HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Resolution 1255RESOLUTION NO. 12 5 5
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT RECOMMENDING
JACKSON COUNTY ADOPTION OF THE GREATER BEAR CREEK VALLEY
REGIONAL PLAN
WHEREAS, pursuant to former ORS 197.654 (1) (2007), Jackson County and the cities
of Medford, Ashland, Central Point, Eagle Point, Phoenix and Talent, entered into a
collaborative regional problem-solving (RPS) process; and
WHEREAS, the City of Central Point (City), as a participant in RPS, having signed a
Participants' Agreement identifying a regional land use problem, establishing goals
addressing the problem, creating mechanisms for achieving such goals, and a system for
monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of the those goals; and
WHEREAS, the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "RPS Plan")
contemplated by the Participants' Agreement has been proposed under the provisions of
former ORS 197.654(1) and former 197.656(2), which remain applicable to this RPS
process; and
WHEREAS, Jackson County is the local government charged with adopting the final
RPS Plan; and
WHEREAS, the RPS process must include: (a) An opportunity for involvement by other
stakeholders with an interest in the problem; and (b) Efforts among the collaborators to
agree on goals, objectives and measures of success; and
WHEREAS, the City has been requested to make recommendation(s) to Jackson County
concerning the contents and adoption of the final RPS Plan, including associated maps
and Findings; and
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission conducted hearings on the RPS Plan on
March 16, 2010, and the City Council conducted hearings on the RPS Plan on May 13
and May 27, 2010; and
WHEREAS, all requirements for legal notices and advertisements have been fulfilled
and public testimony accepted and recorded; now, therefore,
Page 1 of 13
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT HEREBY
RECOMMENDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1- RPS Plan.
3
The City Council hereby recommends Jackson County's adoptionof the "Greater Bear
Creek Vallev Resional Plan. November 2009", referenced as Exhibit "A", including
Findings attached as Exhibit "B", and subject to the following modifications:
1. Clarify the use of the Employment designated lands in CP-6B as described in
Exhibit "C";
2. Include tax lot 362W 34D 230 within CP-4D as described in Exhibit "D", and
3. Correct Figure 2.10 per Exhibit "E" .
PASSED by the City Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 27~'
day of May, 2010.
~~~ -
Mayor Hank Williams
City Representative
`~
Approved by me this ~ day of , 2010.
d'~~sa~Or+~ •
Mayor Hank Williams
Page 2 of 13
EXHIBIT "A"
Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan
Volumes 1- 3
Page 3 of 13
EXHIBIT "B"
FINDINGS OF FACT
FOR
CONSIDERATION OF THE GREATER BEAR CREEK REGIONAL
PLAN
Before the City of Central Point
Consideration of the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan
Applicant:
Jackson County
Page 4 of 13
I. INTRODUCTION
On December 22, 2008 the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1923 adopting the Bear
Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement (the "Agreement"). The Agreement
set forth the terms and conditions agreed to by the City relative to implementation of the
draft Plan as referenced in the Agreement. The Agreement further states that the adopted
Plan shall be what is adopted as a result of Jackson County's comprehensive plan
amendment process'.
Jackson County is currently in the process of conducting a series of public hearings to
consider approval of comprehensive plan and land use regulations necessary to approve
and implement the Plan, which upon adoption will become the adopted Plan per the
Agreement. As part of the County's review process the participating cities are provided
an opportunity to review a final draft of the Plan, and will forward a recommendation to
the County planning commission regarding the Plan. Participating cities will also be
given an opportunity for oral comment before the County planning commission prior to
the County's final decision.
The purpose of these findings is to confirm that the plan as presented in Exhibit "A" is
substantially consistent with the draft Plan presented in the Agreement, and to forward a
recommendation to the County to approve the Plan as presented in Exhibit "A", with
changes.
