HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - July 3, 2012CENTRAL
POINT
CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
July 3, 2012 - 6:00 p.m.
Next Planning Commission
Resolution No. 787
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
Planning Commission: Chuck Piland, Mike Oliver, Tim Schmeusser, Rick Samuelson,
Jr., Tom Van Voorhees, Susan Szc2esniak, Craig Nelson, Sr.
III. CORRESPONDENCE
IV. MINUTES
Review and approval of May 1, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes
V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES
VI. BUSINESS
A. File Nos. 09017 and 12015. A public hearing to consider a resolution
recommending approval of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan,
including adoption of a Regional Plan Element as a new element of the City of
Central Point Comprehensive Plan, and amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
adding Section 17.71 Agricultural Buffering, an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designating the Urban Reserve Areas, and
approval of an Urban Reserve Management Agreement between Jackson County
and the City of Central Point. Applicant: City of Central Point
VII. DISCUSSION
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
X. ADJOURNMENT
City of Central Point
Planning Commission Minutes
May 1, 2012
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Chuck Piland, Mike Oliver, Susan Szczesniak, Rick Samuelson,
Jr., Tim Schmeusser, Tom Van Voorhees and Craig Nelson, Sr. were present.
Also in attendance were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director;
Connie Clune, Community Planner; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary.
III. CORRESPONDENCE —None
IV. MINUTES
Mike Oliver made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 3, 2012
Planning Commission meeting. Rick Samuelson seconded the motion. ROLL
CALL: Oliver, yes; Szczesniak, abstained; Samuelson, yes; Schmeusser, yes;
Van Voorhees, yes; Nelson, abstained Motion passed.
V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES - None
VI. BUSINESS
A. File No. 12011. A public hearing to consider Comprehensive Plan (map)
and Municipal Code Zoning (map) Amendments from C -N Neighborhood
Commercial to M -1, Light Industrial on Table Rock Road. Applicant:
City of Central Point
There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Mike Oliver stated that
he had spoken with a property owner and made a site visit.
Community Development Director Tom Humphrey stated that he would like to use the
meeting this evening as a training opportunity. The City doesn't generally get a lot of
comp plan amendment requests but with the Regional Plan looming, we anticipate getting
more of them. Mr. Humphrey wanted to introduce new planning commissioners to the
process and explained that a comprehensive plan amendment could be initiated by either
the Planning Commission, the City Council or by a private party. The amendment on this
evening's agenda was initiated by the City Council.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 1, 2012
Page 2
Mr. Humphrey reviewed the staff report as presented in the Planning Commission packet,
providing background information and discussing the original intent of the C -N
(Neighborhood Commercial) zoning of the eight (8) tax lots in question that comprise the
7.61 acres. Mr. Humphrey explained that the City plans in advance for 20 years of
growth and properties are pre -zoned so that when a property chooses to annex into the
City, they know ahead of time what the zoning will be. Mr. Humphrey continued with
background information on the development of the Central Point East subdivision and
stated that the developers didn't want to connect to Table Rock Road, leaving a tax lot
with approximately an acre of land that was later rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial.
A majority of the properties located along Table Rock Road are zoned light industrial. It
is reasonable to rezone the C -N properties to light industrial (M -1) as the current uses of
these properties contain light industrial -type businesses.
In order to make changes to the City's comprehensive plan, it needs to be determined that
these changes would be consistent with the existing comprehensive plan, statewide land
use goals, and Central Point zoning ordinances. Mr. Humphrey then reviewed the
findings of fact and conclusions of law that were included in the packet, explaining each
goal and the effect of a rezoning on the parcels of land that would be the subject to the
plan amendment.
Mike Oliver questioned what would happen to existing residences located on these
properties. Mr. Humphrey defined legal non - conforming uses for the benefit of the
commissioners and those in the audience. When the City Council makes a policy
decision, he explained, some properties become legal non - conforming uses and are
grandfathered. Ultimately, we expect that these uses will go away with the idea that over
time, the area will redevelop. If annexed into the City, existing residences would be
allowed to remodel, expand and perpetuate the use on the site if designated a type "A"
non - conforming use.
In conclusion, Mr. Humphrey stated, during the time the properties have been zoned C -N,
nothing has been happening in the way of new development because of the limitations
imposed by the zoning.
The public hearing was opened and a member of the audience, Sharon Boyd, came
forward and said that she has lived in one of the residences along Table Rock Road since
1976. Mrs. Boyd asked what the advantages would be to them with a comprehensive
plan amendment. Commission Chairman Chuck Piland explained some of the difficulties
with access to some of the parcels in question. Mr. Humphrey added that if we change
the City's designation to be the same as the County designation, there would be options
available to homeowners with regard to taxes and non - conforming uses. Tim
Schmeusser offered that Mrs. Boyd's chances of getting a letter from the City to justify
financing for a bank is greater than it would be through the County.
