Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAC Packet - July 28, 2009CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ~-' Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers @ Central Point City Hall I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTIONS Chairman Joe Thomas, Herb Farber, Sam Inkley, Jr., David Painter, Jake Jakabosky, Larry Martin and Jeff Pfeifer III. MINUTES Approval of February 24, 2009 Minutes IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES V. DISCUSSION A. Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan B. Urbanization Element C. Economic Element VI. MISCELLANEOUS VII. ADJOURNMENT ~. ~- City of Central Point Citizens Advisory Committee Minutes February 24, 2009 6:00 P.M. A Citizens Advisory Committee meeting was held in City Council Chambers on February 24, 2009, commencing at 6:00 p.m. Present were Herb Farber, Vice Chairman, David Painter, Sam Inkley, Jr., Jake Jakabosky and Larry Martin. Joe Thomas was absent. Also in attendance were Connie Clune, Community Planner; Dave Jacob, Community Planner; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary. Minutes A motion was made by David Painter and seconded by Jake Jakabosky to approve the ~, minutes of the July 8, 2008 meeting. All members said "aye". Motion passed. Public Appearances There were no public appearances. Wilson Road UGB Expansion Plan Update Community Planner Connie Clune advised that Dick Converse with the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG) had extended an invitation to the community to participate in formulating a plan for the CP-2B area to be used as an example of what can happen in each of the areas that are being considered as part of an urban growth boundary expansion. Recently the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) received state grant monies to develop this proto-type plan and the group will be meeting on Monday, March 2, 2009, in Council Chambers to discuss different ideas. The goal is to come up with a tentative plan by June of 2009 to be used as a tool for an urban growth boundary expansion. Regional Problem Solving (RPS) Process and Comprehensive Plan Community Planner David Jacob told the committee that the Regional Problem Solving process had run into a roadblock as the cities of Jacksonville and Ashland have not signed the Participation Agreement yet and this has stopped the process for now. The Citizens Advisory Committee February 24, 2009 Page 2 ~ Department of Land Conversation and Development has indicated that the process can't move forward without the signed agreement and they have asked for a decision from Jacksonville by the end of March. Ashland has stated that they are uncomfortable with the process. Meanwhile, Mr. Jacob reported, staff is working on comprehensive plan amendments - urbanization, land use, housing, economic element and public facilities. The transportation system plan was acknowledged by the Department of Land Conservation and Development in December of 2008, and the Buildable Lands Inventory and Population Element have also been acknowledged. Rogue Valley I-S Corridor Plan Dave Jacob, Community Planner, presented that the Oregon Department of Transportation will be doing a study of the safety and capacity issues affecting the I-5 Corridor between exits 11 and 35. The City of Central Point has been asked to participate. The Plan will identify strategies and improvements to enhance transportation safety and capacity within the corridor Exit 35 Interchange Access Management Plan John McDonald, Long Range Planner with the Oregon Department of Transportation in Roseburg, Oregon, introduced Jennifer Danziger, Senior Transportation Engineer, and Shelly Alexander, Transportation Engineer, both of whom were representing David Evans and Associates, Portland, Oregon. Ms. Danziger provided a power point presentation on the I-5 Interchange 35 (Seven Oaks) Area Management Plan (IAMP) which will express the objectives of ODOT, Jackson County and Central Point for managing the interchange (Exit 35) and surrounding areas through the year 2030. The plan will protect the function and capacity of the interchange and cross streets. Ms. Danziger explained the process, goals, objectives and operations of the proposed plan. A copy of the presentation is attached to these minutes as Exhibit "A" and by reference, made a part hereof. John McDonald added that at the present time, the City of Central Point does not have jurisdiction of the interchange in question, but that ultimately it will very likely be located within one of our (City of Central Point) growth areas. In response to a question raised by David Painter regarding the receipt of stimulus funds from the federal government for possible local and state projects, John McDonald indicated that the legislature will take a look at it. Exit 33 Interchange Access Management Plan John McDonald, ODOT, advised that the consultants from David Evans and Associates would be meeting with staff the next morning to commence discussion about the proposed plan. Citizens Advisory Committee February 24, 2009 Page 3 ~. Herb Farber thanked everyone for coming. The next meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee was scheduled for April 14, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. A motion to adjourn was made by David Painter and seconded by Jake Jakabosky. All members said "aye". Meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the February 24, 2009 Citizens Advisory Committee were approved by the Citizens Advisory Committee at its meeting of , 2009. Chairman GREATER BEAR CREEK VALLEY REGIONAL PLAN Chapter 5 Proposed Urban Reserves The centerpiece of Oregon's land use planning program is a requirement for most new development to be located inside urban growth boundaries (UGBs). These UGBs are planned to provide the necessary mix of uses, residential densities, and public facilities to support urban development. This RPS process addresses a further refinement of Oregon's urban expansion strategy, the ability to designate urban reserve areas (URAs). These areas are lands outside of established UGBs that qualify as first priority in future UGB expansions. Although very few urban reserves have been `'' established in Oregon, the ability to designate the long-term direction and extent of areas of future growth in southern Oregon was a major motivating factor in gaining the participation of jurisdictions in RPS, and remains, after eight years, one of the most important reasons they have remained involved. While this RPS process does not directly address future UGB expansions, the establishment of the UIZAs will fundamentally change the UGB expansion process for the County and participating cities. Most significantly: - The RPS process determines the suitability of the URAs for future urbanization by making them the highest priority for UGB expansions. This will dramatically reduce the cost, complexity, and time commitment of the UGB expansion process for the state and participating jurisdictions. - The wider selection of URAs for most cities will allow more careful tailoring of their UGB expansions. - The simpler process may allow cities to make more frequent, smaller UGB expansions. On-the-ground realities have meant that some exception lands and low-value resource lands with high potential for residential or employment have not been proposed as urban reserves. At the same time, some productive agricultural lands have been included in the plan as areas for future urban growth. Nonetheless, participants agree that this process has been extremely successful in Draft r2 Proposed Urban Reserves locating and reserving the most appropriate lands for future urban uses by Valley's cities, while also preserving its most important resource lands and open space. This chapter details the growth issues of each participating jurisdiction in the RPS process, and the specific growth areas each proposed. The following summaries for each city explain why the growth areas are needed, how these growth areas will address each city's need, and finally, alternative areas that each city evaluated, but eventually dropped from consideration. This chapter also introduces and evaluates baseline residential "targets" to assist in gauging whether the proposed growth areas will be sufficient for each city, and whether the sum of the proposed growth meets the region's needs within the RPS planning horizon. It will also provide benchmarks for use in monitoring the progress of the plan during its implementation. Draft 'fir Draft Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project - Planning Report 5-3 5-4 Proposed Urban Reserves Exhibit 5-2 Urban Reserve CP-1 B Tolo~ --- - - - - - --r - - -- - -- -, _ _._ - ,~ a ~ -rte ~_. ~ .~<; F~ ~~ -! ~~~ ,~R yy~~''`` ~ -t~ '%' .. :~~ ~ _ +~ •' ~ i ~~~~ ,t ,~ -. , ~ ` ~~ i i ~\ i 1 j~ ~ -: ~`'`~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `• Jr- fv. ~~r~rT ~~ d , ~K~.~~1 a ~- _ ~ ~~nW_ ~" ,y y- ,r y ~^~~e ~ ~s` ._ ;~~ ~, fir. ,~ i (~ ~ {7". v ,~ L - ~ ' ~ • ~ ~ `~ Draft 5-5 Draft Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project - Planning Report '`/ Draft 5~ Proposed Urban Reserves Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-7 Exhibit 5-5 Urban Reserve CP-1C and CP-4D ~;~~~~~ ~:~~ RR-5 Draft Draft 5-8 Proposed Urban Reserves Bear Creek Vallev Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Resort 5-9 Draft Draft 5-10 Proposed Urban Reserves r Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-11 Exhibit 5-9 Urban Reserve CP-5, CP-6A, and CP-66 ___ RR 5 ~ °~ RR-5~ - = ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~,-RR-2 5 R'5 ~`~, R ^t I ~ i~ I i ~ ' ~~ RR-2 ~~ RR-5,`;~~ - ~ ~ ~~ r J, \ ~ ~ ~ , / ,~,i µ ~,~ AR t~,~ ~` ~,~` RR-2.5 R ~ !