The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Commission Packet - February 3, 2009 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA February 3, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 763 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL & INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBERS Connie Moczygemba, Chuck Piland, Pat Beck, Mike Oliver, Justin Hurley, Brett Funk and Tim Schmeusser III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES -Review and approval of January 6, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Pgs. ] - 20 A. File No. 09004(31. A public hearing to consider a recommendation to City Council to amend section 17.37.020(D) of the Central Point Municipal Code, C-2(M), Commercial -Medical District, residential permitted uses. Applicant: City of Central Point Pgs. 21 - 34 B. File No. 09004(1). A public meeting to consider membership warehouse clubs as a similar use within the M-1 district. Applicant: City of Central Point VII. DISCUSSION A. Wilson Road UGB Expansion Plan Update (Memo) B. Regional Problem Solving Process and Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Memo) C. Rogue Valley Corridor Plan D. Exit 35 Interchange Access Management Plan VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MISCELLANEOUS X. ADJOURNMENT City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL & INTRODUCTIONS: Commissioners Connie Moczygemba, Tim Schmeusser, Chuck Piland, Mike Oliver, Brett Funk, and Justin Hurley were present. Pat Beck arrived at approximately 7:00 p.m. Chairperson Moczygemba welcomed new members Tim Schmeusser and Brett Funk Also in attendance were: Matt Samitore, Interim Community Development Director; Don Burt, Planning Manager; Connie Clune, Community Planner; Dave Jacob, Community Planner; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary III. CORRESPONDENCE There were several pieces of correspondence distributed with regard to agenda items C and D. IV. MINUTES Justin Hurley made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 2, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. Chuck Piland seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Schmeusser, abstained; Funk, abstained; Moczygemba, yes. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. File No. 07119. A public meeting to consider an Extension request for White Hawk Estates, a Planned Unit Development. Applicant: Duncan Development, Inc. There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 Page 2 Community Planner Connie Clune presented the staff report in support of a motion for a one year extension of White Hawk Planned Unit Development until January 1, 2010. Current economic conditions are responsible for this request. Ms. Clune assured that none of the conditions of the original PUD approval have changed Chuck Piland made a motion to approve a one year extension for White Hawk Estates, Planned Unit Development, until January 10, 2010, based on the standards, findings, conclusions and recommendations stated in the staff report. Brett Funk seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Funk, yes. Motion passed. B. File No. 09004(3). Consideration of a Resolution declaring the Planning Commission's intent to initiate an amendment to 'a, section of the Central Point Municipal Code, C-2(M), Commercigl'- Medical District, Section 17.37.020(D) related to residential permitted uses'to resolve code language ambiguity in order to provide for the continued use of existing dwelling units::Applicant: City of Central Point There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Connie Clune, Community Planner, presented the staff report, stating that the reason for an amendment to this section of code was to clarify the conforming status of residential units located within--this zoning district.. Since inception of the C-2(M), Commercial- Medical Districts the original. hospital located, iii this district has relocated, and there are a number of established residences in the immediate vicinity: Staff wishes to amend code related to residential-permitted'uses in order toresolve code language ambiguity. Mike Oliver made: a motion to approve Resolution 762 declaring the Planning Commission's intent to initiate an amendment to sections of the Central Point :Municipal. Code related to C-2(M) Commercial-Medical :district in order- to provide the continued use of existing residential structures, based on the standards, findings, conclusions and recommendations `stated in the staff report. Chuck Piland seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Funk, yes. Motionpassed. C. File No. 09004(11:' A public meeting to consider membership warehouse clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district. Applicant: City of Central Point There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Justin Hurley mentioned that he had spoken briefly with John Renz, DLCD, prior to the meeting. Planning Manager Don Burt commenced review of his staff report by indicating that the City of Central Point had received a request to clarify whether a membership warehouse club is an allowed use or not in the M-1 zoning district. Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 Page 3 Mr. Burt defined what a membership warehouse club is and some of its unique characteristics in terms of market area, annual membership fees, sales to business members, site requirements and a warehouse environment. Although it might be possible to consider membership warehouse clubs as a permitted use in the M-1 district, staff recommends that this use be considered as a conditional use, allowing the City more discretion in determining compatibility with other permitted uses. As a conditional use, a membership warehouse club would not be allowed to have a significant impact on abutting properties, internal circulation or ingress/egress. ,Conditions could be imposed as necessary as more traffic would be generated than for atypical industrial use. Section 17.48.020(W) of the CPMC provides the planning commission with the authority to consider expanding the list of permitted uses to include other similar and compatible uses, and such authority is restated in Section' 17.60.140 -•:Authorization for Similar Uses. Mr. Burt continued by reviewing the various. tests and applicable findings presented in the planning commission packet, all of which justify a membership warehouse club as a similar use, compatible and compliant with the intent of the M-1 district. Itwas pointed out that a home improvement store is a permitted use in this zoning district. Because membership warehouse clubs would generate more traffic than most other permitted uses, it is appropriate to classify them and as a conditional use which will allow the Planning Commission to review and: appropriately condition for traffic mitigation. Further, Mr. Burt added that staff finds the proposed use to be consistent with the City's comprehensive plan,and polices, as well as;the land use, economic and transportation elements. Mr: Burt explained'that he purposefully separated the similarity of use of a membership warehouse club in the M-1 zoning district from the code amendment issue in order to focus op he use itself. If it is determined that the use is not to be permitted, the Planning Commission can include it; (or not} in the code amendment. The City Council could overrule the Planning Commission's decision relative to the zoning amendment and an appeal can be made to the City Council without fourteen (14) days. Pat Beck arrived at approximately 7:00 p.m. Chuck Piland asked if a gas station would be permitted as an auxiliary use to a membership warehouse club, and Mr. Burt responded that it was already an allowed use. The public portion of the hearing was opened. John Renz, Southern Oregon Representative, DLCD, came forward and complimented Don Burt on excellent findings for similar use of a membership warehouse club to those already allowed in the M-1 zoning district. Mr. Renz shared that the State has some major concerns with membership warehouses as they are considered by the State to be a retail use, traffic Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 Page 4 generation is extremely different from other uses and impacts may not be able to be mitigated. In addition, Mr. Renz said that they (membership warehouse clubs) evade the requirements of the TPR (Transportation Planning Rule) and its ability to mitigate potential impacts to Exit 33 and Table Rock Road. DLCD, he said, would like to be a party in this matter. Further, he stated, designating membership warehouse clubs as a similar use to those already allowed is discretionary in nature and Mr. Renz encouraged the Planning Commission not to consider the matter. David Pyles, Planner with the Oregon Department of Transportation, came forward and stated that he agreed with most everything John Renz hai) already said and commended Don Burt for a job well done on the findings. Mr. Pyles asked that his letter be made a part of the record for this public hearing. He went on to recommend a delay in consideration of membership warehouse clubs as ari allowed use in the M-1 zoning district, as well as consideration of a code amendment in .this matter. Mr. Pyles recommended that supplemental findings be prepared that would address Goal 12 of the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). He claimed that the ramps on interchange exit 33 were failing at the time the Wal-mart application was filed and are further degraded at this time; that approval of a text amendment v~ould change the Transportation System Plan (TSP) for Central Point as it doesn't include a model for this matter. Susan Lee, Director, Jackson County Planning, came forward and expressed concern about the status of Hamrick and Table'RockRoads. Ms. Lee said that the County would require that a Transportation Impact Analysis be done as part'of a potential application. Although she admitted to not;having reviewed the City's: TSP, it was her opinion that it did not anticipate this change:. Ms. Lee supports that kind bf an analysis and would like to see construction-:.drawings-submitted and permits acquired. Aside from that, she expressed no other substantive objectives. Commission Mike Qliver ekpressed a concern with traffic. He felt that a membership warehouse club in that ,part of-the City would create a situation (traffic) that was unworkable because of its size. Commission. Chuck Piland'wanted to know how traffic issues would be better on Table Rock Road than they would have been on E. Pine Street with Wal-mart. Don Burt responded that the additional traffic on Pine Street would have a direct impact on the interchange, whereas traffiaon Table Rock would be more diluted. Mr. Burt attempted to refocus the commissioners, asking if there was any additional information that they would like to have had in the findings to determine if it is an appropriate use and will it cause significant traffic impacts. Mr. Burt encouraged commission members to focus on technical issues. Mike Oliver asked about placement of this type of use off of exit 35. Mr. Burt responded that before that area is ever brought into our Urban Growth Boundary, an Interchange Management Plan will be prepared to delineate the uses that can and can't be in that area. Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 Page 5 ODOT has already stated that they do not want commercial uses in that area; it will be primarily set aside for industrial use in order to comply with the intent of the regional plan. David Pyles came forward once again and stated that he didn't want the Planning Commission to think that ODOT didn't want to be supportive. They just want to clarify that they need more time and additional findings to coordinate more with the TPR. Commissioner Justin Hurley expressed his discomfort with allowing a membership warehouse club in the M-1 zoning district. He stated,thati,it just doesn't fit there and asked why we would even consider the use when the City`didn't want Wal-mart. Matt Samitore, Interim Community Development Director explained that traffic could have been mitigated...that the City Council determined that the use: didn't fit the intent of the C-5 zone. Justin Hurley made a motion to aof allow membership warehouse clubs as a conditional use within the M-1 zoning, district, Resolution' 763. Mike Oliver seconded the motion. Prior to roll call, Chuck Piland asked if the Commissioners were talking about making it a permitted use or a conditional use. Justin Hurley responded that he thought they were talking about a conditional use. Mr.ll'iland then asked if there need to be findings for a denial. Commissioners discussed how to direct staffls efforts toward their desire to deny membership warehouse clubs as'a similar use in the M-1 zoning district, and Don Burt suggested that staff be directed to create findings: for denial. Justin Hurley amended his original a motion to direct staff to prepare findings for' denial of membership warehouse clubs as a use in the M-1 zoning district: Mike Oliver seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley,-yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, no; and Funk, no. Motion passed: , D. File No. 09004(1):'` A public hearing to consider Legislative Land Use Regulation amendmeiits to update the City's industrial zoning districts. Specific sections to be modified are Section 17.06 -Use Categories, Section 17.08 - General Definitions, Section 17.48 - M-1 Industrial District, and Section 17.49 - M-2 Industrial District, and forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council. Applicant: City of Central Point There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Justin Hurley said he had spoken briefly with John Renz, DLCD, prior to the meeting. Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 Page 6 Don Burt then presented that the code amendment in the packet would serve the purpose of combining the M-1 and M-2 zoning into a single chapter and adopting the model code's use categories. Development standards would not be changed. Staff will have to make some corrections to remove membership warehouse clubs from the list of use categories. The chart that begins on page 65 of the packet contains the changes in uses based on what the State identifies as the purpose of the district is. The proposed changes would make the industrial district quite industrial. Staff failed to notify affected agencies of these proposed changes, and Mr. Burt recommended that the public hearing be opened and continued to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting to allow staff toprovide adequate notice. The City Council will be informed of this delay. The public hearing was then opened. John Renz, DLCD, came forward and said that they have a letter on>record and that the Commission has addressed their concerns with the clarification that code changes for the M-1 and M-2 zoning districts will not include membership warehouse clubs. The Department does not think that they .are appropriate for an industrial zone. Mr. Renz continued that there was nowhere in.Central Point where they would have been able to mitigate traffic. David Pyles came forward'once agaim.to reiterate that ODOT fias a letter filed as part of the record, and when development comes in; it all comes down to local governments, code, the Transportation System Plan and applicable state policies and regulations. Susan Lee came forward to add that. she would.like to have her previous comments stand. Ms. Lee stated that roads should adequately serve development, and the County will work with Central Point. Traffic Impact Analyses are important. Cris Galpin, developer;: came forward and advised planning commissioners that he disagreed with what they were deciding, especially their narrow-mindedness in thinking they could control traffic :'Mr. Galpin felt that the Planning Commission was giving away a valuable tool where; conditional uses were concerned which would give them the right to require mitigation off traffic issues. Existing permitted uses create just as much of an impact but aren't subject to the mitigation requirements. The public hearing was then continued to the February 3, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. Chuck Piland made a motion to continue the public hearing regarding proposed amendments to CPMC Section 17.06 Use Categories, and Sections 17.08.005 Definitions, 17.48 Industrial District, and 17.52 General Industrial District, until February 3, 2009. Justin Hurley seconded the motion. ROLL Planning Commission Minutes January 6, 2009 Page 7 CALL: Piland, yes; Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Funk, yes. Motion passed. VII. DISCUSSION VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MISCELLANEOUS Renional Problem SOlylnE Update Don Burt report that as of January 18, 2009, the appeal; period will have passed. Most of the cities involved in the process will have approved the Participation Agreement with the exception of Jacksonville. Jackson County anticipates having their comprehensive plan adopted no later than June of 2010. X. ADJOURNMENT Justin Hurley made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Pat Beck'seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned: at 8:00 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the January 6, 2009 Planning Commission meeting were approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting on the 3rd day of February, 2009. Planning Commission Chair G~2,(M), COMMERCIAL ~ MEDICAL DISTRICT, AMENDMENT TO SECTION ~ 7.~~.o~ocD) STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM: File No. CENTRAL POINT STAFF REPORT February 3, 2009 Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator Consideration of amendments to Section 17.37.020(D), C-2(M) Comn the Central Point Municipal Code. Applicant: City of Central Point STAFF Connie Planner In the C-2(M) Commercial-Medical District, under permitted uses Section 17.37.020(D), there is a restriction on the continued use of residential units located within the ~ district. In the C-2(M) district, ~R~ \ residential uses are classified as f i b if ~ ¢ non-con orm ng uses, ut 0„6~ converted to an office use, may later " " be reconverted to residential use. D However, if destroyed, a residence i cannot be reconstructed. \ D The purpose of the C-2 (M) district is to assure that adequate medical care will be available to the citizens of Central Point (Section 17.37.010). The C-2 (M) district was initially created to protect and complement Cascade Hospital, which no longer exists. /\ cmm R-1.8 H H H H Y H H H H H H H D Metl om< i TDD-GC \ cs H H Youth Facility r R 18 T I I ~' ~~l Ll Med Cllnlc - Office C 2(M) vacant The only C-2(M) district is located Figure 1 ~~ along Bush Street between South \ ~ I R-~~ ~ --- First Street and South Fourth Street as illustrated in Figure 1. Today the district is a mixed neighborhood of single-family dwellings (H), three (3) duplex units (D), and medical facilities with associated services. The residential lots along Bush Street range from 5,400 to 7,920 sq. ft. Page 1 of 3 ~' in size and are an example of the variety of existing lot sizes. The mixed character of the neighborhood has functioned as such for over twenty years. Section 17.37.020(D) Permitted uses Under the listing of permitted uses, residential uses are not allowed except under circumstances as prescribed in Section 17.37.020(D). This section allows for the reconversion of medical offices to residential provided that they were previously used for residential purposes. Based on this section, existing residential uses are treated as non-conforming uses, and therefore subject to the non-conforming provisions of Section 17.56. Under the terms of Section 17.56, if an existing residential structure were to burn down it could only be replaced with an office or limited retail use. This restriction imposes obstacles to the purchase or refinancing of dwellings within the district. Under the current zoning, residential uses will eventually be phased out and replaced with medical offices and limited commercial. The problem with this scenario is that the demand for medical offices/limited commercial in this area is virtually non-existent as demonstrate over the years with a lack of new commercial development. Amending 17.37.020 (D) to state specifically that residential uses are allowed would assure the continued residential development of the area. FINDINGS: See Attachment "B". ISSUES: 1. Comprehensive Plan Compliance: Approval of the proposed text amendment must be found to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Land Use Element, Chapter XII, of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the C-2(M) zoned area as Hospital-related Development. The 19801and use inventory listed Cascade Hospital as a functioning medical facility. In addition, the inventory found that several single family homes in the immediate vicinity had been converted to medical offices. A December 5, 2008 inventory of the C-2(M) area finds a treatment facility and medical offices located on the former hospital campus. The inventory also finds one residential structure is a youth facility with all other residential structures used as dwelling units. On the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the area will remain designated for Commercial-Medical use. 2. Public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use are in place and are sufficient to serve the C-2(M) zoning district. 