard, Wilson and Upton Added to provide north/south connectivity for circulation andwater facility function (i.e. system looping). Gross Acreage 385.98Parks Deduction 54School Deduction 16.53ROW5.47Adjusted Total 309.98Surplus4.98 Staff Alternative 1 25% of Gross Acreage for Parks, Schools, ROW (SAFE HARBOR) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 876 877 863 165 941 942 862157 E Residential UGB Amendment Project Staff Alternative--TAZ Not part of a Master Plan, Doesn't Meet Proximity Factors Staff Alternative 1B addsthe Exception Lands back into the mix. May needs to remove some parcels due to high cost of water extension. Staff Alternative 1B addsin the lots fronting on Scenicbecause easily servicable withwater and sewer and streetaccess. Boes Park (City-owned) School District 6 Property(Activity Center) Questionable Future:May be in negotiation forcontinued agriculture use.Eliminated to focus on connectionbetween Gebhard, Wilson and Upton Added to provide north/south connectivity for circulation andwater facility function (i.e. system looping). Developed Exception Lot Neighborhood Commercial Activity Center (Note Extends to the Northoutside of the Alternative 1BUGB Expansion Area) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 8in . C 300718in. C 24238in. C 306018in. C 24138in. PVC 2622 8in. PVC 3077 8in. C 3108 8in . PVC 3781 8in. PVC 2596 8in. PVC 999924in. C 2433 8in. PVC 26778in. PVC 29898in . AC 29658in . PVC 163208in . PVC 30118in. C 30268in. PVC 2880 18in . PVC 27588in . PVC 16347 8in. P V C 2 6 1 5 8in. PVC 26178in . HDPE 39216in. PVC 153128in. AC 156948in. AC 4279 8in. PVC 3139 8in. P V C 1 4 9 6 98in . PVC 163988in . PVC 164038in. PVC 44558in. AC 434436in. C 1169215in. PVC 4531 15in. PVC 3929 8in. PVC 43098in . PVC 149558in. AC 44878in. C 432736in. C 122898in. PVC 31478in. PVC 135998in . PVC 39288in. C 122348in . PVC 45198in. PVC 450510in. PVC 17018ArcGIS Web Map Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Maintenance_Map - ssGravityMain RVSS_Service_Boundary ReferenceData - Tax Lots 4/11/2019 8:41:46 AM 0 0.2 0.40.1 mi 0 0.35 0.70.17 km 1:18,056 County of Jackson, OR, Bureau of Land Management, State of Oregon, State of Oregon DOT, State of Oregon GEO, Esri Canada, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS, METI/NASA, EPA, USDA | Google RVSS GIS | Jackson County GIS | Please extend credit to Jackson County GIS in any subsequent works derived from its data, such as maps. | Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS 7.A.b Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) CP10044202CP10982320NM10983CP10982311CP10044204CP1098CP10044208NMGS2CP10982323NM983CP10982314CP100442CO01CP109823CO03CP10982326CP10044205NM003CP10NMGS4CP10982327CP10982312CP10982329CP10044210NMGS3NME8NME10NME9WSZA8CP10067401CP10053913NM100NMW3NMGS7NMGS6NMGN2NMGN1 NMW2NMGN201NMW1NM982306NMCCP2NME12 NM982303NME13NME11NME14NMCCP1600ft600ft600ft600ft600ft+–RVSS Inspector Map (Zoom In to See Infrastructure)RVSS.USPage 1 of 1RVSS Inspector Map4/11/2019https://rvssportal.roktech.net/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=91bd65ec560749ecb7da3f44dc09f37d7.A.bPacket Pg. 290Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) From: Nick Bakke <nbakke@rvss.us> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 4:40 PM To: Stephanie Holtey Cc: Ma Samitore Subject: RE: Central Point Preliminary UGB Amendment Hi Stephanie, I just ran some quick numbers for sewer service north of Taylor Road. Based on our eleva on data, 2744 Taylor Road could be served from a sewer extension along Taylor Road. However, sewer along the north por on of the lot will be very shallow and may even require some fill in areas. Anything north of this tax lot would require a sewer extension from another main. Budget numbers for installing a 15” sewer under the creek would be right around $1,000/foot. Hope this helps, -Nick From: Stephanie Holtey [mailto:Stephanie.Holtey@centralpointoregon.gov] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 8:34 AM To: Nick Bakke Subject: RE: Central Point Preliminary UGB Amendment Hi Nick, Thanks so much for your willingness to meet with me briefly. How does 3:30 this a ernoon sound? From: Nick Bakke [mailto:nbakke@rvss.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 5:27 PM To: Stephanie Holtey Subject: RE: Central Point Preliminary UGB Amendment I can meet tomorrow pre y much any me. Let me know and I’ll swing by your office. I don’t get out much J…. From: Stephanie Holtey [mailto:Stephanie.Holtey@centralpointoregon.gov] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 3:09 PM To: Nick Bakke <nbakke@rvss.us> Subject: RE: Central Point Preliminary UGB Amendment Hi Nick, I have a few ques ons about sewer in the City’s proposed UGB expansion area. Do you have me this a ernoon or tomorrow to meet with me briefly, about 10 minutes, to go over some clarifying ques ons? If you are unavailable, please let me know the earliest possible me you can meet with me. I’m happy to drive out to your office. Thanks, Stephanie Holtey, CFM Principal Planner City of Central Point 140 South 3rd Street 7.A.b Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Central Point, OR 97502 Direct Line: 541.423.1031 www.centralpointoregon.gov From: Nick Bakke [mailto:nbakke@rvss.us] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 2:54 PM To: Stephanie Holtey Cc: Carl Tappert Subject: RE: Central Point Preliminary UGB Amendment Stephanie, A ached comment le er. Let me know if you have any ques ons. Thanks, -Nick From: Stephanie Holtey [mailto:Stephanie.Holtey@centralpointoregon.gov] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2019 12:01 PM To: nbakke@rvss.us Subject: Central Point Preliminary UGB Amendment Hi Nick, It was nice talking with you yesterday about your Table Rock sewer project and the Central Point Residen al Urban Growth Boundary Amendment project. Per our discussion, I have a ached two preliminary alterna ve scenarios for your review and considera on rela ve to the ability to provide sewer service to these areas over the next 20-years. Please let me know if you see any major challenges and if you need addi onal informa on from me at this me. Our objec ve is to finalize the mapping following mee ngs with our Ci zen’s commi ee, Planning Commission and City Council next week. The final map will be used to prepare our formal applica on to amend the UGB. Thank you for taking the me to review our preliminary UGB mapping rela ve to sewer service needs. Best Regards, Stephanie Holtey, CFM Principal Planner Community Development Department (541) 423.1031 (direct) 140 South Third Street Central Point, OR 97502 www.centralpointoregon.gov 7.A.b Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) This electronic communica on, including any a ached documents, may contain confiden al and/or legally privileged informa on that is intended only for use by the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communica on in error, please no fy the sender immediately and delete the communica on and any a achments. Emails are generally public records and therefore subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. This electronic communica on, including any a ached documents, may contain confiden al and/or legally privileged informa on that is intended only for use by the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communica on in error, please no fy the sender immediately and delete the communica on and any a achments. Emails are generally public records and therefore subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. This electronic communica on, including any a ached documents, may contain confiden al and/or legally privileged informa on that is intended only for use by the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this communica on in error, please no fy the sender immediately and delete the communica on and any a achments. Emails are generally public records and therefore subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Impact Analysis July 27, 2020 Prepared By: Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC Transportation Engineering, LLC 7.A.b Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Impact Analysis July 27, 2020 Prepared By: Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC 7.A.b Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 5 II. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 7 Background .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Location ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Project Description .................................................................................................................................. 7 III. EXISTING YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS ......................................................................... 9 Urban Reserve Areas ............................................................................................................................... 9 Roadway Characteristics ......................................................................................................................... 9 Traffic Counts ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Intersection Capacity and Level of Service ........................................................................................... 10 Operating Standards .............................................................................................................................. 10 Year 2019 No-Build Intersection Operations ........................................................................................ 14 Year 2019 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths ............................................................................ 16 Crash History ......................................................................................................................................... 17 IV. FUTURE YEAR 2039 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS ........................................................................... 21 Future Year 2039 No-Build Description ............................................................................................... 21 Future Year Planned Improvements ...................................................................................................... 21 Future Year 2039 No-Build Intersection Operations ............................................................................. 23 Future Year 2039 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths ................................................................. 24 V. URBAN RESERVE AREAS (URA) ..................................................................................................... 28 CP-6A .................................................................................................................................................... 28 CP-4D .................................................................................................................................................... 28 CP-2B and CP-3 .................................................................................................................................... 29 VI. FUTURE YEAR 2039 BUILD CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 30 Future Year 2039 Build Description ...................................................................................................... 30 Future Year 2039 Build Intersection Operations ................................................................................... 30 Future Year 2039 Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths ....................................................................... 33 VII. JURISDICTIONAL EXCHANGES .................................................................................................. 35 Jackson County to City of Central Point Jurisdictional Exchanges ....................................................... 35 Exhibit B from URMA .......................................................................................................................... 35 VIII. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 37 7.A.b Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Roadway Classifications and Descriptions ....................................................................................... 9 Table 2: Existing Intersection Operations – Weekday AM Peak Hour ........................................................ 14 Table 3: Existing Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour ......................................................... 15 Table 4: Existing 95th Percentile Queue Lengths - Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours ............................... 16 Table 5: Study Area Intersection Crash Rates, 2013-2017 ........................................................................... 17 Table 6: Crash History by Type, 2013-2017 ................................................................................................. 18 Table 7: Future Year 2039 No-Build Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour .......................... 23 Table 8: Future Year 2039 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths – Weekday PM Peak Hour ................ 25 Table 9: Future Year Build Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour ......................................... 30 Table 10: Future Year 2039 Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths – Weekday PM Peak Hour .................... 31 Table 10: Design Year 2029 Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths .............................................................. 19 Table 11: Future Year 2039 No-Build and Build Intersection Operations ................................................... 23 Table 12: Future Year 2039 No-Build and Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths ......................................... 24 FIGURES FIGURE 1: Vicinity Map and Study Area Intersections ............................................................................... 8 FIGURE 2: Study Area Lane Configurations and Traffic Control ............................................................. 11 FIGURE 3: Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes, AM Peak Hour ............................................................ 12 FIGURE 4: Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ............................................................ 13 FIGURE 5: Future Year Lane Configuration and Traffic Control ............................................................... 26 FIGURE 6: Future Year 2039 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ................................................. 27 FIGURE 7: Future Year 2039 Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ....................................................... 34 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC COUNTS, SEASONAL ADJUSTMENTS, VOLUME DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX B: CRASH DATA, TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL OUTPUT APPENDIX C: EXISTING YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD SYNCHRO OUTPUT APPENDIX D: EXISTING YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX E: FUTURE YEAR 2039 NO-BUILD SYNCHRO OUTPUT APPENDIX F: FUTURE YEAR 2039 NO-BUILD SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX G: FUTURE YEAR 2039 BUILD SYNCHRO OUTPUT APPENDIX H: FUTURE YEAR 2039 BUILD SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX I: SCOPING REQUIREMENTS 7.A.b Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 7.A.b Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 10, 2020 | Central Point UGB Amendment Traffic Analysis | 5 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC prepared a traffic analysis for an amendment to the City of Central Point Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The City determined its land needs for a 20-year planning horizon (2019-2039) and identified UGB expansion areas to serve future community growth. Four Urban Reserve Areas (URA) were considered in the analysis. These include: 1. A portion of CP-6A located west of Grant Road from a point just north of Twin Creeks Crossing to roughly 400 feet south of Blue Heron Drive 2. CP-4D located north of Old Upton Road and west of Teresa Way, including a 1-acre residential parcel at the westerly terminus of Boes Avenue and approximately 26 acres of parkland 3. CP-2B located south of Wilson Road between Upton Road and Gebhard Road with a 5-acre parcel east of Gebhard Road 4. CP-3 located within the northeast quadrant of the Peninger Road / Pine Street intersection The analysis evaluated existing year 2019 conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, and future year 2039 no- build and build conditions during the p.m. peak hour to determine what impacts proposed URAs will have on the transportation system. The study area included 25 existing intersections under City, County, and ODOT jurisdiction, as well as evaluated 11 new intersections by the future year 2039 based on planned improvement. Conclusions The findings of the traffic impact analysis conclude that the proposed UGB amendment can be approved without creating adverse impacts to the transportation system with identified mitigations. Two study area intersections are identified as exceeding their applicable performance standard under future year 2039 no-build conditions. Four additional intersections exceed performance standards under future year 2039 build conditions. Future Year 2039 No-Build Mitigation: 1. Gebhard Road / Pine Street: Addition of a third westbound through lane, dual eastbound left turn lanes, and dual southbound left turn lanes. A third westbound through lane on Pine Street is recommended to begin east of Table Rock Road and extend to the I-5 northbound ramps for continuity and to help with corridor congestion. 2. Upton Road / Scenic Avenue: Installation of a traffic signal or roundabout when warrants are met. Future Year 2039 Build Mitigation: 3. Gebhard Road / Beebe Road: This new connection in the future is planned as a two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersection with Beebe Road approaches stopped and Gebhard Road approaches free movements. As a TWSC intersection, the eastbound movement operates at a LOS “F”, which exceeds the City operational standard of LOS “D” or better. Implementing all-way stop-control (AWSC) was considered but was not shown to adequately mitigate this intersection. A roundabout is recommended to mitigate the higher demand of traffic volumes and blend in with the proposed roundabout network to the north. 4. N. Grant Road / Twin Creeks Crossing: This TWSC intersection becomes a 4-legged intersection in the future with an increase in traffic generated to/from the east from URA CP-6A. It exceeds the City and County performance standards as a TWSC but meets as an AWSC intersection. Proposed mitigation includes adding stop signs to the north and south Grant Road approaches when warranted. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 6 5. Gebhard Road / Wilson Road: This 4-legged intersection exceeds its County performance standard under future build conditions due to an increase in traffic to/from Wilson Road. Proposed mitigation includes adding stop signs to Wilson Road east and west approaches to make it an AWSC intersection when warranted. 6. Upton Road / CP-2B: This 3-legged intersection exceeds its County LOS D performance standard under future build conditions due to an increase in traffic to/from Upton Road through a new connection to CP- 2B URA. Proposed mitigation includes adding a center turn lane on Upton Road at the CP-2B street connection. This analysis was undertaken to address issues of compliance with the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) between Jackson County and the City of Central Point (adopted per Ordinance No. 2001). The amendment is also governed by state, county, and local criteria as set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), and Statewide Planning Goals (Goals 11, 12, and 14). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 7 II. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this traffic analysis is to evaluate potential impacts from an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) amendment in the City of Central Point and to measure the ability to provide public facilities. UGB expansion areas were identified by the City to serve future community growth. Four Urban Reserve Areas (URA) made it past a coarse filter of land options and include CP-4D, CP-2B, CP-3, and a portion of CP-6A. Background This analysis was undertaken to address issues of compliance with the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) between Jackson County and the City of Central Point (adopted per Ordinance No. 2001). The amendment is also governed by state, county, and local criteria as set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), and Statewide Planning Goals (Goals 11, 12, and 14). The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requirements under OAR 660-012-0060 need not be applied to a UGB amendment if the land added to the UGB is zoned as urbanizable land, either by retaining the zoning that was assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary or by assigning interim zoning that does not allow development that would generate more vehicle trips than development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary. In this instance, land added to the UGB through this amendment will be given a new Comprehensive Plan Map designation, but will require a zone change to demonstrate facility adequacy is maintained or can be maintained prior to being approved for development. Transportation system needs will, therefore, be addressed through the zone change process. This effort is taken to ensure that improvements can be made to satisfy facility adequacy requirements of the proposed UGB amendment. An existing conditions analysis is provided at 25 study area intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours to establish a baseline condition. Future year 2039 no-build and build conditions are then evaluated and compared to identify which mitigation measures will be necessary to support increased development from four URAs selected as part of the UGB amendment. Project Location The four URAs proposed in the UGB amendment are located on the west, north, and northeast boundaries of the City limits. CP-3 is the only URA located within a pocket inside the city limits on the northeast corner of Peninger Road / Pine Street near the Central Point Interchange. Refer to Figure 1 for a vicinity map and study area locations. Project Description The four proposed URAs for inclusion into the City of Central Point total 445 acres of land (51 tax lots) for residential, employment, parks and open space, and associated public facilities uses. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 9 III. EXISTING YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS Urban Reserve Areas The URAs considered in the proposed UGB amendment are located west of Grant Road (CP-6A), north of Old Upton Road (CP-4D), between Upton Road and Gebhard Road south of Wilson Road (CP-2B), and on the northeast corner of Peninger Road/Pine Street (CP-3) in Central Point. The four URAs total 445 acres of land (51 tax lots) for residential, employment, parks and open space, and associated public facilities uses. Roadway Characteristics The project study area is served by roadways under City of Central Point, Jackson County, and ODOT jurisdiction. In general, most of the areas under consideration are along the outer City boundaries. One exception is CP-3, which is a small URA on the northeast corner of Peninger Road/Pine Street. Table 1 provides a summary of roadway classifications and descriptions in the study area. Table 1 - Roadway Classifications and Descriptions Roadway Jurisdiction Functional Classification Lanes Posted Speed (mph) Sidewalks Bike Lanes Interstate 5 Ramps ODOT Interstate 2-3 30-45 No No OR 99 (Front St.) between MP 1.64 - 2.18 Central Point Major Arterial 5 35 Yes Yes OR 99 (south of MP 1.64 and north of MP 2.18) ODOT District Highway 5 45 Yes Yes Pine Street Central Point Minor / Major Arterial 4-5 35-45 Yes Yes Biddle Road Jackson County Major Arterial 5 45 Yes Yes Table Rock Road Jackson County Major Arterial 5 30-45 Yes Yes Hamrick Road Jackson County Minor Arterial / Collector 2-3 30 Partial Yes Peninger Road Jackson County Collector 2 35-45 No Yes 10th Street Central Point Minor Arterial 2 20-25 Yes No Haskell Street Central Point Minor Arterial / Collector 2 20-25 Yes Yes Hanley Road Jackson County Minor Arterial 2 35 No No Grant Road Jackson County Collector 2 40 No No Taylor Road Jackson County Collector 2 35 Partial No Twin Creeks Crossing Central Point Minor Arterial / Collector 2 25 Yes No Scenic Avenue Jackson County/ Central Point Minor Arterial 2 30-35 Partial Partial Upton Road Jackson County Minor Arterial 2 35 Partial Partial Wilson Road Jackson County Minor Arterial 2 45 No No Gebhard Road Jackson County/ Central Point Collector 2 40 No No Beebe Road Central Point Collector 2 25-40 No No Beall Lane Jackson County Minor Arterial 2 40-45 Partial Yes 7.A.b Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 10 Traffic Counts Manual traffic counts were gathered by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering between the spring and fall of 2019 with the majority of counts gathered during the summer peak months. Counts were gathered on a typical weekday in the a.m. and p.m. peak periods to establish a global peak hour. The system-wide or global peak hour was determined to be 7:30-8:30 a.m. and 4:30-5:30 p.m. within the study area. A seasonal adjustment was applied to raw count data to develop 30th highest hour volumes. Intersections north of Pine Street along OR 99 were adjusted using the Automated Traffic Recorder (ATR) #15-014. South of Pine Street along OR 99 ATR #15-019 was used to adjust counts. All other counts within the City and outer County boundaries were adjusted using the ODOT Seasonal Trend Table. Once adjustments were made, counts were then balanced. Refer to Figures 2-4 for intersection lane configurations and turning movement volumes during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Manual traffic counts and ATR sheets are provided in Appendix A. Intersection Capacity and Level of Service Intersection capacity calculations for stopped-controlled intersections were conducted utilizing the methodologies presented in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. Capacity and level of service calculations for signalized intersections were prepared using SYNCHRO 10 timing software. Level of service quantifies the degree of comfort afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or along a roadway section, and is based on total delay, defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. Level of service ranges from “A” to “F”, with “A” indicating the most desirable condition (free-flow state) and “F” indicating an unsatisfactory condition (excessive congestion and long queue lengths). Volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios are decimal representations of used capacity and range between 0.00-1.00, or zero to 100%. Lane movements with low v/c ratios have an excess of available capacity, while movements with high v/c ratios are shown to be near or at capacity. Operating Standards Study area intersections are under ODOT, Jackson County, and City of Central Point jurisdictions. ODOT operates and maintains the Interstate 5 ramp intersections with Pine Street. The operating standard for interchange ramps is a maximum volume-to-capacity (v/c) of 0.85 per the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) Policy 1F. For all other ODOT intersections, mobility performance standards are provided in Table 6 of the OHP. Jackson County’s performance standard for signalized and unsignalized intersections is a maximum v/c ratio of 0.95. Where Jackson County intersections overlap with City of Central Point intersections, a level of service (LOS) “D” standard applies as well. The City of Central Point uses a LOS performance standard “D” for both signalized and stop-controlled intersections. Intersection deficiencies are identified for any study area intersection shown to exceed its operational standard. The need for mitigation in future year scenarios is identified based on intersection operations exceeding performance standards after planned improvements have been considered. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 14 Year 2019 No-Build Intersection Operations Study area intersections were evaluated under year 2019 no-build conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours to provide a baseline for traffic conditions. Results are summarized in Tables 2 and 3. Table 2 – Existing Intersection Operations – Weekday AM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Traffic Control Level of Service (LOS) Volume/ Capacity (V/C) Met? 13 I-5 Northbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal B 0.40 Yes 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal B 0.67 Yes 19 Twin Creeks / OR 99 City LOS D Signal A 0.30 Yes 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) City LOS D Signal C 0.73 Yes 7 Table Rock Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal A 0.52 Yes 9 Table Rock Rd. / Biddle Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.57 Yes 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.66 Yes 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D Signal B 0.57 Yes 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. County / ODOT V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.61 Yes 16 Haskell St. / W Pine St. City LOS D Signal B 0.72 Yes 23 Beall Ln. / Front St. / OR 99 ODOT / County V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.62 Yes 2 Scenic Ave. / OR 99 ODOT V/C 0.95 TWSC C, EB 0.40, EB Yes 4 Upton Rd. / Peninger Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC B, WB 0.09, WB Yes 5 Upton Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC B, WB 0.22, WB Yes 31 Hamrick Rd. / Beebe Rd. City / County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC C, WB 0.03, WB Yes 17 Haskell Rd. / Twin Creeks City LOS D TWSC B, WB 0.08, WB Yes 25 Beall Ln. / Grant Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, SB 0.09, SB Yes 22 Taylor Rd. /Grant Rd. (from south) County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, NB 0.06, NB Yes 21 Taylor Rd. /Grant Rd. (from north) County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, SB 0.04, SB Yes 20 N. Grant Rd. / Twin Creeks Crossing County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, WB 0.03, WB Yes 17 Haskell St. / Taylor Rd. City LOS D TWSC B, EB 0.25, EB Yes 1 N Grant Rd. / Scenic Ave. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, NB 0.09, NB Yes 3 Upton Rd. / Scenic Ave. City LOS D TWSC E, SB 0.68, SB No 6 Gebhard Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, NB 0.07, NB Yes 24 Hanley Rd. /Beall Ln. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D AWSC B, EB 0.35, EB Yes TWSC=Two-way stop controlled, AWSC=All-way stop controlled, EB=eastbound, WB=westbound, NB=northbound, SB=southbound, NA=not applicable 7.A.b Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 15 Table 3 – Existing Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Traffic Control Level of Service (LOS) Volume/ Capacity (V/C) Met? 13 I-5 Northbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal B 0.52 Yes 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal B 0.56 Yes 19 Twin Creeks / OR 99 City LOS D Signal A 0.32 Yes 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) City LOS D Signal C 0.65 Yes 7 Table Rock Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal A 0.45 Yes 9 Table Rock Rd. / Biddle Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.60 Yes 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.74 Yes 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D Signal C 0.75 Yes 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. County / ODOT V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.62 Yes 16 Haskell St. / W Pine St. City LOS D Signal A 0.55 Yes 23 Beall Ln. / Front St. / OR 99 ODOT / County V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.67 Yes 2 Scenic Ave. / OR 99 ODOT V/C 0.95 TWSC F, WB 0.82, WB Yes 4 Upton Rd. / Peninger Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC B, WB 0.18, WB Yes 5 Upton Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC B, WB 0.29, WB Yes 31 Hamrick Rd. / Beebe Rd. City / County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC D, WB 0.16, EB Yes 17 Haskell Rd. / Twin Creeks City LOS D TWSC B, WB 0.12, WB Yes 25 Beall Ln. / Grant Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, SB 0.10, SB Yes 22 Taylor Rd. /Grant Rd. (from south) County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, NB 0.06, NB Yes 21 Taylor Rd. /Grant Rd. (from north) County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, SB 0.09, SB Yes 20 N. Grant Rd. / Twin Creeks Crossing County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, WB 0.03, WB Yes 17 Haskell St. / Taylor Rd. City LOS D TWSC B, EB 0.18, EB Yes 1 N Grant Rd. / Scenic Ave. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC A, NB 0.07, NB Yes 3 Upton Rd. / Scenic Ave. City LOS D TWSC F, SB 0.91, SB No 6 Gebhard Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, NB 0.05, NB Yes 24 Hanley Rd. /Beall Ln. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D AWSC B, NB 0.37, NB Yes TWSC=Two-way stop controlled, AWSC=All-way stop controlled, EB=eastbound, WB=westbound, NB=northbound, SB=southbound, NA=not applicable All study area intersections are shown to operate within applicable performance standards with the exception of the two-way stop-controlled intersection of Scenic Avenue / 10th Street / Upton Road. This intersection is shown to have a failing LOS in the southbound movement during both peak hours as a result of school traffic. All other intersections are shown to operate within applicable performance standards. Synchro output sheets are provided in Appendix C. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 16 Year 2019 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths Queuing is the stacking up of vehicles for a given lane movement and can have a significant effect on roadway safety and the overall operation of a transportation system. Long queue lengths in through lanes can block access to turn lanes, driveways, and minor street approaches, as well as spill back into upstream intersections. As a result of this, the estimation of queue lengths is an important aspect of the analysis process for determining how a transportation corridor operates. Queue lengths are reported as the average, maximum, or 95th percentile queue length. The 95th percentile queue length is used for design purposes and is the queue length reported in this analysis. Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95th percentile queue lengths. Queues were evaluated at study area intersections under year 2019 no-build conditions. Queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 4 for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours if shown to exceed their available link distance. Table 4 – Existing 95th Percentile Queue Lengths – Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours Map ID Intersection Movement Storage (feet) Weekday AM (feet) Weekday PM (feet) 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. Southbound Right 100 175 150 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) Eastbound Right 100 150 50 Westbound Left 200 150 300 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. Westbound Through/Right 250 150 >250 Eastbound Through/Right 175 225 175 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. Northbound Left/Through 425 125 425 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. Northbound Left 175 225 250 Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show five study area intersections have exceeded queue lengths under existing conditions during one or both peak hours. The southbound right turn queue on the I-5 Exit 33 ramp at Pine Street exceeds its storage and spills into the adjacent lane. The queues on this off-ramp reach I-5 at times of the year during the p.m. peak hour. The eastbound right turn storage and westbound left turn storage on Pine Street at Front Street (OR 99) are exceeded during either the a.m. or p.m. peak hour. The eastbound right turn is exceeded during the a.m. peak hour and the westbound left turn during the p.m. peak hour, which results in some blockage of the adjacent lane. The westbound through-shared-right turn movement on Vilas Road at Table Rock spills back and blocks access to the northeast and southeast corner businesses during the p.m. peak hour. Future plans, in the Jackson County Transportation System Plan (TSP), include adding a second westbound left and exclusive westbound right turn lane if shown to be necessary. The northbound-shared-left turn movement on Hamrick Road at Biddle Road is shown to spill back and reach an east-west frontage during the p.m. peak hour. This queue length has increased since Costco relocated from north Medford to Central Point. The last queue shown to exceed its link distance under existing conditions is the northbound left turn movement on Peninger Road at Pine Street. This occurs during both peak hours and is due to semi-truck traffic. A full queuing and blocking report is provided in Appendix D. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 17 Crash History Crash data for the most recent five-year period was provided from ODOT’s online Crash Data System. Results were provided for the period of January 1, 2013 through December 31st, 2017 because 2018 data is still considered preliminary. Crash data was analyzed to identify crash patterns that could be attributable to geometric or operational deficiencies, or crash trends of a specific type that would indicate the need for further investigation at an intersection. Study area intersection crash rates were also compared to critical crash rates. Tables 5 and 6 provide a summary of results for intersections with reported crashes. Crash data is provided in Appendix B. Table 5 - Study Area Intersection Crash Rates, 2013-2017 Intersection 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total Crashes ADT Crash Rate ODOT Critical Crash Rate I-5 NB Off Ramp / Pine St 4 0 5 4 3 16 30700 0.286 0.509 I-5 SB Off Ramp / Pine St 3 9 4 2 8 26 28,100 0.507 0.509 Front St / Pine St 1 5 6 2 3 17 24400 0.382 0.860 Twin Creeks Crossing / OR 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 10100 0.000 0.293 Scenic Ave / OR 99 2 3 6 4 3 18 12,600 0.783 0.408 Beall Ln / Front St / OR 99 6 4 3 4 4 21 20950 0.549 0.860 Peninger Rd / Upton Rd 2 0 1 1 1 5 5450 0.503 0.475 Upton Rd / Wilson Rd 0 0 1 0 1 2 4750 0.231 0.293 Wilson Rd / Table Rock 0 2 1 1 1 5 16150 0.170 0.509 Table Rock / Biddle Rd 3 3 4 7 4 21 24700 0.466 0.860 Vilas Rd / Table Rock 8 8 8 9 15 48 31,200 0.843 0.860 Hamrick Rd / Biddle Rd 5 2 1 7 5 20 25400 0.431 0.860 Beebe Rd / Hamrick Rd 0 1 0 0 0 1 11050 0.050 0.408 Peninger Rd / Pine St 4 4 2 3 6 19 28500 0.365 0.860 Haskell St / Pine St 2 5 2 5 2 16 14750 0.594 0.860 Hanley Rd / Beall Ln 0 0 1 0 1 2 7600 0.144 0.408 Grant Rd / Beall Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 3700 0.000 0.293 S Grant Rd / Taylor Rd 0 0 0 0 0 0 2100 0.000 0.293 N Grant Rd / Taylor Rd 0 0 0 0 0 0 2150 0.000 0.293 Grant / Twin Creeks Crossing 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 0.000 0.293 Taylor Rd / Haskell St 0 0 0 0 0 0 5600 0.000 0.293 Grant Rd / Scenic Ave 0 0 0 0 0 0 2450 0.000 0.293 Upton Rd / Scenic Ave 0 0 0 2 0 2 9400 0.117 0.408 Gebhard Rd / Wilson Rd 1 0 0 1 0 2 3300 0.332 0.408 10th St / Pine St 3 1 3 2 2 11 27550 0.219 0.860 Haskell / Twin Creeks Crossing 0 0 0 1 0 1 2900 0.189 0.293 7.A.b Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 18 Table 6 - Crash History by Type, 2013-2017 Intersection Collision Type Severity Rear- End Turning/ Angle Other Pedestrian / Bicyclist Non- Injury Injury Fatal I-5 NB Off Ramp / Pine St 5 9 1 1 6 102 0 I-5 SB Off Ramp /Pine St 9 10 2 5 12 142 0 Front St / Pine St 4 11 2 0 10 71 0 Twin Creeks Crossing / OR 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Scenic Ave / OR 99 1 15 2 0 7 101 1 Beall Ln / Front St / OR 99 11 8 2 0 6 152 0 Peninger Rd / Upton Rd 1 3 1 0 4 1 0 Upton Rd / Wilson Rd 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 Wilson Rd / Table Rock 2 3 0 0 3 2 0 Table Rock / Biddle Rd 18 2 1 0 7 14 0 Vilas Rd / Table Rock 22 23 2 1 24 23 1 Hamrick Rd / Biddle Rd 6 13 1 0 10 10 0 Beebe Rd / Hamrick Rd 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Peninger Rd / Pine St 9 14 2 0 8 112 0 Haskell St / Pine St 6 8 1 1 13 3 0 Hanley Rd / Beall Ln 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Grant Rd / Beall Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S Grant Rd / Taylor Rd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Grant Rd / Taylor Rd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grant Rd / Twin Creeks Crossing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Taylor Rd / Haskell St 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grant Rd / Scenic Ave 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Upton Rd / Scenic Ave 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 Gebhard Rd / Wilson Rd 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 10th St / Pine St 6 4 1 0 7 4 0 Haskell St / Twin Creeks Crossing 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 Note: Injury# denotes number of INJA crash Intersections having a crash rate exceeding the ODOT critical crash rate include Scenic Avenue / OR 99 and Peninger Road / Upton Road. The Peninger Road / Upton Road intersection crash rate is skewed by its low traffic volume. There were five reported collisions at this intersection within a five-year period and most resulted in property damage only. The intersection of Scenic Avenue / OR 99 had 18 reported collisions within a five-year period. The majority of collisions were turning or angle crashes, which is not surprising due to the width of OR 99 at Scenic Avenue and the stopped approaches of Scenic Avenue. Speed also likely plays a role at this location because the intersection is located on the outside boundary of the City limits where it is more rural in nature and speeds begin to increase. A fatality occurred in late June of 2013 when a vehicle heading eastbound blew through the stop sign on Scenic Avenue and was struck by a southbound vehicle on OR 99. The cause was reported as driving too fast. Additionally, an injury of type A occurred in March of 2014 when a vehicle heading eastbound 7.A.b Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 19 stopped and then proceeded through the intersection without yielding to a southbound vehicle on OR 99. Speeding was not reported to be a cause in this crash. Other study area intersections that were shown to have an injury of type A or fatality include: 1. Pine Street / Front Street (OR 99) – An angle collision in late November of 2015 resulted in serious injury when a westbound traveling vehicle ran a red light and struck a southbound traveling vehicle. Weather does not appear to be a factor. It was a clear, dry Saturday around 3 p.m. in the afternoon. Four other collisions at this intersection were from red light runners, and of those four crashes, one resulted in minor injury and the remaining three in property damage only. 2. I-5 Northbound Ramps / Pine Street – Two crashes resulted in serious injury within a five-year period. One occurred in November of 2013 on a Wednesday at 6 a.m. when it was clear but still dark out. A cyclist traveling eastbound on the north side of Pine Street was struck by a westbound right turning vehicle. The cause was reported as the cyclist not being visible and wearing non-reflective clothing. The second crash resulting in serious injury was in mid December of 2017 at 4 p.m., under clear, dry conditions. It involved an eastbound left turning vehicle failing to yield right-of-way to a westbound traveling vehicle. 3. I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine Street - Two crashes resulted in serious injury within a five-year period. One occurred in late November of 2014 on a Friday at 4 p.m., under wet conditions. A southbound vehicle on the off-ramp rear-ended another southbound vehicle and was reported as driving recklessly. The second crash resulting in serious injury was in May of 2015 on a Thursday at 2 p.m. under clear, dry conditions. This crash involved a pedestrian crossing southbound and being struck by a southbound right turning vehicle. The driver was in error by failing to yield to the crossing pedestrian. This intersection had five reported collisions involving pedestrians and/or cyclists. Four of the five collisions involved a southbound right turning vehicle with a pedestrian or cyclist either crossing westbound or southbound. Some signal equipment located on the northwest corner of the intersection might obstruct an approaching driver’s view of a pedestrian beginning to cross southbound, but a driver can clearly see as he/she arrives at the intersection. A westbound pedestrian or cyclist would be clearly visible to a southbound right turning vehicle unless they were east of the intersection and partially blocked by an existing fence along the north side of the interchange. 4. Peninger Road / Pine Street – Two crashes resulted in serious injury within a five-year period. One occurred on the 4th of July in 2014 as a rear-end collision between two eastbound traveling vehicles. The error was following too close and the cause failing to avoid the vehicle ahead. The crash occurred at noon. The second crash resulting in serious injury was in early December of 2015 at 5 p.m., under dark, wet conditions. It involved an eastbound left turning vehicle failing to yield right-of-way to a westbound traveling vehicle. 5. Beall Lane / OR 99 – Two crashes resulted in serious injury within a five-year period. One occurred on Halloween of 2013 when a northbound traveling vehicle struck another northbound traveling vehicle that was stopped in the travel lane with a green light. No cause is given other than failing to stop but the day is reported to be clear, dry and around noon on a Thursday. The second crash resulting in serious injury occurred in late August of 2016 when a westbound vehicle collided with two northbound vehicles (one was a motorcycle). The error cited was disregarding the traffic signal, but it was unknown which driver caused the crash. The two northbound drivers were injured. 6. Vilas Road / Table Rock Road - There were 48 reported collisions at this signalized intersection within a five-year period, which is the highest occurrence in the study area. Of these collisions, one involved a pedestrian and one was fatal. The fatality occurred at 12 a.m. on a Sunday in August of 2016 when a 7.A.b Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 20 westbound traveling vehicle ran a red light and struck a northbound traveling vehicle. The westbound driver was cited for speeding and reckless driving. The pedestrian collision involved an eastbound left turning vehicle with a westbound traveling pedestrian. The pedestrian collision resulted in minor injury to the pedestrian. In looking at the fatality, it resulted from reckless driving with excessive speed and these types of collisions are typically considered unavoidable or at least not necessarily resulting from a design flaw. The pedestrian collision occurred at 6 a.m. in the morning on a Saturday in July. The pedestrian was reported to be obscured from the drivers view. Both crashes are considered random events. The majority of collisions were rear-end or turning/angle crashes, which are common at signalized intersections that carry a significant amount of traffic and have protected/permissive left turn movements. Protected/permissive left turn movements exist on all approaches, and there is a separate channelized right turn lane in the northbound direction with yield control. This increases the potential for rear-end and turning collisions. Statewide Safety Priority Index System The ODOT Statewide Priority Index System (SPIS) identifies sites along state highways where safety issues warrant further investigation. The SPIS is a method developed by ODOT for identifying high potential crash locations based on crash frequency, rate, and severity. Locations identified within the top 5 percent are investigated by ODOT and reported to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). In our study area, six locations were identified as top 5 percent sites in at least one of three periods 2013-15, 2014-16, or 2015-17. Two of these intersections (Scenic/OR 99 and Vilas/Table Rock) are SPIS sites due to fatalities in 2013 and 2014 that were discussed above. Neither location is identified as a SPIS site during the most recent 2015-17 period. The intersections of Biddle Road / Table Rock Road and Peninger Road / Pine Street were identified as SPIS sites during the period 2013-15. Neither is listed in either of the other two periods. A section of Pine Street through the downtown area is listed as a SPIS site during the 2014-16 period, and a section of Hanley Road west of Brandon Street within a horizontal curve is identified as a SPIS site during the most recent 2015-17 period. The location along Hanley Road could be due to speeding through the curve because two reported crashes were related to speeding and reckless driving. The downtown area is likely due to the frequency of collisions along the 4-lane section of Pine Street that has no center turn lane. Remedies at all locations within the City will be considered and discussed further when the City updates their TSP. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 21 IV. FUTURE YEAR 2039 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS Future Year 2039 No-Build Description Future year 2039 no-build conditions represent future conditions for the study area without consideration of URA development trips. This condition is evaluated to determine how the study area will be impacted by background growth throughout the TSP planning horizon. Background growth was derived using ODOT travel demand model for the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) area (version 4.3 RTP land use scenario). The travel demand model provided base year 2010 and forecast year 2042 traffic volume projections. Future year 2039 traffic volumes were developed by applying the post-processing methodology presented in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 765: Analytical Travel Forecasting Approaches for Project-Level Planning and Design. Traffic volumes were then refined and balanced as appropriate. Future year 2039 no-build traffic volumes are provided in Figure 6 for the p.m. peak hour, which was determined to be the highest peak of the day at the majority of study area intersections. Model runs and post-processing spreadsheets are provided in Appendix B. Future Year 2039 No-Build Planned Improvements Future year 2039 no-build conditions included planned, funded, or financially constrained Tier 1 projects in the City of Central Point TSP, Jackson County TSP, and I-5 Exit 33 Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP). Improvements included: • Scenic Avenue / OR 99 – Re-stripe OR 99 to include a left turn lane, through lane, and right turn lane northbound and southbound. Install a traffic signal (City TSP Tier 1 project #230) • Pine Street / Front Street (OR 99) – City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment, widen Pine Street to include an eastbound left turn lane, two through lanes with a shared right turn, and two eastbound receiving lanes. Add protected-permissive phasing to eastbound and westbound left turn movements. • Biddle Road / Table Rock Road – City TSP Project #218, widen west approach to add second eastbound left turn lane or, City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment, widen to include a third westbound through lane. • Taylor Road / Grant Road (from south) – Re-align south approach approximately 350 feet west to line up with Grant Road from the north. • Twin Creeks Crossing / Grant Road – Add west leg to 3-legged intersection to create 4-legged intersection. • Vilas Road / Table Rock Road – Add second left turn lane and exclusive right turn lane on westbound approach. This was listed in the Jackson County TSP (Project #I3) as potential mitigation if shown to be necessary after construction of the OR 62 Bypass. Future year 2039 no-build conditions show these improvements will be necessary to meet the County v/c 0.95 operational standard. • Hamrick Road / Biddle Road – City TSP Project #216, widen west and south approaches to to add a second eastbound left turn lane and second receiving lane. Restripe northbound approach to include dual left turns and a single through-shared-right turn. Restripe southbound approach to include a left turn, through, and exclusive right turn lanes. (The I-5 Exit 33 IAMP improvement #11 also included part of the City TSP Project #216) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 22 • Beebe Road / Hamrick Road – City TSP Tier 1 project #211, add traffic signal • Gebhard Road / Pine Street – City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment, extend Gebhard Road as a collector street to intersection with E. Pine Street and signalize. • Beebe Road: Gebhard Road to Hamrick Road – City TSP Tier 1 project #209, widen to collector standards. • Gebhard Road: UGB to Beebe Road – City TSP Tier 1 project #220, re-align, widen to 3 lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks. • Peninger Road / Pine Street – I-5 Exit 33 IAMP improvement #10, implement City TSP Project #236 to add third westbound lane on E. Pine Street from Bear Creek Bridge to I-5 northbound ramps. City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment (incorporates part of City TSP Tier 2 project #245), add a bridge across Bear Creek north of Pine Street and extend Beebe Road to Peninger Road. This amendment did not include removing the traffic signal at Peninger Road / Pine Street because for that to occur a bridge across Bear Creek south of Pine Street would be necessary. Instead, to accommodate this amendment, our analysis revised the lane configurations at Peninger Road / Pine Street to restrict the north approach to right- in, right-out movements but continue to remain signalized. This was necessary to address congestion on Pine Street as a result of the new Gebhard Road / Pine Street signalized intersection. • Beebe Road / Gebhard Road – City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment, new 4-legged intersection with Gebhard Road extension to the south. East and west movements stop-controlled. • Beebe Road / Local Gebhard Road – City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment, new 3- legged intersection with Beebe Road and old Gebhard Road (local street section). North approach stop- controlled. • Gebhard Road / Local Gebhard Road - City Gebhard Road 2008 Transportation Plan Amendment, re-align Gebhard Road approximately 750 feet north of Beebe Road to include two 90 degree curves and intersect at a new location with Beebe Road approximately 600 feet east of the existing connection. Install a roundabout at the 3-legged intersection of Gebhard Road (from north) / Gebhard Road (new east leg) / local Gebhard Road (existing south leg). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 23 Future Year 2039 No-Build Intersection Operations Future Year 2039 no-build intersection operations were evaluated at study area intersections during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 7. Lane configurations are provided on Figure 5. Table 7 – Future Year 2039 No-Build Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Traffic Control Level of Service (LOS) Volume/ Capacity (V/C) Met? 13 I-5 Northbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal C 0.73 Yes 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal C 0.71 Yes 19 Twin Creeks / OR 99 City LOS D Signal B 0.48 Yes 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) City LOS D Signal D 0.81 Yes 7 Table Rock Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.68 Yes 9 Table Rock Rd. / Biddle Rd.1 County V/C 0.95 Signal D 0.87 Yes 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal D 0.88 Yes 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D Signal C 0.79 Yes 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. County / ODOT V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.78 Yes 16 Haskell St. / W Pine St. City LOS D Signal A 0.48 Yes 23 Beall Ln. / Front St. / OR 99 ODOT / County V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.79 Yes 2 Scenic Ave. / OR 99 ODOT V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.75 Yes 27 Gebhard Rd. / Pine St. City LOS D Signal E >1.0 No 4 Upton Rd. / Peninger Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC B, WB 0.30, WB Yes 5 Upton Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC D, WB 0.63, WB Yes 11 Hamrick Rd. / Beebe Rd. City / County V/C 0.95, LOS D Signal B 0.69 Yes 18 Haskell Rd. / Twin Creeks City LOS D TWSC B, WB 0.27, WB Yes 25 Beall Ln. / Grant Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, SB 0.13, SB Yes 21 Taylor Rd. / Grant Rd. (4-legged) County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, NB 0.13, NB Yes 31 Gebhard Rd. / Beebe Rd. City LOS D TWSC D, EB 0.11, EB Yes 28 Peninger Rd. / Beebe Rd. City / County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, SB 0.39, SB Yes 30 Beebe Rd. / Local Gebhard Rd. City LOS D TWSC B, SB 0.13, SB Yes 32 Gebhard Rd. / Local Gebhard Rd. City LOS D Roundabout A, SB 0.21, SB Yes 20 Grant Rd. / Twin Creeks Crossing County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, WB 0.21, WB Yes 17 Haskell St. / Taylor Rd. City LOS D TWSC B, EB 0.24, EB Yes 1 N Grant Rd. / Scenic Ave. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, NB 0.14, NB Yes 3 Upton Rd. / Scenic Ave. City LOS D TWSC F, SB >1.0, SB No 6 Gebhard Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC C, NB 0.32, NB Yes 24 Hanley Rd. /Beall Ln. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D AWSC B, NB 0.51, NB Yes TWSC=Two-way stop controlled, AWSC=All-way stop controlled, EB=eastbound, WB=westbound, NB=northbound, SB=southbound, NA=not applicable 1. Table Rock / Biddle Road intersection includes third westbound through lane 7.A.b Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 24 Two study area intersections are identified as exceeding their applicable performance standard under future year 2039 no-build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. One is the proposed new Gebhard Road signalized intersection with Pine Street, and the other is the two-way stop-controlled intersection of Upton Road / Scenic Avenue that is heavily influenced by school traffic during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 1. Gebhard Road / Pine Street signalized intersection: This intersection is proposed in the near future approximately halfway between Peninger Road and Hamrick Road along Pine Street. Its purpose is to provide a direct connection from the Gebhard Road expansion area north of Beebe Road to Pine Street, reduce traffic on Hamrick Road, and ultimately provide more separation between signalized intersections east of the I-5 exit 33 interchange. Peninger Road is currently a signalized intersection (approximately 500 feet east of the I-5 northbound ramps) that provides access to the Jackson County Expo/ other businesses to the north and the Pilot Truck Stop/ other businesses to the south. At such time a bridge is constructed over Bear Creek north of Pine Street and south of Pine Street, traffic will be re-routed to the east through the new Gebhard Road / Pine Street and existing Hamrick Road / Biddle Road signalized intersections. The signalized intersection of Peninger Road / Pine Street will also become a right-in, right-out two-way stop- controlled intersection. Our analysis did not consider all of these improvements, however, because the bridge over Bear Creek south of Pine Street is a City TSP Tier 2 project. To account for traffic re-routing north of Pine Street but not south of Pine Street, the intersection of Peninger Road / Pine Street was evaluated as a signalized intersection with the north approach changing to right-in, right-out movements. This re-routed a significant number of trips through the new Gebhard Road signalized intersection at Pine Street, which caused it to exceed its performance standard. Assumptions for the new intersection lane configurations were that Pine Street would remain as a 5-lane section, and Gebhard Road would have an exclusive left turn and through-shared-right turn lane, which is consistent with the collector street cross- section north of Pine Street. This is not shown to be adequate, however, to support projected traffic volumes. A third westbound through lane, dual eastbound left turn lanes, and dual southbound left turn lanes will be required to meet the applicable performance standard if traffic projections occur as shown by the ODOT travel demand model over the 20-year planning horizon. Because a third westbound through lane was considered as a planned improvement on Biddle Road at Table Rock Road (City 2008 Plan Amendment) and on Pine Street from the Bear Creek Bridge to the I-5 ramps (I-5 Exit 33 IAMP improvement #10) to address future growth, it would make sense to include a third westbound through lane from Biddle Road to the I-5 ramps (City TSP Tier 2 project #255). 2. Upton Road / Scenic Avenue: This two-way stop-controlled intersection experiences congestion and delay during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours that coincide with school traffic in the area. In the future, a traffic signal or roundabout will be necessary to adequately mitigate projected growth. No other study area intersections were shown to exceed their performance standard under future year 2039 no-build conditions with planned improvements considered. Synchro output sheets are provided in Appendix E. Future Year 2039 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths Queue lengths were evaluated at study area intersections under future year 2039 no-build conditions. Reported 95th percentile queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 8 for the p.m. peak hour if shown to exceed their available link distance. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 25 Table 8 – Future Year 2039 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths – Weekday PM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Movement Storage (feet) Weekday PM (feet) Blockage 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. Southbound Right 100 225 Adjacent lane 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) Westbound Through 200 600 1st St., 2nd St. Westbound Left 200 300 Adjacent lane 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. Eastbound Through/Right 175 375 Driveways Westbound Through 200 350 Right turn lane 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. Westbound Through(s) 800 >800 Meadowbrook Northbound Left(s) 425 550 Frontage Rd. Southbound Right 300 >300 Adjacent lane 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. Northbound Left 175 275 Adjacent lane 16 Haskell St. / Pine St. Westbound Left 100 150 Adjacent lane 23 Beall Ln. / Front St. / OR 99 Westbound Left 75 100 Adjacent lane Eastbound Left/Through/Right 225 225 Driveways 27 Gebhard Rd. / Pine St. Eastbound Left 500 550 Adjacent lane Westbound Through(s) 725 >725 Hamrick Rd. Southbound Left 250 275 Adjacent lane Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show intersections with exceeded queue lengths increase from five to eight between existing and future year no-build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. The eastbound right turn storage is no longer shown to exceed its link distance with improvements considered, but the westbound left turn and through movements on Pine Street at Front Street (OR 99) are shown to spill back and potentially block 1st Street and 2nd Street intersections. The westbound movements on Vilas Road at Table Rock Road are much shorter after improvements are considered in the future, but the eastbound through-shared-right turn movement is shown to block driveways of businesses west of Table Rock Road as growth occurs. At Hamrick Road / Biddle Road (Pine Street), the northbound dual left turn movement is shown to have a long queue length that reaches the east-west frontage street to the south. This is even after dual left turns are considered. One reason for this is because the left turns are evaluated as permissive movements to use less intersection green time allocation. The intersection is shown to operate best overall with this movement being permissive, but longer queues occur when there is a spike in southbound right turns. The westbound through lanes on Biddle Road at Hamrick Road under future conditions are also shown to increase significantly as westbound volumes increase as a result of area growth. A third westbound through lane will help to mitigate this between Table Rock Road and the I-5 northbound ramps. The northbound left turn movement on Peninger Road at Pine Street continues to exceed its storage length and spill into the adjacent through lane. This will continue to occur until a south bridge crossing re-routes traffic through Hamrick Road. Additional intersections with exceeded queues under future no-build conditions include the westbound left at Haskell Street / Pine Street, Beall Lane queues east and west of OR 99, and eastbound left, westbound through, and southbound left turn movements at the new Gebhard Road / Pine Street signalized intersection. The Gebhard Road intersection at Pine Street has a high traffic load placed on it due to turn restrictions at Peninger Road that re-route traffic to Gebhard Road. This intersection will require a third westbound through lane, dual eastbound left turns, and an exclusive right turn lane in the future if traffic projections occur as shown by the ODOT travel demand model over the 20-year planning horizon. A full queuing and blocking report is provided in Appendix F. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 28 V. URBAN RESERVE AREAS (URA) Four URAs are proposed for inclusion into the City of Central Point UGB. They include a portion of CP-6A located west of Grant Road (north and south of Taylor Road), CP-4D located north of Old Upton Road (west of Raymond Way), CP-2B located between Upton Road and Gebhard Road south of Wilson Road, and CP-3 located on the northeast corner of Peninger Road/Pine Street. The four URAs total 445 acres of land (51 tax lots) for residential, employment, parks and open space, and associated public facilities uses. See below. CP-6A Expansion into CP-6A recognizes the need for housing and livability by connecting the Twin Creeks Transit Oriented Development (TOD) with a new TOD east of Grant Road, north and south of Taylor Road. Key features include a neighborhood activity center to provide land area for professional offices, neighborhood shopping and entertainment, and a centralized location for future UGB amendments. It includes a mix of low, medium, and high density housing with a small area of neighborhood commercial CP-4D URA CP-4D includes the Boes Park area. Expansion in this location will promote development of Boes Park and Boes Subdivision infill, providing a needed core park. The City owns the land for Boes Park but cannot obtain funding until the Park is included in the City UGB. This area brings in Parks & Open Space (OS) and Residentail Very Low (RL). CP-6A CP-3 CP-2B CP-4D 7.A.b Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 29 CP-2B and CP-3 The proposed UGB Amendment for URAs CP-2B and CP-3 expands the Eastside Transit Oriented Development (ETOD) District to the northwest and west across Bear Creek Park. This allows an opportunity to provide active transportation routes for residents to employment and entertainment areas. CP-2B includes low, medium, and high density residential, neighborhood commercial, and civic land. CP-3 includes general commercial, Bear Creek Greenway, and parks & open space. The close proximity between the URAs and other local attractions create a walkable area for nearby residents and visitors. CP-6A CP-4D CP-2B CP-3 7.A.b Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 30 VI. FUTURE YEAR 2039 BUILD CONDITIONS Future Year 2039 Build Description Future year build conditions in this analysis represent no-build conditions for the study area with the addition of proposed URA developments considered. Build conditions are compared to no-build conditions to determine what impacts and/or mitigation measures will result from proposed development. Future year 2039 build conditions include development of a portion of CP-6A, CP-4D, CP-2B, and CP-3. ODOT’s Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU) ran RVMPO Travel Demand Scenarios considering inclusion of the proposed URAs. The model runs incorporated revised land use and boundary locations, as well as accounted for all existing and planned infrastructure. Future year 2039 build traffic volumes were developed by applying the post-processing methodology presented in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 765: Analytical Travel Forecasting Approaches for Project-Level Planning and Design. Traffic volumes were then refined and balanced as appropriate to include new street connections and planned roadways. Future year 2039 build traffic volumes are provided in Figure 7 for the p.m. peak hour. Model runs and post-processing spreadsheets are provided in Appendix B. Future Year 2039 Build Intersection Operations Future year 2039 build conditions were evaluated at study area intersections during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 9. Table 9 – Future Year 2039 Build Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Traffic Control Level of Service (LOS) Volume/ Capacity (V/C) Met? 13 I-5 Northbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal C 0.86 Yes 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. ODOT V/C 0.85 Signal C 0.79 Yes 19 Twin Creeks / OR 99 City LOS D Signal B 0.63 Yes 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) City LOS D Signal D 0.92 Yes 7 Table Rock Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.74 Yes 9 Table Rock Rd. / Biddle Rd.1 County V/C 0.95 Signal D 0.95 Yes 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. County V/C 0.95 Signal D 0.92 Yes 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D Signal D 0.91 Yes 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. County / ODOT V/C 0.95 Signal B 0.93 Yes 16 Haskell St. / W Pine St. City LOS D Signal A 0.58 Yes 23 Beall Ln. / Front St. / OR 99 ODOT / County V/C 0.95 Signal D 0.94 Yes 2 Scenic Ave. / OR 99 ODOT V/C 0.95 Signal C 0.84 Yes 27 Gebhard Rd. / Pine St. City LOS D Signal F >1.0 No 4 Upton Rd. / Peninger Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC D, WB 0.64, WB Yes 5 Upton Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95 TWSC F, WB 0.86, WB Yes 11 Hamrick Rd. / Beebe Rd. City / County V/C 0.95, LOS D Signal B 0.73 Yes 18 Haskell Rd. / Twin Creeks City LOS D TWSC C, WB 0.72, WB Yes 25 Beall Ln. / Grant Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC C, NB 0.54, NB Yes 21 Taylor Rd. / Grant Rd. (4-legged) County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC C, NB 0.45, NB Yes 7.A.b Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 31 Table 9 Continued – Future Year 2039 Build Intersection Operations – Weekday PM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Jurisdiction Standard Traffic Control Level of Service (LOS) Volume/ Capacity (V/C) Met? 31 Gebhard Rd. / Beebe Rd. City LOS D TWSC F, EB 0.63, EB No 28 Peninger Rd. / Beebe Rd. City / County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC C, SB 0.57, SB Yes 30 Beebe Rd. / Local Gebhard Rd. City LOS D TWSC B, SB 0.19, SB Yes 32 Gebhard Rd. / Local Gebhard Rd. City LOS D Roundabout A, WB 0.34, WB Yes 20 Grant Rd. / Twin Creeks Crossing County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC F, WB >1.0, WB No 17 Haskell St. / Taylor Rd. City LOS D TWSC C, EB 0.41, EB Yes 1 N Grant Rd. / Scenic Ave. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, NB 0.17, NB Yes 3 Upton Rd. / Scenic Ave. City LOS D TWSC F, SB >1.0, SB No 6 Gebhard Rd. / Wilson Rd. County V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC F, NB >1.0, NB No 24 Hanley Rd. /Beall Ln. County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D AWSC D, NB 0.80, NB Yes 29 Beebe Rd. / CP-3 City LOS D TWSC D, WB 0.41, WB Yes 26 N Grant Rd. / CP-6A County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, EB 0.27, EB Yes 35 Wilson Rd. / CP-2B County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, NB 0.27, NB Yes 33 Gebhard Rd. / CP-2B County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC B, EB 0.05, EB Yes 34 Upton Rd. / CP-2B County / City V/C 0.95, LOS D TWSC E, WB 0.69, WB No TWSC=Two-way stop controlled, AWSC=All-way stop controlled, EB=eastbound, WB=westbound, NB=northbound, SB=southbound, NA=not applicable 1. Table Rock / Biddle Road intersection includes third westbound through lane Six study area intersections are identified as exceeding their applicable performance standard under future year 2039 build conditions as compared to two under no-build conditions. The new Gebhard Road / Pine Street signalized intersection and stop-controlled Upton Road / Scenic Way intersection exceed applicable performance standards under both no-build and build scenarios. The four additional intersections include Gebhard Road / Beebe Road, N. Grant Road / Twin Creeks Crossing, Gebhard Road / Wilson Road, and Upton Road / CP-2B. • Gebhard Road / Beebe Road: This new connection in the future is planned as a two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersection with Beebe Road approaches stopped and Gebhard Road approaches free movements. As a TWSC intersection, the eastbound movement operates at a LOS “F”, which exceeds the City operational standard of LOS “D” or better. Implementing all-way stop-control (AWSC) was considered but was not shown to adequately mitigate this intersection. A roundabout is recommended to mitigate the higher demand of traffic volumes and blend in with the proposed roundabout network to the north. • N. Grant Road / Twin Creeks Crossing: This TWSC intersection becomes a 4-legged intersection in the future with an increase in traffic generated to/from the east from URA CP-6A. It exceeds the City and County performance standards as a TWSC but meets as an AWSC intersection. Proposed mitigation includes adding stop signs to the north and south Grant Road approaches. • Gebhard Road / Wilson Road: This 4-legged intersection exceeds its County performance V/C 0.95 standard under future build conditions due to an increase in traffic to/from Wilson Road. Proposed mitigation includes adding stop signs to Wilson Road east and west approaches to make it an AWSC intersection. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 32 • Upton Road / CP-2B: This 3-legged intersection exceeds its County LOS D performance standard under future build conditions due to an increase in traffic to/from Upton Road through a new connection to CP- 2B URA. Proposed mitigation includes adding a center turn lane on Upton Road at the CP-2B street connection. Proposed intersection improvements at Gebhard Road / Pine Street and Upton Road / Scenic Avenue in the future year 2039 no-build scenario are shown to adequately mitigate in the future build scenario as well. This includes: • Gebhard Road / Pine Street: Addition of a third westbound through lane, dual eastbound left turn lanes, and dual southbound left turn lanes. A third westbound through lane on Pine Street is recommended to begin east of Table Rock Road and extend to the I-5 northbound ramps for continuity and to help with corridor congestion. • Upton Road / Scenic Avenue: Installation of a traffic signal or roundabout when warrants are met. All other study area intersections continue to operate acceptably under future year 2039 build conditions with planned improvements considered. Synchro output sheets are provided in Appendix G. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 33 Future Year 2039 Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths Queue lengths were evaluated at study area intersections under future year 2039 build conditions. Reported 95th percentile queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 10 for the p.m. peak hour if shown to exceed their available link distance. Table 10 – Future Year 2039 Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths – Weekday PM Peak Hour Map ID Intersection Movement Storage (feet) Weekday PM (feet) Blockage 14 I-5 Southbound Ramps / Pine St. Southbound Right 100 225 Adjacent lane 13 I-5 Northbound Ramps / Pine St. Northbound Right 375 >375 Adjacent lane 15 Front St. / Pine St. / (OR 99) Westbound Through 200 1250 1st St.- 4th St. Westbound Left 200 350 Adjacent lane 8 Table Rock Rd. / Vilas Rd. Eastbound Through/Right 175 325 Driveways Westbound Through 200 350 Right turn lane 10 Hamrick Rd. / Biddle Rd. Westbound Through(s) 800 >800 Meadowbrook Northbound Left(s) 425 575 Frontage Rd. Southbound Right 300 >300 Adjacent lane 12 Peninger Rd. / E Pine St. Northbound Left 175 325 Adjacent lane 16 Haskell St. / Pine St. Westbound Left 100 150 Adjacent lane 23 Beall Ln. / Front St. / OR 99 Westbound Left 75 125 Adjacent lane Eastbound Left/Through/Right 225 350 Driveways 27 Gebhard Rd. / Pine St. Eastbound Left 500 >900 Adjacent lane Westbound Through(s) 725 >725 Hamrick Rd. Southbound Left 250 325 Adjacent lane 3 Upton Rd. / Scenic Ave. Southbound Left 250 >250 Adjacent lane Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis, under future year 2039 build conditions, show similar intersections having exceeded queue lengths during the p.m. peak hour. The main difference between the no-build and build conditions is seen in the domino effect of queues impacting downstream intersections. The long southbound left turn queue on Upton Road at Scenic Avenue spills back and blocks the adjacent through lane, which causes the through movement to spill back and impact westbound movements at Upton Road / Peninger Road. Similarly, the Gebhard Road / Pine Street and Hamrick Road / Biddle Road intersections have long queues that impact intersections to the east, west, and north. The identified improvements in the previous no-build and build operations analyses are shown to mitigate this. Full queuing and blocking reports for future year 2039 build and mitigated-build are provided in Appendix H. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 35 VII. JURISDICTIONAL EXCHANGES Jackson County to City of Central Point Jurisdictional Exchanges As part of the proposed UGB amendment, the City intends to take over jurisdiction of the following Jackson County Roadways: • Beebe Road: Hamrick Road to Gebhard Road • Gebhard Road: Beebe Road to Wilson Road • Grant Road: Twin Creeks Crossing to Beall Lane • Taylor Road: Silver Creek Drive to the proposed westerly UGB boundary Refer to a street jurisdiction map on the following page for further information. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.bPacket Pg. 330Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC | July 27, 2020 | CP Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Traffic Analysis | 37 VIII. CONCLUSIONS Conclusions The findings of the traffic impact analysis conclude that the proposed UGB amendment can be approved without creating adverse impacts to the transportation system with identified mitigations. Two study area intersections are identified as exceeding their applicable performance standard under future year 2039 no-build conditions. Four additional intersections exceed performance standards under future year 2039 build conditions. Future Year 2039 No-Build Mitigation: 1. Gebhard Road / Pine Street: Addition of a third westbound through lane, dual eastbound left turn lanes, and dual southbound left turn lanes. A third westbound through lane on Pine Street is recommended to begin east of Table Rock Road and extend to the I-5 northbound ramps for continuity and to help with corridor congestion. 2. Upton Road / Scenic Avenue: Installation of a traffic signal or roundabout when warrants are met. Future Year 2039 Build Mitigation: 3. Gebhard Road / Beebe Road: This new connection in the future is planned as a two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersection with Beebe Road approaches stopped and Gebhard Road approaches free movements. As a TWSC intersection, the eastbound movement operates at a LOS “F”, which exceeds the City operational standard of LOS “D” or better. Implementing all-way stop-control (AWSC) was considered but was not shown to adequately mitigate this intersection. A roundabout is recommended to mitigate the higher demand of traffic volumes and blend in with the proposed roundabout network to the north. 4. N. Grant Road / Twin Creeks Crossing: This TWSC intersection becomes a 4-legged intersection in the future with an increase in traffic generated to/from the east from URA CP-6A. It exceeds the City and County performance standards as a TWSC but meets as an AWSC intersection. Proposed mitigation includes adding stop signs to the north and south Grant Road approaches when warranted. 5. Gebhard Road / Wilson Road: This 4-legged intersection exceeds its County performance standard under future build conditions due to an increase in traffic to/from Wilson Road. Proposed mitigation includes adding stop signs to Wilson Road east and west approaches to make it an AWSC intersection when warranted. 6. Upton Road / CP-2B: This 3-legged intersection exceeds its County LOS D performance standard under future build conditions due to an increase in traffic to/from Upton Road through a new connection to CP- 2B URA. Proposed mitigation includes adding a center turn lane on Upton Road at the CP-2B street connection. This analysis was undertaken to address issues of compliance with the Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA) between Jackson County and the City of Central Point adopted per Ordinance No. 2001. The amendments are also governed by state, county, and local criteria as set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), and Statewide Planning Goals (Goals 11, 12, and 14). 