°. ~~` a'+ ,~ iyY ~: ~,v~L~, ~ ~~ ~; ~ , ~ RRn2.5 RR-5 ~. ~. EFU ~. UR-1 F~ r~ - - l / J ~) ! rrl RR 5 RR ...~ ~' EFU °~-~~~~~~~~.~ ~ RR-5 ~_ RR-2.5 IZR-7 ,, EFU `~ f. ,~~ ..~ ., ,,. RR-00 - RR-5 ~~? ,~,,~ . t RR-5 ~.~ ; UR-1 ;:: RR-00 ~` ~ ~-. -F EFU RR `5" Draft 5-12 Proposed Urban Reserves 1 Central Point Central Point is one of the fastest growing small cities in the state. Rapid growth in the early 1990s led to the creation of the Central Point Strategic Plan, adopted in 1998. The plan establishes a vision to preserve small town character and community values, and to enhance community life. Effective growth management practices have led to a follow-on strategic planning process, Central Point Forward. Through this process, the City has updated the 1998 vision, goals and actions to implement its desired future. The City has also created a plan to revitalize its downtown, adopted Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policies and zoning, and has promoted land use and transportation master planning. Central Point intends to continue planning and building master planned communities that contain a diversity of uses including parks, open spaces, civic areas and commercial uses that contribute to the city's character. The City will also incorporate natural features into new development so they can become living assets within their new neighborhoods. In 2002, the City adopted Transit Oriented Development (TOD) land use classifications and ~ zoning standards. This provides for higher residential densities, mixed-use zoning, and more integrated civic and open space development. The City is also working with multiple property owners to design a new neighborhood north of Beebe Road in one of the few-remaining residentially zoned areas in the growth boundary. Preliminary plans call for zone changes that increase residential densities, integrate more parks and open space land and introduce limited commercial uses. This will likely become the city's second TOD. Of the non-residential land in Central Point, almost 20 percent is classified as vacant. Commercial and industrial development each makes up about 5 percent of Central Point's overall land base. The remaining 30 percent is classified as "other", which includes parks, open spaces, places of worship and public right-of--way. The City would like to increase its employment and industrial land base, both to balance jobs and housing, and to provide more immediate services to a growing population. Recent building activity suggests there is a growing local demand for commercial and industrial uses. Recent development includes the USF Reddaway truck terminal, expansion of the LTM regional offices, and the partial development of the Airport Orchard industrial site. The City would also like development to continue towards the west, rather than east of the freeway. The City has determined that development east of the freeway would not encourage a compact urban form, and would not help the city expand their infrastructure. Draft `' Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-13 Additionally, Interstate 5 impedes east-west movement within the city, another reason to grow towards the west. In an effort to improve access to downtown from east of the interstate, Central Point has set aside funds to improve Seven Oaks interchange, as well as at the Upton Road overpass. Proposed Central Point Urban Reserve Areas: CP-1 B (Tolo): ~p Ce acres Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional parks Resource Existing 27% 1% 29% 43% Zoning Proposed 5% 94% 1% Uses This urban reserve has been through several modifications since the time it was originally presented. The area currently proposed is approximately 617 acres. The majority of this area is located north of Interstate 5 and west of its junction with Highway 99. The area is zoned for a variety of uses, ~, including rural residential, industrial, open space, and future urban uses. A small pocket of land in this area extends south of Interstate 5 to Willow Springs Road; this area includes land owned by Erickson Air Crane, a major valley employer. The area also contains some land zoned for Exclusive Farm Use, 48 acres of which was recommended by the RLRC as part of the Commercial Agricultural Base. The Seven Oaks Interchange is a strategic transportation hub where three separate facilities converge-the Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad (COPR), Highway 99, and Interstate 5. The city's comprehensive plan addresses proximity to the interchange as an opportunity to develop transportation- dependent uses in the area. ACity-County plan currently proposes atruck-train freight transfer site near the interchange. Exhibit 5-10 Urban Reserve CP-1 B The initial proposal for a Tolo area urban reserve was larger than the present one, but in response to concerns about included commercial agricultural lands, the City responded by excluding some of the areas recommended for preservation by the RLRC. Draft Total Acres: 617 RLRC Commercial Ag Base Acres: 48 Approved by State for Urbanization: 48 5-14 Proposed Urban Reserves Central Point lacks attractive and suitable sites for new industrial development. The Highway 99 corridor is transitioning from rail-dependent uses to employment uses that support transit and pedestrian-oriented development. The Tolo area's industrially- zoned sites could accommodate new industries and the expansion of existing industrial uses. The City will use agricultural buffers where urban development occurs adjacent to productive farmland. The l 984 Urban Growth Boundary and Policy Agreement (updated in 1998) between the City and Jackson County designated lands in the vicinity of the Seven Oaks Interchange as unique because of the transportation facilities present. The area was designated as an Area of Mutual Planning Concern to protect it from premature development, but available for urbanization when it could be shown to warrant such development. The RPS project has proposed to locate many of the region's ~. new industrial urban reserves away from the two high concentration PM10 areas, Medford and White City. Urban reserve areas CP-1B and PH-5, two areas proposed for primarily industrial use, are outside of these high concentration areas. As the historic focal centers of the region's industries, Medford and White City have the highest modeled annual PM10 concentrations within the AQMA. Condition of Approval: Approval of CP-1 B as an urban reserve by the Policy Committee was contingent on the following condition: • Prior to the expansion of the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary into the CP 1-B area, ODOT, Jackson County and Central Point shall adopt an Interchange Area Management Plan for the Seven Oaks interchange area. Commercial Agricultural Resource Base Status: 48 acres of CP- 1 Bwere recommended as part of the commercial agricultural base by the RLRC. However, the decision made at the first state agency review in March, 2007 was that the case for eventual Drak Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-15 urbanization of CP-1B was more compelling than the one for maintaining them in agricultural use. CP-1 C: Op Ce acres Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional Parks Resource Existing 33% 67% ~ Zoning Proposed ~pp% Uses This urban reserve consists of about 75 acres and sits near the northwestern corner of the Central Point city limits and UGB. It extends from Jackson Creek to Griffin Creek, with Scenic Avenue defining its southern edge. This area was originally proposed by the City as the southern end of a much larger urban reserve, previously named CP-1. The City is no longer considering most of the land between this new area and Willow Springs Road because the RLRC has recommended much of it as commercial agricultural land. The City has opted to retain CP-1C, in part, because it must improve the railroad crossing and the intersection at Scenic Avenue and Highway 99. The new railroad facility will need to cross Highway 99 at a right angle, which means the road will need to extend north from Scenic Avenue, on the east side of the highway, before crossing Highway 99 in a perpendicular fashion. The triangular tax lot at the northwest corner is necessary to ensure that the geometry of the new intersection is efficient and safe. New infrastructure to serve this area would not require extensive public or private funding. Currently, a 12-inch water line extends the length of Highway 99 from the city boundary to the Erickson Air Crane facility, at the edge of CP-1 B. Another smaller water line and a sewer line are near CP-1C, inside the city limits. The area contains three parcels, totaling 50 acres, which have been recommended by RLRC as part of the Commercial Agricultural Base. The parcel immediately east of Highway 99 is bordered by exception land to the north, south and east. The Exhibit 5-11 Urban Reserve CP-1C Draft Total Acres: 76 RLRC Commercial Ag Base Acres: 50 Approved by State for Urbanization: 50 5-16 Proposed Urban Reserves parcel further to the east is bordered by the city on the east, by exception land to the south, and partially by exception land to the west. The last parcel, to the west of the highway, is bordered by Jackson Creek to the west and by Scenic Avenue to the south. The urban reserve area in total contains over 20 residences. Existing agricultural uses are not intensive ones, and the City has agreed to implement agricultural buffering to protect adjoining productive farmlands. The northern portion of this urban reserve area is developed with approximately 15 residences. New infrastructure to this site would not require extensive public or private funding. Currently, a 12-inch water line extends