Another neighbor, Jeannie Savage, came forward and asked what impact a zone change
would have on her property and was assured that it would not impact her at all.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 1, 2012
Page 3
The public portion of the hearing was then closed.
Mike Oliver made a motion to approve Resolution 786 recommending approval of
an amendment to the Central Point Comprehensive Plan (map) and the Municipal
Code Zoning (map) changing 7.61 acres of land designated C -N, Neighborhood
Commercial to M -1, Light Industrial on Table Rock Road. Rick Samuelson seconded
the motion. ROLL CALL: Oliver, yes; Szczesniak, yes; Samuelson, yes; Schmeusser,
yes; Van Voorhees, yes; and Nelson, yes. Motion carried.
VII. DISCUSSION
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS — None
IX. MISCELLANEOUS
Chairperson Chuck Piland welcomed new commissioners Susan Szczesniak and Craig
Nelson, Sr. to the Planning Commission.
Tom Humphrey offered new commissioners copies of the City's strategic plan and
highlighted other periodicals available to them to borrow.
Mr. Humphrey gave an update on a conference that he attended recently regarding retail
district revitalization and explained his involvement with "Destination Boot camp"
alumni, a group of local businessmen who have gathered together to better their
businesses.
Mr. Humphrey then presented an update on the Regional Plan and what it would require
of the cities involved in the process. He also reported on new commercial projects that
were underway in the City and described how the City's new Urban Renewal agency
would enable the City to snake infrastructure improvements, creating incentives for other
people to develop their properties.
X. ADJOURNMENT
Mike Oliver made a motion to adjourn the meeting, Tim Schmeusser
seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
The foregoing minutes of the May 1, 2012 Planning Commission meeting were approved
by the Planning Commission at its meeting on the day of
, 2012.
Planning Commission Chair
STAFF REPORT
Citvot
CENTRAL
POINT
Oregon
STAFF REPORT
July 3, 2012
Community Development
Tom Humphrey, AICP
Community Development Director
ITEM:
Consideration of a resolution recommending approval of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan,
including adoption of a Regional Plan Element as a new element of the City of Central Point
Comprehensive Plan, and amendment to the Zoning Ordinance adding Section 17.71 Agricultural
Buffering, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designating the Urban Reserve
Areas, and approval of an Urban Reserve Management Agreement between Jackson County and the City
of Central Point (File No. 09017 and 12015). Applicant: City of Central Point
STAFF SOURCE:
Don Burt, AICP, EDFP, Planning Manager
BACKGROUND:
On December 22, 2008, after many years of discussion it was agreed by all participants that the Greater
Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "Regional Plan ") was ready for final review. By Ordinance No.
1923, the City of Central Point, along with other participants, signed the Greater Bear Creek Valley
Regional Problem Solving Participant's Agreement (the "Agreement "). This agreement formalized the
conditions for completion of the final draft of the Regional Plan.
On September 8, 2011 the City Council, with a recommendation from the Planning Commission,
approved Resolution No. 1312 forwarding a favorable, and final, recommendation to the County Planning
Commission to approve the Regional Plan. The City Council's recommendation included four (4)
suggested text changes. The County, with the exception of the recommendation to modify the timing for
adoption of an Area of Mutual Planning Concern agreement for the Gibbon Acres area, accepted (in
principle) the City's recommendations.
On November 23, 2011 the Jackson County Board of Commissioners approved the Plan, which; as
instructed in the Agreement, became the final adopted Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan.
Included in the adoption of the Regional Plan the County Board of Commissioners also adopted a new
Regional Plan Element, amended the Comprehensive Plan maps to identify the urban reserve areas,
amended their Land Development Code, and approved the Urban Reserve Management Agreements.
In accordance with the Agreement, and ORS 197.652 - 656, it is now the responsibility of the remaining
participants to:
I . Amend their comprehensive plans to include a Regional Plan Element;
2. Amend their comprehensive plan map (Land Use Plan Map) to include a map that illustrates the
urban reserve areas;
3. Adopt the agricultural buffering ordinance; and
4. Approve an Urban Reserve Management Agreement.
These four actions are the subject of the Planning Commission's consideration, and recommendation to
the City Council. Findings supporting the Planning Commission's recommendation are presented in
Page 1 of 3
Exhibit "E" of the resolution (Attachment "A "). Once the above is completed by all participants the
County will forward the approvals to LCDC for final consideration and action.