7.A.b Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) CP-1B CP-6A CP-2B CP-6B CP-4D CP-1C CP-3 CP-5A E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City LimitsUrban Reserve Areas CP-1B Tolo Road CP-1C Scenic Road CP-2B Wilson Road CP-3 East Pine Street CP-4D Bear Creek CP-5A Grant Road CP-6A Taylor Road CP-6B Beall Lane Proposed UGB Study Area MapCentral Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Proposed UGB AreasCentral Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed CP-6A Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential CommercialProposed CP-3 Land Use General Commercial (GC) Bear Creek Greenway (BCG) Parks and Open Space (OS)Proposed CP-4D Land Use Parks and OS Residential Very LowProposed CP-2B Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential Neighborhood Commercial Civic Parks & Open Space Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Proposed UGB Land UseCentral Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) WILSON RD GEBHARD RDUPTON RDLARA LN RABUN WAY JEREMY ST IVAN LNHAWK DRBLUEGRASS DR WALNUT GROVE LN PENINGER RD PHEASANT WAYTWIN ROCKS DRKENTUCKY CTARISTONA ST BLUE SKY WAYE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside UGBCP-2B Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) WILSON RD GEBHARD RDUPTON RDLARA LN RABUN WAY JEREMY ST IVAN LNHAWK DRBLUEGRASS DR WALNUT GROVE LN PENINGER RD PHEASANT WAYTWIN ROCKS DRKENTUCKY CTARISTONA ST BLUE SKY WAYE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside UGBCP-2B Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) EFU RR-5 EFU EFU UR-1 RR-5 EFU RR-2.5 RR-2.5 RR-5 RR-5 EFU RR-5 WILSON RD GEBHARD RDUPTON RDLARA LN RABUN WAY JEREMY ST IVAN LNHAWK DRBLUEGRASS DR WALNUT GROVE LN PENINGER RD PHEASANT WAYTWIN ROCKS DRKENTUCKY CTARISTONA ST BLUE SKY WAYE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary County Zoning Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Rural Residential (RR-5) Rural Residential (RR-2.5) UR-1 Eastside UGB County ZoningCP-2B Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Proposed CP-2B Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential Neighborhood Commercial Civic Parks & Open Space Eastside Proposed UGB Land UseCP-2B Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson CountyEXPO WILSON RD UPTON RD GEBHARD RD7.A.b Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) WILSON RD GEBHARD RDUPTON RDLARA LN RABUN WAY JEREMY ST IVAN LNHAWK DRBLUEGRASS DR WALNUT GROVE LN PENINGER RD PHEASANT WAYTWIN ROCKS DRKENTUCKY CTARISTONA ST BLUE SKY WAYE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Flood Hazard Zones FLOODWAY AE A AH AO X-SHADED Eastside Flood HazardsCP-2B Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) WILSON RD GEBHARD RDUPTON RDLARA LN RABUN WAY JEREMY ST IVAN LNHAWK DRBLUEGRASS DR WALNUT GROVE LN PENINGER RD PHEASANT WAYTWIN ROCKS DRKENTUCKY CTARISTONA ST BLUE SKY WAYE Legend Streams Extended UGB_Wetlands Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside Wetlands and StreamsCP-2B Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E. PINE ST HAMRICK RDBEEBE RD PENINGER RD GEBHARD RDPENINGER DRHAMRICK RDE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside UGBCP-3 Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E. PINE ST HAMRICK RDBEEBE RD PENINGER RD GEBHARD RDPENINGER DRHAMRICK RDE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside UGBCP-3 Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) RR-5 EFU RR-5 EFU EFU RR-2.5 EFU RR-2.5 RR-2.5E. PINE ST HAMRICK RDBEEBE RD PENINGER RD GEBHARD RDPENINGER DRHAMRICK RDE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary County Zoning Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Rural Residential (RR-5) Rural Residential (RR-2.5) UR-1 Eastside UGB County ZoningCP-3 Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E. PINE ST HAMRICK RDBEEBE RD PENINGER RD GEBHARD RDPENINGER DRHAMRICK RDE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Proposed City Land Use General Commercial (GC) Bear Creek Greenway (BCG) Parks and Open Space (OS) Eastside UGB Proposed City Land UseCP-3 Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E. PINE ST HAMRICK RDBEEBE RD PENINGER RD GEBHARD RDPENINGER DRHAMRICK RDE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Flood Hazard Zones FLOODWAY AE A AH AO X-SHADED Eastside UGB Flood HazardsCP-3 Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E. PINE ST HAMRICK RDBEEBE RD PENINGER RD GEBHARD RDPENINGER DRHAMRICK RDE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Wetlands Streams Eastside UGB Wetlands and StreamsCP-3 Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UPTON RDROCK WAY DOBROT WAYTERESA WAYSCENIC AVE BOES AVE RAYMOND WAYDEL MAR DRPARKWOOD AVE OLD UPTON RD N P E N IN G E R R DOLD UPTON RDE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside UGBCP-4D Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Jackson County EXPO 7.A.b Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UPTON RDROCK WAY SCENIC AVE DOBROT WAYTERESA WAYBOES AVE RAYMOND WAYDEL MAR DRP E N I N GE R R D PARKWOOD AVE OLD UPTON RD N OLD UPTON RDNANCY AVEE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Eastside UGBCP-4D Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) EFU RR-5 EFU RR-5RR-2.5 UR-1 RR-5 UPTON RDROCK WAY DOBROT WAYTERESA WAYSCENIC AVE BOES AVE RAYMOND WAYDEL MAR DRPARKWOOD AVE OLD UPTON RD N P E N IN G E R R DOLD UPTON RDE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary County Zoning Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Rural Residential (RR-5) Rural Residential (RR-2.5) UR-1 Eastside UGB County ZoningCP-4D Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UPTON RDROCK WAY DOBROT WAYTERESA WAYSCENIC AVE BOES AVE RAYMOND WAYDEL MAR DRPARKWOOD AVE OLD UPTON RD N P E N IN G E R R DOLD UPTON RDE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Proposed City Land Use Parks and OS Residential Very Low Eastside UGB Proposed City Land UseCP-4D Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UPTON RDROCK WAY SCENIC AVE DOBROT WAYTERESA WAYBOES AVE RAYMOND WAYDEL MAR DRP E N I N GE R R D PARKWOOD AVE OLD UPTON RD N OLD UPTON RDNANCY AVEE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Flood Hazard Zones FLOODWAY AE A AH AO X-SHADED Eastside UGB Flood HazardsCP-4D Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) UPTON RDROCK WAY SCENIC AVE DOBROT WAYTERESA WAYBOES AVE RAYMOND WAYDEL MAR DRP E N I N GE R R D PARKWOOD AVE OLD UPTON RD N OLD UPTON RDNANCY AVEE Legend Proposed UGB Amendment Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Wetlands Streams Eastside UGB Wetlands and StreamsCP-4D Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) GRANT RDTAYLOR RD DONNA WAYSILVER CREEK DRBUCK POINT STMENDOLIA WAYBRAD WAYRUSTLER PEAK STW . PINE STOAKLEY STGROUSE RIDGE DRN H A S K E LL S T SANDOZ STCARLTON AVE RACHEL DRSAXBURY DRSHAKE DR GOLDEN PEAK DR TULANE AVE RED OAK STBLU E M O O N D R MITCHELL WAY STEAMBOAT DR STRAIT WAY SUMMERLIN DR BROOKSIDE LNTWIN CREEKS CROSSING LOOPMEADOW LARK WAYGRANT RDGRANT RDE Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Westside UGBCP-6A Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Westside UGBCP-6A Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment TAYLOR RD GRANT RDGRANT RDTWIN CREEKS CROSSING 7.A.b Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) EFU EFU UR-1 UR-1 RR-5 RR-5 RR-5 RR-2.5 UR-1 UR-1 UR-1 RR-5 UR-1 EFU RR-2.5 RR-5 RR-00 UR-1 RR-5 UR-1 RR-5 RR-2.5 EFU RR-2.5 RR-2.5 E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits County Zoning Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Rural Residential (RR-5) Rural Residential (RR-2.5) UR-1 Westside UGB County ZoningCP-6A Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment TAYLOR RD GRANT RDGRANT RDTWIN CREEKS CROSSING 7.A.b Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Proposed City Land Use High Residential Medium Residential Low Residential Commercial Westside UGB Proposed City Land UseCP-6A Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment TAYLOR RD GRANT RDGRANT RDTWIN CREEKS CROSSING 7.A.b Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Flood Hazard Zones FLOODWAY AE A AH AO X-SHADED Westside UGB Flood HazardsCP-6A Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment TAYLOR RD GRANT RDGRANT RDTWIN CREEKS CROSSING 7.A.b Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend Proposed UGB Tax Lots Proposed UGB Amendment Urban Growth Boundary City Limits Wetlands Streams Westside UGB Wetlands and StreamsCP-6A Central Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment 7.A.b Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) REGIONAL PLAN PROGRESS REPORT A SELF-EVALUATION MONITORING REPORT ADDRESSING COMPLIANCE WITH REGIONAL PLAN PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN THE REGIONAL PLAN ELEMENT OF THE CENTRAL POINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN City of Central Point Adopted by City Council Resolution No. 1632 June 25, 2020 7.A.b Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) INTRODUCTION The City adopted the Regional Plan Element in 20121 as a new Element of its Comprehensive Plan in response to County adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan. As part of the Regional Plan Element1 the City is required to adhere to various performance indicators and is also subject to monitoring. On a regular basis, beginning in 2017 and every 5 years thereafter, the City is required to participate in a regular Regional Plan review process. This is intended to coincide with the Regional Problem Solving Agreement each city entered into. The review is to be in the form of a self-evaluation monitoring report addressing the City’s compliance with the performance indicators in the Regional Plan Element. The City has created this format to address the three things that are identified as part of local monitoring, namely; A description of Central Point’s activities pertinent to the Regional Plan for the preceding five-year period; An analysis as to whether and how well those activities meet each of the performance indicators; and A projection of activities for the next five-year period. Activities The adoption of the Regional Plan Element in 2012 included subsequent adoption of the City’s Agricultural Buffering Ordinance and an Urban Reserve Management Agreement (URMA) with Jackson County. The City has also completed and/or participated in the following. 1) Preparation and approval of Conceptual Plans for six (6) of City’s eight (8) URAs (CP-1B, CP-2B, CP-3, CP-4D, CP-5A and CP-6A) including collaboration with the MPO and Rogue River Valley Irrigation District; 2) Participation in the Jackson County Agricultural Task Force and support of subsequent recommendations and revisions to the Jackson County Agricultural Element; 3) Adoption of a revised Urban Growth Management Agreement (UGMA) with Jackson County; 4) Revision and adoption of the City’s Buildable Lands Inventory for both employment and residential land; 5) Revision and adoption of the City’s Economic Element; 1 City of Central Point Ordinance 1964 2 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan, Regional Plan Element, Section 4.1 Performance Indicators 7.A.b Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 6) First expansion of the Central Point UGB into portions of CP-4 and CP-1B; 7) Revision and adoption of the City’s Housing Element; 8) Update of the City’s Transportation Systems Plan (TSP) to include and acknowledge the Interchange Area Management Plans for I-5 Exits 33 (Pine Street) and 35 (Tolo); 9) Preparation and adoption of the Central Point Housing Implementation Plan, the City’s Housing Strategy for 2019-2024; and 10) Preparation and adoption of the City’s Land Use and Urbanization Elements. Analysis of Activities Each of the activities described above has contributed to the implementation of Central Point’s Regional Plan Element in particular and the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan in general. The degree to which these activities meet each of the performance indicators is addressed in the City’s findings found at the end of this document. Projection of Activities During the next five years the City of Central Point expects to use the various products and documents cited above to expand its Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and bring in sufficient amounts of residential, employment and open space lands to serve a growing population through the year 2040. The new UGB lands will reflect and implement the conceptual planning that was done for the URAs into which the UGB is expanded. The City also expects to participate with the Regional Problem Solving (RPS) signatories in conducting a 10-year mandated review beginning in 2022. Other activities that the City expects to be involved with include, but are not limited to; updating the Central Point Transportation Systems Plan (TSP), updating the Public Facilities and Services Element, Updating the Environmental Management Element (Hazard Mitigation Plan), maintaining the Buildable Land Inventory (BLI); monitoring the Housing Implementation Plan and updating the Land Use and Development codes to implement new state law and rule making. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Performance Indicators Implementation of the Regional Plan Element is guided by a series of twenty-two (22) primary and twenty-one (21) secondary performance indicators2, not all of which are applicable to all urban reserve areas. The following responses address each performance indicator listed in Chapter 5 Section 2 of The Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (bold Indicators correspond to the City’s Regional Plan Element): 2.1 (4.1.1.) County Adoption. Jackson County adopted the Regional Plan in its entirety into the County Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances. Finding: The GBCVRP has been taken into account in the preparation of Intergovernmental Agreements and in the preparation of each City’s Regional Plan Element. Conclusion 4.1.2: Complies. 2.2 (4.1.2.) City Adoption. The City incorporated the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (GBCVRP) into the Central Point Comprehensive Plan as the Regional Plan Element. Finding: The GBCVRP was taken into account in the preparation of the City’s Regional Plan Element. Conclusion 4.1.2: Complies. 2.3 (4.1.3.) Urban Reserve Management Agreement. An URMA was adopted by the City when it adopted its Regional Plan Element. Finding: The URMA has been adopted and will be used for planning in Urban Reserve Areas. Conclusion 4.1.3: Complies. 2.4 (4.1.4.) Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement. The UGBMA between Central Point and Jackson County was revised to institutionalize and direct the management of Forest/Gibbon Acres as an Area of Mutual Planning Concern. Other changes in the agreement added an intent and purpose statement, aligned procedural language with the County Comprehensive Plan and obligated the City and County to involve affected Irrigation Districts in the land use planning process. Finding: The UGBMA has been amended to account for better inter-agency interaction and long range planning. Conclusion 4.1.4: Complies. 2.5 (4.1.5.) Committed Residential Density. The City has designated land within its URAs to satisfy a regionally agreed to minimum of 6.9 dwelling units per gross acre. Offsets for increasing residential densities within the city limit (in order to reduce URA densities below 6.9) have already been exercised. Finding: The City has followed through with its commitment to the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (GBCVRP) by assigning residential land use designations in conceptual plans that achieve 6.9 units per gross acre. Conclusion 4.1.5: Complies. 2.6 (4.1.6.) Mixed Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. For land within a URA (or within a UGB outside the city limits), each city shall achieve the 2020 Benchmark targets for the number of dwelling units (Alternative Measure No. 5) and employment (Alternative Measure No. 6) in mixed use/pedestrian friendly areas as established in the most recently adopted RTP. 2 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan, Regional Plan Element, Section 4.1 Performance Indicators 7.A.b Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Finding: The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) lists a 49% mixed-use dwelling unit target and a 44% mixed-use employment target for new development by 2020. The land use categories in the Conceptual Plans are being developed to create walkable/ mixed use neighborhoods that are anchored by activity centers. The conceptual activity centers being proposed are characterized by medium and high density residential land use and employment centers (i.e. School and Mixed-Use/Commercial). Conclusion 4.1.6: Complies. 2.7 (4.1.7.) Conceptual Transportation Plans. Conceptual Transportation Plans shall be prepared early enough in the planning and development cycle that the identified regionally significant transportation corridors within each of the URAs can be protected as cost-effectively as possible by available strategies and funding. A Conceptual Transportation Plan for a URA or appropriate portion of a URA shall be prepared by the City in collaboration with the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization, applicable irrigation districts, Jackson County, and other affected agencies, and shall be adopted by Jackson County and the respective city prior to or in conjunction with a UGB amendment within that URA. Finding: The City has adopted conceptual transportation and land use plans in concert with the long range planning it has done within its URAs. Conclusion 4.1.7: Complies. 2.7.1 (4.1.7.1.) Transportation Infrastructure. The Conceptual Transportation Plan shall identify a general network of regionally significant arterials under local jurisdiction, transit corridors, bike and pedestrian paths, and associated projects to provide mobility throughout the Region (including intra-city and inter-city, if applicable). Finding: The regionally significant transportation corridor within CP-1B is the OR 140 Corridor which extends from I-5 Exit 35 to Brownsboro-Eagle Point Road. Additionally, the Interchange Area Management Plan for Exit 35 (IAMP-35) identifies public improvements and projects that have been taken into consideration as part of the CP-1B Conceptual Plan. The Bear Creek Greenway system, which is predominantly pedestrian and bicycle oriented affects part but not all of CP-1B. The Concept Plan acknowledges the proximity of the Bear Creek Greenway system. The plan generally represents an enhanced local street network and access management improvements that are proposed in the OR 140 Corridor Plan and in IAMP-35. Conclusion 4.1.7.1: Complies. 2.8 (4.1.8.) Conceptual Land Use Plans: A proposal for a UGB Amendment into a designated URA shall include a Conceptual Land Use Plan prepared by the City in collaboration with the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization, applicable irrigation districts, Jackson County, and other affected agencies. Finding: The City has prepared and adopted six Conceptual Plans each of which has been done in collaboration with the County, RVMPO and affected agencies. Conclusion 4.1.8: Complies. 2.8.1 (4.1.8.1.) Target Residential Density. The Conceptual Land Use Plan shall provide sufficient information to demonstrate how the residential densities (reflected in the following table) will be met at full build-out of areas added to the UGB. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre 2010 – 2035 2036 - 2060 Central Point 6.9 7.9 Finding: The City has assigned conceptual land use designations to achieve an average of 6.9 dwelling units per gross acre in each URA that has a residential component. Conclusion 4.1.8.1: Complies. 2.8.2 (4.1.8.2.) Land Use Distribution. The Conceptual Land Use Plan shall indicate how it is consistent with the general distribution of land uses in the Regional Plan, especially where a specific set of land uses was part of the rationale for designating land which was determined by the Resource Lands Review Committee to be commercial agricultural land as part of a URA, which applies to the following URAs: CP- 1B, CP-1C, CP-4D, CP-6A, CP-2B, MD-4, MD-6, MD-7mid, MD-7n, PH-2, TA-2, TA-4. Finding: The City has assigned conceptual land use designations to tax lots within URAs CP-1B, CP-2B, CP-3, CP-4D, CP-5 and CP-6. These land use assignments are consistent with the general land use distributions presented in the Regional Plan Element. Conclusion 4.1.8.2: Complies. 2.8.3 (4.1.8.3.) Transportation Infrastructure. The Conceptual Land Use Plan shall include the transportation infrastructure required in Section 4.1.7 above. Finding: The required transportation infrastructure per 4.1.7 is addressed in each of the Concept Plans completed by the City (see Finding 4.1.7). Conclusion 4.1.8.3: Complies. 2.8.4 (4.1.8.4.) Mixed Use/Pedestrian Friendly Areas. For land within a URA, each city shall achieve the 2020 Benchmark targets for employment (Alternative Measure No. 6) as established in the most recently adopted RTP. Finding: The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Appendix B, Page 10 lists a 44% mixed-use employment target for new development by 2020. New land use categories in the various Conceptual Plans have been designed and can be adapted to create walkable/mixed use neighborhoods. Conclusion 4.1.8.4: Complies. 2.9 (4.1.9.) Conditions. The following conditions apply to specific Urban Reserve Areas: 2.9.1 (4.1.9.1.) CP-1B. Prior to the expansion of the UGB into CP-1B, ODOT, Jackson County and Central Point shall adopt and Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for the Seven Oaks Interchange Area. Finding: The adopted CP-1B Concept Plan is consistent with the Regional Plan Element’s Conceptual Transportation Plan, in that IAMP-35 management strategies have been acknowledged and incorporated. The State, County and City have formally adopted IAMP-35. Conclusion 4.1.9.1: Complies. 2.9.2 (4.1.9.2.) CP-4D. Use of CP-4D is predominantly restricted to open space and park land with the exception of an existing one acre home site. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Finding: The adopted CP-4D Concept Plan is consistent with the Regional Plan Element’s land use type distribution, which allocates 99% of the gross acreage to open space/parks use. Residential uses have been restricted to the existing one acre home site. Conclusion 4.1.9.2: Complies. 2.9.3 (4.1.9.3.) CP-4D. No roadways are to extend North, East, or West from CP-4D. Finding: Currently there are three public streets that access CP-4D; Dean Creek Road from the north, Boes Avenue from the east, and Old Upton Road from the south. The adopted CP-4D Concept Plan does not propose the extension of any roadways from CP-4D. However, it is proposed that Boes Avenue and/or Old Upton Road may be extended westerly and northerly as necessary to provide access/parking to serve the future open space and recreation uses proposed for CP-4D. The determination of the extent of the extension of these two roads will be subject to more detailed identification and design of the future open space development of CP-4D. Through access shall not be permitted. Conclusion 4.1.9.3: Complies, no roadways will be extended from CP-4D. 2.9.4 (4.1.9.4.) CP-6B. Development of the portion of CP-6B designated as employment land is restricted to institutional uses. 2.9.5 (4.1.9.5) Central Point URA, Gibbon/Forest Acres. Prior to the expansion of the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary into any Urban Reserve Area, the City and Jackson County shall adopt an agreement (Area of Mutual Planning Concern) for the management of Gibbons/Forest Acres Unincorporated Containment Boundary. Finding: The City coordinated with Jackson County and entered into an Area of Mutual Planning Concern Agreement prior to a UGB expansion into any of its URAs. Conclusion 4.1.9.5: Complies 2.10 (4.1.10.) Agricultural Buffering. Participating jurisdictions designating Urban Reserve Areas shall adopt the Regional Agricultural Buffering program in Volume 2, Appendix III into their Comprehensive Plans as part of the adoption of the Regional Plan. The agricultural buffering standards in Volume 2, Appendix III shall be adopted into their land development codes prior to a UGB amendment. Finding: Agricultural buffering has been shown in the various Conceptual Plans where applicable. There are some instances where buffering will be facilitated by natural stream channels and public rights-of- way. In all cases, during the design/development phase, the City will implement its Agricultural Buffering Ordinance to mitigate potential land use conflicts. Conclusion 4.1.10: Complies. 2.11 (4.1.11.) Regional Land Preservation Strategies. Participating jurisdictions have the option of implementing the Community Buffer preservation strategies listed in the Regional Plan or other land preservation strategies as they develop. Finding: Central Point shares common boundaries with the City of Medford on the east and south. The City’s zoning code including design and development standards have been used in the past and will continue to be used to maintain Central Point’s unique identity. City standards have been an effective Community Buffer preservation strategy. Conclusion 4.1.11: Complies. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 2.12 (4.1.12.) Housing Strategies. Participating jurisdictions shall create regional housing strategies that strongly encourage a range of housing types throughout the region within 5 years of acknowledgement of the RPS Plan. Finding: The City joined other RPS partners and worked with EcoNorthwest consultants to craft both regional and community specific housing strategies. Central Point took the EcoNorthwest work and used it to revise and adopt a new Housing Element and a corresponding Housing Implementation Plan (HIP) in 2019. The City has already implemented a variety of housing strategies from the HIP. Conclusion 4.1.12: Complies. 2.13 (4.1.13.) Urban Growth Boundary Amendment. Pursuant to ORS 197.298 and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-021-0060, URAs designated in the Regional Plan are the first priority lands used for a UGB amendment by participating cities. Finding: The Regional Plan Element includes a provision that requires adoption of a concept plan prior to urban growth boundary expansion into an urban reserve area. Areas that have already come into the UGB or will come into the UGB are part of the urban reserves for which Conceptual Plans have been prepared and therefore comply with the Regional Plan and the priority system of the ORS and OAR. Conclusion 4.1.13: Complies. 2.14 (4.1.14.) Land Division Restrictions. In addition to the provisions of Oregon Administrative Rule 660-021-0040, the following apply to lots or parcels which are located within a URA until they are annexed into a city: 2.14.1-5 (4.1.14.1-5.) Land divisions within a URA should not be in conflict with the land use plans and transportation infrastructure identified in an adopted Conceptual Transportation Plan. However, cities will have to rely on their URMA with the Jackson County to manage land divisions. Finding: The Concept Plans are prepared in collaboration with Jackson County and the RVMPO. Policies in the City-County URMA and UGBMA ensure continued notification and coordination of infrastructure with proposed land divisions. Conclusion 4.1.14.4: Complies. 