As used in these findings the following terms are used in referencing the Greater Bear
Creek Valley Regional Plan:
"Regional Plan" - A generic reference to the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan;
"Agreement Plan" -Refers to the Regional Plan approved as part of the Participants
Agreement;
~~Pending Plan" -Refers to the Regional Plan dated November 2009 and the subject of
these findings; and
"Adopted Plan" -Refers to the Regional Plan adopted by the County per the current
proceedings, subject to LCDC acknowledgement and appeals.
It is the purpose of these findings to determine whether or not the Pending Plan is
consistent with the Agreement Plan, and to recommend any changes, and supporting
findings, that are revealed during the City's public hearing process.
The following addresses the comparison between the Agreement Plan and the Pending
Plan:
~ RPSPA, Section II General Agreement
Page 5 of 13
II. Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement
The Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement
("Agreement") has been approved by the City2 and the Land Development and
Conservation Commission on September 23, 2009' The Agreement is an
agreement by all participating cities that that they will abide by the Plan adopted
by the Implementing Signatories and acknowledged by the State of Oregon. The
Agreement further stipulates that the adopted Plan shall be the Plan adopted as a
result of Jackson County's comprehensive plan amendment process.
Approval of the Agreement included approval of the Agreement Plan, subject to
any modifications that may occur during the comprehensive plan and land use
changes necessary to implement the Region Plan.
III. Statement of Problems to be Addressed
Finding: The Agreement identifies three problems to be addressed by the
Regional Plan:
Problem #1: Lack of a Mechanism for Coordinated Regional Growth;
Problem #2: Loss of Valuable Farm and Forest Land Caused by Urban Expansion;
and
Problem #3: Loss of Community Identity.
These three problems were addressed in the Agreement draft Plana. The pending
draft of Plan restates these three problems verbatim4.
Conclusion: The pending draft plan is consistent with the Agreement draft Plan.
IV. Project Goals
Finding: The Agreement sets forth three goals to be achieved by adoption of the
Plan:
Goal # 1: Manage future regional growth for the greater public good;
Goal #2: Conserve resource and open space lands for their important economic,
cultural, and livability benefits; and
Goal #3: Recognize and emphasize the individual identity, unique features, and
relative comparative advantages and disadvantages of each community within the
Region.
Z City of Central Point Ordinance No. 1923, December 22, 2008
s Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, July 2008, Chapter 1
a Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, November 2009, Chapter 1, Section 4.3.1.
Page 6 of 13
These three goals were incorporated in to the Agreement draft Plans. The pending
draft Plan restates these goals verbatim, including all related guiding policies as
previously presented in the Agreement Plan.
Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan.
V. Optional Techniques/Strategies for Implementation
Finding: The Agreement Plan included ten (10) optional implementation
techniques addressing6, addressing the Problems and Goals discussed in the
Agreement Plan. The Pending Plan restates, verbatim, the implementation
techniques set forth in the Agreement Plan.
Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan.
VI. Measurable Performance Indicators
Finding: In the Agreement Plan there are ten (10) Performance Indicators, which
are essentially a restatement of the Implementation Techniques. The Pending
Plana restates, verbatim, the Performance Indicators set forth in the Agreement
Plan.
Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan.
VII. Incentives and Disincentives to Achieving Goals
Finding: In the Agreement Plan9 there aze six (6) incentives for participating
cities to adhere to the Plan, and six (6) disincentives. The Pending P1an10 restates,
verbatim, the Incentives and Disincentives set forth in the Agreement Plan.
Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan.
VIII. Progress Monitoring System & Amendment Process
Finding: In the Agreement P1an11 Section IV of the Agreement lists the standazds
by which progress in attaining the objectives of the Regional Plan will be
measured, including minor and major amendments to the Regional Plan. The
language in the Pending PlanlZ is verbatim from the Agreement Plan.