3. Use of LMR Standards. If residential development is allowed to occur within the C-2 (M) district, the question is which standards apply. As a result of the current mixed use character of the neighborhood, it is suggested that the TOD Low Mix Residential (LMR) district standards be used. The LMR zone provides for single family and lower density multifamily housing types with a density of 6-12 units per acres which corresponds to the current development pattern in the C-2(M) zone. The R-1-6 (north and east), R-1-8 (south) and R-3 zones (north), which border the C-2(M) zone, do not provide for the needed flexibility to allow for replacement of both existing single and multi-family 2 Page 2 of 3 structures. The R-1-6 zone does not allow for multi-family units and the R-3 zone has a minimum lot size requirement of 6,000 sq. ft. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A"- Amendment CPMC Section 17.37.020(D) Attachment "B"- Findings Attachment "C"- Resolution ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. , a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the text amendments to the Central Point Municipal Code, Section 17.37.020 (D), C-2(M) Commercial -Medical District, Permitted uses, Residential purposes. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. , forwarding a favorable recommendation to the City Council. Page 3 of 3 3 ATTACHMENT "A" Chapter 17.37 C-2(M), COMMERCIAL-MEDICAL DISTRICT Sections: 17.37.010 17.37.020 17.37.030 17.37.040 17.37.050 17.37.060 17.37.070 Purpose. Permitted uses. Conditional uses. Height regulations. Area, width and yard requirements, Signs and lighting of premises. Off-street parking. 17.37.010 Purpose. The C-2(M) district is intended to assure that adequate medical care will be available to the residents of Central Point and enhance Central Point's attractiveness as a location for private medical practices and other health facilities, both public and private, that may be directly or indirectly related to hospital-type activities. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-2(M) district: A. Professional and financial, including: 1. Hospitals; 2. Health care facilities required to be licensed by the state of Oregon; 3. Professional medical offices; and 4. Medical services, clinics and laboratories. B. Personal services when the primary use is in conjunction with related health care facilities in the zone, including: 1. Barber and beauty shops; 2. Counseling services; and 3. Day care centers. C. Retail outlets, when such uses are in conjunction with health care facilities located in the area, including: 1. Drugstore; 2. Health food; 3. Gifts, notions and variety; 4. Sit-down restaurant; 5. Delicatessen, pastry, confectionery, bakery; 6. Jewelry; and 7. Books and stationery. D. Residential purposes, when developed to the standards of the TOD-LMR. Low Mix Residential district as set forth in Chapter 17.65. 4 17.37.030 Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-2(M) district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76: A. Insurance company offices; B. Legal services; C. Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, such as incidental storage facilities, may be permitted as conditional uses when not included within the primary building or structure; and D. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission by city staff because they were found to exhibit potentially adverse or hazardous characteristics not normally found in uses of a similar type and size. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.040 Height regulations. No building or structure shall exceed thirty-five feet in height in a C-2(M) district. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.050 Area, width and yard requirements. The following lot requirements shall be observed in the C-2(M) district: A. Lot Area. No requirements except as necessary to meet the applicable yard, parking and loading requirements. B. Lot Width. No requirements. C. Lot Depth. No requirements. D. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of fifteen feet between the front property line and any buildings, structures or parking areas. The front yard shall be planted with lawn, trees, shrubs, flowers or other suitable landscaping materials and shall be continuously maintained in good condition and in an attractive manner. E. Side Yard. The side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except that when a side lot line abuts a lot in a residential district, the side yard shall be a minimum of five feet per story, and when the side lot line abuts a private right-of-way, the side yard shall be ten feet and landscaped as described in Section 17.36.050(D). F. Rear Yard. No rear yard shall be required in the C-2(M) district except when the rear yard line abuts property in a residential district and then the rear yard shall be a minimum of ten feet. G. Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage by buildings and structures shall be fifty percent of the total lot area. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.060 Signs and lighting of premises. A. No illuminated signs or lighting standards used or the illumination of premises shall be designed and installed so that direct rays are toward or parallel to a public street or highway or directed toward any property that lies within a residential district. B. No red, green or amber lights or illuminated signs maybe placed in such a location or position that they could be confused with, or may interfere with, any official traffic control device, traffic signal or directional guide signs. C. Signs in the C-2(M) district shall be permitted and designed according to the provisions of Chapter 15.24 and Section 17.60.110. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 5 17.37.070 Off-street parking. Off-street parking and loading space shall be provided as required in Chapter 17.64. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). s EXHIBIT". ~~ .~ Chapter 17.37 C-2(M), COMMERCIAL-MEDICAL DISTRICT Sections: 17.37.010 Purpose. 17.37.020 Permitted uses. 17.37.030 Conditional uses. 17.37.040 Height regulations. 17.37.050 Area, width and yard requirements. 17.37.060 Signs and lighting of premises. 17.37.070 Off-street parking. 17.37.010 Purpose. The C-2(M) district is intended to assure that adequate medical care will be available to the residents of Central Point and enhance Central Point's attractiveness as a location for private medical practices and other health facilities, both public and private, that may be directly or indirectly related to hospital-type activities. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-2(M) district: A. Professional and financial, including: 1. Hospitals; 2. Health care facilities required to be licensed by the state of Oregon; 3. Professional medical offices; and 4. Medical services, clinics and laboratories. B. Personal services when the primary use is in conjunction with related health care facilities in the zone, including: 1. Barber and beauty shops; 2. Counseling services; and 3. Day care centers. C. Retail outlets, when such uses are in conjunction with health care facilities located in the area, including: 1. Drugstore; 2. Health food; 3. Gifts, notions and variety; 4. Sit-down restaurant; 17.37.030 Conditional uses. 7 5. Delicatessen, pastry, confectionery, bakery; 6. Jewelry; and 7. Books and stationery. D. Residential purposes, when developed to the standards of the TOD-LMR, Low The following uses are permitted in the C-2(M) district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76: A. Insurance company offices; B. Legal services, C. Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, such as incidental storage facilities, may be permitted as conditional uses when not included within the primary building or structure; and D. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission by city staff because they were found to exhibit potentially adverse or hazardous characteristics not normally found in uses of a similar type and size. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.040 Height regulations. No building or structure shall exceed thirty-five feet in height in a C-2(M) district. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.050 Area, width and yard requirements. The following fot requirements shall be observed in the C-2(M) district: A. Lot Area. No requirements except as necessary to meet the applicable yard, parking and loading requirements. B. Lot Width. No requirements. C. Lot Depth. No requirements. D. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of fifteen feet between the front property line and any buildings, structures or parking areas. The front yard shall be planted with lawn, trees, shrubs, flowers or other suitable landscaping materials and shall be continuously maintained in good condition and in an attractive manner. E. Side Yard. The side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except that when a side lot line abuts a lot in a residential district, the side yard shall be a minimum of five feet per story, and when the side lot line abuts a private right-of-way, the side yard shall be ten feet and landscaped as described in Section 17.36.050(D). F. Rear Yard. No rear yard shall be required in the C-2(M) district except when the rear yard line abuts property in a residential district and then the rear yard shall be a minimum of ten feet. G. Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage by buildings and structures shall be fifty percent of the total lot area. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 17.37.060 Signs and lighting of premises. A. No illuminated signs or lighting standards used or the illumination of premises shall be designed and installed so that direct rays are toward or parallel to a public street or highway or directed toward any property that lies within a residential district. B. No red, green or amber lights or illuminated signs may be placed in such a location or position that they could be confused with, or may interfere with, any official traffic control device, traffic signal or directional guide signs. C. Signs in the C-2(M) district shall be permitted and designed according to the provisions of Chapter 15.24 and Section 17.60.110. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). 8 77.37.070 Off-street parking. Off-street parking and loading space shall be provided as required in Chapter 17.64. (Ord. 1684 §43(part), 1993). ~, Attachment "B" FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW File No: 09004(3) INTRODUCTION Consideration of a text amendment of the Central Point Municipal Code, C-2(M), Commercial -Medical District, Section 17.37.020(D) Permitted uses, Residential purpose to resolve code language ambiguity. Background: The purpose of the C-2 (M) district is to assure that adequate medical care will be available to the citizens of Central Point (Section 17.37.010). The C-2 (M) district was initially created to protect and complement Cascade Hospital, which no longer exists. Amending 17.37.020 (D) to state specifically that a residential use, developed to the TOD Low Mix Residential (LMR) district standard is allowed, would provide clear and measurable code standards while resolving the current nebulous language. The LMR zone provides for single family and lower density multifamily housing types with a density of 6-12 units per acre. The current development pattern and variety of existing lot sizes in the C-2(M) area closely fits development standard of Section 17.65. These findings are prepared in four (4) parts to address the statewide planning goals, the applicable elements of City's Comprehensive Plan, public facilities and the Transportation Planning Rule as required by CPMC 17.05.500 and 17.10.600. CPMC LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT 17.10.200 Legislative amendments. Legislative amendments are policy decisions made by city council. They are reviewed using the Type IV procedure in Section 17.05. S00 and shall conform to the statewide planning goals, the Central Point comprehensive plan, the Central Point zoning ordinance and the transportation planning rule provisions in Section 17.10.600, as applicable. Finding: By Resolution No. 762, the City of Central Point Planning Commission initiated a text amendment of the Central Point Municipal Code, C-2(M), Commercial -Medical District, Section 17.37.020(D) as provided in Section 17.96.020. This amendment is reviewed as a Legislative amendment using the Type IV procedure in conformance with Section 17.10.200. Conclusion: A text amendment is reviewed as a Type IV,.Legislative decision. ~Q Page 1 of 10 17.05.500 Type IV procedure (legislative). G. Decision-Making Criteria. The recommendation by the planning commission and the decision by the city council shall be based on the following factors: I. Whether the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals; 2. Whether the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and 3. If the proposed legislative change is particular to a particular site, the property and affected area is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or such facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. PART 1 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS: 17.05.500 G. 1. Whether the request is consistent with the applicable statewide planning goals; COAL I. CITIZENINVOLVEMENT - To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Finding, Goal 1: The proposed text amendment does not enhance, or detract, from citizen participation in the City's planning process. A duly noticed public hearing is scheduled for February 3, 2009 to review the proposed text amendment. Conclusion, Goal l: Consistent. GOAL 2. LAND USE PLANNING - To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. Finding Goa12: The proposed text amendment is in accordance with CPMC Section 17.10.200 and therefore does not modify or otherwise affect the City's planning process as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed text amendment serves to clarify current code language by providing clear and measurable standards specifically for subsection D of Section 17.37.020 as it relates to residential uses. Conclusion Goa12: Consistent. Goal3. AGRICULTURAL LANDS - To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. Finding Goa13: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect lands designated for agricultural use. Conclusion Goal 3: Not applicable. 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 Page 2 of 10 ~ 1 economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting offorest tree species as the 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, Goa14: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect lands designated for forest use. Conclusion, Goa14: Not applicable. GOAL 5. OPENSPACE, SCENICAND HISTORICAREAS, AND NATURAL RESOURCES - To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. Finding Goal 5: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect lands designated as natural, scenic, or historic resources. Conclusion Goa15: Not applicable. 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: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect regulations managing the quality of air, water and land resources. Conclusion Goa16: Not applicable. GOAL 7. AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL HAZARDS AND DISASTERS - To protect people and property from natural hazards. Finding Goa17: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect regulations protecting the citizens of Central Point from natural hazards. Stephanie Woolett, CFM, City of Central Point Floodplain/ Stormwater Specialist review of the text amendment and found, according to the FIRM, the C-2(M) zoning district is outside the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) of Mingus Creek. Conclusion Goa17: Consistent. GOAL 8. RECREATIONNEEDS - To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, here appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Finding Goal 8: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect the City's provision of necessary recreational facilities. Conclusion Goa18: Not applicable. Page 3 of 10 1 2+ GOAL 9. ECONOMY OF THE STATE - 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 Goa19: The C-2(M) district is a specialty district formed many years ago when the Cascade Hospital was located within the district. Although the district was predominantly residential, it was the purpose of the C-2(M) district to assure that adequate medical care will be available to the residents of Central Point and enhance Central Point's attractiveness as a location for private medical practices and other health facilities. Over the course of the past thirty years, and with the loss of the hospital, there has been no new medical office development in the district. Finding Goa19: The proposed text amendment does not alter the City's provision of adequate economic opportunities. The proposed text amendment serves to clarify current code language by providing clear and measurable standards specifically for subsection D of Section 17.37.020 as it relates to residential uses. Conclusion Goa19: Consistent. GOAL 10. HOUSING - To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. Finding Goa110: The C-2(M) district allows, as anon-conforming use, the continued use of existing residential buildings for residential purposes. Non- conforming residential structures when destroyed by more than 50% cannot be rebuilt. Non-conforming residential structures are also difficult to refinance due to their non-conforming status. As previously noted, the C-2(M) area is predominantly residential in character. Amending 17.37.020 (D) to state specifically that a residential use developed to the Low Mix Residential (LMR) district is allowed thus, acknowledges residential uses as a legitimate use in the C-2(M) district. Conclusion Goa110: Consistent. GOAL ll. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES - To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement ofpublic facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. Finding Goal 11: The area within the C-2(M) zoning district is currently served by City water, storm drain system and by Rogue Valley Sewer Service. Finding Goal 11: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect the City's provision of timely, orderly and efficient public facilities and services. The proposed text amendment does not cause an increase in the demand for public facilities and services not already available within the C-2(M) districts. Conclusion Goal 11: Consistent. Page 4 of 10 ~' 3 GOAL 12. TRANSPORTATION- To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Finding Goal 12: The area zoned C-2(M) is serviced by South Third, South Fourth and portions of Bush Streets. Each of these roadways is currently classified as local streets according to the City's functional classification system. Finding Goa112: The City of Central Point Transportation System Plan, Chapter 7 - Street System, 2008-2030 provides an analysis and forecast of future demands on the City system in order to maintain level of service. The streets and intersections within the C-2(M) zoning district are not identified as areas of future concern. Conclusion Goal 12: Consistent. GOAL 13 ENERGY- To conserve energy. Finding Goal 13: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect and development standards or regulations that address conservation of energy. Conclusion Goal 13: Not applicable. 