2.15 (4.1.15.) Rural Residential Rule. Until the City of Ashland adopts an Urban Reserve Area, the minimum lot size for properties within 1 mile of the Urban Growth Boundary of Ashland shall continue to be 10 acres. Finding: This performance indicator does not apply to the City of Central Point. Conclusion 4.1.15: Complies. 2.16 (4.1.16.) Population Allocation. The County’s Population Element shall be updated per statute to be consistent with the gradual implementation of the adopted Plan. If changes occur during an update of the County’s Population Element that result in substantially different population allocations for the participating jurisdictions, then the Plan shall be amended. Finding: The City has participated in and uses the Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County. The City adopted a new Population Element in 2019 and the update reflects the forecast for Central Point’s Urban Area (city limits and Urban Growth Boundary) published by the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) on June 30, 2018. Per ORS 195.033, the City is obligated to utilize the PRC Forecast when updating its Comprehensive Plan or land use regulations which it has. The proposed update is consistent with ORS 195.033 and documents forecast growth over 20-year period 2019-2039. Conclusion 4.1.16: Complies. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 2.19 (4.1.17.) Greater Coordination with the RVMPO. The participating jurisdictions shall collaborate with the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Organization (RVMPO) to: 4.1.17.1. Prepare the Conceptual Transportation Plans identified in Section 4.1.7. 4.1.17.2. Designate and protect the transportation infrastructure required in the Conceptual Transportation Plans identified in Section 4.1.7 to ensure adequate transportation connectivity, multimodal use, and minimize right of way costs. 4.1.17.3. Plan and coordinate the regionally significant transportation strategies critical to the success of the adopted Regional Plan including the development of mechanisms to preserve rights-of-way for the transportation infrastructure identified in the Conceptual Transportation Plans; and 4.1.17.4. Establish a means of providing supplemental transportation funding to mitigate impacts arising from future growth. Finding: The RVMPO Technical Advisory and Policy Committees determined that the Central Point Conceptual Plans comply with the Regional Plan Part 3- Goals, Policies and Potential Actions. The committee has consistently voted to endorse Central Point URA plans and to support their implementation. Conclusion 4.1.17: Complies. 2.20 (4.1.18.) Future Coordination with the RVCOG. The participating jurisdictions shall collaborate with the Rogue Valley Council of Governments on future regional planning that assists the participating jurisdictions in complying with the Regional Plan performance indicators. This includes cooperation in a region-wide conceptual planning process if funding is secured. Finding: The Concept Plans have been prepared in collaboration with the RVCOG. Conclusion 4.1.18: Complies. 2.21 (4.1.19.) EXPO. During the first Coordinated Periodic Review process for the Regional Plan, Jackson County shall consider including the land occupied by the Jackson County Expo to the City of Central Point’s Urban Reserve Area. Finding: This performance indicator is not initiated by the City of Central Point. Conclusion 4.1.19: Complies. 2.22 (4.1.20.) Agricultural Task Force. The Agricultural Task Force shall develop a program to assess the impacts on the agricultural economy of Jackson County arising from the loss of agricultural land and/or the ability to irrigate agricultural land, which may result from Urban Growth Boundary Amendments. The Agricultural Task Force shall also identify, develop and recommend potential mitigation measures, including financial strategies to offset those impacts. Appropriate mitigation measures shall be applied to Urban Growth Boundary Amendment proposals. Finding: The City participated in the County’s Agricultural Task Force who proposed changes to the County Comprehensive Plan. Each City Concept Plan is consistent with the Regional Plan Element, is consistent with the City-County UGBMA (which directs consultation with affected irrigation districts during UGB planning) and is also consistent with new policies found in Jackson County’s Agricultural Lands Element resulting from ATF recommendations. Conclusion 4.1.20: Complies. 2.17 (4.1.21.) Park Land. For purposes of UGB amendments, the amount and type of park land included shall be consistent with the requirements of OAR 660-024-0040 or the park land need shown in the acknowledged plans. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) Finding: Although not required at this time it is worth noting that OAR 660-024-0040 addresses determination of land need necessary to justify expansion of an urban growth boundary. The adopted CP-4D Concept Plan and other adopted Concept Plans that have Park Land components are consistent with the Regional Plan Element land use allocations for parks and open space and they are also consistent with Central Point’s adopted Parks and Recreation Element. Conclusion 4.1.21: Complies. 2.18 (4.1.22) Buildable Lands Definition. Finding: The term “buildable lands” as defined in OAR 660-008-0005(2) is used by the City in managing its Buildable Lands Inventory and is the basis for determining future need. Conclusion 4.1.22: Complies. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 7.A.b Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) E Legend 250-ft Notification Buffer 750-ft Notification Buffer Proposed UGB Amendment 750-ft Notification Parcels (City and County) Urban Growth Boundary Proposed UGB Tax Lots City Limits Landowner Notification MapCentral Point Urban Growth Boundary Amendment LDO 2.7.3(B) requires notice of land use application be provided to all parties entitled to a Notice of Decisionper LDO 2.7.5(B). For lands not within a UGB and that are in farm or forest zones, the notification area is 750-ft from the subject properties. For the purpose of this UGB Amendment, the landowner notification area is 750-ft since there are parcels zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) in the proposed UGB boundary. 7.A.b Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-34-400 BEAR CREEK ORCHARDS INC PO BOX 712 MEDFORD, OR 97501 36-2W-34-401 KATHOL KEVIN G/LOLA M 5485 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34-402 SHARPE JENNIFER SUZANNE/LINE 2043 KINGSWOOD DR MEDFORD, OR 97501 36-2W-34-3200 SEVEN OAKS FAMILY LLC 5504 ROGUE VALLEY HWY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34-3201 JACKSON COUNTY , 0 36-2W-34C-103 SEVEN OAKS FAMILY LLC 5504 ROGUE VALLEY HWY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-2100 JACKSON COUNTY , 0 36-2W-34C-2201 SEVEN OAKS FAMILY LLC 5526 ROGUE VALLEY HWY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3600 HERNANDEZ NANCY E MEJIA 5217 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3800 RODER OTTO 5246 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3801 SHOPE THOMAS L TRUSTEE ET AL 5233 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3802 WAITE RANDEL DAVID/TRACI L 5247 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3900 BERGH PATTY 5236 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3901 SEE WILLIAM H IV/ALISA ANN 5242 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-3902 IBOA RICARDO P/EMILY 5212 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34C-4000 LITTON ROSS ALAN 5204 DOBROT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-100 OROZCO FRANCISCO TRUSTEE 100 ESTHER WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-200 PICOLLO AUGUST J/ANNA MARIA 637 BUTTE FALLS HWY PROSPECT, OR 97536 36-2W-34D-201 MONROE CARL H/BRENDA M 5266 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-202 HALL LARRY D TRUSTEE ET AL 4973 OLD UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-203 HOBBS MONICA 4969 OLD UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-204 PATHWAY ENTERPRISES INC 1600 SKY PARK DR #101 MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-34D-205 MILLER DAVID R TRUSTEE ET AL 5336 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-206 WORKMAN ALBERT R 2018 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-207 SPARKMAN STEVEN C/KELLI ANN 5397 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-208 MOORE LAWRENCE H/JOYCE A 5247 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-209 JOLI TED (TOD/JULIE (TOD) 2098 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-210 HERNANDEZ ROBERT/ANTOINETTE 2056 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-211 STOFFLET BRIAN R ET AL 1972 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-212 BANUELOS DANIEL 5416 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-34D-215 TAYLOR GLEN D/LOIS L 5334 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-216 HUGHES RICHARD D/KATHY J 5304 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-217 MADRUGA BUCK J TRUSTEE ET AL 5267 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-218 STOCKTON JAY R/MICHELLE R 5284 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-219 MOSS LARRY L/KATHIE E 5315 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-220 YOUNG TERI L/VICKI L PO BOX 5416 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-222 RODGERS MATTHEW A/TAMARA L 5380 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-223 BOREN MICHAEL D/BEVERLY A 5359 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-224 PICOLLO AUGUST J/ANNA MARIA 637 BUTTE FALLS HWY PROSPECT, OR 97536 36-2W-34D-225 BECKWITH JOHN G/YVONNE M 4971 OLD UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-226 CLARK DANNY JAY JR 5320 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-227 ALGER JAMES P/SUZANNE R 5358 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-228 TINGLEY BRIAN A/ALYCIA A 5755 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-229 WILSON SHIRLEY ANN TRUSTEE ET 2090 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-230 SONNEN TY/SHERI 2130 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-231 DEUBERT GERALD R/LINDA G 158 JANNEY LN MEDFORD, OR 97501 36-2W-34D-232 SLUSHER MICHAEL BRADLEY/SAMAN 5283 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-233 BERG ROBERT P/KATHRYN S 5337 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-234 HOLM DAVID/SHERRY SHELDON 5365 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-235 TIMBERMAN JUNE L 5296 RAYMOND WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-236 GIESE JEFF C 531 BUSH ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-237 LEWIS CHERYL L 1997 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-239 ANSTINE SONDRA N PO BOX 5443 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-240 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF 140 3RD ST S CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-241 SCHROEDER GAIL/LILLIAN A 2089 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-242 NELSON KRISTI/COREY 2940 COMICE DR MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-34D-243 NAVE RICHARD/JACKIE 5395 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-244 JONES DONNA M 4945 OLD UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1300 DIAMOND CREST CORPORATION 4952 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1400 PHILPOT ERIK L 4972 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-34D-246 DEWITT DAVID M JR/DONNA 4927 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-247 PETERSEN LANNY TRUSTEE ET AL 5258 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1401 HEFFNER PATRICIA F/E TERRY 4964 OLD UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1402 VICKOREN MICHAEL W/JOANNA L 4970 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1403 GARCIA MICHELLE 4960 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-300 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-300 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1100 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34D-1200 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-200 SMITH KARIN E 4095 OLD UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-800 DUSENBERRY GARY H/BETTY L 5020 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-900 CARRANZA AMPARO ARAGON 5030 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1000 SCHWAB MERLIN D/LINDA C 5040 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1100 CORONADO DIANNE E HERNANDEZ E 5050 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1200 GONZALEZ PRISCILLA DIANE TRUS 5060 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1300 DAVIS LYNETTE SUE 5070 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1400 MARSHALL GARY/DENISE 5080 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1500 DENT CHELSIE R 5090 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1600 STOFFLET STACY M 1972 BOES AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1700 BRIM VERONICA M 6010 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1800 PULLIN JAMES M TRUSTEE ET AL 6020 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-1900 LYNN DENNIS E 6030 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-2000 ELO KATHERINE L 6040 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-2100 KRESS GEORGE R/SHANNON A 6050 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-2200 DANIELS BLAKE K 6060 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-2300 WEATHERS DARWIN/PENNY 6070 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-2400 CULVER MINNIE L 6090 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-4100 TEWES MARK H/DAWN MARIE 5080 DEL MAR DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-4200 DANTONIO FRANK THOMAS TRUSTEE 5003 GRIFFIN CREEK RD MEDFORD, OR 97501 36-2W-34DC-4300 MESSMER EVELYN M TRSTEE FBO 6025 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-34DC-4500 IRIGOYEN ANGELO A/SHARON L 5055 CRESTWOOD AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-5600 OCCUPANT 5050 CRESTWOOD AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-5700 DAUBENSPECK CLARENCE R 5045 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-5800 MARTIN ALICE M 5035 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-5900 TAROLLI DARYLE J/LETICIA 5025 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-34DC-6000 FREDERICK PAUL/KARRI 5015 ROCK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-600 RUSTED GATE FARM PO BOX 5326 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-601 RUSTED GATE FARM PO BOX 5326 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-700 HEFFNER DWIGHT E/PATRICIA F 996 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-800 RUSTED GATE FARM PO BOX 5326 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-900 BROWN RICHARD 5476 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1000 BURLEIGH ADAM G ET AL 5454 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1100 WOLTERMAN ROBERT KYLE ET AL 5432 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1100 WOLTERMAN ROBERT KYLE / TYLER 9048 BLACKWELL RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1200 GUENTHER JAMES E 5418 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1300 SUMMERFIELD DARRYL J/PAMELA J 5402 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1400 MEJIA ELEUTERIO/ANA BELIS 5368 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1500 PROLIFIC PARTNERS LLC 1921 BERYL ST SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 36-2W-35-1600 SESOCK RICHARD W/JANICE C 5230 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1700 YOROZU YAE A TRUSTEE ET AL 26639 SE 18TH ST SAMMAMISH, WA 98075 36-2W-35-1800 INKLEY SAMUEL C/DIANA L 5123 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1801 JACKSON COUNTY , 0 36-2W-35-1802 KEEBLE LINDA 5196 UPTON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-1900 RUSTED GATE FARM PO BOX 5326 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-2000 RUSTED GATE FARM PO BOX 5326 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-2100 RUSTED GATE FARM PO BOX 5326 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-2101 CENTRAL POINT SCHOOL DISTRICT 300 ASH ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35-2200 SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 6 300 ASH ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-100 BURCHER EVELYN 4401 OMAHA AVE MEDFORD, OR 97501 36-2W-35AD-300 RYDEN JULIA ANNE LIVING TRUST 5646 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-35AD-400 GARRISON ALBERT C SR 5616 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-500 REED MICHAEL D ET AL 5566 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-501 ISAAC GLENDA K 5596 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-600 SLATER TERESA 5552 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-700 TWEET MONINA ET AL 734 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-900 GREEN DAVE I/JOAN D 698 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-1000 COX RODNEY B 2543 COREY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-1001 ESCOBAR TERESA/HERNANDEZ JOSE 2700 FALCON ST #43 WHITE CITY, OR 97503 36-2W-35AD-1001 ZAZUETA-ESCOBAR VIVIANA E 684 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-1100 PUTNAM CAROL L 5598 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-1101 DULAC ANNETTE M/MICHAEL R II 5588 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-1200 FREDERICKS THOMAS/CHARLOTTE 646 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35AD-1300 ROBBINS DAVID/LISA 616 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-100 ANGELETTI EDWARD J/YVONNE CEC 529 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-101 GARFIELD HART LLC PO BOX 3354 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-200 LACEY REV LIV TRUST ET AL 2141 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-300 MINER DELORA L 573 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-400 LACEY DONALD I TRUSTEE ET AL 2141 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-500 MUIR JEAN E 607 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-600 PRUETT HERBERT A TRUSTEE ET A 2530 E MCANDREWS RD #APT 142 MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35D-700 ZASTERA ARLEN 5480 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-800 HIMMELMAN STEVEN D SR/CAROLYN PO BOX 3972 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-900 FROMBACH WILLIAM 5432 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-1000 MCCULLOUGH KATHLEEN B REV LIV 5392 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-1100 CLABORN AARON R/CALLIE R 3273 BIDDLE RD MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35D-1200 CLABORN KEVIN/JAMI 5342 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-1300 STACH RICHARD G & GAUMER DEBO 2949 WINTER NELL CIR MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35D-1700 BELLAMY ANDREW/JOANNE 5095 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-1800 DEBRICK WADE E TRUSTEE ET AL 5117 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-1900 ELLEFSON ELMO R ET AL 5133 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-35D-2100 GOMEZ RAUL RANGEL 5161 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2200 HUBBARD DONALD D 5183 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2300 HUBBARD DONALD A TRUSTEE 5203 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2400 WHITE JERALD T & KAREN LIVING 2024 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2500 HALL HANNAH 5243 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2600 JONES ALFRED SR/JACQUELINE 5275 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2601 HOPPER JEREMY/TIA 1643 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2602 PICOLLO ANNAMARIA TRUSTEE ET 637 BUTTE FALLS HWY PROSPECT, OR 97536 36-2W-35D-2604 INKLEY SAMUEL C/DIANA L 5123 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2606 CORP OF THE PRESIDING BISHOP 50 E NORTH TEMPLE SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84150 36-2W-35D-2608 INKLEY SAMUEL C TRUSTEE ET AL 2639 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35D-2700 SPENCE JAMES T/AMY P 955 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1100 MILLER DON PAUL/MILLER MARGAR 4340 BORGEN BLVD #1520 GIG HARBOR, WA 98332 36-2W-35DD-1101 COFFMAN JOSEPH L/CARRIE L 300 DUNLAP RD JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 36-2W-35DD-1102 OLIVER RICHARD L/SUMMER 2000 ARISTONA ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1103 NICKERSON JOEL B/HOLLY M 974 COVENGTON CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1104 GARRETT R KEVIN/PAULA EVE 1980 ARISTONA ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1105 RYDINGS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT L 1344 IVAN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1106 ALARCON JERRY J 1960 ARISTONA ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1107 HORTON ROBERT B 1950 ARISTONA ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1108 KIRKPATRICK DAVID CONNOR/MCKE 1940 ARISTONA ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1200 WILLIS-MAGANN LESLI ET AL 2199 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1201 SIMMONS THOMAS M/STEPHANY J 2195 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1202 PICKTHORNE LINDA K 2185 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1203 LILLY JAY (TOD)/DONNA (TOD) 2175 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1204 HART CATHERINE G TRUSTEE ET A 2165 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1205 STEVENS GEORGE R/DEBRA A 2155 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1206 WOLF CASSANDRA/TYLER 2147 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1207 LACEY DONALD I TRUSTEE ET AL 2141 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1209 LACEY DONALD I TRUSTEE ET AL 2141 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-35DD-1211 SEVERSON AARON/EMILY 2015 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1212 DORNER SAMUEL DAVID/MCKINSY L 2005 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1213 GERVAIS JOSHUA M 1994 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1214 MATHEWS BRYAN D/AMANDA N 2004 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1215 LEUTHOLD JOHN S/CAROL J 2014 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1216 WHITE JERALD T & KAREN LIVING 2024 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1217 DICKSON ROBERT D 1757 TENNESSEE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1218 ORTIZ JOSE G TRUSTEE ET AL 1758 TENNESSEE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1219 SHUBIN BRADLEY CRAIG ET AL 1748 TENNESSEE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1220 AXTELL TRACY S/PATRICIA J 2154 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1221 COOPER DANNIE C/MELISSA J 2164 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1222 VANIKIOTIS HARRY P/PATRICIA A 2174 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1223 REAVIS STEVE F/TERESA L 2184 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1224 KNOUFF WAYNE D TRUSTEE ET AL 2194 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1225 TAYLOR FAMILY TRUST ET AL 2198 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1300 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1305 WESTERFIELD JAMES R TRUSTEE E 2040 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1306 HIRSCH MICHAEL/JANA 2030 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1307 HAUSER MYRON/CYNTHIA 2020 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1308 YU JAMES C/KATHY L 2015 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1309 LEASE SUSAN D TRUSTEE ET AL 2000 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1310 L'HOMMEDIEU NAOMIA J 1990 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1311 DE MOND TIMOTHY/NANCY DIANE 1980 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1312 GIPSON NATHAN W/SAMANTHA 1970 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1313 HICKS ROBERT V 1960 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1314 ANGELOPOULOS JOHN A/PAMELA S 1950 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1315 BACKEN BRYAN/JENNIFER PO BOX 5474 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1316 KELL ANTHONY D/CRISTY M 1961 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1317 GONZALEZ SHAUN 1971 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1318 THUESON BRANDON/MELODY 1981 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-35DD-1320 PETERSON JENNIFER 2001 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1321 GUMAER GLENN F 2011 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1322 PARKER SCOTT B/JESSICA L 2021 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1323 GRAY KIP F 823 BOULDER CREEK LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 36-2W-35DD-1324 WHEELER ROBERT R JR ET AL 2041 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1325 GOTTULA NICKI ANN TRUSTEE ET 2051 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1326 GARCIA JOSE DIONICIO ET AL 1607 TENNESSEE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1327 KING STEVEN/SYDNEY PO BOX 1631 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 36-2W-35DD-1328 MARTINSON KENT/KRISTIN 1627 TENNESSEE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1329 INABA DARRYL & DIANE TRUST ET 2042 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1330 FULMER LOUIS B 2032 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1331 KUCERY DANIEL W 2022 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1332 BRINGHURST JOHN FRANK JR/JEAN 2012 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1333 FOWLER JOHN H TRUSTEE ET AL 2002 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1334 ROBNETT THEODORE 1992 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1335 CHRISTIAN CHRISTOPHER W/KIRST 1982 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1336 CAYWOOD DAVID/BRITTANY 1972 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1337 PATTERSON DAVID 23753 E EVANS CREEK RD WHITE CITY, OR 97503 36-2W-35DD-1352 GOTTULA SCOTT A ET AL 1974 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1338 MILLER KENNETH D/ADRIANNE Y 1603 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1339 PAYNE JOHNNY PHILLIP/MICHELLE 1613 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1340 TURITURI NATASCHA ET AL 1623 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1341 BRIEL-SMITH CHRISTINE/SMITH S 1633 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1342 HOPPER JEREMY/TIA 1643 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1343 PACHECO ANA E GONZALEZ 1653 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1353 OCCUPANT PO BOX 5547 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1344 PATEL PRADIP/HINA 1663 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1345 QUALLS COREY LEWIS/SHANNON GA 1945 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1346 HOPPER TIMOTHY M/LESLEY T 1955 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1347 PETERSON KELLAN G/CAROLYN L 1965 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-35DD-1349 VANWART VIRGINIA L 1985 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1350 EASTER MARTY 1995 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1351 HORTON ROBERT T/JENNIFER L 1984 RABUN WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1354 HAFNER GREGORY/DEBORAH 1644 KENTUCKY CT CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1355 