Conclusion: The Pending Plan is consistent with the Agreement Plan.
s Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, July 2008, Chapter 1, Section 7
6 lbid, Chapter 6, Section 1
' Ibid, Chapter 6, Section 2
s Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, November 2009, Chapter 5, Section 1
9 Ibid, Chapter 6, Section 3
10 Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, November 2009, Chapter 5, Section 2
" Ibid, Chapter 6, Section 4
12 Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, November 2009, Chapter 5, Section 2
Page 7 of 13
EXHIBIT "C"
Note: Proposed changes identified in red.
Page 4-26
Area CP-6B: (Third paragraph)
"Central Point Little League operates a baseball field facility on a 14.5 acre parcel within one of
the two Agricultural land inclusions in CP-6B. The baseball property constitutes the majority of
the acreage within this Agricultural land inclusion. Two EFU zoned parcels having
approximately five aggregate acres, exists between the baseball fields and the Rural Residential
land to the north. These two parcels are used by the Central Point Council, Boy Scouts of
America for its facilities and activities. The Boy Scout property is not nor likely will be used for
farming in the future (other than incidental not-for-profit farming by Boy Scouts). In Figure
CP 11 both the Central Point Little League property and the Boy Scout property are classified
under then Emplovment land use-type with the understandinl_l that they will be retained as a
subclassification land-use type Institutional. The second inclusion of Agricultural land is located
near the geographic center of CP-6B and is completely surrounded by Rural Residential
exception lands. Together, these inclusions have approximately ~-419 acres."
Figure CP.11
Gross ' ~ Reasonably ` `~.
Acres: 188 ~ : ,Develo" able: 162 ~ = Residential Aggregate Resource Open Space Employment
/Parks
Existin Plan 77% 23%
Pro osed Uses 90% 10%
Page 8 of 13
EXHIBIT "D"
Note: Proposed changes identified in red.
Page 4-9
Fi re CP.3
Detail' ~
,.~Study~Ar'ea
: ~~ ~ Ezishng ~ Gross ~~`
Dwelhngs~ yAcres
Physically; "
Constrianed'
.Built
°'= Generally ':
Unconstrained
CP-1B~ __ 104 103 544 82 21 441
`CP=TC ,`~ ~ ~ 25 26 70 2 9 60
'MCP=2B 72 82 325 25 19 282
~?CP 3 ~~_ - 9 7 36 8 1 27
uCP=4D' ~ ~ 67 81 583 30 81 52
CP 5 ~`~~~ 9 11 31 10 2 19
.:CP=6A<<,~ ° 165 163 444 2 56 386
~~ CP=6B::' 95 93 188 4 22 162
CP Aa ~ 28 30 86 9 9 69
Y~~CP=Aai ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 177 8 0 169
~-A~fc ~ ~ -1- 8 4 8
CP=B:x~. 6 4 297 11 1 286
;CP-Da ~ 7 4 87 0 1 86
"~'CP-Da 3 0 46 0 0 46
~u~CP=FG`.x~` 4 4 247 67 1 179
Totals 535 529 2,664 258 141 2,264
Page 4-11
AA «eriracrcrrT~
• ~
Page 4-20
Area CP-4D:
This Urban Reserve area exists as atriangular-shaped tract that runs along the northeastern side
of Interstate 5. The area has approximately 8.83 acres, approximately two-thirds of which is
currently designated Agricultural and is owned by Jackson County. The southerly third of the
area is designated as Rural Residential land and is owned by the City of Central Point. Both
tracts are part of the Bear Creek Greenway. None of the land is or has in recent history been in
agricultural production and the soils are of low agricultural suitability (Class N-VII, where not
built as roadway, or within the Bear Creek floodway). This area also has environmental
Page 9 of 13
constraints. The eastern third of this 883-acre area is within the 100-year floodplain of Bear
Creek and is also impacted by wetlands. The City expects to use this area for passive recreation,
dedicated open space, or parks adjacent to and in connection with the Bear Creek Greenway.