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 text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect, regulations addressing and regulating the transition from rural to urban lands. Conclusion Goa114: Not applicable. GOAL 15. WILLAMETTE GREENWAY- To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. Finding Goal 15: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect the Willamette River or Willamette River Greenway. Conclusion Goa115: Not applicable. GOAL 16. ESTUARINE RESOURCES - To recognize and protect the unique environmental, economic, and social values of each estuary and associated wetlands; and To protect, maintain, where appropriate develop, and where appropriate restore the long-term environmental, economic, and social values, diversity and benefits of Oregon's estuaries. Finding Goal 16: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect estuaries and associated wetlands. Page 5 of 10 14 Conclusion Goa116: Not applicable. GOAL 17. COASTAL SHORELANDS - To conserve, protect, where appropriate, develop and where appropriate restore the resources and benefits of all coastal shorelands, recognizing their value for protection and maintenance of water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, water-dependent uses, economic resources and recreation and aesthetics. The management of these shoreland areas shall be compatible with the characteristics of the adjacent coastal waters; and To reduce the hazard to human life and property, and the adverse effects upon water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, resulting from the use and enjoyment of Oregon's coastal shorelands. Finding Goal 17: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect coastal shorelands. Conclusion Goa117: Not applicable. GOAL 18. BEACHESAND DUNES - To conserve, protect, where appropriate develop, and where appropriate restore the resources and benefits of coastal beach and dune areas; and To reduce the hazard to human life and property from natural or man-induced actions associated with these areas. Finding Goa118: The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect coastal beach or dune areas. Conclusion Goal 18: Not applicable. GOAL 19. OCEANRESOURCES - To conserve marine resources and ecological functions for the purpose of providing long-term ecological, economic, and social value and benefits to future generations. Finding Goa119: The City of Central Point is not adjacent to, or near the ocean. The proposed text amendment does not involve, or otherwise affect marine resources and marine ecological functions. Conclusion Goa119: Not applicable. PART 2 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 17.05.500 (G) (2) m The request is consistent with the Central Point comprehensive plan; There are three elements of the Comprehensive Plan that apply to the proposed amendment: 1. Land Use Element This element provides an inventory of land use by category and condition, including a projection of land use needs by category. 15 Page 6 of 10 Finding: The Land Use Element, Chapter XII, of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the C-2(M) zoned area as Hospital-related Development. The 19801and use inventory listed Cascade Hospital as a functioning medical facility. In addition, the inventory found that several single family homes in the immediate vicinity had been converted to medical offices. Finding: The 1980 analysis concluded that future expansion of the hospital would necessitate a need for related development resulting in a future medical office park. Finding: To comply with Commercial Development Policy No. 5 the City adopted the C-2(M) zoning designation to support the hospital and future hospital expansion. Finding: Since the 1980 inventory, the hospital has closed. A treatment facility, medical offices and associated services are now located on the hospital grounds. Finding: A December 5, 2008 inventory of the C-2(M) area finds one residential structure is youth facility and all other residential structures used as dwelling units. A treatment facility, physician offices and medical support office occupy the structures of the former hospital site. Finding: The proposed text amendment does not prohibit medical facilities, or otherwise affect those existing facilities it clarifies code language by providing standards specific to subsection D of Section 17.37.020 as it relates to residential uses. Conclusion: Consistent 2. Housing Element The Housing Element, Chapter V, provides an inventory and needs projection for residential lands and sets forth the City's goals and policies for attainment of identified residential growth objectives. This element of the Comprehensive Plan addresses Statewide Planning Goal 10, Housing. Finding: The proposed text amendment does not affect the use and availability of residentially planned or zoned lands. The amendment serves to clarify current code language by providing clear and measurable standards specifically for subsection D of Section 17.37.020 as it relates to residential uses. Conclusion: Consistent 3. Transportation Finding: The City of Central Point Transportation System Plan 2030 (TSP) replaces Chapter XI, Circulation/Transportation of the Comprehensive Plan. The TSP provides an inventory of the City's existing transportation system, including street Page 7 of 10 ~ s standards. This element ofthe-Comprehensive Plan addresses Statewide Planning Goal 12, Transportation. Finding: As discussed in Finding Goal 12, Chapter 7 -Street System, 2008-2030 of the TSP provides an analysis and forecast of future demands on the City system in order to maintain level of service. The streets and intersections within the C-2(M) zoning district are not identified as areas of future concern. Finding: The proposed text amendment will not cause an increase in land uses that would result in levels of travel or access that would be inconsistent with the City's functional street classification system for existing and planned transportation facilities. Conclusion: Consistent PART 3 PUBLIC FACILITIES 17.05.500 (G) (3). If the proposed legislative change is particular to a particular site, the property and affected area is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or such facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. Finding: Public facilities, services and transportation network are in place and are sufficient to serve the C-2(M) zoning district. Conclusion: Consistent PART 4 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE 17.10.600 Transportation planning rule compliance. Section 660-012-0060(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. A plan or Zand use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system plan: Page 8 of 10 (A) Aldow types or Zevels of land uses that would result in levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. Finding 660-012-0060(1)(a): The proposed text amendment serves to recognize the existing residential structures and to provide clear and measurable code standards while resolving the current nebulous language. Development standards of the property within the mixed residential designated area are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed text amendment will not cause any changes to the functional classification of any existing or planned transportation facilities. Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(a): No significant affect. Finding 660-012-0060(1)(b): The proposed text amendment does not modify any existing land use regulations. The proposed text amendment serves to maintain the density standard of the mixed residential property consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed text amendment will not cause a change to standards implementing the City's transportation system. Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(b): No significant affect. Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): The proposed text amendment will not cause an increase in land uses that would result in levels of travel or access that would be inconsistent with the City's functional street classification system for existing and planned transportation facilities. Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A): No significant affect. Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B): The proposed text amendment will not cause a reduction in the performance of any existing or planned transportation facilities below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B): No significant affect. Finding 660-012-0060(1)(c)(C): The proposed text amendment will not cause the worsening of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected Page 9 of 10 ~ 8 to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion 660-012-0060(1)(c)(C): No significant affect. Summary Conclusion: As proposed, the text amendment is in conformance with the acknowledged Comprehensive Plan, Transportation System Plan and Central Point Municipal Code. Page 10 of 10 - 1~ ATTACHMENT "~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING FORWARDING A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE ZONING SECTION 17.37.020(D), C-2(M) COMMERCIAL-MEDICAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, the amendment of the Central Point Municipal Code may be initiated by adoption of a resolution of intention by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on January 6, 2009 with the adoption of Resolution No. 762, the Planning Commission of the City of Central Point, in a public meeting declared the need to amend Section 17.37.020(D), C-2(M) Commercial-Medical District amendments as proposed were in the public interest and that the general welfare of the public will benefit by the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, on February 3, 2009 the Planning Commission, held a public hearing to consider public testimony on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the requested proposal and considering public testimony it is the determination of the Planning Commission that the proposed amendments as set forth in Exhibit "A" are minor design adjustments that do not alter, or otherwise modify the uses and character of development and land use within the City of Central Point, and is therefore determined to be consistent with the all goals, objectives, and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Central Point, Oregon that the amendments as set forth in Exhibit "A" be forwarded to the City Council with a recommendation that the City Council favorably consider amending the City of Central Point Municipal Code Zoning as specifically set forth in the attached Exhibit "A". Passed by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of , 2009. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this day of 2009. Planning Commission Chair ?Q MEMBERSHIP VYAREHOUSE CLUBS Planning Department STAFF REPORT Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator [MISSION REPORT Febrnary 3, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: File No. as a use similar to allowed uses within the M-1 District and allowing as a Conditional Use. Applicant: City of Central Point. STAFF SOURCE: NA BACKGROUND: After deliberating on whether or not Membership Warehouse Clubs are a use similar to other uses within the M-1 district, it was the Planning Commission's finding that Membership Warehouse Clubs were not a similar use within the M-1 district. This determination was based on: 1. A concern for the amount of traffic that would be generated by a Membership Warehouse Club and the impacts of that traffic on the local street system; and 2. That the purpose of the M-1 district is for light industrial development and the Commission does not believe that Membership Warehouse Clubs are a light industrial use. Section 17.48.020(W) allows the planning commission to consider expanding the list of permitted uses to include other similar and compatible uses'. This authority is restated in Section 17.60.140 Authorization for Similar Uses. FINDINGS: There are five (5) basic tests that must be applied when considering similar use per Section 17.60.140. Those tests and a summary of the findings are: 1. Must be closely related to, and compatible with listed uses. Although there are uses within the M-1 district that are related and compatible with permitted uses in the M-1 district, it is the Planning Commission's position that Membership Warehouse Clubs are not closely related to those uses. r CPMC Section 17.48.020(W) 2. The proposed use must not have been anticipated or known to exist on the effective date of the ordinance. The Planning Commission acknowledges that Membership Warehouse Clubs were not defined until after adoption of the M-1 ordinance (1981). 3. The proposed use must be treated under local, state, and federal law the same as listed uses. The Planning Commission acknowledges that Membership Warehouse Clubs do not have any restrictions on their operation} that do not apply to other listed uses. 4. The proposed use is consistent with the purpose of the zoning district. The purpose of the M-1 district is to provide lands for light industrial services and manufacturing/assembly. It is the position the Planning Commission that a Membership Warehouse Club is not a light industrial use. 5. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and policies. There are three (3) Comprehensive Plan elements that apply to consideration of the Proposed Use: Land Use, Economic, and Transportation. Each of these elements are addressed in Attachment "B -Comprehensive Plan Findings" As concluded in Attachment "B" Membership Warehouse Clubs have been determined not to be consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive-Plan. Based on the above findings Membership Warehouse Clubs are not considered as a use consistent with the purpose of the M-1 district and they are not similar to, or compatible with, the list of permitted uses as set forth in Section 17.48.020. ISSUES: None ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A -Resolution No. " Attachment "B -Comprehensive Plan Findings" ACTION: Consider Resolution No. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No, denying Membership Warehouse Clubs as a similar use to allowed use within the M-1 zoning district. 22 ATTACHM~N~''~,~,,,;~~," PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION DENYING MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS AS A SIMILAR USE WITHIN THE M-I ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, on January 6, 2009 the City of Central Point Planning Commission, in accordance with Section 17.48.020(W), considered the question of Membership Warehouse Clubs (the "Proposal") as a similar use within the M-1 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the Proposal was based on the criteria set forth in Section 17.60.140(A) of the City of Central Point Municipal Code; and written and oral testimony received from DLCD and ODOT, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission by Resolution No. does hereby find as set forth in Exhibit "A -Findings" that Membership Warehouse Clubs are not similar to other uses permitted within the M-1 zoning district and hereby denies the Proposal. PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 3rd day of February, 2009. Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this day of , 2009. Planning Commission Chair 23 Planning Commission Resolution No. ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" FINDINGS OF FACT FOR WAREHOUSE CLUBS SIMILARITY FINDINGS Before the City of Central Point Planning Commission Consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a use similar to allowed uses within the M-1 District Applicant: City of Central Point ) Findings of Fact 140 S. Third Street ) and Central Point, OR 97502 ) Conclusion of Law PART 1-INTRODUCTION These findings have been prepared in accordance with Section 17.60.140(A)(4) addressing the question of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a use similar to uses allowed within the M-1 district. The findings presented herein address the Comprehensive Plan criteria for determining "similar use" as required of Section 17.60.140(A)(4). Including this introduction these findings will be presented in four (4) parts as follows: 1. Introduction 2. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element Findings 3. Comprehensive Plan, Economic Element Findings 4. Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element Findings 2 4 Page 1 of 13 ATTACHMENT °°B -FINDINGS" ~~ -+- nNwd nun IqB MI ~ MtlNM 25 Page 2 of 13 ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" PART 2 -MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS, LAND USE ELEMENT "The Land Use Element contains the goals and policies for the physical use of the land. It combines the land use aspects of all other elements into an overall configuration of compatible land uses that is in balance with statewide goals as well as in balance with local goals, community needs, and the environment." The following Land Use Element goals and policies apply to the consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an industrial land use designations: Goal 1: To establish a strong and diversified industrial sector of the community. Finding, Goal l: A Membership Warehouse Clubs are not considered a part of the industrial sector and therefore do not offer any opportunity to either strengthen or diversify the City's industrial sector. Conclusion, Goal l: Not applicable. Goal 2: To maximize industrial expansion and new development opportunities in locations that utilize existing highways, rail facilities and other infrastructure, are in close proximity to employee housing areas, and will minimize conflicts with all non-industrial land uses. Finding, Goa12: Membership Warehouse Clubs are not an acknowledged industrial use, and therefore do not offer opportunities for industrial expansion. Conclusion, Goal 2: Not applicable. 2 6 Page 3 of 13 ATTACHMENT'B -FINDINGS" PART 3 -MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS, ECONOMIC ELEMENT The City's Economic Element addresses the requirements of Goa19 (Economy of the State). It is the ultimate goal of both the City and the state to provide for a local economy that positively contributes to the local and state economy. The framework for the City's economic development program is presented in eight (8) elements and related policies. The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district has been compared against each of these elements and their related policies as follows: 1. Information, Research and Technical Assistance Policy 1, Information, Research and Technical Assistance. Utilize the results of the 1980 Census, when available, to provide the detailed data necessary to complete the profile of the community and region. Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district does not alter or otherwise affect the source of data. Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable. Policy 2, Information, Research and Technical Assistance. Request assistance from the Department of Economic Development in the development of the economic development program, and remain aware of the ongoing plans and activities of the County and other area communities. Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district does not alter or otherwise affect the City's economic development programming. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable. Policy 3, Information, Research and Technical Assistance. Encourage the local Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development Committee and other interested persons and organizations to become involved in the City's plans and programs. Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district does not alter or otherwise affect the City's public participation process. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not applicable. 2. Planning and Regulation 2 ~ Page 4 of 13 ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" Policy 1, Planning and Regulation. Continue to refine City regulations pertaining to economic development to ensure that the program can be carried out and that such development will be an asset to the Community and region. Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use detracts from the City's efforts to encourage the continued development of a diversified industrial base. It is further determined that Membership Warehouse Clubs, regardless of location, will not be an asset to the City. Conclusion, Policy 1: Not consistent Policy 2, Planning and Regulation. Continue to emphasize the need to maximize the potential of major existing facilities that represent major public investments, but are presently underutilized (Emphasis on railroad, Highway 99, the I-5 Freeway and the airport related to industrial development, and Pine Street/Head Road for commercial, office-professional and tourist development). Findings, Policy 2: Membership Warehouse Clubs generate large amounts of traffic that, when concentrated in the M-1 district, may exceed the ability of the City's existing major transportation facilities to accommodate such a use within acceptable levels of service. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not consistent. Policy 3, Planning and Regulation. Implement policies of the Housing and Land Use Elements pertaining to the orientation and buffering ofnon-industrial and non- commercial land uses by modifying existing codes to require these actions. Findings, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district does not affect the City's site development standards for the M-1 district. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable. 3. Assembly and Disposal of Land Policy 1, Assembly and Disposal of Land. Work with developers to ensure that proposed plans are consistent with the overall development concept of the area and will not create obstacles to the future development of neighboring sites. Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to manage development within the M-1 district. Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable. 2 8 Page 5 of 13 ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" Policy 2, Assembly and Disposal of Land. Study the benefits of developing "concept plans" for the coordinated development of critical areas, such as the Seven Oaks Interchange Area and other industrial sites along the railroad. Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to study the benefits, or otherwise pursue concept plans for industrial development within the M-1 district. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable. Policy 3, Assembly and Disposal of Land. Consider initiating the planning for an industrial park along the railroad that would provide for a greater degree of development coordination and might qualify for state or federal financial assistance. Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to initiate plans for an industrial park within industrially zoned lands along the railroad. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable. 4. Provision of Physical Facilities Policy 1, Provision of Physical Facilities. Ensure that the City's plans for public facilities and utilities are phased according to the most desirable progression of development. Finding, Policy 1: Because of the amount of traffic generation the inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs within the M-1 district will negatively affect the City's ability to adequately plan for transportation facilities. Conclusion, Policy 1: Not consistent. Policy 2, Provision of Physical Facilities. Strive to provide all necessary public facilities to the industrial (and commercial) sites prior to inquires to avoid losing potential firms because of inadequate facilities. Finding, Policy 2: Because of the amount of traffic generation the inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs will negatively affect the City's ability to provide necessary public facilities to industrial/commercial sites prior to inquires. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not consistent. Policy 3, Provision of Physical Facilities. Utilize the plans for public facilities and services as a guidance instrument to implement the Plan in accordance with community needs and planned growth. 2 9 Page 6 of 13 ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" Finding, Policy 3: Because of the amount of traffic generation resulting from a Membership Warehouse Club the City's current plans are not adequate to accommodate such a use. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not consistent. Policy 4, Provision of Physical Facilities. Include the development of public facilities in a capital improvements program to ensure coordinated and adequately financed development of the facilities. Finding, Policy 4: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's capital improvement planning. Conclusion, Policy 4: Not Applicable. 5. Site Development Policy 1, Site Development. Ensure that all new development is in conformance with City codes, as well as applicable state and federal requirements. Finding, Policy 1: All development proposals within the City are subject to compliance with the land division and zoning regulations set forth in the City of Central Point Municipal Code. The proposed inclusion of Membership Warehouse clubs as an allowed use will not affect the City's land development and use standards. Conclusion Policy, 1: Not Applicable. Policy 2, Site Development. Seek ways to improve codes and repair deficiencies that may be identified as development occurs. Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district has brought to the attention of the Planning Commission the need to restructure the currently allowed uses within the M-1 district to strictly industrial uses. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not applicable. Policy 3, Site Development. Consider the development of an "industrial park", as recommended in the Land Use Element and discussed in other elements of this Plan. Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to consider the 3 0 Page 7 of 13 ATTACHMENT'B -FINDINGS" development of industrial parks. A majority of the City's M-1 lands are currently within a developed or planned industrial park. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable. Policy 4, Site Development. Ensure through the plan review process that all proposed developments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and are of the highest possible quality. Finding, Policy 4: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will be subject to all development requirements imposed within the M-1 district. Conclusion, Policy 4: Not Applicable. Policy 5, Site Development. Ensure that proposed development plans will not create obstacles to the future development of adjacent parcels. Finding, Policy 5: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district is relegated to the status of a conditional use. The purpose of this allowed use classification is to assure that any proposed Membership Warehouse Club does not create any adverse impacts on existing and future adjacent uses within the area relative to traffic circulation. Conclusion, Policy 5: Consistent. 6. Non-Financial Incentives to Development Policy 1, Non-Financial Incentives to Development. Strive toward implementation of the Comprehensive Plan to ensure the overall development of the community that will be attractive to prospective industries and will provide a high quality community in which to live. Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs within the M- 1 district will adversely affect the overall development of the City in such a manner that it would negatively affect the industrial attractiveness of Central Point as a place to live and do business. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not consistent. Policy 2, Non-Financial Incentives to Development. Undertake promotional opportunities that will emphasize the location and quality of the community and will demonstrate the long-range plans of the City. 31 Page 8 of 13 ATTACHMENT `B -FINDINGS" Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to undertake promotional opportunities. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable. Policy 3, Non-Financial Incentives to Development. Ensure that all future activities of the City are consistent with the goals directed toward continued improvement of the community. Finding, Policy 3: The process employed in the determination of Membership Warehouse Clubs as a "similar use" has included a comprehensive evaluation of such a decision with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the M-1 district. Membership Warehouse Clubs have been found not to be similar to other uses allowed within the M-1 district. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable. 7. Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development Policy 1, Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development. The City will consider legal tax concessions only as a last resort as an inducement to development. Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to propose, or otherwise address tax concessions as an inducement to development. Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable. Policy 2, Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development. Actions that could produce a short-term economic gain should be passed over if it could also detract from the quality of the environment and become a serious detriment to the long-range plans of the Community. Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district is considered as a short-term economic gain. Whether such a use would detract from the environment more so than other permitted uses is unknown. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not applicable. Policy 3, Financial Incentives, Assistance to Development. Investigate alternative financial incentives such as offering loan guarantees or direct loans financed through the issue of tax-free general obligation bonds floated by a local development corporation. 32 Page9of13 ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to develop financial incentives to encourage economic development. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable. 8. Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance Policy 1, Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance. Work with state agencies, including D.E.D, and the Department of Transportation to gain contact with firms seeking to relocate. Finding, Policy 1: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to work with state agencies to facilitate recruitment of firms. Conclusion, Policy 1: Not Applicable. Policy 2, Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance. Encourage the City's Economic Development Committee to take a leading role in advertising, promotion and prospect assistance. Finding, Policy 2: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to advertise, promote, or otherwise seek means of soliciting industrial development. Conclusion, Policy 2: Not Applicable. Policy 3, Advertising, Promotion, and Prospect Assistance. Consider the preparation of a brochure or other types of advertising materials that can be mass produced and appropriately distributed. Finding, Policy 3: The inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district will not affect the City's ability to advertise, promote, or otherwise seek means of soliciting industrial development. Conclusion, Policy 3: Not Applicable. 3 ~ Page 10 of 13 ATTACHMENT "B -FINDINGS" PART 4 -MEMBERSHIP WAREHOUSE CLUBS, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The proposed inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district has been evaluated against the applicable goals and policies of the City's Transportation Element (TSP). Consideration of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use is a land use action and would be evaluated against the Land Use goals and policies of the Transportation Element. The development of a Membership Warehouse Club would be subject to all transportations system standards applicable to all currently listed uses. Goal 3.1, Land Use: 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. Finding, Goa13.1: It has been previously found that Membership Warehouse Clubs are not a use consistent with the purpose of the M-1 district. Conclusion, Goa13.1: Not Applicable. Policy 3.3.1, 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. Finding, Policy 3.3.1, Land Use: It has been previously found that Membership Warehouse Clubs are not a use consistent with the purpose of the M-1 district. Conclusion, Policy 3.3.1, Land Use: The City's industrial land use districts are not appropriate locations for Membership Warehouse Clubs. Policy 3.1.2, Land Use: 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, Policy 3.1.2, Land Use: The proposed inclusion of Membership Warehouse Clubs as an allowed use within the M-1 district does not affect the City's planning for transit oriented development. Conclusion, Policy 3.1.2, Land Use: Not Applicable. 3 ~ Page 11 of 13 WILSON ROAD UGB EXPANSION PLAN City of Central Polnt, Oregon Planning Department 140 So.Thlyd St., Cenaal Point, Or 97502 Tom Humphrey, AICP, 547.664.3321 Fax 547.664.6384 Community Development Director/ www.ci.central-point.or.us Assistanttity Admin(strator - ~ -- CENTRAL POINT MEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Subject: Wilson Road UGB Expansion Plan Date: January 27, 2009 One of the by-products of the RPS process will be the need for each City to develop a land use plan for each. urban reserve area. Recently the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) received a state grant to develop a proto-type plan for one of the Regional Problem Solving (RPS) urban reserve areas. The RVMPO selected Central Point's Wilson Road (CP-2B) urban area. The RVMPO staff is working closely with City staff in the development of this plan, as well as other interested stakeholders (property owners). On November 25, 2008 the RVMPO held a well attended kick-off meeting. If all goes well, at some point the proposed Wilson Road plan will be considered by the CAC, Planning Commission, and ultimately the City Council for inclusion as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. At this time it is important to keep the CAC and the Planning Commission informed of the Wilson Road Plan progress. On January 29, 2009 the RVMPO has scheduled the second meeting. The agenda and information to be discussed is attached, and includes the following: 1. Agenda 2. Introductory email from Dick Converse 3. Technical Memorandum No. 1 4. Technical Memorandum No. 2 5. Technical Memorandum No. 4 It is not necessary that the CAC or the Planning Commission to attend the meeting. Staff will provide an update at the CAC and Planning Commission meetings. If you want to attend the RVMPO meetings you are more than welcome to do so. Rogue Valley Metropo/itan Planning Organization Regional Transportation Planning Ashland • Centrel Point • Eagle Point • Jacksonville • MedfoN • Phoenix •Talent • Whtte Ctty WILSON ROAD AREA UGB EXPANSION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING #1 6 P.M. JANUARY 29, 2009 RVCOG MEETING ROOM AGENDA 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Review Schedule The Statement of Work calls for the Advisory Committee to meet a minimum of three times. Staff will seek advice on the dates and times for the meetings, based on the tasks that lie ahead. 3. Review Technical Memorandum 1 and 3 Technical Memo 1 is a compilation of plans and policies that affect land use and transportation. No action is necessary, but clarifications or corrections are welcome. Technical Memo 2 includes project review criteria from a number of sources and, as a result, some concepts are repeated. The committee will be asked to select a set of criteria from among the lists and will be invited to suggest additional criteria. 4. Base Case Scenario The purpose of this task is to illustrate future land use and transportation conditions, assuming development types (residential, commercial, institutional, public/open space) and densities committed to in the RPS plan. For Central Point, the density scenario calls for a minimum of 6.0 units per acre. The base case maps will portray: • Land uses, including structures, roads, parks, etc.; • Potential Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations; • Road network, including functional classification; • Roadway level of service, including volume to capacity (V/C) ratios as available; • Pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including deficiencies for safe and convenient travel between destinations; and • Transit systems-routes and stops. 4. Review Technical Memorandum 4. Technical Memo 4 describes assumptions used to develop the base case scenario and other conditions and characteristics relating to land use and the transportation system. The committee will be asked to affirm the content of the memo or suggest changes. RVMPO Is staffed by Rogue Valley Council of Governments • 155 N. First St. • P 0 Box 3275 • Central Point OR 97502.541.6545674 Don Burt From: Dick Converse [dconverse@rvcog.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 5:40 AM To: Chris Borovansky; Kathy McCullough; Don Burt Cc: Sue Casavan Subject: FW: Wilson Road Area Study Map Attachments: 2MailStudyAreaWilson Rd_U RA1. pdf Sorry, I gave Sue some bad email addresses when she sent this to other committee members yesterday. Dick Converse Principal Planner Rogue Valley Council of Governments PO Box 3275 Central Point OR 97502 541.423.1373 From: Sue Casavan Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 3:55 PM To: Dick Converse; Dan Moore Subject: FW: Wilson Road Area Study Map FYI Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 1:32 PM To 'Chris Borovansky'; 'Connie Moczygemba'; 'Don Burf; 'Janet ]ones'; 'Joann Cernick'; Tustin Hurley'; 'Kathy McCullough'; 'Kay Harrison'; 'Mike Collins'; 'Mike Quilty'; 'Paige Townsend'; Shirley Roberts Subject: Wilson Road Area Study Map Dear Committee Members, The attachment is the first draft of the Wilson Road Study Area Plan. This is a very tentative depiction of potential zoning and traffic circulation that will serve as a foundation for our discussion Thursday evening. (If you are unable to attend the meeting, I would very much appreciate the opportunity to convey to the committee any comments you have.) As Memorandum 4 describes, the Regional Problem Solving project calls for four broad zoning allocations, with a further split of residential uses. The categories and their acreages are as follows: Low Mix Residential - 173 acres Medium Mix Residential - 93 acres Institutional (schools, etc.) - 26.5 acres Parks/Open Space: 20 acres Commercial 16.5 acres As shown in this scenario, institutional land includes the District 6 property north of Upton Road, and an area just west of the Medium Mix Residential area west of Table Rock Road. Parks and open space lands are shown near Bear Creek, and along the Bear Creek Orchard north of Upton Road. We have shown two nodes of commercial, both west of Gebhard Road. One site is near Wilson Road, and the other is adjacent to the Expo property. We are also showing two potential RVTD transit stops, realizing that there will likely be more. Please keep in mind that these allocations are simply a beginning point, showing only one of dozens of options. I look forward to seeing you Thursday evening. Dick Converse Principal Planner Rogue Valley Council of Governments PO Box 3275 Central Point OR 97502 541.423.1373 Rogue I/a//ey Metropolitan P/arming Organization Regional Transportation Planning Ashland • Central Point • Eegle Point • Jacksonville • MedPoN • Phoenix •Talent • White C8y TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 1 EXISTING PLANS, REGULATIONS & STANDARDS 1.1 Introduction This section summarizes plans and policies at the state, Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), county, and local level that directly affect land use and transportation planning in the City of Central Point and Jackson County. Although each document reviewed contains many policies, only those sections most pertinent were chosen for this examination. The purpose of this review is to provide a policy context for Urban Reserve Area planning. Applicable standards and policies are printed verbatim where possible, or paraphrased as necessary, leading to conclusions about the relationship to urban reserve area planning. Three jurisdictions are responsible for maintenance of public roads in the city: City of Central Point, Jackson County and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The policies, plans and standards governing each jurisdiction's roadway responsibilities are discussed below with a focus toward identifying impacts and influences on Central Point's transportation planning. Additionally, Central Point is within Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) planning area. The RVMPO coordinates transportation planning within the metropolitan planning area. This section begins with State of Oregon policy documents, followed by the RVMPO, Regional Problem Solving (RPS), Jackson County, and Central Point. 