KENNEDY BEN V/KRISTEN E 1973 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1356 MILLER GARY C/SALLY M 1983 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1357 TROYER KENNETH A TRUSTEE ET A 24548 SW QUARRYVIEW DR WILSONVILLE, OR 97070 36-2W-35DD-1358 STEWART BRETT R/KAILENE M 2003 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1359 MCINTYRE DAVID L ET AL 2013 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1360 REICHENBACH GERHARDT/KATHERIN 1830 CREEK DR SAN JOSE, CA 95125 36-2W-35DD-1361 ENDRIKAT JONATHAN M/KAYLEEN R 2033 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2000 PIERLE ROBERT P JR/TATIANA 2031 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2100 WILLIAMS KEITH F/ALICE M 2027 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2200 SHELTON FARMS LLC 1119 BRISTLE CONE RD BONNERS FERRY, ID 83805 36-2W-35DD-1362 MURPHY JON R/STEPHANIE A 2043 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1363 KUNDERT BRUCE/LAURA 1747 TENNESSEE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1364 MA HONG HUA/YE XUE HONG 2153 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1365 VALLE ARACELI DEL ET AL 3429 SNOWY BUTTE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1366 KEMMLING RICHARD J TRUSTEE ET 2173 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1367 KNOUFF MARK A/LAURA D PO BOX 3026 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1368 ENANDER ASHTON J/SAMANTHA R 2193 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1369 TUBB ROGER/KAREN 2197 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1800 CISNEROS TAMARA L 2121 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-1900 STRUCK JEANNETTE L 2035 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2300 CALA THOMAS C TRUSTEE ET AL 45980 HIDDEN VALLEY TER FREMONT, CA 94539 36-2W-35DD-2400 JOLING HERMAN H/NANCY L 2015 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2500 SALEH JAWWAD KADHEM ABU ET AL 1939 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2600 TORRANO MATTHEW 2925 WINTER NELL CIR MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35DD-2700 CHRISTENSEN DOUGLAS B ET AL 1931 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-2800 HILTON ROBERT M TRUSTEE ET AL 640 S 5TH ST JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 7.A.b Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-35DD-3000 SMITH DONN/LEANNA 1919 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-3100 SHAY AMBER N 1406 BLUE SKY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-3200 MCNAMARA DANICA E 1402 BLUE SKY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-3300 LAKELY RICHARD F TRUSTEE ET A 1308 BLUE SKY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-3400 ROBINSON DELBERT DEWAYNE/EMA 1304 BLUE SKY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-3500 HOKINSON TODD R 801 OHARE PKWY #102 MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35DD-3600 LANE DONALD G TRUSTEE ET AL 4012 FIELDBROOK AVE MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35DD-3700 MDBMRB PROPERTIES LLC 5189 E EVANS CREEK RD ROGUE RIVER, OR 97537 36-2W-35DD-3800 VALLEJO HECTOR P/ERIN 7584 CALLE VERDE RD DUBLIN, CA 94568 36-2W-35DD-3900 HOLLOWAY ELIZABETH 8935 E EVANS CREEK RD #6 ROGUE RIVER, OR 97537 36-2W-35DD-4000 HATHAWAY PAUL/JODY 1307 BLUE SKY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4100 ESPINOSA SAUL B ET AL 1401 BLUE SKY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4200 WELCH MATTHEW/BRITTNEY 1908 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4300 ZEEDYK RICHARD BRIAN ET AL 1912 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4400 WULFF MICHAEL R/CHRISTEN M 1068 WARDS CREEK RD ROGUE RIVER, OR 97537 36-2W-35DD-4500 JUDD WILLIAM P/VIRGINIA A 1918 WALNUT GROVE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4600 TEWES NATHANIEL M ET AL 1409 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4700 KILLMEYER TODD/JORDAN 1323 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-4800 MCCULLY JOSHUA A/MICHELLE C 533 N ROSEMARY LN BURBANK, CA 91505 36-2W-35DD-4900 HOOK CHARLES 1320 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-5000 LEASE SUZY TRUSTEE ET AL 2000 BLUEGRASS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-5100 JM OLSEN CUSTOM HOMES LLC 4513 WOLF RUN DR MEDFORD, OR 97504 36-2W-35DD-5200 BROWN BETTY J ET AL 1413 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-5300 EGALITE CANDIS E 1327 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-35DD-5400 MONTOYA RUDI ET AL 1321 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-36C-2400 OSHIRO LLOYD K/TERESA C 497 WILSON RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-36CC-101 KAUZLARICH WAYNE V/DANIELLE 1635 SCOFIELD ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-36CC-102 MAJESKY LEO ALVIN TRUSTEE ET 1645 SCOFIELD ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-36CC-127 OCCUPANT 2201 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-36CC-128 MCCULLOCH PHILLIP TRUSTEE ET 1655 SCOFIELD ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 36-2W-36CC-3912 PLUE ROBERT A TRUSTEE JR ET A 1775 SCOFIELD ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 36-2W-36CC-3913 REEDER PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 1807 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-01BC-9900 PICOLLO FAMILY LLC PO BOX 3515 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-01C-2400 NISTLER JAMES C/MICHELLE 489 HAMILTON RD JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 37-2W-01C-2500 CALLAHAN TERRIE Z/HARLEY L 507 BEEBE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-01C-2600 DUNLAP HOLDING LLC 2535 HERRINGTON WAY MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-01C-2700 UMPQUA HOLDINGS CORPORATION 9285 NE TANASBOURNE DR HILLSBORO, OR 97124 37-2W-01C-2800 SUP LLC ET AL 1060 CRATER LAKE AVE MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-01C-2900 SUP LLC ET AL 1060 CRATER LAKE AVE MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-01C-3300 JACKSON COUNTY PO BOX 1569 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-01C-3400 OREGON STATE OF HWY DEPT TRANSPORTATION BLDG SALEM, OR 97310 37-2W-02-200 HIMMELMAN STEVE D/CAROLYN PO BOX 3972 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-400 SMITH MERYLLENE M TRSTE FBO 3560 ESKATON DR PLACERVILLE, CA 95667 37-2W-02-500 JACKSON COUNTY , 0 37-2W-02-501 JACKSON COUNTY , 0 37-2W-02-600 ROGUE VALLEY FAMILY FUN 1A PENINGER ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-600 JACKSON COUNTY 1A PENINGER ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-600 U S CELLULAR - MEDFORD 8410 W BRYN MAWR AVE #700 CHICAGO, IL 60631 37-2W-02-600 JACKSON COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS/ COUNTY COURTHOUSE RM 215 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02-600 JACKSON COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS PO BOX 3635 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-600 ROGUE VALLEY FAMILY FUN 1A PENINGER ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-600 JACKSON COUNTY 1A PENINGER ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-600 U S CELLULAR - MEDFORD 8410 W BRYN MAWR AVE #700 CHICAGO, IL 60631 37-2W-02-600 JACKSON COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS/ COUNTY COURTHOUSE RM 215 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02-600 JACKSON COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS PO BOX 3635 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-2600 MEJIA SERGIO/CAMPOS ELIZABETH 4613 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-2601 WEBB DAVID M/JULIE A 4617 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-2602 FLORES EOUCARIO MEJIA 4603 GEBHARD RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02-2700 WHITE HAWK PROPERTIES LLC 841 O'HARE PKY #100 MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02-2701 WHITE HAWK PROPERTIES LLC 841 O'HARE PKY #100 MEDFORD, OR 97504 7.A.b Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-02-3100 SHEPHERD OF THE VALLEY CATHOL 600 BEEBE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-2800 LOWMAN REVOCABLE TRUST ET AL 4462 COAL MINE RD MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02AA-4500 JOHNSON LAURIE ANN 1317 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-4600 RUPE ALICIA E/TIMOTHY P 1313 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-4700 DOVELL NICOLE 1241 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-4800 OKERLUND THOMAS F/CATHERINE A 1237 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-4900 LEIDER SAMANTHA 1233 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5000 MOORE DERRECK/CARTER MAE 1229 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5100 MORRIS ALLYSON 1225 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5200 MCPHERSON MEGAN ELISE 1107 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5300 CHAVEZ MICHELLE 2684 SILVER STONE LN SANTA ROSA, CA 95407 37-2W-02AA-5400 MELLEMA ANDREW/SARAH 4957 GLEN ECHO WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5500 HUMPHRIES FAMILY TRUST ET AL 5550 HILLCREST RD MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02AA-5600 REEDER PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 1807 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02AA-5700 FIELD MARCIA JEAN REV TRUST E 1230 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5800 MCGOWAN KENNETH D/STEFANIE D 1234 PHEASANT WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-5900 HOKINSON TODD R 801 OHARE PKWY #102 MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02AA-6000 1316 PHEASANT LLC 3924 MONTE VISTA DR MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02AA-6100 DALVA JOSEPH L/CASSEY N 1315 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6200 ALLEN WILLIAM 191 ROSEWOOD LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6300 KINDERMAN KIMBERLY C 8363 GOLD RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6400 PREE KARYN J 1217 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6500 LINK KIM ET AL 760 N HASKELL ST #6 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6600 GOEGLEIN EVAN/MANDY M 163 BROCK LN GRANTS PASS, OR 97527 37-2W-02AA-6700 WOODARD MARVIN S JR TRUSTEE E 1205 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6800 GOODING JACOB J 1103 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-6900 HIDDEN GROVE/GREEN VALLEY SUB 718 BLACK OAK DR #A MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02AA-7000 ANDERSON JOSEPH W ET AL 1920 GREEN VALLEY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7100 ADAMS NATASHA R 1922 GREEN VALLEY WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7200 GREENE CHRISTINE A 1218 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-02AA-7400 GOODSON STEVEN J 1210 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7500 BUCK RANDY K 1206 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7600 BRODERICK ALLEN G/RHONDA 415 HAZEL ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7700 PLEITEZ CLAUDIA C 1100 TWIN ROCKS DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7800 SCOTT STEVEN H/CAMILLA A 2000 LARA LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-7900 OCCUPANT 2004 LARA LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-8000 CHANDLER MARIE LINN REVOCABLE 2008 LARA LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-8100 CHILDS KELLIE ET AL 2012 LARA LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-8200 BEAN DEANDREA S 2016 LARA LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-8300 HALE JAMES D ET AL 2020 LARA LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02AA-8400 KURICA ERNEST W 75-6095 PAULEHIA ST KAILUA KONA, HI 96740 37-2W-02D-100 WAL-MART STORES INC PO BOX 8042 BENTONVILLE, AR 72712 37-2W-02D-200 MINGUS ERNEST MARTELL TRUSTEE 511 BEEBE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02D-300 PICOLLO FAMILY LLC 628 BEEBE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02D-300 PICOLLO FAMILY LLC 628 BEEBE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02D-400 OREGON STATE OF , 0 37-2W-02D-400 OREGON STATE OF , 0 37-2W-02D-400 OREGON STATE OF , 0 37-2W-02D-400 OREGON STATE OF , 0 37-2W-02D-500 NAUMES INC PO BOX 996 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02D-501 JACKSON COUNTY MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02D-1204 MOUNTAIN VIEW CP LLC 1175 E MAIN ST #2B MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02D-1300 FURNITURE ROW USA LLC 5603 BROADWAY DENVER, CO 80216 37-2W-02D-600 NAUMES INC PO BOX 996 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02D-601 JACKSON COUNTY MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02D-1100 ACI REAL ESTATE SPE 130 LLC 250 E PARKCENTER BLVD BOISE, ID 83706 37-2W-02D-2200 BEAR BRIDGE LLC 1060 CRATER LAKE AVE MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-02D-2100 COLVIN LANE RILEY TRUST ET AL 401 MINA LN GRANTS PASS, OR 97526 37-2W-02D-2101 PULVER FRANK J III ET AL PO BOX 970 MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-02D-2301 TRAVEL CENTER DEVELOP LLC PO BOX 54470 LEXINGTON, KY 40555 7.A.b Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-02D-2402 CUTSFORTH REAL ESTATE LP 5084 SLOAN WAY UNION CITY, CA 94587 37-2W-02D-2500 COLVIN OIL I LLC 2520 FOOTHILL BLVD GRANTS PASS, OR 97526 37-2W-02D-2500 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES 1600 SW 4TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97201 37-2W-02D-2600 CORNITIUS LLC 1355 CORA LN AUBURN, CA 95603 37-2W-02D-2700 CORNITIUS LLC 1355 CORA LN AUBURN, CA 95603 37-2W-02D-2800 CORNITIUS LLC 1355 CORA LN AUBURN, CA 95603 37-2W-02D-2900 JSBAPA HOSPITALITY LLC 2303 N 4TH ST COEUR D ALENE, ID 83814 37-2W-02D-2901 TRAVEL CENTER DEVELOP LLC PO BOX 54470 LEXINGTON, KY 40555 37-2W-02D-2902 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02D-2903 ANDERSON DUKE G TRUSTEE ET AL 9400 SW GEMINI DR BEAVERTON, OR 97008 37-2W-03B-1900 MACLAUCHLAN DONALD KELLY ET A 4574 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-200 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-201 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-206 KUNTZ WADE R/COURTNEY P 538 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-207 FIGUEROA VICTOR/ALMA 542 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-208 HEBERT LEONARD GERALD TRUSTEE 546 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-209 VERNON EDWARD TRUSTEE ET AL 550 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-210 JANKO JEROME W TRUSTEE ET AL 1407 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-211 MCOMBER ELIZABETH 1415 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-213 AUBORN JEANNE MARIE/RICHARD G 569 EAGLE ROCK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-229 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-230 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-231 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-232 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-233 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-234 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-235 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-236 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-237 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-238 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-03BC-240 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-241 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-242 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-243 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-244 W L MOORE CONSTRUCTION INC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-245 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-307 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT NO MAILING ADDRESS SUPPLIED , 0 37-2W-03BC-308 GIANGRECO LYNDA LEE 605 STONE POINTE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-309 HAMBLIN LARRY G L TRUSTEE ET PO BOX 958 ROGUE RIVER, OR 97537 37-2W-03BC-310 DIETZ WERNER HEINZ 530 STONE POINTE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-311 RENFROE HAROLD DAVID ET AL 526 STONE POINTE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-312 DEGEORGE ROBERT M/REBECCA L 522 STONE POINTE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-313 COGGINS CODY B ET AL 518 STONE POINTE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-314 BETTENCOURT DOLOREDS M REV TR 514 STONE POINTE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-320 ELLIOTT PATRICIA L 537 BRIDGE CREEK RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-321 BURNS GERALD M TRUSTEE ET AL 541 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-322 DEKORTE CAROL J ET AL 545 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-323 DAY CHAD R/PAULA M 549 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-324 SMITH ROBIN L TRUSTEE ET AL 553 BRIDGE CREEK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-325 DIPPEL SCOTT G/JENNIFER 1321 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-1600 FURROW WILLIAM V TRUSTEE ET A 1174 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03BC-1700 LARSON MIKE/WENDY 519 BLACK OAK DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03C-101 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOP CO LLC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03C-208 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOPMENT CO LL PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03C-228 IDIART CHRISTINE E/JARED A 819 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-116 HEIGEL GARY/REBECCA 1119 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-117 BRADBURN DEBORAH L 1127 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-118 DICKERSON ALICIA D LIVING TRU 1135 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-119 WEST ALEESHA/JASON 1143 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-120 ROBNETT THEODORE JAMES 1992 JEREMY ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-03CB-122 TEGTMAN SANDRA LEE 1167 RUSTLER PEAK ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-123 BAUDEN ANN TRUSTEE ET AL 457 SAN PABLO TERR PACIFICA, CA 94044 37-2W-03CB-700 JOSEPH SHAYNE N/NITA 1020 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-800 DAVOL PATRICK ERIN ET AL 934 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1400 THOMAS ANDY ET AL 1127 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1500 BENNETT TODD D/KIMBERLY A 1123 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1600 VRANES MATTHEW S/JENNIFER E 1019 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1700 HULL BRANDAN A/REBECCA L 1015 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-900 OLSON JEFFREY B/MARY C 1021 TWIN CREEKS XING CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5100 MILLER JORDAN MATTHEW/MARIE 1135 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5200 USHER CHRISTOPHER R ET AL 815 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5300 AMES LIVING TRUST ET AL 817 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5400 FROST JIM TRUSTEE ET AL 921 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5500 LANG JEFFERIE L/RULLMAN LISA 923 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1000 CRUMLEY JAMES KEVIN/LAURENE D 1125 TWIN CREEKS XING CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1100 PATEL YOGINABEN/NAINESHKUMAR 943 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1200 SAMPLES LOUIS L/MARJORIE LEE 935 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1300 CASEBEER CARL A TRUSTEE ET AL 919 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-1900 JACKSON LEVI/KAYLEA 1118 TWIN CREEKS XING CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2000 CASEY DAVID L/SUSAN J 1028 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2100 MATTOS SUSAN L TRUSTEE ET AL 1034 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2200 LANDAMERICA 1031 EXCHANGE SER 1040 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2300 LEWIS PAUL D ET AL 1043 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2301 BROWN PETER JAY/SUSAN C 1031 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2400 BOHN STEVEN/JENNIFER PO BOX 3082 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2500 BARIONI ALEXANDRE T 2046 LARS WAY MEDFORD, OR 97501 37-2W-03CB-2600 TIBERIO CAROLE J 1019 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2700 CLIFFORD DANIEL J 1114 TWIN CREEKS XING CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2800 WHALEY ANN MARIE 1010 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-2900 PERMANN VERLA D TRUSTEE ET AL 1016 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-03CB-3100 LANDERS PATRICIA A ET AL 1028 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3200 SIX WADE A/JUDY L 1034 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3300 HENWOOD WALTER T TRUSTEE JR E 1040 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3400 BARROW ROBERT L/MARGARET A 1044 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3500 SCHROEDER RICHARD L/JANET 1128 GROUSE RIDGE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3501 LAMSON DENNIS R/SHEILA R 1130 GROUSE RIDGE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3600 SCHWAB COREY A/KILEY R 1132 GROUSE RIDGE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3700 MILLER ROBERT C/SHELLY M PO BOX 1271 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 37-2W-03CB-3800 LE HANH T ET AL 1140 GROUSE RIDGE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3900 SMITH FRANCES LEE 1144 GROUSE RIDGE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-3901 SMITH FRANCES L 1144 GROUSE RIDGE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5600 CHAMBERS ROYCE R TRUSTEE ET A 925 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5700 MYERS MATTHEW/LAUREN 927 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5800 SIMPSON RICHARD P/REBECCA LEA 929 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4000 DAVOL PATRICK E/CATHERINE A 934 SANDOZ ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4800 GOODE DANIELLE K ET AL 924 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4900 MCCONNEHEY BRUCE H/CHERYL A 920 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-5000 PEDERSEN GERLEV M/HERBERS TAM 1131 SHAKE DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4001 GRIFFIN CHAD 1116 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4100 THOMAS BRETT R TRUSTEE ET AL 1118 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4200 BORCHARD VICTOR WEST/JENNY AN 1122 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4300 KEEFE WILLIAM/NIETO-KEEFE JOY 1128 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4400 HAMILTON SUE E TRUSTEE ET AL 1132 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4500 PETERSON THOMAS L TRUSTEE ET 930 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4600 EDWARDS GREGG K/PAMELA 928 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CB-4700 PETERSEN CHAD A/RIKKI D 926 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-102 MOFFET JEFFREY J TRUSTEE ET A 2400 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-103 DORRIS BRYAN S/KATHERINE L 2390 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-104 RITCHIE MICHAEL WARREN ET AL 2380 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-105 GARRETT CAROLINE 2370 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-03CC-115 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOPMENT CO LL PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-118 HARNOIS BRANT W/HARNOIS REBEK 1014 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-119 GRAHAM JENNIFER 1018 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-120 BAUTISTA VICTOR C/AMBER L 1122 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-121 MELENDY ALLEN P/SHARON L 1126 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-122 MOORMAN MICHAEL R/MELISSA D 1129 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-123 JOHNSON JARED 1125 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-124 JENSEN BRENDA 1121 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-125 BAUTISTA JIMMY O/AMBER N 1017 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-126 FORTIER TERRY A ET AL 1013 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1100 SCHULTZ RACHEL B/CHAD J 4095 SUNLAND AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1200 BOEN ALEX M/CHEYANNE E 4103 SUNLAND AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1300 PFAFF DONALD R/SHARON L 4123 SUNLAND AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1400 SILLS LARRY R/SHARON K 2313 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1500 MENTEER JUSTON 2315 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1600 HIGGINSON SPENCER K/KRISTINE 2361 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1700 LEBLANC PAUL C 2395 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1701 KYTHE LIVING TRUST ET AL 2369 TULANE AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1800 GRADDY WAYNE 4100 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-1900 PATTERSON CYNTHIA 4080 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2000 FARMHOLE LLC PO BOX 1150 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 37-2W-03CC-2200 MURPHY WARREN LOUIS 4035 1/2 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2300 SMITH BRADLEY SCOTT ET AL 4035 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2400 WAYMAN WILLIAM J TRUSTEE 4057 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2500 SPENCER MICHAEL N/AMY C 4081 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2600 GODARD GRANT C/LINDA J 4097 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2700 LEE ROBERT J/KELSEY L 4131 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2800 SMYTH BERNICE M 4163 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-2900 TAUCHER EDWRD A TRUSTEE ET AL 4165 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3000 NEAL NORMAN/DENISE 4175 CARLTON AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-03CC-3200 CRANSTON ERIC/REGINA E 4164 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3300 LATHROP CRAIG D/NANCY J 4138 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3400 GRANT ANGELA M 4118 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3500 BARNES EDWARD WAYNE TRUSTEE E 4102 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3600 REYNOLDS CHRISTINA DEE 4080 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3700 HUCKABY CAROL F 4056 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3800 BROWER TONY RAY 4038 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-3900 BROWER TONY RAY 4038 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4000 KELLER THOMAS V A 5850 HILLCREST RD MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-03CC-4100 FRICK REBECCA JEAN TRUSTEE ET 2492 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4200 HIGINBOTHAM TIMOTHY TRUSTEE E 2450 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4300 BROWN NEIL F 2394 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4400 MONGRAIN PHILIP A TRUSTEE ET 2384 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4500 SAKRAIDA DANNY/LOUISE 2785 SCENIC AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4600 HAAKINSON TANYA 2338 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4700 ETCHIE DAVID R/GAIL A 1130 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4800 HULCE ROBIN M/SHELLEY R 1134 STEAMBOAT DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-4900 SILVA DENNIS M/DENEEN K 813 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-5000 TODD RICHARD S TRUSTEE ET AL 811 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-5100 