At the northeast corner of CP-4D there is a one-acre parcel of exception land zoned Urban
Residential (UR-1). This property has an existing residence, and abuts the City limits and
residentiallX zoned lands to the .east. The property also abuts Agricultural lands to the north. As
an exception area it was deemed appropriate to include the property within this urban reserve as
first priority land However it is recognized that the property abuts Agricultuarl land and as
such any future development of the property will be subject to compliance with the agricultural
buffering standards to be implemented as part of this Plan. Because of the existing, residential
character of the_property and it proximity to other developed residential lands it was deemed
appropriate to include thisparcel within CP-4D.
(:P_R
With the exception of the single residential exception property, Y-IttYthis area was found to be
suitable for park and trail use due to the following Goal 14 boundary location factors and
resource land use impacts:
1. Efficient Accommodation of Identified Land Needs - CP-4D will accommodate the City's
identified park land needs and non-motorized transportation facility needs. The Bear
Creek Greenway Master Plan guides the city and county development which links active
recreation nodes with abicycle/pedestrian trail system along the natural corridor of Bear
Creek. The plan includes a land and easement acquisition strategy which seeks to
eventually extend the geenway trail to the Rogue River. Although public ownership of
the greenway is preferred, easements have also been employed as a viable alternative.
Through the years aggregate has been mined from Bear Creek; sometimes leaving deep
pits which have filled with water and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Reclamation
plans for aggregate sites which exist to the north provide extension of the greenway trail
system. Construction of this trail linkage and including same within or linking to the
larger Central Point urban area, will provide an alternative transportation mode for
workers in the Tolo employment area in addition to providing recreational access along
the geenway for all.
The inclusion of the one acre residential property reco~lizes the exceations status of the
property and avoids the~otential isolation and longterm limitation of public service
extensions.
2. Orderly and Economic Provision of Public Facilities and Services -The area extends
northerly from existing city limits over land assembled by public agencies for the
purpose of providing the Bear Creek Greenway in accordance with its adopted master
plan. Access to urban facilities and services, to the limited extent needed for the
Page 10 of 13
greenway use and the exceptions parcel, may be extended directly from Old Upton Road
on the south and the Boes subdivision to the east. Greenway improvements, policing, and
management would be coordinated between the City and Jackson County.
3. ESEE Consequences -The overall comparative ESEE consequences of an Urban
Reserve boundary in this area is positive, based on the following:
a. Economic -The provision of park and non-motorized transportation linkage will
supply an attractive community amenity and have a positive affect on property
values and tourism. It will also afford workers a more economical way to access
employment opportunities. The area has already been acquired by the public and
inclusion into Central Point will help finance completion of this segment of the
Bear Creek Greenway. The use of lands within the greenway area for
economically viable agriculture is severly limited as discussed above. Land
acquisition will be required in other areas to provide for park and trail needs.
The inclusion of the one acre exception parcel will allow for the extension of
public utilities as may be needed to serve this property. The economic
conclusion is neutral.
b. Social -Residents and vistors will have the opportunity to view preserved
natural habitat in close proximity to urban populations and inclusion of this area
will facilitate the development of facilities for the handicapped. This will
positively affect the community's sense of identity and quality of life, and will
promote opportunities for healthful exercise. Park land will need to be provided
in some proportion for any future growth area. However, the greenway is a
unique resource in this fixed location.
Inclusion of the exception parcel will have a positive social consequence as a
result of the property being able to obtain public services and utilities similar to
the abutting_residential subdivision to the east.
c. Environmental -the area will serve as a natural area providing open space and
habitats for fish and wildlife. Inclusion as urban reserve will assure, through and
urban reserve management agreement and the RPS agreement, further protection
for the area to preserve the enumerated natural values.
The environmental consequence of includingthe exception parcel within CP-4D
is neutral The property is currently zoned and developed for residential use.
Any future development of the property will be subject to compliance with the
agricultural buffering standards required of this Plan.
d. Energy -inclusion of the area will facilitate completion of a continuous trail
along the length of the Bear Creek corridor and, specific to this segment, anon-
motorized corridor between the Tolo employment area and residential population
areas of Central Point. The delivery of non-motorized transportation facilities
linking employment and residential areas can and is expected to result in
significant energy savings.