the length of Highway 99 from the city boundary to the Erickson Air-Crane facility, along the western edge of CP-1C. Another smaller water line and a sewer line are near CP-1C, inside the city limits. The City will promote a master plan for this area to ensure more efficient urban development, incorporate natural features (i.e. ~„ Griffin Creek) into the neighborhood design, create agricultural buffers, and lay out an internal street network that minimizes access onto Highway 99. Commercial Agricultural Resource Base Status: 50 acres of CP- 1 Cwere recommended as part of the commercial agricultural base by the RLRC. However, the decision made at the second state agency review in December, 2007 was that the case for eventual urbanization of CP-1 C was more compelling than the one for maintaining it in agricultural use. Draft Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-17 CP-2B: 9 ~p Ce ac~ e.4 Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional parks Resource Existing 38% 62% Zoning Proposed $t% 5% 8% 6% Uses This area, approximately 329 acres, is defined on the north by Wilson Road and on the south by the Jackson County Fairgrounds Exposition Park and portions of the Central Point city limits. The city limits also define this area's eastern and western boundaries. The area's zoning is a mixture of EFU land and rural residential, and the RLRC recommended 197 acres as part of the Commercial Agricultural Base. About 20 percent of this area contains oak savanna, and some areas have ponded sources of irrigation water. This area is critical for extending storm drainage from the exception area south of Wilson Road and from other areas closer to Bear Creek. The City also plans to extend the east-west leg of Upton Road further east to Gebhard Road to improve transportation connectivity. The County Roads Department, in cooperation with ODOT, will be reconstructing the Upton Road bridges in the near future. This will strengthen the connection between northeast and northwest Central Point. Public infrastructure, in the form of sewer lines and gas lines, already extend into CP-2B. Water lines exist in city subdivisions east of Gebhard Road and north along Table Rock Road. These water lines can be extended into CP-2B. While Central Point recognizes the conflict between urban and rural uses, it has few places to grow without encroaching into farmland and/or open space. The interstate currently splits the city, and it is important to maintain an urban form by closing the loop along the city's northern boundary. City planning staff is collaborating with the Fair Board in their master planning efforts. The Jackson County Expo property may become a recreational/parks centerpiece in the future, similar to Stewart Park in Roseburg. The City also plans to protect CP-2B's Exhibit 5-12 Urban Reserve CP-2B Draft ``„ 5-18 Proposed Urban Reserves natural resources by incorporating them into a master plan, and will also require agricultural buffers to protect nearby agricultural lands that remain in production. The State has also suggested that the City consider extending this urban reserve into exception areas to the north of CP-2B. oak savanna Norm of cP-2B Central Point has given two reasons why this is not practical or desirable: the presence of oak savannah habitat, and large areas of wetland. The significant areas of oak savannah habitat consist of open grassland or grass beneath oak-dominated communities of varying densities. This area hosts a significant example of this ecosystem, and was recognized and catalogued as such by the RPS Citizen Involvement Committee (pCIC). The area also contains wetlands, which have been addressed most recently by a Department of State Lands employee who toured the area in spring of 2007. According to DSL, about 115 acres, or 30 percent of the site may be wetland, and a substantial portion of this site may present wetland-development conflicts. ~. Commercial Agricultural Resource Base Status: 197 acres of CP-2B were recommended as part of the commercial agricultural base by the RLRC. However, the decision made at the second state agency review in December, 2007 was that the case for eventual urbanization of CP-2B was more compelling than the one for maintaining it in agricultural use. C P-3: r Op ace ac es Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional park Resource Existing 6% 94% Zoning Proposed 42% 58% Uses This 41-acre growth area has East Pine Street, and the Central Point city limits, as its southern boundary. The extension of Beebe Road defines the area's northern edge. Penniger Road These oak stands have become progressively less common in the region over the last century, falling initially to agriculture, and now increasingly to development. The recommended stands are especially important due to the fact that the trees, not being economically valuable nor in demand as ornamentals, are not being replanted. Since the only significant occurrences of these trees in the future are going to be naturally occurring in existing stands, the pCIC is recommending that these examples be preserved. RPS Phase 1 Status Report, page 25. bisects the southwest corner. The area is east of the Fairgrounds, -- t\ ~ ~ ~-~ ~~ and also has Central Point city limits defining its southern Total Acres: 41 and eastern boundaries. Bear Creek and its associated floodplain RLRC Commsrctal Ag Base Acres: 0 Draft Exhibit 5-13 Urban Reserve CP-3 Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-19 cross this area's eastern edge. Water and sewer infrastructure is either in place or is planned for the area. The East Pine Street Transportation Plan is recommending improvements to the I-5 interchange and reconfiguration of fairground access; this may dictate the type and the amount of new commercial uses along North Penniger Road. The majority of this urban reserve is zoned for Exclusive Farm Use, or open space, though the RLRC did not recommend any of it as part of the commercial resource base. Since the 100-year floodplain crosses this area, ideas for future development have been limited to regional parks, open space and tourist commercial uses. The City removed a northern portion of approximately 70 acres, the RLRC identified as commercial agricultural land. The portion of CP-3 that remains is surrounded on three sides by the Central Point city limits or by the fairgrounds. CP-4D: acres Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional OpePnaSkace Resource Existing 31 % 69% Zoning Proposed 100% Uses This urban reserve is atriangular-shaped area that runs along the northeastern side of Interstate 5. About 86 acres in size, most of this area is zoned as Exclusive Farm Use. A small extension at the southern end is zoned for rural residential use. CP-4D as originally proposed was 444 acres, and extended from the I-5 on the west to CP-2B to the east, but was reduced to the present CP-4D after the agricultural value much of the area became clear. The remaining land is owned by Jackson County and is part of the Bear Creek Greenway between Bear Creek and Interstate 5. While these parcels are zoned EFU, they are not in agricultural production and they do not hold a soil classification on county maps. `~,, Exhibit 5-14 Urban Reserve CP-4D Draft Total Acres 86 RLRC Commercial Ag Base Acres: 0 5-20 Proposed Urban Reserves This area also has environmental constraints. About one third of this 86-acre urban reserve sits within the 100-year floodplain, which cuts along eastern edge. Additionally this area contains several wetlands. The City expects to use this area for passive recreation, dedicated open space, or parks, especially for Bear Creek Greenway use. Where urban areas are adjacent to productive farmland, it is understood that agricultural buffering will be incorporated. The RLRC recommended this area as part of the Commercial Agricultural Base when it was part of the original, much larger 444-acre CP-4D. This smaller piece was not revisited by the RLRC once it had been reduced its present size; and as a result, the RLRC designation was eventually removed by the agreement of both the Policy Committee and the state agencies due to the fact that the land is fairly heavily wooded, is not in agricultural production (nor has it been within memory), and has no soil classification on County maps. Condition of Approval: Approval of CP-4D as an urban reserve by the Policy Committee was contingent on the following condition: • This area shall only be used for greenway and parks. C P-5: This growth area, approximately 33 acres, sits immediately west of the city limits, east of Grant Road, and south of Scenic Avenue. Most parcels are zoned RR-S, and there is a 10-acre parcel zoned EFU at the southern end. The 10-acre EFU parcel was initially recommended by the RLRC as part of the commercial resource base, but that recommendation was removed in a subsequent re- evaluation. The parcel contains a walnut grove, Christmas trees, and ,~ a dwelling with accessory uses southwest of the creek. A small Exhibit 5-15 Urban Reserve CP-5 Draft Total Acres: 33 `,. Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-21 pasture and two barns are on the other side. Because the creek runs through the property and portions are in residential use, the effective farmable portion of the property is significantly less than ten acres, particularly when no adjacent parcels are available for farm use. Jackson Creek and its associated 100- year floodplain follow Grant Road except where they cut through the EFU parcel. These riparian areas create a significant physical barrier from the larger tract of farmland to the west. The properties in this urban reserve are adjacent to the city limits, and could easily be served by the extension of public utilities and services from the Twin Creeks development. The area could be used for either residential development or dedicated open space for Twin Creeks. The location of Jackson Creek and Grant Road reinforces this area's stronger relationship to urban development than to farm land across the creek and to the west. A road and creek would serve as a much better dividing line between urban and rural uses than would a property line having no discernable difference on either side of the fence. CP-6A: 457 Open Space acres Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional parks Resource Existing 31% 69% Zoning Proposed 76% 4% 20% Uses This area consists of 457 acres. The City and its residents have supported including this area because it helps the City's goal of developing in a centric pattern. The City envisions larger master planned communities in the areas where several large lots can be assembled for higher density residential development, some open space preserved and agricultural buffers created. Managed growth to the west will promote efficient local resident access to the Downtown core. The properties in this urban reserve are adjacent to the city limits, and could easily be served by services from the Twin Creeks development or from existing collector roads, such as L Beall Lane, Taylor Road, and Scenic Avenue. The circulation Exhibit 5-16 Urban Reserve CP-6A Draft Total Acres: 457 RLRC Commercial Ag Base Acres: 292 Approved by State for Urbanization: 292 5-22 Proposed Urban Reserves plan for this area is a natural extension of the Twin Creeks Development, and of historic east-west roads such as Taylor and Beale. The City believes that there are more natural linkages from the areas west of Grant Road to the Downtown and other neighborhoods. Water, natural gas and sewer maps indicate that other infrastructure can be readily, efficiently, and economically extended to CP-6A from the east and the south. Storm drainage can be developed, treated, and effectively drained into existing systems. The Twin Creeks Development is using passive water treatment, which the City will impose on new development in this area. Approximately 2/3 of the land in this urban reserve is zoned as Exclusive Farm Use, and has been recommended by the RLRC as part of the Commercial Agricultural Base. The remaining l/3 is exception lands zoned for rural residential use. Soils in this area are class 3 with limited amounts of Class 2. Local long-term \,,. members of the farming community have maintained that the land is not productive, and that for years it has been used extensively for grazing, or has been allowed to remain fallow. Commercial Agricultural Resource Base Status: 292 acres of CP-6A were recommended as part of the commercial agricultural base by the RLRC. However, the decision made at the second state agency review in December, 2007 was that the case for eventual urbanization of CP-6A was more compelling than the one for maintaining it in agricultural use. Draft `/ Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-23 CP-66: Op Ce acres Res. Comm. Ind. Institutional parks Resource Existing 7g% 22% Zoning Proposed 90% 10% Uses This 200-acre area sits immediately south of CP-6A, which, along with Beall Lane, defines its northern boundary. Its southern boundary is defined by Sylvia Road, its western boundary is Old Stage Road, and the eastern boundary is defined by the 100-year floodplain along Hanley Road. Zoning is primarily for rural residential use, with two developed areas that are zoned EFU. None of the lands in this urban reserve have been recommended as commercial agricultural land by RLRC. While this area is relatively flat, steeper slopes to the southwest and northwest provide a buffer from other rural lands outside of the reserve. CP-6B was a later addition by the City to its set of proposed urban reserves, and was added largely in response to DLCD's request to consider the area's high concentration of exception lands. This is a mixed area, with scattered large lot development, and a little league field in the southeastern corner. The City has also reported some septic system failures potentially affecting aquifers in this area, which could be addressed by extending urban services into it. Gibbon Acres -Area of Special Planning Concern: Both the State and Jackson County have expressed concern about the unincorporated community of Gibbon Acres not being proposed as an urban reserve. Central Point acknowledges that concern, and as a condition to creating limited Urban Reserve (UR) areas west of Grant Road, the City has agreed to assume future jurisdictional responsibility for Gibbon Acres west of Table Rock Road and north of Wilson Road. The City and County have agreed in principle to managing L Gibbon Acres as an "Area of Mutual Planning Concern" Exhibit 5-17 Urban Reserve CP-6B Draft Total Acres: 200 RLRC Commercial Ag Base Acres: 0 Exhibit 5-18 Gibbon Acres '~. 5-24 Proposed Urt~an Reserves through an Urban Growth Management Agreement (UGMA). This agreement will be adopted by both jurisdictions and remain in effect until it is determined that the area will be managed as a new Central Point urban reserve area or as part of an incorporated White City urban reserve or urban growth boundary. It is understood that Central Point is not able and consequently not obligated to urbanize Gibbon Acres until it becomes part of an urban reserve, and until adequate financing is identified for it to be effectively retrofitted and/or more comprehensively developed. Addressing the local and regional need According to the land need estimates developed for this plan, Central Point needs between 852 and 1,119 acres of additional residential land. Central Point is designating close to this amount, 899 acres of residential land, in its urban reserve proposal. If Central Point's urban reserves develop closer to the higher range of its proposed residential densities proposed (7.3 units per acre) and redevelopment activity continues within the city, Central Point's urban reserves will easily accommodate the bulk of its allocated residential growth. If these areas develop closer to the lower end of its proposed densities (6 units per acre), or if redevelopment activity is slower, Central Point could require up to 220 acres of additional residential land. Central Point has also designated 929 acres for non-residential uses in its urban reserves, 578 of which are envisioned for industrial uses. As noted earlier, the City would like to increase its employment and industrial land base, both to balance jobs and housing within the city limits, and to provide more immediate services to a growing population. Specifically, the City would like to increase its current employment land base from the current level of 9 to 10 acres per 1,000 residents for commercial and industrial land, to 15 acres per 1,000 residents. This is consistent with benchmarks in Central Point's Draft Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-25 comprehensive plan, Recent building activity suggests there is a growing local demand for commercial and industrial uses. Examples of recent development include the USF Reddaway truck terminal, expansion of the LTM regional offices, and the partial development of the new Airport Orchard industrial site. Exhibit 5-19 Central Point Urban Reserves -Proposed Land Uses Institutional 3% Parks 12% Commercial 5% ~'" Alternatives Analysis When Central Point committed itself to the RPS process it was aware of the `give and take' that occurs in regional land use planning and collaboration. The City has been taking steps in recent years to promote and develop new and more efficient planning practices that include mixed use and higher density development. These practices are also aimed at extending development timelines and preserving important farm land. The City has also been trying to establish its own identity, independent of Medford and other Rogue Valley cities. Consequently, these goals have attracted more new residents to the City. Central Point is committed as a community to accept a considerable share of the region's future population growth; however it is also faced with numerous constraints to the expansion of its urban footprint. The city is also committed to expanding its supply of employment lands which will allow it to move away from its status as a bedroom community. Residential 49% Draft Industrial 31 °/n c .~ 5-26 Proposed Urban Reserves Area A At one point in the process, Central Point included a much larger urban reserve proposal north of the city. The eastern half of Area A was mapped as CP-2, and ~' `~"~s- a ' ~. * - added approximately ] ,000 ` ~ ~ `i r ` ` =' ,, .'~ ` -~ acres to the existing CP-2B. ~~~ ;. ~ , ; ~ - Much of this area is ~ nn ~ ~.-- occupied by oak sava a, ; ~ vernal pools and wet soils, ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ 1~~'- severely limiting t ~ ~ ~ , , development. The area has ~' ~ ~~~ ~ pockets of residential ~ ~ ~f' ~ f" t ' ,~ t, r development in the city to ~ ~' the south and on both sides ~~~ ' > ~' ,~ ` ~ ~, , of Wilson Road. The ~+'` ~` ~ ~ s~~~ ~ ~~~ ~, significant areas of oak ~,,, „ . g~!`::: ~: ~ savannah habitat in this area '° ~ y_- - consist of open grassland or ' ~ %+ ~' `~' 3 `°~~ grass beneath an oak- .~,,• .: d..