HARRINGTON DONALD L TRUSTEE E 809 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-5200 MILLER GEOFFREY M/TANYA Y 805 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-5300 CHOY-HEE JEFFREY FRED ET AL 803 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-5400 MENDOZA EDDIE TRUSTEE ET AL 807 BUCK POINT ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-03CC-5500 TWIN CREEKS DEVELOPMENT CO LL PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-1400 JOHNSON CLAYTON R TRUSTEE 4675 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-1401 HOFFMAN DUSTIN L TRUSTEE ET A 4625 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-1500 BRANSOM DOYLE/LAURA 2679 BRANSOM RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-1500 BRANSOM DOYLE/LAURA 2679 BRANSOM RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-1501 MCCULLOCH SCOTT E ET AL 2661 BRANSOM RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-1502 KERR RALPH R TRUSTEE 4599 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-04-1600 DINSDALE SAMUEL C/ALICE J 57673 FORT ROCK RD SILVER LAKE, OR 97638 37-2W-04-1600 DINSDALE SAMUEL C/ALICE J 57673 FORT ROCK RD SILVER LAKE, OR 97638 37-2W-04-2400 BLUM COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES LL 11514 GLOWING SUNSET LN LAS VEGAS, NV 89135 37-2W-04-2401 BOHNERT RUSSELL MARVIN/TERESA 3080 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2600 MISSION LAGO WEST LLC 11865 FORT KING HWY THONOTOSASSA, FL 33592 37-2W-04-2601 GILLISPIE SHAD 2940 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2700 WALTERS DENNY D/ANGELA J PO BOX 3068 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2703 GILLISPIE SHAD D 2940 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2800 KING KATHERINE L 2850 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2801 DEKORTE BRADLEY M/ERICA L 2874 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2802 MEILICKE STEVEN R/SHARON L 2864 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-2900 KOCKX RUSSELL TOBIAS 4419 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3000 GALEDRIGE ALAN K/TERRI L 4333 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3101 PEDERSEN ANTONE & MYRNA LIVIN 4269 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3102 MATHENY DALE R TRUSTEE ET AL 925 PROFETTA LN GOLD HILL, OR 97525 37-2W-04-3103 WOOD CHLOE A TRUSTEE ET AL 6731 WAGNER CREEK RD TALENT, OR 97540 37-2W-04-3104 REYNOLDS CHRISTINA D/MILLER J 4080 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3105 SCOTT BROCK DUKE TRUST ET AL PO BOX 5387 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3106 BROTHERTON CHARLES R/CARI D 4215 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3200 H & L GRAND LLC 4147 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-04-3300 HIGINBOTHAM BYRON/EMMALEE 2744 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1300 MAY JAMES L TRUSTEE ET AL 3642 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1400 DEE JAMES/EUNICE E 2512 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1500 BENNETT WES L 3571 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1501 UHLES HARRY R JR/MARLA G 3603 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-100 WIEDMAN FAMILY LLC 3817 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1701 KOENIG THOMAS A/AMANDA R 3539 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1800 HULIN TOMMIE JOE TRUSTEE ETAL 3536 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1900 DOSS BRADLEY P/WANDA K PO BOX 1492 MYRTLE CREEK, OR 97457 37-2W-09AD-2000 YORK DENNIS R 2537 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-09A-300 BROCK CLYDE L TRUSTEE ET AL 2815 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-400 BROCK CLYDE L TRUSTEE ET AL 2815 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-500 BROWN JAMES DELBERT/JILL J 2900 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-600 JENKINS FRANK H III/JANET L 2828 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-700 MORRIS CLARK A JR/BRENDA J 2796 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1100 JACKSON COUNTY , 0 37-2W-09A-1200 MALLAMS DUANE L 2855 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1300 SATHER BRUCE B/DENISE K 2911 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1500 VANMOPPES MARK S TRUSTEE ET A 2735 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1501 HICKS TIM TRUSTEE ET AL 2801 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1502 MEINHARDT JANELLE G 2833 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1600 TERRY PAMELA KAY 3545 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1700 WOOD ROLLO L/SANDY L 3521 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1600 CALDWELL FAMILY TRUST ET AL 3475 FREELAND RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09A-1700 BERMUDEZ ANDRES JR ET AL 30929 THE HORSESHOE WINTERS, CA 95694 37-2W-09AD-200 ROBIN ARDENE M 3687 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-300 ROBBINS STANLEY JR/CATHY L 3649 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-400 POTTRUFF JEFFREY E ET AL 3150 CENTURY WAY MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-09AD-500 MAY JAMES L TRUSTEE ET AL 3642 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-1200 GODLEY LINDA A 2494 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-2100 CARDER DANA M/SALLY F 2515 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-2200 CLAUS KENNETH F/LOMA M 2495 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-3800 CLELLAND WILLIAM A G 2700 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09AD-3900 MADIGAN WHITNEY K 1240 CROWFOOT RD EAGLE POINT, OR 97524 37-2W-09AD-4000 JARDIM FRANK TRUSTEE ET AL 2750 HERITAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-100 KRAMER JORDAN H/LAURIE E 4500 OLD STAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-200 HENDRIX RACHAEL L/ANDREW S 2945 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-300 BARLOW MICHAEL J 2947 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-400 PHILLIPS ALICE TRUSTEE ET AL 2951 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-700 FELLOWS ROBERT E/JUDITH M 2950 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-09B-801 LAWRENCE MATTHEW K ET AL 2946 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-802 LAWRENCE MATTHEW K ET AL 2946 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-902 MACKISON CHRISTINE C/MACKISON 3223 TAYLOR RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-1301 BRUGGER WILLIAM ARTHUR TRUSTE 1818 NANCY AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-2900 YOUNG STEPHEN C TRUSTEE 3602 OLD STAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09B-3000 YOUNG STEPHEN C TRUSTEE 3602 OLD STAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09C-100 VAN BUREN JACK E 2900 WELLS FARGO RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09C-200 VAN BUREN JACK E 2900 WELLS FARGO RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09C-300 CHRISTENSEN THOMAS J 2942 WELLS FARGO RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09C-400 HOLST STEVE/ANNA 2966 WELLS FARGO RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09C-1700 GIBBS DANIEL E/CONNIE J 3200 WINTERBROOK LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-1700 LACEY WILLIAM D/TRAUTE G 3395 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-1800 WILSON STEPHEN L/TERRY R 3409 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-1900 PURDY DEAN L TRUSTEE 3396 FREELAND RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-3700 CALDWELL ALMA P 3505 FREELAND RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-3800 HARTHUN SHIRLEY AND HERBERT J 3395 FREELAND RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-3904 RICHEY NICOLE MARIE 3399 GREEN ACRES DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-3905 GARNER VIRGINIA M 3395 GREEN ACRES DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7200 LEYRER ROBERT M/LINDA S 3435 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7300 FINCH DEAN J/CALEA M 3463 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7400 WONDER ROBIN D TRUSTEE ET AL 6801 E 10TH ST LONG BEACH, CA 90815 37-2W-09D-7500 RASMUSSEN LINDA M 3478 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7600 BURNS DARCY L 3458 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7700 WIGELSWORTH BRIAN/KATY 3436 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7800 DUNN STACY/JESSICA 3435 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-7900 CORBETT JAMES L/MARGARET A 3451 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-8000 HIATT JAMES E 3471 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-8001 AKINS CLYDE E 3501 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-8100 COLE JOSHUA 3498 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-09D-8200 PARENT LAMAR J/TRACY M 3620 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-09D-8400 RYERSON KEVIN 3422 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-103 ZAMBONIN STEVEN P/JEANETTE M 337 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-104 BAYMILLER JAMES P/BAYMILLER E 331 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-105 CHUNG HWAN K 2929 FLINTRIDGE AVE MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-10BB-106 TACCHINI LOVING TRUST 327 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-107 DENT CHRISTOPHER A/TANYA L 325 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-108 CARLSON JANIN/AMIE 323 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-109 EVANS JOYCE L 321 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-110 SHIPLEY CYNTHIA J 319 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-111 BUNCH WILLIAM C TRUSTEE ET AL 317 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-112 WESTLAKE ANDREW D 315 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-113 WILSON MELISSA ET AL 313 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-200 WASHINGTON WATER/POWER CO E 1411 MISSION ST SPOKANE, WA 99220 37-2W-10BB-300 TEMPLE CORPORATION OF THE 50 E NORTH TEMPLE SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84150 37-2W-10BB-301 CORP/PRESIDING BISHOP/ 50 E NORTH TEMPLE SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84150 37-2W-10BB-500 CAMPBELL RICK A/DEBORA L 590 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-501 CRAFTS RANDALL J/PAMELA J 582 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-502 CUSHMAN THOMAS R/ALICE B 574 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-503 PAINTER RICHARD W/KRISTY G 566 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-504 CHENOWETH ADAM E/CHENOWETH AL 558 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-505 HILL JOHN ALFRED/CAROLYN S 3682 SCENIC AVE CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-506 LASATER EUGENE D/SONYA A 542 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-507 NORTHROP MARK B/TONJA F 534 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-508 DEAN DONALD G ET AL 524 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-509 CENTRAL POINT CITY OF 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-510 PHILLIPS UVOLLA S 928 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-511 JONES JOSHUA T/REBECCA L 105 RACHEL DR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-512 TIBBETS RICHARD T/KELLY J 543 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-513 MITCHELL BARBARA A 551 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-514 KRUGER DONALD RAY/STEPHANIE J 557 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-10BB-516 CHRISTENSEN DUANE/MICHELLE 575 MITCHELL WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-600 MONTEMAYOR ENRIQUE/SUSAN 3832 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-700 LIVING OPPORTUNITIES INC 717 MURPHY RD MEDFORD, OR 97504 37-2W-10BB-701 STROMBERG BRIAN M/MELINDA S 556 BLUE HERON WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-702 PETRASEK DALE W/MARCIA A 320 MEADOW LARK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-703 PASTORINO CHARLES JOHN/CYNTHI 330 MEADOW LARK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-704 BLAKELY DAVID/ASHLEY 340 MEADOW LARK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-705 WARNER KELLI 345 MEADOW LARK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-706 EKBERG KATHRYN D TRUSTEE ET A 335 MEADOW LARK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-707 FERREE RICHARD D/MARY L 325 MEADOW LARK WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-708 BROUILLETTE ANTHONY LAURENCE 580 BLUE HERON WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-709 SHULTZ CHARLENE D 880 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-800 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-801 MARINEAU TODD WILLIAM/KIMBERL 916 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-802 CADMAN MARY 912 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-803 HIRT ROBERT P/ANNETTE 908 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-805 JOHNSON JEFFREY T/SUZANNE J 909 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-806 BATH RICHARD L TRUSTEE ET AL 913 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-807 QUIGLEY JEANNE L 917 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-808 ASCIUTTO MARILYN ET AL 921 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-1000 JACOBSEN MYRL L 211 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-1100 CAMPBELL JAMES KEVIN/NIKI A 2841 CASTLEWOOD CT CHULA VISTA, CA 91915 37-2W-10BB-1200 MCCALLISTER PAUL R/PAMELA K 207 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-1300 CHIPMAN WAYNE H/MARY P 205 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-1400 PAYNE CRYSTAL 203 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BB-1500 WATKINS NATALIE ET AL 201 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-800 MYERS GARY H/SHARON A 95 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-900 DRAKE RICHARD N TRUSTEE ET AL 101 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1000 HAINES TERRY M/JUDY L 103 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1100 FINCH BRIAN PO BOX 5043 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-10BC-1300 MELTON DOLORES B 109 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1400 WHITNEY ARLENE 111 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1500 BROWN PHILBERN R/DOROTHY J 113 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1600 GOBLE NANCY L 115 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1700 BARLOW BRET J/SHERRY C 117 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1800 PARKER KATHERINE S 119 DONNA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1900 HALL RICHARD 892 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1901 JOHNSON JEFFREY S 191 SPRING MOUNTAIN RD GRANTS PASS`, OR 97526 37-2W-10BC-1902 RUST RICHARD JOSEPH REV LIVI PO BOX 3408 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1903 SMITH RODNEY TRUSTEE ET AL 896 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1904 KOESTER SCOTT/KIMBERLY 893 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1905 SUTTON MATTHEW/MARY T 897 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1906 TUCKER BILL TRUSTEE ET AL 905 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1910 RATHBURN GREGORY M/LORI K 888 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1911 LUDWIG MAE ANN TRUSTEE 4165 JACKDAW ST SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 37-2W-10BC-1912 SCHULTZ RICHARD J/SHARI E 880 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1913 HUFFMAN CHET/CINDY 23801 CALABASAS RD #1013 CALABASAS, CA 91302 37-2W-10BC-1914 CACKA JOHN W/CACKA ANN E 872 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1915 BURNETT MICHAEL E/ROBIN E 868 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1916 SWENSON DAVID R/RUTH M 864 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1917 YOUNG MARTIN K 861 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1918 BECH BARBARA A 865 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1919 MARRON JAMES E 869 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1920 HAGA GREG/VALARIE ANN 873 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1921 GARNICA FRED S/ROBIN D 877 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1922 TUERS SCOTT T/KRISTEN D 881 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1923 MACLAUCHLAN RYAN SHANE/KRISTI 885 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-1924 HOPKINS BRAD/JULIE 889 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2000 COONTZ DANIEL M/REBECCA L 549 BLUE HERON WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2001 SCHULTZ BRIAN L/MELISSA C 557 BLUE HERON WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-10BC-2003 MELODY CYNTHIA 573 BLUE HERON WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2004 ATKINSON JASON A/STEPHANIE J 7811 OLD STAGE RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2200 W L MOORE CONSTRUCTION INC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2300 JOHNSON LYLE D TRUSTEE ET AL 3634 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2301 WL MOORE CONSTRUCTION INC PO BOX 3577 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2400 GOFF RYAN/ZSANINE 3610 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2500 MISENER MARK J TRUSTEE ET AL 3590 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2600 FELLOWS BOB 2950 PHILLIPS WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2700 HANNA-BELL JUDY D/BELL EUGENE 853 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-2900 ZERBY TAMERA N 554 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3000 ST RANGE SUSAN E 562 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3100 HILL BILLY D 570 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3200 GFROERER WILLIAM P/KATHLEEN 578 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3300 POULSEN CAREY 575 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-4505 HEARNE KEVIN M TRUSTEE ET AL 549 BROOKSIDE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3400 KNAPP JUAN/DANA 571 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3500 MCKINNEN SHANE J/JESSICA D 563 BACHAND CIR CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-4506 HOMEN STEVEN S/SHERRI L 550 BROOKSIDE LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3600 SVITAK CHARLES A TRUSTEE ET A 793 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3800 WEAVER JERRY E TRUSTEE ET AL 788 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-3900 JOHNSON FAMILY TRUST ET AL 792 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-4000 MOORE ROBERT/MOORE MARIANNE 796 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-4100 BORTLES MARK ERIC TRUSTEE ET 846 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-4300 ARANEDA JASON B ET AL 850 MENDOLIA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-4400 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT 155 S 2ND ST CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-5100 BARATTA LETICIA TRUSTEE ET AL 164-29 77TH AVE FRESH MEADOWS, NY 11366 37-2W-10BC-5200 BIONDI MYRNA TRUSTEE ET AL 2405 BLUE JAY LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-5300 MAY JAMES L TRUSTEE ET AL 3642 OAK PINE WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-5400 JUAREZ GODOFREDO/JEREMIAS 2401 BLUE JAY LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-5500 MONTES ISAIAS/MARIANA 3601 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) 37-2W-10BC-5700 MC GEE STEVEN W/JANICE K 2472 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-5800 MARTINICH STEPHEN A/CYNTHIA 2482 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-5900 CHANDLER RONALD G/CHANDLER DO 2471 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-6000 WOOD ANGELA L ET AL 2469 ROBIN LN CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10BC-6100 DODDINGTON BENJAMIN/JESSICA 3523 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10CB-2600 KELLY MIKE/PAMELA 3451 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10CB-2600 KELLY PAMELA R /MICHAEL D 3471 GRANT RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10CB-3000 CRANSTON BETH A 3650 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-10CB-3000 CRANSTON BETH ANN 3650 NEW RAY RD CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 37-2W-02D-700 JACKSON COUNTY 10 OAKDALE AVE 111 MEDFORD, OR 97501 36-2W-34D-213 MICAHELIS KYLE ET AL 5394 TERESA WAY CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 7.A.b Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Attachment 2 - City Council Ordinance with Exhibits (1393 : Ordinance UGB Amendment) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: City Attorney FROM: Sydnee Dreyer, City Attorney MEETING DATE: March 25, 2021 SUBJECT: First Reading - Ordinance Amending in Part Central Point Municipal Code Title 10 Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferential Parking Districts ACTION REQUIRED: Ordinance 1st Reading RECOMMENDATION: None Forwarded BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This past summer the City received numerous complaints regarding parking issues on Good Fortune Drive/Penninger Road. In particular, there were multiple broken-down RV’s, vans and vehicles parked in the public right-of-way, and in a couple of instances vehicles were lifted with floor jacks and were being actively repaired. There were fairly large “debris fields” surrounding these vehicles creating obstructions in the travel lanes. These abandoned/disrepaired vehicles also created conflicts with neighboring business uses in that the hotel often hosts drivers of trucks and other large vehicles that must park in the right-of- way as the parking lot cannot accommodate semi-trucks and other oversized vehicles and the Pilot Travel Center has customers using this right of way. While code enforcement had tagged a number of vehicles in disrepair, City staff begin looking into other options to better manage use of the right-of-way in that location. Based on that review, staff presented draft code language to the Council at a prior study session allowing for the creation of preferred parking districts in neighborhoods in which parking management becomes a significant issue. The Council directed staff to bring back an ordinance that would establish the process for creation of such districts. It does not create any preferred parking districts at this time. If this ordinance is adopted, preferred parking districts could be created on a case by case basis in the future, should the need arise. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: LEGAL ANALYSIS: The draft ordinance is the first step to set forth the process by which a preferred parking district can be established. 7.B Packet Pg. 399 COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: 2040 City of Central Point Strategic Plan – Strategic Priority – Responsible Governance GOAL 5 - Continue to develop and foster the city’s community policing program. STRATEGY 1 – Build relationships with the community through interactions with local agencies, stakeholders, and members of the public, creating partnerships and programs for reducing crime and disorder. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider proposed amendment and 1) forward the ordinance to a second reading; or 2) make revisions and forward the ordinance to a second reading. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to second reading an Ordinance Amending in Part Central Point Municipal Code Title10 Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferential Parking Districts. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules 7.B Packet Pg. 400 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1 | Ordinance No. _____; March 25, 2021 ORDINANCE NO. _____ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING IN PART CENTRAL POINT MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 10 ADDING CHAPTER 10.12 PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICTS RECITALS: A. Pursuant to CPMC, Chapter 1.01.040, the City Council, may from time to time make revisions to its municipal code which shall become part of the overall document and citation. B. The Council has directed staff to prepare an Ordinance allowing for the creation of Parking Districts to address parking concerns in designated areas of the City. C. The Ordinance establishes the process to create and operate a Parking District. Individual Parking Districts may be designated by Council or upon receipt of a petition signed by the applicable number of merchants or residents residing in the proposed District. D. Words lined through are to be deleted and words in bold are added. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Title 10 is amended to add Chapter 10.12 Parking Districts as set forth below and incorporated herein by reference. PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT 10.12.010 Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms, phrases, and words shall have the meaning given herein. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not merely directory. A. "Dwelling unit" means a house, apartment, condominium, mobile home or other type of residence, in conformance with city code and related zoning maps, having an address assigned consistent with the house numbering maps maintained by the City. Apartments having numbers or letters assigned in addition to the street address shall be deemed as a dwelling unit. B. "Employee of merchant" means any person employed by a merchant within a preferential parking district. 7.B.a Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules (1395 : First Reading - Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferred Parking ______________________________________________________________________________ 2 | Ordinance No. _____; March 25, 2021 C. "Visitor" means any person visiting or intending to visit, for any purpose, either a resident or merchant located in a preferential parking district. D. "Merchant" means a person who, as proprietor, operates a commercial business involved in the retailing of goods or services within a preferential parking district. E. "Preferential parking district" or "district" means an area with streets or boundaries designated by the ordinance establishing the district, wherein vehicles displaying a valid permit shall be exempt from parking restrictions established pursuant to this part. F. "Resident" means a person who lives in a dwelling unit located in a preferential parking district. 10.12.020 Designation of preferential parking districts. The City Council may, by ordinance, at its discretion or upon receipt of a petition signed by residents or merchants living or working in two-thirds of the dwelling units or businesses comprising not less than 50 percent of the developed frontage of the area proposed for designation, designate a certain area or areas to be a preferential parking district. 10.12.030 Issuance of permits. A. Parking permits for preferential parking districts shall be issued by the department of public works. B. The number of permits to be issued to any one dwelling unit or to any merchant's business establishment shall be determined by the parking conditions within each district and set forth in the ordinance establishing the district. C. Parking permits may be issued by the City only to the following persons: residents and merchants within the prescribed preferential parking district. 10.12.040 Posting signs in permit parking area. Upon the adoption by the City Council of an ordinance designating a preferential parking district and the specified parking regulations applicable thereto, the department of public works shall cause appropriate signs to be erected in the district, indicating prominently thereon the parking limitation, period of the day for its application, and the fact that motor vehicles with valid permits shall be exempt therefrom. 