1.2 State of Oregon 1.2.1 Transportation Planning Rule The rule (Oregon Administrative Rules, Division 12, Section 660-012) implements Statewide Planning Goal 12, to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system, and provisions of other statewide planning goals related to transportation planning. The purpose is to direct transportation in coordination with land use planning and development. The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) was most recently amended in November 2006. The TPR requires cities, counties, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), and ODOT to adopt TSPs, addressing the following: • A determination of transportation needs; • A plan for a network of arterial and collector roads • A public transportation plan • A bicycle and pedestrian plan • Plans for air, rail, water and pipeline transportation RVMPO Is staffed by Rogue Valley Council of Govemmenls • 155 N. First St. • P 0 Box 3275 • Central Polnl OR 87502.541.6646874 • Plans for transportation system management and demand management • A parking plan • A financing program; and • Polices and land use regulations to implement TSP provisions. In MPO areas, local TSPs are to be designed to increase transportation choices and reduce reliance on the automobile. These factors also affect transit-oriented design. Protection of transportation facilities, corridors. Regulations to protect transportation facilities include: • Access controls; • Standards to protect future operations; • A coordinated review of land use decisions that affect transportation facilities; • A process to apply conditions on development to minimize transportation impacts; • Regulations to provide notice of potential impacts to affected agencies; and • Regulations assuring the land use, density and design decisions are consistent with function and performance standards in the TSP. Land use and subdivision regulation. Provisions for safe and convenient movement of pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles that are consistent with street function, including: • Bicycle parking for retail office, and institutional development, and multi-family residential development of four or more units; and • Sidewalks and bicycle paths within new development, and connecting to nearby neighborhoods, transit stops and activity centers; Support for transit. Regulations that encourage transit service and ridership, carpooling. • Provision of pull-outs, shelters and other amenities; • Walkways connecting to transit stops from retail, office and institutional uses; • Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools; and • Designation of densities and land uses to support transit service. Adopt land use and subdivision regulations to reduce reliance on the automobile. The RVMPO audit for an Integrated Land Use and Transportation Plan for Central Point (discussed below and submitted as Appendix A) contains measures to help reduce reliance on the automobile and contribute toward meeting the RVMPO Alternative Measures, which are noted in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) discussion below. The Alternative Measures set standards for meeting the TPR requirement to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the RVMPO area. Other measures include: A parking plan; and • Providing the most direct possible access for pedestrians and bicyclists. Minimum width standards for local streets. Establish street standards that minimize pavement width and rights-of--way consistent with operational requirements. Such measures reduce cost and discourage inappropriate traffic volumes and speeds, while providing adequate access for all emergency vehicles. Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 2 RVMPO maintains a Regional Transportation Plan that is updated every four years. Central Point is completing an update of its TSP. As of October 2008, the plan was in the public hearing phase. 1.2.2 Access Management The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requires local governments to adopt land use or subdivision ordinance regulations, consistent with applicable federal and state requirements, to protect transportation facilities, corridors and sites for their identified functions. Regulations include access control measures such as driveway and public road spacing, median control and signal spacing standards, which are consistent with functional classification. 1.2.3 Oregon Statewide Transportation Improvement Program The Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a four-year construction (2006- 2009), multi modal program that fulfills federal requirements. It is a compilation of projects utilizing various federal and state funding programs, and includes projects on the state, city and county transportation systems, and projects in the National Parks, National Forests, and Indian Reservations. Also included are projects fully funded by the metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) that are of regional interest or significance. The STIP is not a planning document; it is a project prioritization and scheduling document developed through various planning processes involving local and regional governments, transportation agencies, and the interested public. Through the STIP, ODOT allocates resources to the highest priority projects in these plans. The only STIP project located in Central Point is a jurisdictional transfer of a portion of Highway 99 from ODOT to the City. 1.2.4 Executive Orders on Quality Development and Sustainability Executive Order No. EO-00-23: Use of state resources to encourage the development of quality communities. The order adopted by the governor in August 2000 is intended to ensure that state programs and activities contribute to building and maintaining quality communities that are environmentally sound, offer affordable housing and a balance of jobs and housing to reduce transportation needs and the cost of providing services including transportation. The order has seven objectives, which state agencies should use in combination with state and local partnership principles and local development objectives. Objective 4 most closely relates to the TSP update. It reads: "Support development that is compatible with a community's ability to provide adequate public facilities and services." Executive Order No. EO-03-03: A sustainable Oregon for the 21s` century. The order recognizes that Oregon's economic recovery will be aided by establishing a commitment to lasting solutions that simultaneously address economic, environmental and community well- being. One aspect of well-being should not be traded against another. The order supports the goals of the Oregon Sustainability Act of 2001. Executive Order No. EO-06-14 establishing the Transportation and Tourism Task Force to synchronize tourism and transportation enhancement efforts statewide, including traveler information. Wilson Road Land Use Study Teckmical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 3 1.2.5 Oregon Transportation Plan The Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) adopted the Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) in 1999 and in September 2006 adopted a completely updated multi-modal plan. This Plan supersedes the 1992 Oregon Transportation Plan. The 1992 OTP established a vision of a balanced, multimodal transportation system and called for an expansion of ODOT's role in funding non-highway investments. With'fourteen years of experience and technological advances, the 2006 OTP provides a framework to further these policy objectives with emphasis on maintaining the assets in place, optimizing the existing system performance through technology and better system integration, creating sustainable funding and investing in strategic capacity enhancements. The OTP has four sections: (1) Challenges, Opportunities, and Vision; (2) Goals, Policies and Strategies; 3) Summary of Financial and Technical Analyses; and (4) Implementation. The OTP meets a legal requirement that the OTC develop and maintain a plan for a multimodal transportation system for Oregon. The OTP also implements the federal requirements for a state transportation plan. The OTP also meets land use planning requirements for State agency coordination and the Goal 12 Transportation Planning Rule. This rule requires ODOT, the cities, and the counties of Oregon to cooperate and to develop balanced transportation systems. 1.2.6 Oregon Public Transportation Plan (1997) The Public Transportation plan focuses primarily on public transportation in metropolitan and urban areas. The following optimum (plan Leve13) public transportation level of service standards for urban areas envisions increased funding and applies for conditions in the year 2015. Leve13 standards include: • Increase services to enable metropolitan areas to respond to TPR requirements for per-capita reduction in vehicle miles traveled; • Provide services to all parts of the urbanized area; • Provide service frequencies for all routes at no less than one-half hour at peak periods; • Provide service at no less that one-hour frequencies for off-peak services on all routes, or make a guaranteed ride home program available; • Provide park-and-ride facilities along major rail or bus corridors to meet reasonable peak and off-peak demand for such facilities; • Provide services with regular, convenient connections to all intercity modes and terminals; and • Provide sufficient service levels to public transportation-oriented development to achieve usage goals of the development. Leve12 service standards would allow transit service to expand at pace with population; and Level 1 would maintain existing service. In addition to public transportation, the plan also describes rail standards and minimum level of service standards for intercity bus service. 1.2.7 Oregon Bike and Pedestrian Plan (1999) The goal of this plan is to provide safe, accessible and convenient bicycling and walking facilities and to support and encourage increased levels of bicycling and walking. The plan identifies policies, classification of bikeways, construction and maintenance guidelines, and Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 4 suggested actions to achieve these objectives. These actions are: (1) provide bikeway and walkway systems that are integrated with other transportation systems; (2) create a safe, convenient, and attractive bicycling and walking environment, and (3) develop education programs that improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. 1.3 Regional and County Plans Central Point is in the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning organization and is adjacent to land under the jurisdiction of Jackson County, so planning at the county and regional level impacts the city. City transportation projects that are federally funded and of regional significance must be part of the RVMPO planning process. 1.3.1 Regional Transportation Plan, Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is the long-range, multimodal transportation plan for the Rogue Valley metropolitan area. Because of it proximity to Medford, Central Point was included when the MPO was first formed. A result of the 2000 U.S. Census was the expansion of the Medford urbanized area to include Jacksonville, Eagle Point, Talent, and Ashland. Central Point participated in the drafting and adoption of the 2005-2030 RTP. The plan meets federal mandates by meeting standards for air quality and by being fully funded. The RTP serves as a guide for managing existing transportation facilities and for the design and implementation of future transportation facilities. It provides the framework and policy foundation for decision making. The plan's Guiding Principles rely heavily on increasing facility efficiency, supporting alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles and balancing competing demands for services and resources. The plan's projections include forecasts for population and employment, and expectations based on results oftravel-demand modeling. Projects listed in the RTP are either Tier 1 (funded) or Tier 2 (no funding identified). ~entrat rotnt Ke tonal tr ans ort:atton rtan ro ects, t ter ~ ~ 4 ~ I ~ i` F ~~Y t: y; +^t~ ~ ~ ~ ; w ~t ~ ~`~ Ci ~~ O 4 , ~ J ~ ~ C ~T, ~t r / It ~ t * i --. t $ $ , ~, , F t .s n,d :" t, i`a~'~ , ~~e . ~ .AYuCF i fr1~6i.kt : ~A#r~ ~ , ~' - ~ ~x, . i . uG~'£ ~ 200 LaurehSt., N. 9th to Pave and Improve Short $166,000 N. 10 CMAQ 201 N. 9th St., Laurel Pave and improve Short $489 000 St. to Cher St. CMAQ , Haskell St. Pine Widen to add 202 , St. to Snowy Butte continuous turn lane Short $750,000 Rd with bike lanes and . sidewalks Widen to add 203 10th St., Hazel St. continuous turn lane Short $1 250,000 to Scenic Ave. with bike lanes and , sidewalks R/R X-ing between 204 Pine St. and At-grade R/R X-ing Shorty $1,600,000 Scenic Rd. Upton Rd., Widen to two lanes 205 approaches to I-5 with bike lanes and Shdrt °$775,000 overcrossin sidewalks Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum # 1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 5 '.. ' a ..c' ., f -. r sd~ eE a ~ ~ ~-'ti q L -~ . Intersection of Change alignment at 206 Upton Rd., 3rd St., intersection, add ' , Short $375 000 Scenic Ave. and sidewalks & bike , Tenth St. lanes E. Pine St., Bear Widen for turn lanes 207 Creek Bridge to and bike lanes, add Short $140;000 $5,547,000 .$5,555,000 Penin er Rd. sidewalks Remove 4th St. 208 E Pine St signal, add new . . signals at 2nd St. and B1h St. E. Pine St. and Upgrade traffic 209 Third St. signals Intersection 210 OR 99, Pine St. to Provide bike lanes $ , g .. Griffin Creek Rd. and sidewalks Construct bulb outs, 211 Pine St. traffic and bike lanes and - t calming sidewalk im rovements ' New Haven Rd. Add signal for ~; 212 and Hamrick Rd. pedestrian crossing `' intersection Beebe Rd. and Add signal for ' '~ 213 Hamrick Rd. pedestrian crossing ;, intersection Widen to add 214 Freeman Rd., Oak continuous turn lane bong $1,898,000.: St, to Hopkins Rd. with bike lanes and sidewalks Scenic Ave., ' Change alignment, 215 Mary s Way to widen to add bike Long $630,000 Scenic Middle lanes & sidewalks School Taylor Rd., Valley Replace box culvert 216 Oak Dr. to Haskell and transition to new Long, $1,000,000 St. E-W sections Scenic Ave. 10th Widen to add 217 , St, to Scenic continuous turn lane Long $1,035,000 Middle School with bike lanes and sidewalks OR 99 and Beall Change alignment ` 218 Lane intersection and upgrade signals Long $500,000 and R/R X-in 219 Hazel St., 3rd St. to Provide sidewalks, Long $300,000 10th St. re air curb and utter 220 3rd St., E. Pine St. Add bike lanes and Long $225,000 $5,597,000 $5,597,000' to Hazel St. sidewalks E. Pine St., Widen for decel/accel 221 Hamrick Rd. to lanes, add bike lanes Tier 2 $355,000 Bear Creek Bride and sidewalks Gebhard Rd. UGB Widen to add 222 , limits to Beebe Rd continuous turn lane Tier 2 $1,817,000 . with bike lanes and Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1-Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 6 sidewalks Beebe Rd. Widen to add 223 , Hamrick Rd. to continuous turn lane Tier 2 $934 000 Gebhard Rd. with bike lanes and , sidewalks Bursell Rd. Beall Widen to lwo lanes 224 , to Hopkins with bike lanes and Tier 2 $1,262,000 sidewalks Widen to add 225 W Pine St., Hanley continuous turn lane Tier2 $1 312 000 Rd. to Haskell St. with bike lanes and , , sidewalks Widen to add 226 10th St., E. Pine continuous turn lane Tier 2 $500 000 St. to Hazel St. with bike lanes and , sidewalks Scenic Ave and Add traffic signal and 227 . OR 99 intersection change alignment at Tier 2 $375,000 intersection OR 99 Beall Ln. to Widen to provide 228 , Pine St bike lanes and Tier 2 $900,000 $7,455,000 $0 . sidewalks The plan's Alternative Measures section meets state planning requirements for MPOs contained in the Transportation Planning Rule. Alternative Measures set benchmarks for urban areas that, in general, encourage development of compact, pedestrian friendly development. The measures were adopted after travel-demand modeling for the 2000 RTP showed that the region could expect at 2.5 percent per capita reduction in vehicle miles traveled, falling short of the required 5 percent reduction. The Measures seek to: 1. Increase bicycle, pedestrian and transit use; 2. Increase percentage of dwelling units within '/4-mile of transit; 3. Increase percentage of arterials and collectors with bicycle facilities; 4. Increase percentage of housing and jobs in mixed-use development near activity centers; and 5. Increase transit funding on a regional (RVMPO) basis. 1.3.2 Transportation Improvement Program The RVMPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) identifies transportation projects in the planning region that are expected to be funded in the federal fiscal years 2008-1 I. Project in the TIP are drawn from the RTP. The TIP, like the RTP, meets air quality conformity requirements. 1.3.3 Air Quality Conformity Central Point is within the Medford-Ashland Air Quality Maintenance Area and under state Department of Environmental Quality rules, the region must show conformity with emission standards for particulates, specifically PMto, and carbon monoxide in the Medford UGB. The Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization performs a conformity determination for all federally funded, regionally significant projects in the RTP and TIP. Therefore, Central Point projects listed in those documents must meet air quality standards. Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page'J 1.3.4 Baseline Environmental Data 1.3.4.1 RVMPO Environmental Review In late 2006 and early 2007, the RVMPO conducted a survey of environmental features within the MPO planning area to conform to new federal requirements. The survey used available local, state and federal conservation plans, maps and inventories of historic and natural resources. • U.S. Department of Agriculture, Class 1 and 2 soils, which have the least amount of restrictions to their use and are considered most valuable for agriculture and conservation. Class 2 soils (irrigated) cover portions of the area west of Gebhard Road. A small area of Class 1 soils is west of Upton Road. • Wetlands, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), and Jackson County's Goa15 Inventory of Natural Areas. Several small wetlands exist throughout the study area. Critical wildlife habitats, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife areas for deer, elk, Coho salmon and vernal pools. The study area is not critical deer or elk winter range. Bear Creek contains coho salmon. Vernal pools occupy the area east of Gebhard Road. • Clean Water Act directive 303(d) listing of impaired waters lists Bear Creek and its tributaries, monitored for bacteria and temperature. 1.3.4.2 Statewide Land Use Goal 5 Goa15 addresses many of the same features addressed in the previous two sections by the RVMPO and the City of Central Point. The Goal covers more than a dozen resources including wildlife habitats, historic places and aggregate. It contains measures intended to avoid duplication with other state or federal programs that address resources. The goal sets up a planning process to protect resources that includes: an inventory; identification of potential conflicts with existing or proposed uses; analysis of the consequences of the conflicts; a decision onprotections needed; and adoption of measures to put protection policies into effect. Goa15 resources not addressed in the programs described above include options for local governments to designate open space and scenic views and sites. 