The inclusion of the exception parcel because of it existin dg evelonment and
proximity to available public facilities will not have an adverse impact on the
Page I 1 of 13
use of enerev.
4. Compatibility of the Proposed Urban Uses with Nearby Agricultural and Forest
Activities Occurring on Farm and Forest Land Outside the Urban Growth Boundary -
There are no nerby forest lands or forest activities. Nearby agricultural uses on land that
would remain outside the urban area (assuming inclusion of the greenway area) include
an active fruit orchard having approximately 177 acres and located to the easrt of the
corridor. Hay and livestock pasturing further to the north exists along the east bank, and
the cultivation of field crops also exists north of the subject area to the west of the creek
corridor. The proposed urban use of the area will be for park and trail use. The Bear
Creek Greenway routinely traverses farm land throughout its reach. Fencing is used to
control and prevent trespass. The predominant wind direction during the summer months
is from the north. Consequently, care in the routing of the trail and separation of
recreational areas from farm activities should and will be taken in the planning of these
park and trail facilities and the same will occur under the jurisdiction of Jackson County
or the City of Central Point. The area has sufficient size to accommodate setbacks and
screening of sensitive receptors from the nearby and sometimes adjacent agricultural
land activities. The riparian corridor along the creek is heavily vegetated and provides
natural screening through a significant portion of the area. While the potential exists for
noise from farm activities, the same are not anticipated to be a significant problem and
can be mitigated. In addition, ambient noise from Interstate 5 will serve to dampen noise
from farm uses.
The one-acre residential exception tercel that abuts Agricultural lands to the north is
occupied by one single-familxdetached residence dwelling. The inclusion of this uarcel
within the urban reserve area will facilitate the availabilitypublic utilities to serve the
existing residence. Because the parcel abuts Agricultural lands anv future development
of the property will be subject to compliance with the agricultural buffering standards to
be implemented as part of this Plan.
Page 12 of 13
J
~~ _~
Z®
W~
V
RdM`dS3a31
Z ~C
~
o. V
V
a ~.
W
\ ~
_ ~
W Q W
O
m D
,lb'M 4NOWAb'a i
~ a
r ~
C
,
•
°
a
o
Q ~ .o
a~ ~ a
o ~~~ V
I
a ~
Q
O
r
gg '~
,% . S
®
;~ y
NJ
~ O
f ~ ~ O
~
-
a
,
;
;.
;~
,~~
~. ~ ,~
,.
/~
n O
a
~ ~' Ad 8 Q'.
'
,
i
~' /r
/ A
~ ~
i~
~
m m a
G
E t ~
J ~
Vii:,
~
~ S~ v v ~aa
c i~Ceq U U
~-'~®
EXHIBIT "E"
Note: Proposed correction is identified in red. The use of urban reserve average persons per
household of 2.5 has always been agreed to and noted in prior drafts, and is correctly noted in
Volume 2 of the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan. As a result of this correction it may be
necessary to adjust developable land figures.
Page 4-9
Figure 2.10
• ~ ~Astiland• Central -Eagle Medford Phoen~s --•:Talent
";
~, x . Poiat ~
,,. ,Point ~
`: Expected ; People Per 2.15 2.69 2.82 2.47 2.30 2.25
Residential Household
;.. ,:
Buldout of
Density
`.' Existing (DU/Gross 5.28 5.50 5.20 5.20 6.00 5.65
UGBs - Acre
People Per n/a X12.50 2.82 2.41 2.30 2.30
Household
Lower
Anticipated ": Density
Residential
(DU/Gross n/a 6.00 6.40 6.50 6.20 6.20
'.Buildout~of~
Acre
Proposed
,~~ ~ . Higher
Density n/a 7.26 7.74 7.87 7.50 7.50
(DU/Gross
Acre
Page 13 of 13