~... , dominated ecosystem. The r- ~ ~ area was recognized and catalogued as significant by the RPS Citizen Involvement Committee (pCIC) several years ago. The area also contains wetlands, which have been addressed most recently by an employee from the Department of State Lands who toured the area in the spring of 2007. According to DSL, about 115 acres, or 30 percent of the site may be wetland, and a substantial portion of this site may present wetland-development conflicts. The western half of Area A was the original CP-4D, almost 400 acres larger than it is now Since there is an active commercial pear orchard managed by Bear Creek Corporation on the land and due to the cost and difficulty in extending infrastructure, the City eventually abandoned this area for future urban use and reduced CP-4D to the present remnant of city and county owned ~ land. Draft Exhibit 5-20 Other Areas Considered for Urban Reserves ,..,, Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report 5-27 Area B Immediately south of the City, east of CP-6B and west of the Medford city limits is an area that was never included in the City's mapping of urban reserve proposals. The EFU-zoned land here is universally viewed by the region's agricultural community as having some of the deepest and highest quality soils in southern Oregon, and as such, it was never seriously considered for future urbanization. Area C The city originally proposed only the very small CP-5 area on the west side of the city to square off its western boundary and to reduce its expansion west because the area contained high-value farmland. When it became apparent that the agricultural lands to the northeast and to the south of the city were the most productive, and that there were no other viable options for its Central Point's allocated population, CP-6A was proposed. It was during this time that the City also re-evaluated its urban form and a more logical and cost effective extension of its infrastructure. As a further refinement, a 150 acre parcel was removed to reduce CP-6 to the present proposal. Although Central Point's total proposed urban reserves will not be sufficient to meet all of the city's needs, even at the most ambitious density targets, the city will not propose a further westward extension of CP-6 due to the greater value and productivity of the lands further west. Area D The area was originally proposed by the city as a means of meeting its full population allocation and to provide an urbanizable connection with the Tolo area. Nonetheless, once it was demonstrated that the agricultural land in this location (especially the Seven Oaks farm), like the land in Area B and in the western half of Area A, was highly productive, the city made the decision to considerably reduce the original area to the present CP-1 C, and to rely on CP-6A to provide most of the needed residential land. Draft URBANIZATION ELEMENT ~ City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St., Central Point, Or 97502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.ci.central-point.or.u s Planning Department CENTI\/`1L Tom Humphrey, AICP, POINT Community Development Director/ Assistant Ciry Administrator URBANIZATION TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM N0.1 To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Subject: Urbanization Element Date: July 21, 2009 INTRODUCTION It is anticipated that the County will begin proceedings for consideration of the Regional Plan by the fall of 2009. As we proceed with the Regional Problem Solving process the ~r focus will turn to actions necessary to incorporate the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan (the Regional Plan) in to each city's comprehensive plan. There are three basic components of the City's Comprehensive Plan that need to address/incorporate the Regional Plan: 1. The Urbanization Element; 2. The Land Use Plan Map; and 3. Urban Reserve Management Agreements (URMAs). The purpose of this memo is to provide an overview of each of the above three items for consideration by the Planning Commission and the Citizens Advisory Committee, and how the Regional Plan will integrate with the City's Comprehensive Plan. It is not the purpose of this memorandum to re-review the Regional Plan. Discussion of the Regional Plan (Central Point component) will be addressed as a separate item. THE URBANIZATION ELEMENT The comprehensive plan element most affected by the Regional Plan is the Urbanization Element, which addresses the city's urbanization (growth) needs over a specified planning period, typically twenty (20) years. With the Regional Plan the planning period has been extended to include up to an additional thirty (30) years. In the case of the proposed Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan the planning period is based on a doubling of the City's 2007 population (17,025) to 34,192, which is roughly equivalent to the year 2050 Page 1 of 11 population (36,600). For reference purposes this memorandum will refer to the year 2050 as equivalent to the RPS projected population of 34,192. As its title infers the subject of the Urbanization Element is urbanization, which is the result of the continued movement of people from rural environments to urban environments, and from one urban environment to another. This movement can be motivated by any number, or combination of reasons; such as jobs, housing, health care, and education. The result of this movement is an increase in the demand for urban services such as housing, and support infrastructure, retail, schools, streets, parks, utilities, etc. Urbanization has its most negative impacts when the demand for support infrastructure exceeds supply, resulting in overcrowded schools, poor health care, inadequate utility services, etc. The solution is simple -provide for services reasonably in advance of demand. The cornerstone of the City's Comprehensive Plan is its Urbanization Element. From the basic strategies, goals, and policies of the Urbanization Element, a baseline is established guiding the more refined goals and policies of such other elements as housing, economic, recreation, and public facilities. The information presented in the Urbanization Element sets the broad parameters within which the City is expected to operate over the planning period. The significance of urbanization on the economic, environmental, and general welfare of communities is acknowledged in Statewide Planning Goa114, Urbanization; which ~ establishes as a statewide goal the need 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." Compliance with Goa114 is mandatory. The guidelines necessary for compliance are set forth in OAR 660-015-0000(14). The objective of the Urbanization Element is rather straightforward -identify the anticipated population and the land and policies necessary to accommodate the projected population. In this memo we will address the population projections and associated land needs in a very broad manner, and as noted; refine our needs in other Plan elements. In the next memo we will address the goals and policies for the Urbanization Element. Population Forecast The basic input to understanding urbanization is population growth. As directed by ORS 195.036 the County is required to prepare a coordinated population projection for all cities within its jurisdiction. Based on the County and City Population Element it is expected that by 2030 the City's population will reach 25,8801 adding 8,700 people to today's population. By 2050 it is projected that the City's population will double, reaching 34,192, for an additiona18,300 persons. All total by the year 2050 it is expected that the City of 1 City of Central Point Population Element, 2008 Page 2 of 11 Central Point will need sufficient lands to serve the needs on an additiona117,000 people, or a doubling of its 2007 population. Figure 1 illustrates the City's projected population growth as presented in the Population Element and the Regional Plan. Policy~uestion, Population: The City's current Population Element acknowledges the 2030 population projection of 25,880. As a result of the Regional Plan it is necessary that the City accept a 2050 population projection of 34,192, As noted earlier the use of 2050 as a reference years is for descriptive purposes only, and is synonymous with the figure of 34,192. FIGURE 1 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT POPULATION PROJECTIONS ao,ooo 3s,000 C 30,000 Q zs,ooo 0. zo,ooo a 1 s,000 10,000 s,ooo YEAR Land Use Needs 1980 - 2000 Given the population projections it is possible to estimate the amount, and type of land "'~ needed. In the Urbanization Element the City's land use needs will be based on broad land use classifications, which in subsequent elements will be refined and discussed in- depth. The land use needs for any city, and the area required by each use, varies depending on the city's role in the local, regional, state, and national economy. In the 1980 Comprehensive Plan it was estimated that in the aggregate the City would need 169 acres per 1,000 population, which would be distributed among five basic land use types as follows: 1. Residential 2. Commercial 3. Industrial 4. Parks & Open Space 5. Civic (schools, government services, streets, etc.) The 169 acres per 1,000 population was developed based on a survey of cities of similar size. The result was a series of ratios for each land use type. Table 1 identifies the benchmarks used in 1980 to determine the City's land needs, and the percentage distribution of each land use type. As would be expected; at 47%, the Residential sector is the dominant land use type, followed by Public Right-of-Way (20%), and Industrial (13%). Based on these ratios it was Page 3 of 11 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 determine in 1980 that the City required 2,708 acres to meet the needs of a population of 16,000 by the year 2000, at which time all lands would be fully developed. As illustrated in Table 1 the actual acreage distribution by land use type was very close (2,737) to the estimated need 2,708 acres. The only exception was in the Commercial land use type, which included approximately 24% more commercial land than initially estimated. _~ TABLE 1 --- CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ~ ~ .LAND USE DISTRIBUTION BY POPULATION BENCHMARK, 1980 ! •~ ~ ~~ ~:i Residential 80 ~ 1,280 i 1,281 47~~0 Commerclall 10 160 ~ 198 ~ 7%! ~Industriall 22 352 ~ 351 i 13% Parks & O n S ce1 10 160 162 6% CivicZ 13 _ ' 215 206 8% Public R' t-of-Wa 2 34 ' 542 1' 538. 