7.B.a Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules (1395 : First Reading - Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferred Parking ______________________________________________________________________________ 3 | Ordinance No. _____; March 25, 2021 10.12.050 Permit parking exemption. A. A motor vehicle on which is displayed a valid parking permit hanging from the rearview mirror shall be permitted to stand or be parked in the preferential parking district for which it is issued without being limited by parking restrictions established pursuant to this Chapter. Except as provided below, all other motor vehicles parked within a preferential parking district shall be subject to the parking restrictions and penalties as provided in this Chapter. B. A preferential parking permit shall not guarantee or reserve to the holder thereof an on-street parking space within the designated preferential parking district. 10.12.060 Exemption of certain vehicles. No person shall, without a permit therefor, park or leave standing any vehicle or trailer in a preferential parking district in excess of the parking restrictions authorized pursuant to this part, except for the following: A. Repair, maintenance, refuse, utility, fuel or delivery vehicles doing business in the preferential parking district; B. Vehicles delivering emergency services within the preferential parking district, such as police, fire and ambulance. 10.12.070 Application for and duration of permit. A. Except as otherwise provided in an Ordinance creating a preferential parking district, each parking permit issued by the department of public works shall be valid for one year. Permits may be renewed upon reapplication in the manner prescribed by the department of public works. B. Proof of residency/merchant location shall be required. Proof of residency/merchant location shall consist of two of the following: 1. Driver's license 2. Property Tax Bill or rental/lease agreement 3. Utility Bill (Cable TV, Telephone (landline only), Gas, Water, or Electric) 4. Company business card/letterhead. 7.B.a Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules (1395 : First Reading - Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferred Parking ______________________________________________________________________________ 4 | Ordinance No. _____; March 25, 2021 10.12.080 Permit fees. The fee for a preferential parking permit shall be established by resolution of the City Council. In the absence of any such order, the fee shall be $25.00. 10.12.090 Deposit of permit fees. Permit fees collected under the provisions of this Chapter shall be paid to the City and deposited in the general fund. 10.12.100 Penalty provisions. A. Unless exempted by provisions of this Chapter, no person shall stand or park a motor vehicle in any preferential parking district established pursuant to this part in violation of any parking restrictions established pursuant to this part. A violation of this section shall constitute an infraction, which shall be punishable by a fine of $___.00. B. No person shall falsely represent himself as eligible for a parking permit or furnish false information to the department of public works or other authorized city personnel in an application for a preferential parking permit. C. No permit issued pursuant to this part shall thereafter be assigned, transferred or used for any consideration, monetary or otherwise. Violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction and be punishable by a fine of $100.00. Notwithstanding the foregoing, residents and merchants within a parking district may allow its/their visitors, customers, or employees use of such permits while visiting or conducting business within the parking district. D. No person shall copy, produce or create a facsimile or counterfeit parking permit, nor shall any person use or display a facsimile or counterfeit preferential parking district permit. Violation of this subsection shall constitute an infraction and be punishable by a fine of $100.00. E. Permit holders shall report to the department of public works or other authorized city personnel a lost, stolen, or missing permit within 10 days of loss, at which time that permit shall be cancelled and a new permit issued, at no cost. F. Permits shall be returned to the Department of Public Works when the permit holder ceases to reside or exist in a preferential parking district. G. No person shall display a permit cancelled pursuant to subsection E. Any such display on a vehicle shall be cause for ticketing and towing at the owner's expense in addition to the penalty set forth in subsection A of this section. Such cancelled permits shall be confiscated by the impounding authority. 7.B.a Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules (1395 : First Reading - Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferred Parking ______________________________________________________________________________ 5 | Ordinance No. _____; March 25, 2021 10.12.110 Permit revocation procedure. A. Any permittee who has violated the provisions of subsections B, C, D, E, F, or G of Section 10.12.100 shall be subject to having the permit revoked, and shall be notified in writing of the permit revocation. Upon notification of such revocation, the permittee shall, within 15 working days of receipt of such notice, either surrender the permit to the department of public works or request, in writing, a hearing before the director of public works or designated representative. B. A timely request for a hearing made within 15 days of the receipt of the notice of revocation shall stay any revocation until five working days after the hearing decision is rendered. C. A hearing shall be held by the director of public works or designated representative, unless continued by agreement, within five working days of the request for a hearing. At the hearing, any person may present evidence or argument as to whether the permittee has violated any provisions of this part and whether the permit should be revoked. D. A decision shall be rendered, by the director of public works or designated representative, within five working days after the close of the hearing. E. The director of public works or designated representative may give oral notice of the decision at the close of the hearing or may send notice of the decision by mail to the permittee. The decision of the director of public works or designated representative shall be final and conclusive. F. If the revoked permit is not surrendered, the police department shall be notified so that appropriate enforcement action may be taken against the vehicle with the revoked permit the same as any other vehicle parking in the district without a permit. 10.12.120 Dissolving a district. The designation process as set forth in this chapter shall be utilized by the City Council in determining whether to dissolve a preferential parking district. SECTION 2. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Recitals A-C) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. 7.B.a Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules (1395 : First Reading - Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferred Parking ______________________________________________________________________________ 6 | Ordinance No. _____; March 25, 2021 SECTION 3. Effective Date. The Central Point City Charter states that an ordinance enacted by the Council shall take effect on the thirtieth day after its enactment. The effective date of this ordinance will be the thirtieth day after the second reading. PASSED by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this ____ day of ___________, 2021. ________________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: __________________________________ City Recorder 7.B.a Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: Ord Amending Ch 10 Adding Parking District Rules (1395 : First Reading - Ordinance Adding Chapter 10.12 Preferred Parking City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: Public Works FROM: Matt Samitore, Parks and Public Works Director MEETING DATE: March 25, 2021 SUBJECT: Resolution No. ________, A Resolution accepting the Qualified Based Selection Process for the design and construction engineering of the Hamrick-Pine Signal Upgrade and Beebe-Hamrick Signal and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Dowl, Inc. ACTION REQUIRED: Motion Resolution RECOMMENDATION: Approval BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City conducted a formal Qualified Based Selection (QBS) process to select an engineer that would perform the tasks of finishing the design and supervise construction engineering for the Hamrick-Pine Signal Upgrade and the Hamrick- Beebe signal. Both intersections have or will meet warrants for these upgrades and have been planned for multiple years. The Beebe-Hamrick design is currently in the 19-21 FY Budget, and the Beebe-Hamrick Signal will be in the 21-23 FY Budget. The City conducted a formal QBS process where the City asked contractors their ability, time, and qualifications to design and supervise construction over the next 18 months. The City received only one bid submittal. In this scenario, the award is not based on the lowest bid but qualifications. The City review team scored the submissions. The only submittal was from Dowl, Inc, formerly OBEC, Inc., who did the preliminary layout and design for the Hamrick-Pine Signal. The Dowl team has done multiple projects in the City, including the 99 Streetscape, 99 at Pine Signal and Rail Crossing, and various smaller projects. The following steps are twofold. If the Council elects to select the contractor, City staff would finalize the contract and move forward on the Hamrick-Pine Signal design first, then the Beebe-Hamrick Signal. The goal is to have both constructed and operational before June 2023. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: The Hamrick-Pine project is budgeted for in the FY 2019/2021 City of Central Point Budget (street fund). Design and Construction of the Beebe-Hamrick Signal will be in the 21-23 FY budget. LEGAL ANALYSIS: The Qualified Based Selection process was legally noticed/advertised per the requirements of Oregon Revised Statute Chapter 279. 7.C Packet Pg. 407 COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: Strategic Priority Community Investment: GOAL 5 - Plan, design, and construct modern and efficient infrastructure in all areas and systems. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the design and construction engineering project award to Dowl Inc. RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution No. ____ accepting the Qualified Based Selection Process for the Hamrick-Pine and Hamrick-Beebe Signals Project and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Dowl, Inc. ATTACHMENTS: 1. resol_hamrick signals 2. bid ad 7.C Packet Pg. 408 1 - Resolution No. _________ (3/25/2021 Council meeting) RESOLUTION NO. _______ A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE QUALIFIED BASED SELECTION PROCESS FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING FROM DOWL, INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT. RECITALS: A. WHEREAS, the City recently published a solicitation for a Qualified Based Selection process to bidders/contractors for the design and construction of the Hamrick-Pine signal upgrade and the Beebe-Hamrick signal. B. WHEREAS, the City received one submittal. C. WHEREAS, the review committee reviewed the proposal from Dowl Inc. D. WHEREAS, the engineer indicated they can complete the project for within the timeframe stated The City of Central Point resolves as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby accepts the Qualified Based Selection Process and selects Dowl, Inc for the Design and Build of the Parks and Public Works Operations Center. Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a contract and any related documents necessary to effectuate the acceptance of this award in a form substantially the same as that included in the specifications. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately from and after its passage and approval. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this _____ day of _____________________, 2021. __________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: _____________________________ City Recorder 7.C.a Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: resol_hamrick signals (1397 : Hamrick Signals - Design & Build) NOTICE TO ENGINEERING FIRMSPUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: Ham ri ck * * X,R'E3e'"Pr"#9mn d c on structio n The,city of central Point, oregon (the "city") is requesting proposals in order to serect ag!?l,tl99 consuttaxt,to provide professionat services for [wo piojects. The Hamrick andEast Prne signal Enhancement including new turn lanes and lignal timing upgrades anda new signal at the intersection of Hamrick and Beebe Roads. lnterested consultants shall submit five (5) copies of their written proposals, sealed in anenvelope, plalnly marked_'Request tor prbposals - Hatnrick Road Signals,', anA in"iuJ"the name and address ofthe Proposer. proposals shall be addressei and submitted toGreg Graves, Conslruction Mariagement boordinator, Ciiy ot Cenirar cli;i; ;t i40south r!.l.rd streel, central Poinl oiegon 9zs02the following'location uy z,oo pinr rocatime on Thursday, March 11,2021. Qualified firms are invited to demonslrate lheir experience and qualifications in perform-ing work_directly related to the services required by respondincr'to this Requesifor pro-posals (RFP).; therefore, Proposars wiil be evaruaied ih accofuance wittr ine ouJtirici- liofis trg-.sed, selection procedures of oAR 1 37- o4B-0220. This project does noi rnGiielederal lunds. lf federal funds.are involved, special federal requirehents are containedwithin the attached draft Professional serviies Agreoment ana muif oJcir"tuiry i":viewed and complied with. lvlinimun] Qualifications to be considered for award of the contract for this proiect. eachProposer shall demonstrate the following minimum criteria as p-rt oi tireii p;;b;ai-.- a- Proposer's project team sharl include-a state of oregon negistered proiesiionai en-grneer. b. Proposer shall demonstrate a minjmum of five (S) Vears'experience Drovidino thetypes of services described within the scope of wor( 6f tris Reiuest ror Froposais 1oipublic agencies.c Proposershall nothavearecordofsubstandardworkmanship,asverifiedbythecityby communication with licensing authorities, former clients anb reterenCei,Znc ot iimeans as the City deems appropriate Project information will be available onlino only at wu{W-qucstedn e=ol"n beoinnino Febru_ary 5' 2021. Any addenda witt be posred on *ie abo-veiebilte.l"Gre.t"i oiiiili iir.tbe plan holders on the abovo website to be considered for lhis project. co-qr ESTIMATE: The anticipated negotiated fee for this project is expected to exceed$ 1 00.000 There aro two projects.associated with this RFp. The first is a signal modification andrurn Iane expansion at Hamrick and E. pine. The project will desig-n a designated southbound right turn lane on Hamrick Road and nrovci thb signal pore'to accorimooat"liritrequ€st. ad-e[!g[ah4 a designated North bound left turniane and corresoondino sionalmodrlrcations will occur on the south side of the intersection, Additional nrodificaiioni ontiming will bereviewed with Jackson County. The second proiecl is a new sional at ttreintersection of Beebe and Hamrick Roads. The right of way'{or'bottr pioiecis-nii iliedcibeen acquired and preliminary engineering has aiready octuireO. -' l,!: 9LtV of ,Central Point may reject any proposal not in compliance with all public bid_qrng procedrlres and requjrements and may reject for qood cause anv or all bids uoon alrnding by the City of Central Point that it is in the public interest to dci so. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Greg Graves, Construction Management Coordinalor Febrr"rary, 7 , 13 and 14, 2021 7.C.b Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: bid ad (1397 : Hamrick Signals - Design & Build) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: City Attorney FROM: Sydnee Dreyer, City Attorney MEETING DATE: March 25, 2021 SUBJECT: Discussion - Anti-Camping Ordinances ACTION REQUIRED: Information/Direction RECOMMENDATION: None Forwarded BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in Martin v. Boise holding that criminalizing sitting, lying, or sleeping on public property if the prohibition were jurisdiction- wide and there were not adequate number of shelter beds in that jurisdiction would be a violation of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against imposing excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishment. In response to that case, the City reviewed its code and determined that the City treated violations of the code as violations, which the City found was consistent with the Martin case. On July 22, 2020, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Medford Division, issued an opinion in Blake v. Grants Pass, which is now under appeal. In that case, the city essentially prohibited sleeping in any public space in Grants Pass while using any type of item that falls into the category of "bedding" or is used as "bedding." The Blake Court held that the Eighth Amendment “prohibits a City from punishing homeless people for taking necessary minimal measures to keep themselves warm and dry while sleeping when there are no alternative forms of shelter available.” The Court clarified that the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to both criminal matters and violations because the issue is whether “involuntarily homeless people are punished for engaging in the unavoidable acts of sleeping or resting in a public place when they have nowhere else to go.” The court also found the fines in Grants Pass violated the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment given that they were imposed as a penalty and were excessive in amount for people that primarily have no ability to pay. However, the Court did not fully restrict a city’s ability to adopt anti-camping ordinances and allows reasonable time, place and manner restrictions “for when homeless individuals may use their belongings to keep warm and dry and when they must have their belongings packed up…. For 8.A Packet Pg. 411 example, the City may ban the use of tents in public parks without going so far as to ban people from using any bedding type materials to keep warm and dry while they sleep. The City may also consider limiting the amount of bedding type materials allowed per individual in public places. Moreover, this holding does not limit Grants Pass' ability to enforce laws that actually further public health and safety, such as laws restricting littering, public urination or defecation, obstruction of roadways, possession or distribution of illicit substances, harassment, or violence. Grants Pass would retain a large toolbox for regulating public space without violating the Eight Amendment.” Additionally, there are two unrelated bills making their way through the Oregon legislature dealing with these issues. HB 3115, the Kotek bill, is similar to the Martin and Blake cases. It states that local government cannot prohibit “sitting, lying, sleeping or keeping warm and dry outdoors on public property that is open to the public” but can adopt reasonable time, place, manner restrictions. This bill has involved extensive negotiations with the Oregon Law Center and the League of Oregon Cities. If approved, this legislation would become operative on July 1, 2023. A second bill, the “Lively bill” deals with how property is handled when an unlawful encampment is cleared. It increases the duration that such property must be held from 30- days to 90-days. Both bills are anticipated to pass in some form. In an effort to deal with Blake, and the anticipated adoption of the Kotek Bill, the City of Medford began working on updates to its anti-camping ordinances, which were discussed at the Central Point City Council study session in January. Medford has proposed two phases. The first phase is intended to comply with the foregoing cases and the Kotek bill. The second phase would only be adopted if the Lively bill passes. Under Medford’s Phase 1 changes there are several key components: 1) The City would restrict all camping, sleeping, or lying in the greenway or Prescott Park during fire season (May 1 to October 31) as a fire safety measure. 2) It would prohibit all camping lying or sleeping on playgrounds, sports facilities (during hours of closure), under bridges, near railroad tracks and on publicly owned property not open to the general public at all times. 3) The City would also prohibit all structure camping such as in cars, tents, or with campfires at all times and on all public property. The foregoing restrictions are classified as misdemeanors in order to ensure that law enforcement can remove individuals from those sensitive areas. 4) In keeping with the time, place, manner restrictions, individuals would be permitted to lie or sleep in other areas of parks, along sidewalks so long as it does not block pedestrian traffic or block entrances to businesses, and on other public property that is generally open to the public, for up to 24-hours. Individuals can use sleeping bags, bed rolls, etc. but are prohibited from setting up tents or other similar structures or from having campfires. Violation of these provisions are subject a citation. Medford’s phase 2 changes, which are not being adopted at this time, are intended to mirror 8.A Packet Pg. 412 the Lively bill and would increase notice periods to clear a camp from 24-hours to 72-hours and would require storage of collected items for 90-days. While the Blake case is not binding on the City, and the pending legislation has not been adopted, the purpose of this discussion is to determine whether the Council desires to proceed with ordinance changes in anticipation of the adoption of the Kotek bill in particular. Currently, the City’s code regulates uses in various sections. For example, Chapter 8.32 regulates the Greenway and provides that the Greenway is closed from 10pm to 6 am, prohibits fires anywhere within the greenway, littering and camping, and allows the greenway authority to “eject” any person in violation of these regulations year-round. Removal of individuals in violation of the camping provisions is subject to state law, ORS 203.077, which requires at least 24-hour advance notice of removal and requires the city to hold any property collected for 30-days. The City regulates park usage under Chapter 9.68 and violation of this chapter may be subject to the general penalty provisions of the code. If the Kotek bill passes, the City will need to review the code and consider potential revisions to ensure compliance with state law. Staff seeks direction on whether to review the code for potential changes at this time in anticipation of the passage of such legislation. COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: The 2040 City of Central Point Strategic Plan addresses the above-described issues in a variety of sections/strategic priorities including: Community Engagement, Community Culture and Responsible Governance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None forwarded RECOMMENDED MOTION: No motion required. Seeking direction. ATTACHMENTS: 1. HB 3115 Introduced 8.A Packet Pg. 413 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 81st OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2021 Regular Session House Bill 3115 Sponsored by Representative KOTEK SUMMARY The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor’s brief statement of the essential features of the measure as introduced. Provides that local law regulating sitting, lying, sleeping or keeping warm and dry outdoors on public property that is open to public must be objectively reasonable as to time, place and manner with regards to persons experiencing homelessness. Creates affirmative defense to charge of violat- ing such local law that law is not objectively reasonable. Creates cause of action for person expe- riencing homelessness to challenge objective reasonableness of such local law. Authorizes court to award attorney fees to prevailing plaintiff in such suit in certain circumstances. Declares emergency, effective on passage. A BILL FOR AN ACT Relating to the regulation of public property with respect to persons experiencing homelessness; and declaring an emergency. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1.(1) As used in this section: (a) “City or county law” does not include policies developed pursuant to ORS 203.077 or 203.079. (b)(A) “Keeping warm and dry” means using measures necessary for an individual to survive outdoors given the environmental conditions. (B) “Keeping warm and dry” does not include using any measure that involves fire or flame. (c) “Public property” has the meaning given that term in ORS 131.705. (2) Any city or county law that regulates the acts of sitting, lying, sleeping or keeping warm and dry outdoors on public property that is open to the public must be objectively reasonable as to time, place and manner with regards to persons experiencing homelessness. (3) It is an affirmative defense to a charge of violating a city or county law described in subsection (2) of this section that the law is not objectively reasonable. (4) A person experiencing homelessness may bring suit for injunctive or declaratory relief to challenge the objective reasonableness of a city or county law described in subsection (2) of this section. The action must be brought in the circuit court of the county that enacted the law or of the county in which the city that enacted the law is located. (5) For purposes of subsections (2) and (3) of this section, reasonableness shall be deter- mined based on the totality of the circumstances, including, but not limited to, the impact of the law on persons experiencing homelessness. (6) In any suit brought pursuant to subsection (4) of this section, the court, in its dis- cretion, may award reasonable attorney fees to a prevailing plaintiff if the plaintiff: (a) Was not seeking to vindicate an interest unique to the plaintiff; and (b) At least 90 days before the action was filed, provided written notice to the governing NOTE:Matter in boldfaced type in an amended section is new; matter [italic and bracketed] is existing law to be omitted. New sections are in boldfaced type. LC 2805 8.A.a Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: HB 3115 Introduced (1396 : Discussion - Anti-Camping Ordinances) HB 3115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 body of the city or county that enacted the law being challenged of an intent to bring the action and the notice provided the governing body with actual notice of the basis upon which the plaintiff intends to challenge the law. (7) Nothing in this section creates a private right of action for monetary damages for any person. SECTION 2.Section 1 of this 2021 Act becomes operative on July 1, 2023. SECTION 3.This 2021 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2021 Act takes effect on its passage. [2] 8.A.a Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: HB 3115 Introduced (1396 : Discussion - Anti-Camping Ordinances)