1.3.5 Jackson County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Transportation System Plan The Jackson County Comprehensive Plan is the official long-range land use policy document for Jackson County. The plan sets forth general land use planning policies and allocates land uses into resource, residential, commercial and industrial categories. The plan serves as the basis for the coordinated development of physical resources, and the development or redevelopment of the county based on physical, social, economic and environmental factors. The Board of County Commissioners updated the 1989 plan in early 2004, and the revised plan took effect in March 2004. For the most part, the Comprehensive Plan guides rural development in Jackson County, but some policies affect cities as well. Urban Lands Element: GOAL: TO PROVIDE FOR AN ORDERLY, EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND PLAN FOR URBAN LAND USES WITHIN URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES. Policy #1: Jackson County shall maintain along-range commitment to the implementation of urban centered growth. Transportation Element: Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 8 Jackson County updated its Transportation System Plan in 2004. The plan is the county's long- range guide to managing and developing multi-modal transportation facilities within the county. It sets system goals and policies for livability, the modal components and integration with land use planning, financial and environmental planning. Gebhard Road, Upton Road, and Wilson Road are county roads serving the study area. Farther to the east is Table Rock Road, also a county road. 1.4 City Plans and Studies 1.4.1 Central Point Comprehensive Land Use Plan Agricultural Lands (Goa13) 3-9 Every effort will be made to reduce urban-agricultural conflicts by: discouraging "leap- frog" development that is inconsistent with urbanization policies dealing with the phasing of development; providing appropriate buffers between urban land uses and intensive agricultural uses, with emphasis on the periphery of the urban growth boundary; and supporting efforts by the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service and the Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District to promote best Management practices reducing soil erosion and excessive irrigation boundary. Air, water and land resources (Goa16) 3-15 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 areas. 3-16 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. 3-31 In conjunction with flood hazard reduction and established greenway policies, Central Point will encourage all new construction to set back a minimum of 100 feet from 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 urban growth boundary area. 3-36 To develop and adopt a long range environmental management plan that will help to guide future growth and development of Central Point, in balance with the physical requirements and continued enhancement of the natural environment. 3-37 To maximize the use of public rights-of--way and publicly held lands for open space, conservation, and environmental protection purposes. 3-39 To develop a plan and policies that will provide for urban development in a marmer that is compatible with adjacent resource lands, including agricultural lands. Energy Conservation (Goal 13) Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 9 3-45 To provide for energy efficient design in all new development that maximizes the use of natural environmental features, including topography, natural vegetation and trees, and proper solar orientation. 3-46 To ensure, through the comprehensive plan and zoning, the most energy-efficient arrangement of land uses and neighborhoods. 3-47 To minimize transportation-related energy consumption through appropriate land use planning and an emphasis on non-motorized transportation alternatives. 3-55 The city will encourage attached or clustered housing whenever such development would result in substantial energy conservation; or in areas of natural vegetation where con- ventional housing or subdivisions would have a detrimental impact on the natural environment. 3-60 The city will strive for energy-efficient future neighborhoods by providing for future residential development that is based on the "neighborhood concept". 3-61 The city will minimize the costs of and energy consumed in the provision of urban facilities such as streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, etc., through the encouragement of planned unit developments and cluster housing that utilize cul-de-sac streets, private streets, and interior common areas with walkways and bikeways. 3-64 The city will consider modifications to existing ordinances that will add requirements for bicycle paths and walkways within planned unit developments, clustered residential development and other proposed development that includes common open space areas suitable for such trails. 3-65 The city will continue to support and promote carpooling and public transit (bus) service to Central Point. 3-67 The city will provide for highest residential densities along major arterial streets and in the vicinity of major activity centers in order to maximize convenience and access, encourage pedestrian trips, and maximize the cost effectiveness of public transit. 3-68 Whenever possible, the city will encourage non-motorized forms of transportation to lessen the dependence on the private automobile for short trips and commuting. 3-70 The city supports the county's proposed development of the Bear Creek Greenway pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian system as an important project that will encourage non-motorized travel. Transportation (Goal 12) Wilson Road Land Use Study Teclmical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 10 To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. 4-3 Work with transportation officials and the county to create an additional access point from the I-5 Freeway to Expo Park. (Possibilities should include a frontage road off-ramp for northbound traffic north of Pine Street, and the possible improvement of the Upton Road bridge to include freeway access.) 4-5 Include in all future specific or neighborhood plans, provisions for reducing through traffic in residential neighborhoods. 4-10 Include considerations of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in all street improvements and in the design of new streets. 4-11 Consider the need to develop a street tree and landscaping plan for all city streets, including guidelines for new subdivisions that will increase the visual appearance of the development. 4-12 In future planning, continue to emphasize the most efficient use of the automobile within the community and also provide for non-motorized transportation alternatives, with emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle facilities. 1.4.2 Central Point Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance City ordinances governing transportation facilities generally are found in the municipal code in Title 16, Subdivision Regulations; and Title 17, Zoning (defining uses that require traffic and parking plans). Title 16: Land Division Regulations -enacts subdivision and land partition regulations including standards for public and private streets, including engineering and construction standards. Title 17: Zoning -Defines city land use zones. Chapter 17.65 establishes standards for transit oriented development (TOD), including uses and standards for design, circulation, and access. 1.4.3 RVMPO Integrated Land Use and Transportation Plan The RVMPO in 2004 conducted audits of development regulations in several cities including Central Point to determine the steps participating jurisdictions would need to take to achieve an integrated land use and transportation plan, as required by the TPR. In Central Point, the audit identified several provisions that support the integrated planning requirement. It also made recommendations and proposed specific code changes. Recommendations included: • Establish maximum lot sizes. While most zoning ordinances include minimum parcel sizes, they do not have maximum parcel sizes. The model code recommends that single-family zones have a maximum size of 120 percent of the minimum size; e.g., 8,400 square feet in an SF-6 zone. Inmulti-family zones, the recommendation is 150 percent of the minimum. • Allow mixed use residential in commercial zones. This would allow developments similar to Four Oaks in other zones. • Increase lot coverage [and building height?] where transportation facilities and public safety measures can be achieved. Current coverage requirements for single-family and multi-family Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 11 districts are in the middle of the ranges suggested by the Model Development Code. For example, the RL zone limits coverage to 35 percent, while the model code suggests a range from 30-40 percent. The R-2 and R-3 zones limit coverage to 50 percent, while the model code suggests 40-60 percent. Central Point could increase its coverage, but it is clearly consistent with current standards. • Consider requiring a portion of a commercial building to be at the property line, with entrances oriented to street to encourage pedestrian use. • Provide measures for evaluating proximity of transit to commercial uses in other than the TOD sites. • As in many communities, Central Point's street design standards call for wider streets than the Model Code recommends. To be consistent with the goal of providing narrower streets, evaluate the standards in the Model Code when updating the Transportation System Plan. 1.5 Conclusion Central Point's policies and ordinances promote compact, mixed use, transit-oriented design. Twin Creeks is among the first TOD developments in the Jackson County, and the ordinances that facilitated it can be applied to the urban reserve areas as well. The ILUTP audit identified a few potential amendments that would enhance land use and transportation planning. RVMPO staff will include these amendments as it develops design options for the project area. Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #1 -Existing Plans, Regulations, and Standards Page 12 ~ Rogue l/alley ~ ~ Metropolitan P/arming Organization ~ ~ Regional Transportation Planning _ - ___ I Ashland • Centrel Point • Eagle Point • Jacksonville • Med/ord • Phoenix •Telent • Whife City WILSON ROAD AREA UGB EXPANSION PLAN TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2 PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA The purpose of this task is to draft criteria to be used in evaluating alternative demonstration master plans for the URB in Technical Memorandum 2. Factors to be considered include: • Level of service and volume to capacity ratios • Total vehicle miles traveled • Trip length and purpose • Travel time and accessibility The Leadership in Energy and Design (LEED) program outlines a number of strategies for improving the connection between transportation and land use. The following criteria are based on LEED. • Increase density to reduce vehicle travel • Increase land use mix, including housing, commercial, and institutional. • Locate near regional urban center • Increase the portion of commercial, employment, and other activities in major activity centers • Increase the degree that walkways and roads are connected to allow direct travel between destinations • Provide multi-modal streets that help reduce motor vehicle traffic and increase walking and cycling. • Increase the quantity, quality, and security of sidewalks, crosswalks, paths, and bike lanes. • Increase transit service and accessibility • Provide financial incentives that encourage use of efficient travel modes. Source: US Green Building Council New Urbanism features • Rectilinear street grid • Narrow streets • Sidewalks at curb • On-street parking/structured parking • Alleys behind buildings • Semi-enclosed spaces • Shallow setbacks • Street-level shopping • Mixed-use neighborhoods RVMPO Is staffed by Rogue Valley Councli of Governments • 165 N. First St. • P 0 Box 3275 • Central Point OR 97502.547.6646674 21 S` Century Land Development Code TODs support: • Increased density along transit corridors; • Location of residences, jobs, and retail destinations close to public transit facilities; • Provision of mixed-use development within walking distance of residential areas; • Development of a multimodal, interconnected transportation network; and • Development of urban design guidelines that encourage a more pedestrian and walkable community. Guiding Principles • Site must be located on an existing or planned transit line, and land-use patterns should lead transit service planning • Site must be mixed use and must contain a minimum of public, core commercial, and residential uses • Site must provide a mix of residential densities, housing types, ownership patterns, and prices. • Street system should be simple, connected, and pedestrian friendly • Buildings should be oriented to the street, with parking to the rear, and should be accessible on foot. • The site should meet minimum size requirements to provide a mix of uses. • The project should adhere to a "specific area plan." Design elements Travel Connections • Convenient and direct pedestrian connections Pedestrian-scale blocks Interconnected street network • Bicycle circulation and parking Building Scale and Orientation • Human-scale architecture • Buildings and entrances oriented along the street Public Spaces • Pedestrian-friendly streets • Structured and shared parking Land Use • Mixed-use buildings and neighborhoods • Increased density in neighborhood centers Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas. Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration. Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #2 -Review Criteria Page 2 The preceding criteria will be reviewed and amended as necessary by the Advisory Committee at its first meeting. Wilson Road Land Use Study Teclmical Memorandum #2 -Review Criteria Page 3 ~ 7 ~~ ~ Rogue I/al/ey Metropo/itan Planning Organization -- -------------------- ----------- Regional Transportation Planning Ashland • Central Point • Eagle Polnf • Jacksonville • Medford • Phoenix •Telenf • WhRe qty WILSON ROAD AREA UGB EXPANSION PLAN TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 4 RPS BASE CASE SCENARIO 4.1 Introduction This section summarizes assumptions used to describe, map, and illustrate potential future land use and transportation in Regional Problem Solving (RPS) future growth area CP-2B, consistent with the residential densities and mix of land uses committed to by Central Point in the RPS Plan. The RPS Plan seeks to increase urban residential densities throughout the region, and for Central Point the aim is to increase from the current density of 5.5 units per acre to 6 units. The plan also requires cities to develop conceptual land use plans for urban reserve areas in sufficient detail to allow the region to size, locate, and protect regionally significant transportation corridors. 4.2 Land Use Area CP-2B includes 329 acres, of which approximately 38 percent of the land is zoned residential and the remaining land is zoned Exclusive Farm Use. The RPS plan increases the residential portion to 81 percent, with 8 percent institutional, 6 percent open space/parks, and 5 percent commercial. This translates to the following acreages for each use: • Residential: 266 acres • Institutional: 26.5 acres (school district property is 16.5 acres, leaving 10 additional for other institutional uses); • Parks/Open Space: 20 acres • Commercial: 16.5 acres Oregon statutes prescribe a method for conducting buildable land inventories, and recommend subtraction of 23 to 31 percent from residential acreage to account for roads and public uses. Because institutional and park uses are listed separately in the RPS allocations, it is reasonable to subtract the lower percentage, leaving approximately 205 acres available for residential development. The residential acreage in area CP-2B accounts for slightly less than 30 percent of the anticipated residential land in all of Central Point's growth areas. The RPS plan assumes a future population increase of 22,898, of which 4,742 residents can be accommodated inside the existing urban growth boundary. Assuming an equal distribution of the remaining 18,156 residents among all future growth areas, the future population for CP-2B would be 5,374. With a household size of 2.69 persons, nearly 2,000 dwellings units will be required in this area, RVMPO Is staffed by Rogue Valley Council at Govemmenle • 155 N. First St. • P 0 Box 3275 • Central Point OR 97502.547.854.5674 Table 4-1 illustrates several residential growth scenarios, reflecting TOD zones already in the Central Point Municipal Code and in place at the Twin Creeks planned development. The table includes Low Mix Residential (LMR 6-12 units per acre) and Medium Mix Residential (MMR 16-32 units per acre). It does not include HMR (High Mix Residential), which requires a minimum density of 30 units per acre. For comparison purposes, the table also includes R-1-6 and R-1-10 zones that reflect land uses inside the city and adjacent to the future growth area. The RPS process further assumes a split of 65 percent single-family residential and 35 percent multiple-family residential. This scenario results in 133 acres for single-family development and 72 for multiple-family residential. Table 4-1 Land Use Scenarios TOD Residentlal High Density Land Use Scenario Densities Land Density Density Usable Housing Average Lot Use Range Assumption Units Acres Mix Size Sq/ft Units/Ac Average LMR 6 -12 12 1 596 133 55% Overall Units/Ac , Density 3,630 MMR 18 - 32 32 2 304 72 35% Units/Ac , 1,361 Totals 3,9 00 205 100% 19 Units/acre i$~~' ~ ~ ~ ~~ fi ~ ~~~~~ ~ ° )), t"' ~ t ~ ° i ~~ E ~t~x~2.~ ~'~t~S~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~~ x , : ,a! ld n 4 A , . v .e :4 . ,' L V,h. . 1 f cer,t ~,s l ~:_ t`h. .r ai TOD Residentlal Densities Medlum-High Density Land Use Scenario Land Density Density Usable Housing Average Lot Use Range assumption Units Acres Mix Size Sq/ft Units/Ac Average LMR 8-12 8.5 1 131 133 55% Overall Units/Ac , Density 5,125 MMR 18 - 32 24 1 728 72 35% Units/Ac , 1,815 Totals 2,859 205 100% 14 Units/ acre ,y~y y~ ~d //v` d '+)~ e P' !3~ ' ' "" ~ f {.y ~ 4 q:c. < lJ 1 b3Y F ~ z! S. S~ ~ ~ ~ b~ ~ ~ ~t ~.+ R ~?a ~ ~ t } 4 ~. t ~fZ 14 ~ : F. ~ f :.Slv -x,c ufW $. „.i ..g i. ~., x? ~.A ,..L ~.. a i< .v ~i~ ~25. 3„~X 4n ~ i. ~.L . n.f itA~r ,£ +'iy TOD Residential Densities Medium Density Land Use Scenario Land Density Density Usable Housing Average Lot Use Range assumption Units Acres Mix Size Sq/ft Units/Ac Average 6 -12 Overall LMR Units/Ac 6 798 133 85% Density 7,280 MMR 18-32 16 1 152 72 35% Units/Ac , 2,723 Totals 1,950 205 100% 10 Units/ acre rn ! x t ' f~i i '~' t ~ f ) $'a .$~A S j~. ~~ , f T 's a ~ Y. ~~r~. Hr ~r f g'.. ~r1 .+~' . a> f 5 i . ~ r ir, t ci 1 } il i +.t ~-, v F f xqf r~ ~ ~ Y'~ n ,~~ (+vs ~ a t.a. } a{'^ s.