20%~ ~ ~ ~ ' Measured in acres/1,000 population a Measured as percentage of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial t-- 3Based on a population projection of 16,000 by the year 2000 j Source: City of Central Point 1980 Comprehensive Plan, Urbanization Element, E-1 ~"' In Table 2 we compare the 1980 projected gross acreage needs against the City's 2008 gross acres. When comparing 1980 against 2008 it is important to note that that the City's urban area boundaries have not changed since 1980; however, as illustrated in Table 2 the total acreage inventory within the City's urban area is now 2,879 acres. The difference between the two figures is attributed to the methodology used in calculating the total acreage. In 1980 a planimeter was used to calculate the total area. The planimeter is a mechanical instrument that is hand operated and used to measure area. In 2009 the total area was calculated using the City's computerized geographic information system, a more accurate methodology. The net result was the inclusion of an additiona1142 acres within the City's urban area. The additiona1142 acres trickled down through the various land use types, which in conjunction with land use changes between 1980 and 2008 resulted in differences between the land use needs established in 1980 and those that exist today. Table 2 compares the 1980 estimates in Table 1 against today's land use distributions. The most significant change has occurred in the residential, industrial, and civic sectors, with a gain of 183 and 106 acres in residential and street right-of-way respectively, and a loss of 141 and 56 acres in industrial and civic respectively. The significance in these differences is of no real consequence, they simply represent a redistribution of the existing land supply. What is important is how the land was actually used (demand). Page 4 of 11 Land Use Demand 1980 - 2008 In 1980 the designated land needs were based on full consumption of all lands within the urban area by the year 2000. Considering the changes that have taken place since 1980, the increase in population and the amount of land actually developed, we are able to determine how the land was actually used. By adjusting the City's total acreage to `, account only for developed lands (Gross Acres less Vacant Acres) and dividing by population (1,000), will yield actua12008 demand ratios. The use of Vacant Acres as defined in the Buildable lands Inventory is consistent with the term "vacant lands' used in the 1980 Comprehensive Plane TABLE 3 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ' -------- ------- LAND CONSUMPTION COMPARISON 1980 PROJECTION vs. 2008 ACTUAL Residential _ 80 1,280 1,373 ~ _ 1,329 77 Commercial _ _~ 10 160 172 !, 16_7 __ _ __10_ Industrial 22 352 378 134 ' 8 Parks & O ern Space 10 160 172 ~ 175 _ 10 _ Civic ----- - _ 13 --- _ 215 ~ ----- r 223 ! -- - 41 9 9 - Streets 34 542 583: 644 ' 38 ~ Acres per 1,000 population Z Based on PSU July 1, 2008 Certified Population Estimate of 17,160 2 City of Central Point Comprehensive P1an,1980, Urbanization Element, Buildable lands Inventory, page III-20 Page 5 of 11 iSource: City of Central Point Buildable Lands Inventory ~- In Table 3 the 1980 ratios are applied to the 2008 population to adjust the projected acreage needs (Adjusted Acres, 2008). These figures are compared against the actual demand for land per 1,000 population (Actual Developed Acres). With the exception of Streets the 2008 ratios were at or below the 1980 benchmarks. Figure 2 provides a visual comparison between the 1980 and the 2008 ratios. FIGURE 2 LAND USE RATIO COMPARISON,1980vs2008 Iso 160 ~ 140 e o I20 a a y 100 0 °0 80 i 60 u e ao ?o Land Use Category ^19808enchmark(Ratio)1 ^2008ActualRatio `,. The following discuses the ratio comparisons between 1980 and 2008 by land use sector. Residential Sector - In 1980 it was expected that for each 1,000 population the City would need 80 acres of residential land, which is equivalent to an average of 9,374 sq. ft. of residential land per dwelling unit, for a gross residential density of 4.65 units per acre. By the end of 2008 the City's realized ratio was 77 acres per 1,000 population. Commercial Sector - At 10 acres per 1,000 population the ratio for the commercial sector appears to be adequate, as demonstrated by the use of commercial land since 1980. Industrial Sector -The reduction in the Industrial sector ratio is indicative of either an over estimation of industrial needs, a low demand for industrial development, or a combination of both. It is common practice for cities to overestimate their industrial land needs as a means of being prepared for and promoting industrial development opportunities. Parks & Recreation Sector -This sector relies on a nationally recognized standard for park lands. The National Park Lands Association recommends a ratio of between 8 and 10 acres per 1,000 population. The City's ratio is 10 acres per thousand population, which is at the higher range, and is consistent with the City's ~r vision of a community with plentiful parks and recreation facilities. Page 6 of 11 Residential Commercial Industrial Parks& Civic Streets TOTAL Open Space ACRES Civic Sector -The Civic sector, although below the 1980 ratio, is not unreasonably ~. below the 1980 benchmark (13 vs. 9). Streets -The established benchmark was 34. The 34 benchmark is equivalent to 25% of the total urban area, and has proven to be reasonably accurate over time. Today the ratio is 38. Projected Land Use Needs, 2030 & 2050 Using the 1980 Comprehensive Plan ratios and applying them to the projected population, the land needs for the City by the year 2030 and 2050 can be calculated. The land use needs necessary to accommodate the City's projected growth are presented in Table 4. The 1980 ratios are used as a benchmark against current and future acreage needs and ratios. Projections for 2030 (Urban Growth Boundary) and 2050 (Urban Reserve Areas) are compared against current acreage within the City's urban area. TABLE 4 I ~ _ _.- . __ CITY OF CENTRAL POINT - __ _ -- LAND USE NEEDS PROJECTION, 2030 & 2050 Residentiah _ 1,464 !_ 2,070 (60'7) __ 2_,735 Commerciah _ 237 ; 259 (22)~ 342 Industrial' -- 210 ~~~ --~ 569 _ (359) ~~ _ 752 Parks & Open Spacel - __ 175 ' ~ 259_' (84)~ 342 _ Civicz 150 333 (183) 440 Public Rl£bt-of-Wav2 644 870. (226) 1,150 ~ Measured in acres/1,000 population Measured as percentage of Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Based on a 2008 population of 17,160 and developed lands only. ° Based on a 2030 population of 25,880 ' Based on a 2050 population of 34,192 i In Table 5 the City's projected land use needs proposed in the Regional Plan are presented by sector. For comparison purposes Table 5 also includes the projected 2050 acreage figures from Table 4. With the exception of the Residential and Civic sectors, the acreage figures are reasonably comparable. Public Right-of-Way is down, but that is a reflection of the lower need for residential and civic land. Page 7 of 11 STABLE 5 _ _ CITY OF CENTRAL POINT ;LAND USE NEEDS COMPARISON 2050 vs. RPS Residential' 2,819 2,363 (456' Commercial' 332 344 9 Industrial' 773 788 13_ Parks & Open Space' 332 ~ 383 ~ 30 -- Civic2 --.._ 453 _ _ _ 208 , , (245 Pnhlir Riuht_nf_WavZ 1,185 . 1,062 ! (123. Measured in acres/1,000 population ' Measured as percentage of Residential, Commercial, end Industrial 3 Based on a 2030 population of 31,237 and 1980 Ratios ° (;teeter Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, Appendix V In Table 6 the ratios from 1980, 2008, and RPS 2050 are compared. These are real differences and are the result of development occurring at higher densities, lost r~ development opportunities, or a combination of both. The following is a discussion of the ratio changes by sector. TABLE 6 __ _ _ __ I ~ --- CITY OF CENTRAL POINT LAND USE RATIO COMPARISON 1980, 2008, & RPS 2050 n..:a,. .,t' >zn 77 76 Commercial' 10 ]0 I 1 'Industrial' 22 8 2S Parks & Open Space' ]0 __ ]0 12 Cl ivic` _ _ 13 j _ 9 7 Public R' t-of-Wa 2 34 38 34 Residential Sector -Since 1980 it is apparent that residential development has been occurring at higher densities as the acreage needs per 1,000 population declines from 80 to 77 acres. As the City moves forward this decline is expected to continue. Commencing with adoption of the Regional Plan the ratio will drop to 76 acres per thousand population. Because of the methodology on which the ratio Page S of 11 is based the decline from 80 to 77 was strictly a result of development at higher 1`, densities. Policy Question, Land Use Need -Residential: In 1980 it was estimated that the City would require 80 acres per 1,000 population. By 2008 the City's actual need zuas 77 acres per 1,000 population, and Inj 2050 it is expected to drop to 76 acres per 1,000 population. As history demonstrates the City outperformed the 1980 benchmark. It is expected tluzt the Cih~ will continue to promote housing policies that support reasonable increases in the average dwelling unit density, to the extent that development standards are in place to assure that the City's vision of maintaining a small town appearance is achieved. It is recommended that the 2050 ratio of 76 be accepted? Commercial -Between 1980 and 2008 the commercial demand for land has remained constant at 10 acres per thousand population. As we move forward to 2050 the ratio will increase slightly to 11 acres per 1,000 population. Policy Question, Land Use Need -Commercial: Since 1980 the commercial benchmark of 10 appears to accurately address the City's commercial land needs. Unless tl~e City significantly modifies its economic policies to encourage more commercial development it is recommended that the 10 ratio be accepted. Industrial -Between 1980 and 2008 the industrial demand for land fell short, by a '`,r substantial amount, from the benchmark of 22 acres per 1,000 population. The 2008 ratio reflects the markets interest in industrial development in Central Point. This statement needs to be tempered with the understanding that industrial development occurs at an absorption rate much lower than residential. It is also a common practice to provide more land than actually needed for industrial purposes to encourage both selection and opportunity for industrial development. As we move forward to 2050 the ratio exceeds the 1980 benchmark. Policy Question, Land Use Need -Industrial: Of all the land use sectors the Industrial sector significantly underperformed. This is not unusual. At approximately 600 acres of industrially designated acres the inclusion of CP-1B (Seven Oaks) is the sole reason for an industrial ratio of 25 per 1,000 population. This urban reserve area, with its rail and freeway confluence, is targeted for eventual development as a freight transfer center. As the City reviews its Economic Element additional attention should be given to addressing the needs of CP-1B as a freight transfer center. It is recommended that the 25 ratio be accepted. Parks & Open Space -Between 1980 and 2008 the industrial demand for land fell short, by a substantial amount, from the benchmark of 22 acres per 1,000 population. The 2008 ratio reflects the markets interest in industrial development in Central Point. This statement needs to be tempered with the understanding that industrial development occurs at an absorption rate much lower than residential. As we move forward to 2050 the ratio exceeds the 1980 benchmark. Page 9 of 11 Policy Question, Land Use Need -Parks f~ Recreation: The City's Park £~ `, Recreation Element sets the standard, which is supported by national standards. Based on the 2050 projected needs the benchmark increases from 10 to 12. The primary reason for the increase is in the inclusion of CP-3 which contains 41 acres that are solely dedicated for open space. The outer consideration is the impact of the Bear Creek Greenzuay on the City's Parks and Open Space inventory. After adjusting for CP-4D the ratio returns to 10. It is recommended that the 12 ratio be accepted. Civic -Between 1980 and 2008 the industrial demand for land fell short, by a substantial amount, from the benchmark of 22 acres per 1,000 population. The 2008 ratio reflects the markets interest in industrial development in Central Point. This statement needs to be tempered with the understanding that industrial development occurs at an absorption rate much lower than residential. As we move forward to 2050 the ratio exceeds the 1980 benchmark. Policy Question, Land Use Need -Civic: The differences in the Civic sector ratio from 13 to 7 represents a significant reduction; however, when judged against what actually occurred since 1980 it is not far from the actual demand. It is suggested that the 7 ratio be accepted, but monitored on a five year cycle and adjusted as necessary. Public Right-Of-Way -Between 1980 and 2008 the industrial demand for land fell short, by a substantial amount, from the benchmark of 22 acres per 1,000 \,, population. The 2008 ratio reflects the markets interest in industrial development in Central Point. This statement needs to be tempered with the understanding that industrial development occurs at an absorption rate much lower than residential. As we move forward to 2050 the ratio exceeds the 1980 benchmark. Policy Question, Land Use Need -Streets: The continued use of the 34 ratio is justifiable. At tliis time it is not suggested Hutt the benchmark he reduced. In general it appears that the City's overall acreage demand per 1,000 population is not much different from that used in 1980. The reality is that after adjusting for industrial acreage needs to reflect past industrial activity, the requirement per 1,000 population drops considerably, from 165 to 148. LAND USE PLAN MAP Attached is a Land Use Plan Map that includes the Urban Reserve Areas identified in the Regional Plan. The City's approval of the Regional Plan requires identification of the urban reserve areas. On the City's Urbanization Map there will be three geographic urbanization categories: 1. Lands within the City limits; 2. Lands within the Urban Growth Boundary; and ,~ 3. Lands within the Urban Reserve Area. Page 10 of 11 Figure 3, identifies all three categories. URBAN RESERVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT A compulsory requirement of adopting urban reserve areas is that the City and County enter into Urban Reserve Agreement (URMA). The purpose of the URMA is to establish conditions addressing the timing and development of property within the City's urban reserve areas. In addition to standard restrictions on development within an urban reserve some of the City's proposed urban reserve areas (CPCP-1B and CP-4D) have unique conditions that must also be included in the URMA. A draft copy of an URMA will be distributed at the meeting. FIGURE 3 URBANIZATION PLAN Page 11 of 11 -- ~.,~. ^ Central Point „_,~~„~„A..mm Urbanization Plan ECONOMIC ELEMENT City of Central Point, Oregon __ 140 So.Third St., Central Point, Or 97502 541.664.3321 Fax 541.664.6384 www.ci.central-point.or.u s Planning Department Tom Humphrey, AICP, Community Development Director/ Assistant City Administrator ECONOMIC ELEMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM N0.1 To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee From: Dave Jacob, Community Planner Subject: Economic Element, Employment Projections & Land Use Scenarios Date: July 7, 2009 The purpose of the Economic Elem to demonstrate compliance with L (LCDC) Statewide Planning Goa19 and improvement of the economy. suitable for economic growth. Acc Comprehensive Plan is to promote adequate provisions for future div industries and businesses to locate growth. CENTRAL POINT ent of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan is and Conservation and Development Commission Economy of the State, which calls for diversification Goa19 also requires cities to provide lands that are ordingly, a major goal of the City of Central Point the economic health of the community by making ersified industrial development, encouraging suitable in the city, and by promoting healthy employment Goa19 requires Comprehensive Plans to consider certain economic issues and incorporate policies designed to address those issues. Goal 9 further mandates that Comprehensive Plans must include: • An analysis of economic patterns, potentialities, strengths, and deficiencies as they relate to state and national trends, • An inventory of buildable commercial and industrial lands for economic growth, and • Policies conc community. the economic development opportunities in the NATIONAL TRENDS As described in Figure 1.1, since the 1950s, the composition of the United States economy has undergone a dynamic transformation. • In the 1950s, the economy was heavily weighted toward goods producing industries, comprising better than 30% of national employment. Page 1 of 8 • Technological advances, increased construction activity, and contractual labor arrangements, such as outsourcing, are largely responsible for the Nation's ~,. economic shift. • Since 1980, service-oriented industries have experienced a 13.2% increase in their share of the national economy. Government Services Finance, Insurance, Real Estate ^ 2000 Retail Trade ^ 1990 Wholesale Trade ^ 1980 ^ 1970 Transportation & Public Utilities ^ 1960 Manufacturing ^ 1950 Constuction Mining 0% 5% 10% 15 % 20 % 25 % 30 % 35 °~ 40 % Figure 1.1. United States Industry Trends -1950 to 2000 aging national and Leisure & -- - Abstract of the United States, 2003 mt in the national economy is expected to continue to oriented jobs. Service sector growth will be more cally than the previous decade. For example, Health all industries over the next decade, largely driven by the dition to consumer goods, growth in Financial Activities .o projected to grow significantly as the result of aging STATE OF OREGON AND REGIONAL TRENDS The State of Oregon and Jackson County mirror national industry trends in many ways. In both cases, there has been a consistent decrease in manufacturing employment and growth in the service industries as demonstrated in Figures 1.2 and 1.3. Page 2 of 8 Baby Boomers. ure 1.2. State of Ore Trends, 1976 to 2000 0% 5% 10°~ 15% 20% 25% 30% Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Mining Construction Manufacturing Trans., Comm., and Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trad e Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Services Nonclassifiable/all others ! ~ Government ^ 1976 ^ 19>30 ^ 1990 ^ 2000 F;mwn 1 ~ iarlrcnn ('nnnfv indnctrv Trend. 1976 to 2000 0% 5 % 10 °.6 15°.6 20% 25 % 30 % Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing Mining Construction ~ ~ ~ I Manufacturing ~ ~ ^ 1976 Trans., Comm., and Utilities i ^ 1980 Wholesale Trade ~ ^ 1990 ^ 2000 Retait Trade Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Services Nonclassifiable/all others i Government Related to future industry growth in Region 8, which includes Jackson and Josephine Counties, Table 1.1 outlines the State of Oregon s most recent employment growth forecast which was used as a baseline estimate to forecast the rate of employment growth by industry in this analysis. Page 3 of S Table 1.2. Covered Em to ent b Indus -Central Point UGB, 2007 Indus Jobs % Distribution Natural Resources 6 0.2% Construction 273 9.0% Manufacturin 104 3.4 Wholesale Trade 102 3.4 ~.