~~i i~ ~%, ~. , v M1µ/ ~ SS Residential Densities Low Density Land Use Scenario Land Density Density Usable Housing Average Average Lot Use Range Assumption Units Acres Mix Overall Size Sq/ft Units/Ac Density Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #4 -Base Case Scenario Page 2 R 1-8 i 6 798 133 65% Un ts/Ac 7 280 R 1-10 1-10 Units/Ac 10 720 72 35% 4,356 Totals 1,518 205 100% 7 Units/ acre The table shows that a Medium density scenario will allow approximately 1,950 units. Slight increases to units per acre, e.g., 6.5 units per acre in the LMR zone, can easily accommodate 50 additional units and achieve a total of 2,000 units. The TOD zones contain standards that must be addressed as the area develops and can serve as guidelines for developing scenarios. • Mixed use development must have 2 housing types for 16-40 units, and 3 or more building types for greater than 40 units. (Because the area is being master planned, 3 or more house types will be necessary.) • Block perimeters cannot exceed 1600 feet. • Blocks cannot exceed 500 feet between streets. • Connections shall be provided between new streets in a TOD district or corridor and existing local and minor collector streets. • Pedestrian/Bike accessways may be designed within and outside of public street rights- of-way • Parking lot driveways 100 feet or longer are to be designed as private streets. • Design in context with surroundings. • Cluster to preserve natural areas. • Limit impact of development on steep slopes, wetlands, and stream corridors. • Whenever possible, preserve opens spaces such as wetlands, groves, and natural areas. • Preserve important views. (Portions of the study area include views of the Table Rocks, Mt. McLoughlin, and the mountains at the south valley boundary.) • Solar orientation. • New prominent buildings -community centers, churches, schools, libraries, post offices, and museums - should be placed in prominent places. • Minimize effect of more intensive uses on residential uses and of high-density housing on lower density housing. • Zoning changes should occur midblock • Parking to side and rear. If at side, no more than 50 percent of frontage of total site frontage. • Extensive landscaping. To soften the effect of high impact uses on neighborhoods, the ordinance establishes the following sequence of increasing intensities. • Large lot SFR • Small lot SFR • Duplexes, townhomes, and courtyard multifamily apartments • Large apartments • Mixed use buildings. Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #4 -Base Case Scenario Page 3 Municipal Code Section 17.67.060 provides these guidelines for parks: • Within walking distance of all areas in TOD • Primarily in residential areas • Need to have 400 square feet of parks and open space for each single-family dwelling, 600 square feet for each multi-family dwelling, and 10 percent ofnon-residential. If one assumes all units in the LMR zone are single-family and all units in the MMR are multiple-family, 23.7 acres of parks and open space would be needed. This slightly exceeds the 20 acres set aside in the RPS plan for parks and open space, but additional open space maybe available as part of institutional development. 4.3 Transportation The Central Point Transportation System Plan identifies roadway deficiencies through 2020 and recommends improvements. The plan does not identify projects in CP-2B because it is outside the Urban Growth Boundary; however several projects can significantly affect development of the study area. Central Point's policy is to maintain a minimum Level of Service "D"peak hour street standard for city streets. (ODOT uses a volume to capacity (V/C) ratio for roads under its jurisdiction, and sets .90 as its maximum standard.) Two projects to the southeast of the study area will be necessary to maintain this standard. 1. Gebhard Road extension By 2020, it is forecast that Gebhard Road will be extended to intersect with East Pine Street approximately 700 feet west of Hamrick Road. In addition to the extension of Gebhard Road, its intersection with East Pine Street would need to be signalized. 2. Hamrick Road & East Pine Street & Table Rock Road/Biddle Road Major capacity improvements are necessary for these intersections to accommodate heavy left-turn volume demand and added traffic due to development along East Pine Street that will use existing and proposed cross-streets versus direct access to East Pine Street 4.3.1 Future Conditions By 2030, Gebhard at Wilson will be LOS B, but all other intersections at Hamrick and East Pine will be LOS F by 2030. The Gebhard/Wilson rating does not reflect its inclusion within a future growth area. ODOT's Transportation Analysis Unit (TPAU) will evaluate the effect of proposed land uses to determine its future LOS. Table 4-2 shows morning and evening peak hour LOS or V/C ratings in 2006, 2010, 2020, and 2030 for intersections in and near the study area. Table 4-2 AM and PM Peak Hour Ratings Intersection Mornin Peak Hour Evenin Peak Hour Beebe & Hamrick 2006: LOSE 2006: LOS F 2010: LOS F/B (Signal) 2010: LOS F/B (Signal) 2020: LOS F/B Si nal 2020: LOS F/B Si nal Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #4 -Base Case Scenario Page 4 Intersection Mornin Peak Hour Evenin Peak Hour 2030: LOS F/B (Si nal 2030: LOS F/C Si nal Hamrick & East Pine 2006: LOS B 2006: LOS C 2010: LOS C 2010: LOS D 2020: LOS C 2020: LOS F 2030: LOS C 2030: LOS F Peninger & East Pine 2006: V/C.61 2006: V/C .82 2010: V/C .67 2010: V/C .94 2020: V/C .56 2020: V/C .80 2030: V/C .56 2030: V/C .80 Upton &Peninger 2006: LOS A 2006: LOS B 2010: LOS B 2010: LOS B 2020: LOS B 2020: LOS B 2030: LOS B 2030: LOS C Wilson & Table Rock 2006: LOS D 2006: LOS D 2010: LOS F 2010: LOS F 2020: LOS F 2020: LOS F 2030: LOS F 2030: LOS F Gebhard & Wilson 2006: LOS A 2006: LOS B 2010: LOS B 2010: LOS B 2020: LOS B 2020: LOS B 2030: LOS B 2030: LOS B Gebhard & East Pine 2020: LOS B 2020: LOS F Constructed after 2010 2030: LOS C 2030: LOS F 4.3.2 Identified projects To address the anticipated traffic congestion reflected in Table 4.2, Central Point identified the following improvements and the projected year of completion. • New Haven Road & Hamrick Intersection Install traffic signal for pedestrian crossing when warranted by traffic volumes and pedestrian activity. 2012 • Beebe Road; Gebhard to Hamrick Widen to collector standard with sidewalks and bike lanes. 2017 • Beebe Road & Hamrick Road intersection Add traffic signal for pedestrian crossing. 2012 • Table Rock Road & South Hamrick Road intersection Add traffic signal. 2017 • East Pine Street & Hamrick Road intersection Widen west and south approaches to add a second eastbound left turn and second receiving lane. Restripe northbound approach to include dual left turns and a single Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #4 -Base Case Scenario Page 5 through-shared-right turn. Restripe southbound approach to include a left turn, through, and exclusive right turn lanes. 2012 • East Pine Street & Table Rock Road Widen west approaches to add second eastbound left turn lane. 2012 • Table Rock Road & Vilas Road intersection Widen to increase capacity, add east bound land & shared through-right turn movement. 2012 • Gebhard Road; UGB to Beebe Road. Realign, widen to 3 lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks, urban upgrade (collector standard) 2017 • East Pine Street; I-5 to Peninger Add right turn lane with sidewalks. 2030 • East Pine Street traffic calming Miscellaneous enhancements such as bulbouts, cross-walks, signals, etc, that improve the pedestrian environment along Pine Street (west of freeway?) 2030 • East Pine Street; Hamrick Road to Bear Creek Bridge Widen for deceleration lane; add bicycle lanes and sidewalks. 2031 • East Pine Street; Bear Creek Bridge to Peninger Road Widen for turn lanes, bike lanes; add sidewalks; add third lane. 2017 • Upton Road, Scenic Avenue, Raymond Street Widen to rura121anes with bike lanes, sidewalks. 2031. (Partially complete as part of the freeway overpass project) • Peninger Road project Extend Peninger Road from East pine Street north across Bear Creek to Beebe Road. Remove signal at Peninger/Pine Street and construct bridge across Bear Creek. Also, extend Peninger Road south across Bear-Creek to intersect with South Hamrick Road. 2031 Roads currently serving the study area are Upton Road, Wilson Road, and Gebhard Road. A network of new collector and local streets will be required to serve the area. The Street Construction standards of the Public Works Department will be followed in determining appropriate location of transportation facilities. These standards include the following minimum street separations, depending on street status. • Major Arterials: 1000' from other arterials and collectors; 750' from local streets • Secondary: 1000'from major; 750' from secondary; 500' from collector and local • Collector: same as above, but 300' from local • Local: 750'from major; 500' from secondary; 300' from collector; 150' from local Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #4 -Base Case Scenario Page 6 The map includes several proposed connections. These will be refined throughout the planning process, but are intended to provide routes for transit users, pedestrians, and bikers. The TSP calls for an Upton Road to Wilson road cut-off to replace two existing 90 degree curves. This concept is reflected in the map, but at a slightly different location to avoid encroaching on the farm land north of the study area. The map also shows new routes connecting Peninger Road and Gebhard Road. RVTD does not currently serve the area, but intends to expand to include all RPS growth areas in its boundary. At this point, the district includes only the eastern portion of the study area. RVTD prefers a density of 12-15 units per acre within''/4 mile of its routes. RVTD recommends higher density housing near the eastern edge of the study area, within its current sphere of influence. As a starting point, the maps show transit routes along Upton/Wilson Road, and Gebhard Road, with stops near high density residential and commercial nodes. These routes may be expanded as the land use scenarios are refined. In June 2004, Jackson County School District #6 purchased 16.5 acres of property across Upton Road from the ball fields. At this point, the district does not have specific plans for the site, but it is large enough to accommodate a middle school or high school. The proximity to the ball fields and Bear Creek make it attractive for one or more of the small schools that now make up Crater High School. The site is deemed too large for an elementary school, although a portion of the property could be used for a school and the rest could be sold. While there are no immediate plans to develop the site, its recent purchase demonstrates the district's interest in preserving a number of options for its future use. While not in the study area, the Jackson County Exposition Park owns approximately 50 acres northeast of Bear Creek. Existing buildings and activities are confined to the opposite side of the creek, but the undeveloped public area can benefit from improved access, and there are significant opportunities for enhanced access to the greenway in this area. The map designates an area adjacent to the county land for commercial uses. Wilson Road Land Use Study Technical Memorandum #4 -Base Case Scenario Page 7 REGIONAL PROBLEM SOLVING City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Thlyd St., Central Polnt,Or 97502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.d.central-poi nt.o r.u s CENTRAL POINT MEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator Subject: Regional Problem Solving and Comprehensive Plan Amendments Date: January 27, 2009 Attached is the most recent schedule for processing of the Regional Plan. Over the course of the next year it is expected that the participating cities will be providing input to the County on the Regional Plan. During this period (approximately 15 months) the cities will be modifying their comprehensive plans as necessary to accommodate the Regional Plan. Coincident with the review of the Regional Plan the RVMPO will be contracting with a consultant to prepare findings for the adoption of the Regional Plan. It is intended that these findings be structured for use by each of the participating cities for the comprehensive plan amendment process. The end product will be a series of synchronized comprehensive plans for all participating cities that supports the Regional Plan as adopted in the County's comprehensive plan. For the City of Central Point the comprehensive plan elements which will be most affected are: 1. Urbanization; 2. Land Use; 3. Housing; 4. Economic; 5. Public Facilities; and 6. Transportation The Planning Department is currently in the process of updating each of these elements. Each element will be formatted to address land use needs within the UGB and the pending URAs. Commencing with the March 2009 Planning Commission meeting time will be set aside to discuss amendments to each of the above elements. At the Planning Commission's discretion a second monthly meeting could be scheduled and dedicated to the comprehensive plan amendment process. r 1 t ,j ~~ ° q~ gy r.p SS C s (F? . y ~ }-- cBY~yR £ LLo ix` ~ 5 E ~ rv S .. ~ e ~ o _ ~e e EP ~ yy $ 9 LSEE ~N ~ y ~ _ & n ~ g¢ ~4 ~ ~ ~ ~ O 6s n - S .a c y ~ .Y; M1 p p CQ ~N E _ t~ E o ~ i8 ~ yp d c~ as r'n ~ P ~L ~ ~~ r E^ } r V ^ I Y ~ ~ e m a _ s m n ~ ` ~ Qc ~ ~ - - ^a8 4 - , 8 ~~ ~ E J ~ n i _ ~ g 3 d w m - E - ~ P ~- - ~ ~ F ~~ n € g - d. g E LL N _ ID NF ~ ' _ _ Y c nE - F _ ~ o $ $ g e F Eg `~ ~ E S L u 2 6 c a ~ n °n v~ F a~ ~ gg -~~ S' R- ~ P ~ __ - R b9 ~' p y S - F. 88 A ^ ` g ° epn e Eo V E € e~ g~ £ o'er €g a gc~ 3 ~ i g ._ U ~€ i ?'' ,.~ °e ~ ~~ s~G _ ` AS "y oa ~o ~ E o '8E S_o _ 3E °og c , , ~~: s~ xw , v.a x 8 £y ~ Q '~ G ~ QTl 6 ~ . e i ~^ 8 T Co°o ~~ EpS ~ u3a ~E . ~ xE u3a ao a W 0 r r .' a K W D 7 5 0 a Y K 3 J T T ~ ~ ~ ~ U~ n ~ U 6 Z ri .P. d ~ e ~ E o m r ~ B~ s ~ n 8 E ~ u F u° C $ s 2 a ~ e g e ~ ~ F PR a e d E ~ ~ S ~ ~ r A ~ a~ 's a "~~ ~~ ~~aR ~ g ~ ~ m ~ e a € ~ s x ~ E ~ p ~ 8 0 o Y x .. s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e R ~~ ~~ ~~~~~ @ d~ ~ P P A A A~ g 8 8 ~ 5 5~ z ~ ~ a E E 5 $ .9 ~ ~ ~ ~ $!8€E ~ Y ~ 8 8 A A s 3~ ~~ ~ ~' ~~ ~~~~ ROGUE VALLEY I~.S CORRIDOR PLAN City of Central Point, Oregon ~ Planning Department 5461 664.9327 tFax 541x664'638497502 CENTRAL community De a opmenthDire tlor/ www.ci.central-point.ocus POINT Assistant City Administrator MEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Subject: Rogue Valley I-5 Corridor Plan Date: January 27, 2009 The City has been invited by ODOT to participate in an I-5 Corridor Plan for the Rogue Valley. The purpose of the Plan is to assess existing and future transportation conditions along the Interstate 5 (I-5) and Oregon Highway 99 (OR 99) corridors from Interchange 11 south of Ashland to Interchange 35 north of Central Point (see Figure 1-1). The Plan will identify strategies and improvements to enhance transportation safety and capacity within the corridor. A draft of ODOT's Technical Memorandum No. 1 is attached. ODOT's kick-off meeting is scheduled for January 29, 2009 at 1:00 (White City Offices). Planning Department staff will be attending the meeting and will report to the CAC and the Planning Commission. My I-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Plan Definition and Background Prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 3 3500 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg, Oregon 97470 Prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. 2100 SW River Parkway Portland, Oregon January 22,2009 DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Plan Definition and Background January 14, 2009 Plan Definition and Background The I-S Rogue Valley Corridor Plan (Corridor Plan) will assess existing and future transportation conditions along the Interstate 5 (I-5) and Oregon Highway 99 (OR 99) corridors from Interchange I I south of Ashland to Interchange 35 north of Central Point (see Figure 1-1). The Plan will identify strategies and improvements to enhance transportation safety and capacity within the corridor. The Corridor Plan builds upon The I-S State of the Interstate Report (Interstate Report), released in 2000, which focused on identifying deficiencies along the entire Oregon portion of the I-5 corridor. The Interstate Report was a transportation conditions report that represented the first of a two-phase planning process. By defining problems that Oregon travelers may face, the Interstate Report was intended to serve two purposes: 1) to help ODOT focus its planning efforts on the most significant problems, and 2) to act as a catalyst for the public discussion about how best to invest in I-5 so that it can continue to be an asset to the people of Oregon and western North America. The next phase in planning for the future of I-5 is to determine which transportation improvement alternatives will best protect and improve travel conditions on I-5. Hence, the Corridor Plan represents the second phase of the Interstate Report for the urbanized Rogue Valley segment of the Oregon I-5 corridor The Interstate Report and this subsequent Corridor Plan for the urbanized Rogue Valley region are intended to help enable ODOT to meet this challenge by identifying and addressing the most pressing problems, region-by-region, along the I-5 corridor in a priority manner. Background I-5 is a continuous interstate corridor extending through the United States (US) from Mexico to Canada. As Oregon's main north-south transportation facility, it is a critical link for moving commerce and people within the state and into and out of the neighboring states of California and Washington. The corridor connects all of the major population centers of the western seaboard, including San Diego, Santa Ana, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Sacramento, Portland, and Seattle. It also functions as an international thoroughfare by connecting to highways in Mexico and Canada. Constructed between 30 and 40 years ago, the freeway was designed to provide enough capacity fora 20-year period of projected travel demand. Today, with many more users and few significant upgrades since its initial construction, I-5 has become quite congested, particularly in urban areas. In rural sections, the roadway is impacted by high truck and recreational vehicle traffic demands. With a quarter of the nation's exports and imports passing through the corridor on an annual basis, I-5 is the third most heavily traveled truck corridor in the US. Subsequently, I-5 is also a federally designated Trade Corridor in recognition of its critical role in the nation's commerce. The entire I-5 corridor is one of six interstate routes across the nation selected by the US Department of Transportation for the "Corridors of the Future" program aimed at developing innovative national and regional approaches to reduce congestion and improve the efficiency of freight delivery. The corridor was selected for its potential to use public and private resources to reduce traffic congestion. The concepts include building new roads and adding lanes to existing I-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan Page 1 of 5 I ~~ i f~ ./~~ ~t'S "`~4 v ~x : .,~r,r f ~~ x E* v r' ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~,~ ^~" 1 > ~. 4.T ~,, ~,m ~~°~ ~ ~", ~x, ~ f' '~~~ ke ,~ ~ ~ ,&, J ~ ~; ' g ~,~.° ~y rn. ~ ~ J1:. y .A 1 k~ N2 r ~p ~ ~~ ~ ~ -v~ t ~~ -` r,~ .~~ ~~f is ~~ v ~ .j~ 'z~j3' ~ '`~ ' r~ .~ /t~~" i' ~ ~ ~ t~ ~~ ~~t" ~ P P. 1 x.~r t u X W ~',~ d ~ e.. .3 a~ ~' v" 1 ~~ ~ ~ ' s~ ; s ~ i •.. _ ;,h~~ p ~ ~ n-~ e i> 1 ~ '4. ~ r, q Ci y. ~ , ~ ~.~ s d fi ~ i -'~, ~ t~ t `ra ~' _ i. Y~. A~Y~ ~ tf ~ ~ 1 p yip( ~".. /~ ~~ d sr ~- ~ ~ i ~ t ,! ~ :: h~.~ ~ Z.j' r ~!nr s~'~~~xVSrx P \ { '~e. ~ f ~ ~ /~ /. e~ ,q., a. ,~ \~`~ "" r~ 5 k [ r~ in ~~~ 9 ~~ ~~' ~ l °~y . ~~ "~7~~~' ? "^ ~ ~ /. ~(~ ~ t T i 7" , a ~> t ~ r ~_ ~ t r ,~{ Jt~,~ ~ ~i < yr. 1 9`` 4 '.b ° ~~? oti ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~~~ .1 ~ . " ,~'' hi ~ ,~ ?{. @ ~ ~ 5 ti s ~~~~gt,r ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ °+ r ~ Et .~ ~ i ~, { J~~ iS. ~ y ~ ~ 3 ~~ ~ *;~R e+•Y„ ,`~ ~~e ~ n ~~I „7. t.i O ~% t~ ~rl: ££__ y~~+5~) g D n. e ~ ~~' g g R ~ ,~ e DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Plan Definition and Background January 14, 2009 roads, building truck-only lanes and bypasses, and integrating real time traffic technology like lane management that can match available capacity on roads to changing traffic demands. I-5 passes through many of Oregon's largest cities where the freeway must serve interstate travel as well as interurban, commuter, and regional freight traffic -all vital functions for these local economies. As would be expected, Portland, Salem, Eugene/Springfield, Roseburg, and Medford metropolitan areas are among the most heavily congested along the Oregon portion of the corridor. OR 99 functions as an alternate or business route for many of these urban areas, including the Rogue Valley region. Local demand in urban areas greatly influences the functionality of I-5. Auto-oriented development near interchanges has often impacted ramp terminal intersection operations and, at times, the freeway's mainline operations. In some locales, I-5 has come to operate as an alternate Main Street by serving high percentages of local trips rather than the long-distance trips for which it is primarily intended. Portions of I-5 have now reached or have exceeded the original design life, and high demands are creating operational and safety problems. Construction to add capacity is becoming increasingly difficult, economically, environmentally, and politically. Overall system deficiencies, regional issues, and local "hot spots" can have a major impact on the social and economic fabric of the state. These deficiencies can be compounded by local land use decisions. Project Overview The intent of this Corridor Plan is to build upon ODOT's previous efforts of assessing physical and operating conditions of the statewide I-5 corridor and general forecast of future travel demand by implementing a regional I-5 corridor plan through the Rogue Valley region The ultimate outcome of this Corridor Plan will be to initiate solutions that meet ODOT's Mission Statement: Provide a safe, efficient transportation system that supports economic opportunity and livable communities for Oregonians. The planning process for this 25-mile corridor will involve the following steps: 1. Define the problem(s) and establish goals and objectives. 