~ Retail Trade 402 13.2°~ Trans ortation and Warehousin 44 1.4°ib Information 48 1.6 °i~ Financial Activities 109 3.6% Professional & Business 119 3.9% Education & Health Services 979 32.2% Leisure & Hos itali 465 15.3% Other Services 128 4.2% Public Administration 264 8.7% Source: Oregon Employment Department, ES-202 Table 1.3 presents a forecast of total eml Growth Boundary (UGB) between 2008 forecasts within the City of Central Poir `, methodology will be described in detail the next decade, and i s projected growth rates by sector over kh to the estimated current employment additional forecasts are also generated, ;. While a final reconciliation of need will noted that employment forecasts are forecast anticipates an increase of 2,493 jobs, The high growth scenario projects an increase of 2,498 jobs (1.9% AAGR), while the low growth scenario projects 1,941 new jobs (1.4% AAGR). Education & Health Services, Professional Services, and Retail Trade are expected to account for the largest percent of new growth over the forecast period in all reflecting an average annual growth rate of 1.7%. scenarios. 2007 nt within the existing Central Point Urban i30. This analysis updates the employment B and is generated through 2030. The complete Economic Element. Page 5 of 8 Table 1.3. Em to ent Forecast, Central Point UGB, 2008 to 2030 BASELINE Base Em to ment Forecast 2008-203 0 Growth Medium Growth Forecast Year 2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Jobs AAGR* Natural Resources 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0.2% Construction 480 496 538 584 634 688 208 1.7% Manufacturin 125 127 131 136 140 145 20 0.7% Wholesale trade 125 128 138 148 160 172 47 1.5% Retail trade 485 500 537 578 621 668 182 1.5% Transportation and warehousin 61 62 66 71 75 80 19 1.3% Information 61 62 65 67 70 73 12 0.8% Financial Activities 238 244 261 280 299 320 83 1.4% Professional and Business 239 249 275 304 336 371 132 2.1 Education and health services 1878 1975 2232 2522 2850 3221 1343 2.6% Leisure and hos itali 547 570 630 696 769 850 303 2.1 Other services 308 316 337 359 382 407 99 1.3% Public Administration 279 282 292 303 313 324 46 0.7% Total 4831 5019 5510 6054 6656 7325 2493 1.7% Base Em to went Forecast 2008-2028 Growth High Growth Forecast Year 2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Jobs AAGR* Natural Resources 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0.2% Construction 480 499 547 601 660 724 244 2.0°~ Manufacturin 125 127 132 137 143 149 24 0.8% Wholesale trade 125 129 140 152 165 180 55 1.7% Retail trade 485 502 545 593 644 699 214 1.7% Transportation and warehousin 61 63 67 72 78 84 23 1.5% Information 61 62 65 68 71 74 13 0.9% Financial Activities 238 245 265 286 309 334 97 1.6% Professional and Business 239 250 281 315 353 395 156 2.4% Education and health services 1878 1990 2287 2629 3022 3474 1597 3.0% Leisure and hos itali 547 573 643 720 807 905 358 2.4% Other services 308 317 341 367 394 423 115 1.5% Public Administration 279 283 294 306 319 331 53 0.8% Total 4831 5048 5615 6253 6971 7780 2948 1.9% Base Em to ment Forecast 2008-2028 Growth Low Growth Forecast Year 2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Jobs AAGR* Natural Resources 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0.2% Construction 480 493 528 565 604 647 167 1.4% Page 6 of 8 Manufacturin 125 126 130 134 138 142 17 0.6% Wholesale trade 125 128 135 143 152 161 37 1.2% Retail trade 485 497 527 558 592 628 142 1.2% Transportation and warehousin 61 62 65 68 72 75 15 1.0°~ Information 61 62 64 66 68 70 8 0.6% Financial Activities 238 243 258 273 290 307 70 1.2% Professional and Business 239 247 268 291 316 342 103 1.7% Education and health services 1878 1956 2162 2389 2640 2917 1039 2.1 Leisure and hos itali 547 566 614 666 722 784 237 1.7% Other services 308 314 330 346 364 382 74 1.0% Public Administration 279 281 288 296 303 311 32 0.5% Total 4831 4983 5376 5803 6267 6772 1941 1.4% 2. SUMMARY OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND NEED FINDINGS The results summarized in Table 2.1 highlights projections of net new demand within the Central Point UGB for commercial and industrial land between 2008 and 2030. Detailed findings by use type and growth scenario will be included in a technical appendix. Over the next twenty years, expected to range from 67 tc Point's realized growth patt and industrial land is it upon Central indicates that Central Point can expect need in the vicinity of 81 acres through to accommodate particular numbers e land, required only for building and Roads, right-of-ways, parks and public to serve projected land development, are Table 2.1 Proj Central Point Aggregate Need for Commercial and Industrial Land in the 2008 to 2030 Net Buildable Acres Use T e Medium Growth Hi h Growth Low Growth Office Commercial 22.0 26.1 17.1 Industrial 19.7 23.0 15.3 Retail Commercial 39.4 44.1 34.9 Total 81.1 93.2 67.3 In addition to the demand for actual sites, the need for public rights of way and infrastructure must be estimated in order to project the total amount of land that would be `,: required in the event the Urban Growth Boundary were expanded to provide land for Page 7 of 8 needed employment sites. The Department of Land Conservation and Development Goal ~ 9 guidebook recommends 25% for city's that would largely be extending infrastructure into new areas to serve new development. The below figure converts the acreages from Table 2.1 to total gross land demand by category. Table 2.2 projects the total land demand for Central Point Table 2.2 Projected Aggregate Need for Commercial and Industrial Land in the n _ __.___, r,_._a iT!'Q 7MQ i~i. 7n'2n /rrncc Rnilrlahle ACresl t.emrai r ~uu v.~,., ~.,.,.~ • Use T e - - -- Medium Growth Hi h Growth Low Growth Office Commercial 27.5 32.6 21.4 Industrial 24.6 28.8 19.1 Retail Commercial 49.2 55.1 43.6 Total 101.3 116.5 84.1 "`./ Page 8 of 8 • Over the forecast period (2006-2016), the region s employment growth is projected '1`„ to average 1.5% across all industries. • The Education & Health (2.6% Average Annual Growth Rate (AAGR)) and Professional & Business (1.9%AAGR) sectors are expected to display accelerated growth at the regional level during the period. Only modest rates of growth are expected in the Natural Resources (0.2%AAGR), Manufacturing (0.7% AAGR) and Public Administration (0.7% AAGR) sectors. • Modest projected growth in the Manufacturing sector reflects anticipated declines in many traditional industries, offset by expansion in other manufacturing firms. While current operations may decline in employment, a commensurate decline in land utilization is not anticipated, as these firms are not expected to reduce property needs. Table 1.1. Em to ent Pro'ections, Re ion 8 ackson & Jose hine Counties NAICS 2006 2016 Growth Rate Natural Resources 980 1,000 0.2% Construction 7,590 8,800 1.5 Manufacturin 10,420 11,220 0.7% Wholesale Trade 3,540 3,950 1.1 Retail Trade 18,300 21,160 1.5% T.W.U 3,200 3,630 1.3% 170 2 0.8% Information 2,010 , 870 6 1.2% Financial Activities 6.090 , 1 9% Professional & Business 9,580 11,550 . Education & Health 15,730 20,250 2.6% Leisure & Hos itali 12,120 14,580 1.9% Other Services 3,800 4,310 1.3% Public Administration 15,530 16,590 0.7% Total 108,890 126,080 1.5% SOURCE: Oregon Employment Department ~ CITY The v was derived from provide data on cov on those employees provide data on all current industry in the DATA As shown in Table 1.2, current employment within the Central Point UGB is concentrated in Education and Health Services (32.2%), Accommodation and Food Services (15.3%), the Retail Trade (13.2%), Construction (9.0%) and Public Administration (8.7%) sectors. Overall, Central Point contains approximately 3.2% of the workforce of Jackson County. For the purpose of comparison, in 2006 the City of Medford accounted for 60.7% of all employment in Jackson County, with dominant shares in the service and trade sectors. of data on current employment patterns for the City of Central Point the State of Oregon Employment Department's ES-202 reports which ered employment. Covered employment data provides information that are covered by state unemployment insurance. While it does employment in the city, it does provide an effective snapshot of Page 4 of S CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. `' Council Chambers @ Central Point City Hall I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER IL ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTIONS Chairman Joe Thomas, Herb Farber, Sam Inkley, Jr., David Painter, Jake Jakabosky, and Larry Martin III. MINUTES Approval of July 8, 2008 Minutes IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES V. DISCUSSION ~ A. Wilson Road UGB Expansion Plan Update B. Regional Problem Solving Process and Comprehensive Plan C. Rogue Valley I-5 Corridor Plan D. Exit 35 Interchange Access Management Plan VI. MISCELLANEOUS VII. ADJOURNMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE `, Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers @ Central Point City Hall I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL/INTRODUCTIONS Chairman Joe Thomas, Herb Farber, Sam Inkley, Jr., David Painter, Jake Jakabosky, Larry Martin and Jeff Pfeifer III. MINUTES Approval of February 24, 2009 Minutes IV. PUBLIC APPEARANCES V. DISCUSSION A. Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan B. Urbanization Element C. Economic Element VI. MISCELLANEOUS VII. ADJOURNMENT