2. Collect and analyze existing plans, land use/environmental constraints, Facilities, operations, crash history, rail service, and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) programs. 3. Assess future (2034) no-build conditions. 4. Identify potential projects and strategies and conduct corridor concepts analysis 5. Develop a preferred alternative(s) resulting from Step 4. Public involvement will play an important role throughout the Corridor Plan process. A Project Management Team (PMT) consisting of local agencies has been formed to provide technical and policy guidance throughout the planning process. The PMT will serve as the decision making body for the plan. The general public will be kept informed and will have opportunities to learn more about the project and to comment on items of interest through public meetings conducted in the "open house" format -the first of which will be scheduled early in the plan process with the second planned towards the end when alternatives are being assessed. In addition, the project 1-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan Page 3 of 5 DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Plan Definition and Background January 14, 2009 team will inform local elected officials through local agency presentations. All meeting discussions will be summarized and documented. Goals and Objectives Goals are high-level statements of the general issues and concerns to be addressed in the Corridor Plan while objectives are specific and measurable statements that describe how the project would meet the goals. Furthermore, objectives provide a basis for evaluating and comparing alternatives in terms of their ability to meet the stated goals. The following goals and objectives were developed through input provided by the PMT and community stakeholders, including local residents, business owners, elected officials, and government staff. <snecific obiectives to be discussed during PMT #1 meeting schedule on January 29rn> Goal 1: Improved Traffic Management Operations Problem Statement: I-5 from Ashland to Central Point has experienced increased congestion and delays as a result of rapid growth in the Rogue Valley region but budgetary constraints and competing demands limit the viability of short-term, capital-intensive capacity enhancements. Goal Statement: Develop and implement management measures and improvements that maximize the efficiency of roadway operations through 2035 Objectives: <discuss during PMT #1 meeting> Potential issues: • Sfskiyou Summit: often closed in winter resulting in significant congestion in the Ashland area. • Need for managing demand on the Medford viaduct (incident management critical). • Population growth in Oregon and Rogue Valley in particular is higher than the national average. • In southern Oregon, I-5 from Ashland to Central Point has experienced increased congestion and delays as a result of rapid growth in the Rogue Valley. Goal 2: Improved Safety in the I-5 Corridor Problem Statement: Roadway design issues such as lane merges and weaving conflicts result in potential hazardous conditions along I-5. Goal Statement: Develop and implement measures to mitigate hazardous roadway conditions along I-5. Objectives: <discuss during PMT #1 meeting> Potential issues: • Port of Entry south of Interchange 19: conflict between passenger vehicles and trucks due to the proximity of the northbound interchange exit ramp to the Ashland Port of Entry entrance ramp. • Incident management, particularly at the Medford viaduct and during closures of the Siskiyou Pass during inclement weather 1-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan Page 4 of 5 DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Plan Definition and Background January 14, 2009 Goal 3: Improved Interchange Operations Problem Statement: Several interchanges in the Rogue Valley are projected to experience high levels of congestion by 2020 (I-5 State of the Interstate Report) Goal Statement: Maintain efficient operations of I-5 interchanges. Obiectives: <discuss during PMT #1 meeting> Potential issues: • The I-S mainline at several interchanges in the Rogue Valley are forecasted to experience high levels of congestion. Goal 4: Improved Freight Operations Problem Statement: Trucks accounting for nearly half of all the I-5 traffic through the Rogue Valley region of I-5 -the highest in western Oregon -demonstrates the high dependence on trucks for transport of goods, and an underutilization of rail for the movement of freight. Goal Statement (Rail): Identify physical and managerial improvements to that could facilitate freight movement on the rail system through the Rogue Valley. Objectives: <discuss during PMT #1 meeting> Potential issues: • Freight Rail.• the rail route parallel to the I-5 corridor is an assemblage of short-haul rail operators like CORP, making freight travel through the corridor more difficult because of the track being operated by different companies. Goal Statement (Trucks): Explore viable solutions to enable more direct travel to and from delivery destinations and improve coordination for enhanced multi-modal transport. Objectives: <discuss during PMT #1 meeting> Potential issues.• • Lack of parallel routes along the east side of the I-S freeway The I-S Rogue Valley corridor has the highest proportion of truck traffic along the entire interstate corridor • Are there technological ITS related solutions for monitoring traffic conditions that could be improved (e.g. trip check)? I-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan Page 5 of 5 EXIT 3'S INTERCHANGE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third Sc, Central Polnt, Or 97502 641.6fi4.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.cLcentrai-pol nt.or.us CENTRAL POINT MEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Subject: Exit 35 Interchange Access Management Plan Date: January 27, 2009 Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community pevelopment Director/ Assistant City Administrator The Planning Department recently met with ODOT to discuss preparation of Exit 35 (Seven Oaks) Interchange Access Management Plan (IAMP35). Technical Memorandum No. 1, Definition and Background, and a map of the study area is included as part of this memo. Although IAMP35 builds on a prior Interchange 35 study, it is extremely important that IAMP35 be coordinated with the RPS process, especially the proposed land use designations. ODOT is aware of this concern. The timeline for completing IAMP35 is approximately one (1) year, during which time the CAC, Planning Commission, and City Council will get involved. The end product will be an intergovernmental agreement reviewed by the CAC and the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. A CAC meeting is tentatively scheduled for late February to begin discussions. I-5 Interchange 35 (Seven Oaks) Jackson County Interchange Area Management Plan DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Definition and Background Prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 3 3500 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg, Oregon 97470 Prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. 2100 SW River Parkway Portland, Oregon November 11, 2008 DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Definition and Background November /I, 2008 Purpose and Introduction As outlined in OAR 734-051-0155(7), an Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) is "required for new interchanges and should be developed for significant modifications to existing interchanges." Public investments for new interchanges and major improvements to existing interchanges are very costly and it is in the interest of the State, local governments, citizens of Oregon, and the traveling public to ensure that the interchange functions as it was designed for as long a time period as possible. This IAMP will assist the County and ODOT with the long-term transportation system management in the area around the interchange. The IAMP planning process examines existing and potential future land use and transportation conditions along with opportunities and limitations and identifies long-range needs. Outcomes include improvements to the local street network in the vicinity of the interchange needed for consistency with operational standards and to accommodate anticipated growth in the region. A significant element is recommended land use actions and/or management measures to be applied in the management area. This IAMP builds on previous analysis efforts summarized in the Interchange 35 (Seven Oaks) Improvement Project Interchange Area Study, dated July 2005 and prepared by David Evans and Associates. The analyses summarized in the study were used to gain a better understanding of both the current and the future transportation needs of the interchange, and to examine the performance of two interchange configurations under projected future traffic volumes. The 2005 Interchange Area Study provides the basis for the Seven Oaks Interchange IAMP. Problem Statement Interchange 35, includes the Blackwell Road overpass on Interstate 5 (I-5), which was found to be functionally obsolete and structurally deficient. The interchange is currently under construction to improve the safety and function of both the overpass and the connections with Oregon Highway (OR) 99 and Blackwell Road. In addition to building a new Blackwell Road overpass, the southbound off-ramp will be reconfigured as a loop ramp connecting to OR 99 from the east. The other ramps will also be constructed to meet highway design standards and improve spacing between ramps. With this investment in interchange improvements, a plan to assist the County and ODOT with the long-term transportation system management in the area around the interchange is critical. Although Interchange 35 is a rural interchange, it currently serves as the north access to the City of Central Point and also provides freeway access to the Tolo industrial area. It also connects to White City via Blackwell and Kirtland Roads. In the future, traffic demand at the interchange is expected to increase from nearby development as well as growth from the City of Central Point to the south and the creation of OR 140 Freight Route Extension from White City. I-5 Interchange 35 Area Management Plan DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Definition and Background November I7, 2008 The current Central Point population is approximately 16,500 residents. By the year 2030, Central Point's population is estimated to be almost 26,0001, making it the second largest city in the Rogue Valley. Interchange 35 is will be affected by growing traffic volumes on OR 99 and more traffic destined for I-5. The Tolo industrial area lies primarily north of Interchange 35. Although the development density is currently low, nearby access to I-5 may make this area more desirable in the future. In addition to increased demand at the interchange, higher traffic volumes turning on and off Blackwell Road could become a bigger concern. In the future, Interchange 35 will also function as the western terminus of the OR 140 Freight Route Extension that will connect between OR 62 in White City and I-5. As the phased elements of the Freight Route are implemented, more traffic will be accessing the interchange from the north via Blackwell Road. Not only will the freight route increase demand at the interchange but the potential for conflicts with access to adjacent industrial land will become a greater concern. Interchange Function Interchange 35 is principally a rural interchange that connects I-5 with OR 99 to the south and Blackwell Road to the north. OR 99 is a district-level highway that serves the nearby community of Central Point to the south. Blackwell Road serves some industrial lands northeast of the interchange and provides a connection with White City to the southeast. Blackwell Road serves significant truck trips between the interchange and White City and will become part of the OR 140 Freight Route connecting between OR 62 and I-5. The intended function of Interchange 35 is to safely and efficiently accommodate future traffic demands associated with current rural and limited future industrial land uses in the interchange vicinity. The interchange improvements outlined in this IAMP are not intended to facilitate major commercial or residential development in the interchange area. Planned Interchange Area Improvements Interchange 35 provides an important link in the movement of freight in the region. Undeveloped land in the immediate vicinity of the interchange has potential for significant industrial development. Additionally, the interchange is located approximately six miles southwest of the major industrial area in White City. Finally, the OR 140 Freight Extension project and jurisdictional transfer could intensify the regional significance of the interchange to the movement of freight in the region. A description of current planned and in-process projects follows. ~ City of Cenral Point Transportation System Plan, 2008 to 2030, Draft July 18, 2008, page 14. I-5 Interchange 35 Area Management Plan DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Definition and Background November 11, 2008 Seven Oaks Bridge Replacement Project The OTIA III-funded Seven Oaks Bridge Replacement project, currently under construction, consists of the following: • Replacement of the structurally deficient OR 99/Blackwell Road bridge over I-5 (Bridge No. 08539): The bridge will have three travel lanes and will accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians, with a minimum span long enough to accommodate six travel lanes on I-5 with an urban median and a southbound loop off-ramp. The bridge type will allow for widening, should future traffic conditions require additional lane capacity. • Realignment of the southbound entrance and exit ramps: The existing interchange configuration, which has a unique, non-standard configuration is being replaced by a folded diamond configuration for the southbound ramps. The southbound exit ramp will be a loop ramp and will intersect OR 99 at a new signalized intersection, with Willow Springs Road and the southbound entrance ramp as the other intersection approaches. • Realignment of the northbound entrance and exit ramps: The skewed northbound ramp terminal intersection will be reconstructed at a right angle. The unconventional intersection control is being replaced with conventional stop control that will require only the I-5 northbound exit ramp approach to stop. All other movements will be free. • Realignment of frontage road approach: A frontage road approach directly north of the northbound exit ramp terminal is being realigned to intersect with Blackwell Road at a point approximately 75-feet north of its current location. OR 140 Freight Route Extension Project OR 140 is a major route for the east-west movement of freight in the region; however, it currently terminates at OR 62 in White City. The lack of direct connectivity between OR 140 and 1-5 has been identified as a significant deficiency in the area's transportation system. The OR 140 Freight Extension project will modify the existing intersection of Kirtland and Blackwell Roads to provide free-flow movements on Kirtland versus Blackwell. The project will also increase travel lane widths and provide shoulders on Kirtland Road between Blackwell Road and High Banks Road, and will widen Avenue G to improve turning movements to and from OR 62. OR 140 Jurisdictional Transfer ODOT is in the process of acquiring ownership of Blackwell and Kirtland Roads between [need detail on exact route] and Interchange 35. The route, comprised entirely of existing roadways, connects OR 140 to I-5 Interchange 35. The new state highway will be designated a [Dlstrict/Regonal/Statewide] highway and a freight route in order to represent the prioritization of freight movement along the corridor. Taken together, the improvements at the interchange and along the Blackwell/Kirtland/Antelope freight route are intended to improve freight connectivity and efficiency along this corridor. I-Slnterchange 35 Area Management Plan DRAFT Technical Memorandum #1: Definition and Background November 11, 2008 It should be noted that neither the jurisdictional transfer nor the other planned corridor improvements will preclude a potential future new highway alignment connecting the OR 62/OR 140 junction with the Interchange 35, although no such highway project is currently planned. IAMP Goal and Objectives The goal of this IAMP is to maintain the function of Interchange 35 and maximize the utility of the current investment in upgrading the interchange. The objectives of the IAMP are to: • Protect the function of the interchange as specified in the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) and Jackson County Transportation System Plan (TSP). • Provide safe and efficient operations on I-5 and OR 99 as specified in the OHP and Jackson County TSP. • Identify system improvements and management techniques that would not preclude connection to a potential new arterial extending from the interchange to the OR 62/140 junction. • Develop an access management plan that provides for safe and acceptable operations on the transportation network, and meet OHP requirements and the access spacing standards in Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 734-051. • Identify future land uses that would be inconsistent with the operation and safety of the new interchange and develop strategies for recommended land use controls. • Ensure ODOT is involved in future land use decisions that could affect the function of the interchange. TAMP Planning Area The IAMP planning area delineates the vicinity in which transportation facilities, land uses, and approaches may affect operations at the interchange. The planning area includes the existing interchange, the immediate surrounding area where new ramps would be constructed, commercial and industrial parcels immediately north and west of the interchange, and the area south of the interchange that is of mutual concern to Jackson County and the City of Central Point. This area is under County jurisdiction, and the County sends the City notices of development applications affecting property Within this area. The IAMP planning area is roughly bound by Bear Creek to the East, Scenic Avenue to the south and Kirtland Road to the north. North of the interchange, the western boundary is the CORD railroad line. South of the interchange, the western boundary is approximately 2,700 feet west of OR 99. ~'iggre 1 shows the IAMP planning area. I-S Interchange 35 Area Management Plan Kirtland Rd TU WHITE GRY ~~ Cantml Oragan & Pedfl Rellroad Newland Rd `~ ~ ~ to z S m ` ~ ' a m~~~ ; 0 f°- ~a° $o~~ ` ~nT ~a ma GS s ar. ar•, 5 ~ Gibbon R ow rin s Rd tir~~ A ro Willow Springs Rd Eric ~ Ave L 'O d~ -. ~ '~ J Y y~i a O +•a~~~ y ~ !L ~! y ,». ~® a'O' ~~ NTRAL ~ POINT i,ooo aoo o ~,oooreec Legend Figure 1 ® _ Souroe: Jedcson Coun GIS ~ IAMP Study Area ty IAMP Study Area Map Prepared By: ~;;~~ Central Point UGB and Street Network ° • Study Intersections ~~ I-5 Interchange 35 (Seven Oaks) OAV ID f VAIJA ..,.oA ,50CiATl45 „~... Interchange Area Management Plan