DISCUSSION:
As noted above there are four actions to be taken by the Planning Commission. At the July Yd meeting
each action will be presented and discussed separately as follows:
Regional Plan Element (Exhibit "A" of the Resolution) — The Regional Plan Element will be a new
element of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of this Element is incorporate applicable sections of the
Plan into each participant's comprehensive plan. This is a requirement of ORS 195.137 -145. The text in
the Element is either directly quoted from, or references the adopted Plan.
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map (Exhibit "B" of the Resolution) — As part of the
Comprehensive Plan modification it is necessary that the Land Use Plan Map be amended to include the
urban reserve areas as described in the adopted Plan. For the City of Central Point there are eight (8)
Urban Reserve Areas.
Urban Reserve Management Agreement (Exhibit "C" of the Resolution) — Another condition of the
Agreement was approval of an Urban Reserve Management Agreement (URMA). The purpose of the
URMA is to define and delegate responsibilities between the City and the County for development within
the urban reserve areas.
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance (Exhibit "D" of the Resolution) — One of the conditions agreed to
in the Agreement is the adoption of an agricultural buffering ordinance by all participants.
The attached resolution (Attachment "A ") consolidates each action into a single decision. Information
supporting the decision is presented in Exhibit "E" of the attached Resolution.
ISSUES:
For each of the above actions the primary issues may be:
Regional Plan Element — There exists the possibility of requests for reconsideration of the Urban
Reserve Area boundaries. The boundaries have been extensively vetted as detailed in the adopted
Regional Plan. The Jackson County Planning Commission held numerous public hearings to
discuss the boundaries and any possible changes.
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map — No expected issues other than noted above.
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance — Impact of ordinance implementation on development
proposals. The ordinance requires the establishment and maintenance of buffer zones ranging
from 40 feet to 200 feet in depth, depending on the type of buffer proposed. As written the
ordinance only applies to future development within the Urban Reserve Areas. The ordinance
does not apply to lands within the City Limits and the existing Urban Growth Boundary.
Urban Reserve Management Agreement — No expected issues.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A ": Resolution No.787
Page 2 of 3
ACTION:
Consideration of resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve Resolution No. 787 recommending to the City Council adoption of:
1. The Regional Plan Element;
2. The amendment of the Land Use Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan;
3. Section 17.71 of the Zoning Ordinance adding regulations and standards for Agricultural
Buffering; and
4. The Urban Reserve Management Agreement.
Page 3 of 3
Attachment "A"
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 787
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE GREATER BEAR CREEK VALLEY
REGIONAL PLAN, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF A REGIONAL PLAN ELEMENT AS A NEW
ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AN AMENDMENT TO
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTIONS 17.71 AGRICULTURAL BUFFERING,AN
AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP DESIGNATING
THE URBAN RESERVE AREAS, AND APPROVAL OF AN URBAN RESERVE MANAGEMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN JACKSON COUNTY AND THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT
WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 197.654(1)'' -0°', the City Council, on December 22, 2008 by Ordinance No. 1923,
signed the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement (the "Agreement "); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Agreement the City of Central Point committed to amending its
comprehensive plan and land use regulations, and complete other actions as necessary to implement the Greater
Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan ( the "Regional Plan ") as adopted by Jackson County; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2011 by Resolution No. 1312 the City forwarded to the Jackson County
Planning Commission a recommendation, in accordance with the Agreement, to approve the Regional
Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2011 by Ordinance No. 2011-14 the Jackson County Board of Commissioners
approved the Regional Plan, and in accordance with the Agreement adopted a new Regional Plan Element of the
Jackson County Comprehensive Plan, as well as amendments to their Comprehensive Plan maps, adoption of an
agricultural buffering ordinance, and Urban Reserve Management Agreements;
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Agreement, and as a result of Jackson County's Ordinance No. 2011-12,
the Regional Plan became the adopted Regional Plan, and
WHEREAS, the City of Central Point has reviewed the adopted Regional Plan and in accordance with the
Agreement has prepared the following (the "Amendments "):
I . A Regional Plan Element, incorporating the Regional Plan as a new element of the City of Central Point
Comprehensive plan;
2. An amendment to the Comprehensive Land UsePlan Map to designate the Urban Reserve Areas;
3. An amendment to the Central Point Municipal Code, Section 17.7 1, Agricultural Mitigation; and
4. An Urban Reserve Management Agreement between Jackson County and the C it y o f Central
Point; and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 2012 the Department of Land Conservation and Development ( "DLCD ") was mailed
a notice regarding the City's consideration of the Regional Plan and proposed Amendments; and
WHEREAS, on July 3, 2012 the City of Central Point Planning Commission held a properly advertised public
hearing; reviewed the Staff Report and findings; heard testimony and comments, and deliberated on approval of
the Regional Plan and the proposed Amendments; and
WHEREAS, it is acknowledged that the final adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan will
only be effectuated at such time as Jackson County, the City of Central Point, and other participating cities by
way of post - acknowledgement plan amendments and intergovernmental agreements, including the Regional
Attachment "A"
Problem Solving Agreement and Urban Reserve Management Agreements, are submitted jointly in the manner
of periodic review consistent with the Collaborative Regional Problem Solving Statute set forth in ORS 197.652
to 197.656 and pursuant to OAR Chapter 660, Division 25, Section 175 relating to review of Urban Reserve
area designations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, based on the findings presented in Exhibit "E ", that the City of
Central Point Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 787 does hereby accept, and forward to the City
Council, a recommendation to approve the:
1. Regional Plan Element (Exhibit "A ") as a new element of the City of Central Point Comprehensive
Plan;
2. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designating the Urban Reserve Areas (Exhibit `B ");
3. Urban Reserve Management Agreement between Jackson County and the C i t y o f Central Point
(Exhibit "C "); and
4. Central Point Municipal Code, Sections 17.71 (Exhibit "D ") establishing regulations for agricultural
buffering.
PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 3rd day of July,
2012.
Approved by me this Yd day of July, 2012
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
City of Central Point
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Chapter 2 — Regional Plan Element
Exhibit "A"
Chapter 2:
Regional Plan
Element
City of Central Point
Comprehensive Plan
Adopted by Central Point City Council
Ordinance No. XXXX
August xx, 2012,
Draft 7 -2 -2012
LCDC Acknowledged
December xx, 2012
1. INTRODUCTION
The Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "Regional Plan ") is the product of a
comprehensive regional land -use planning effort undertaken by the cities of Ashland,
Central Point, Eagle Point, Medford, Phoenix, Talent, and Jackson County to address
long -term urbanization needs of the region, including the establishment of goals and
policies.
The most significant product of the Regional Plan is the establishment of requirements
which affect the form and function of future urban -level development and the creation
of an Urban Reserve (UR) for each of the cities, the purpose of which is to set aside a 50-
year supply of land for future urban -level development. The method of establishing an
urban reserve is defined in state law (see ORS 195.137 -145).
Adoption milestones:
■ On December 22, 2008, by Ordinance No. 1923, the City of Central Point signed the
Greater Bear Creek Regional Problem Solving Participants' Agreement, acknowledg-
ing and supporting the continued efforts in completing and adopting a long -term re-
gional plan for the continued urbanization in the Greater Bear Creek Valley.
■ On November 23, 2011 the Jackson County Board of Commissioners adopted Ordi-
nance No. 2011 -14 approving the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (Regional
Plan).
■ The Plan was considered by the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Com-
mission (LCDC) on March 15, 2012, at which time it advised changes it would like to
see before acknowledging the Plan.
The purpose of this comprehensive plan element is to acknowledge by reference the en-
tire Greater Bear Greek Valley Regional Plan (Regional Plan) 1, and to incorporate those
sections of the Regional Plan that are applicable to the City of Central Point, and in so
doing commence implementation of the Regional Plan.
2. REGIONAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES
The Regional Plan contains three goals and guiding policieS2 that form the basis of the
Regional Plan. These goals and policies are made a part of this Regional Plan Element.
3. URBAN RESERVE
The following describes the context in which the City selected its urban reserve areas.
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 are extracted verbatim from the Regional Plan. Maps of each of the
Urban Reserve Areas discussed in this section can be found in Appendix A, Urban Re-
f The entirety of the Regional Plan can be found in the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan.
Z Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, Chapter 1, Section 5.3.2
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 2 of 26
serve Map of this Element. For a detailed description of the selection process, refer to
Appendix B, Urban Reserve Selection Process.
3.1. CITY DESCRIPTION
Central Point is one of the fastest growing small cities in the state, and is projected to
become the second largest municipality in Jackson County by the year 2026. The Jack-
son County Comprehensive Plan Population Element projects that population for Cen-
tral Point's urban area will be 23,875 residents in the year 2026 and 31,237 residents
by the year 2040. To accommodate its proportional share of a doubling of the region's
urban population, Central Point will plan for an increase of 20,7663 residents for a total
of 38,598 residents within its urban area by the year 2060. Chapter 3 of the Regional
Plan includes the methodology and discussion to estimate the projected land needs for
urban reserve planning for residential and employment lands. Demand for urban park
land for Central Point is estimated as an approximation of ten acres per 1,000 additional
residents. The estimated land demand needs are summarized in Table 3.1 below.
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 the City's small town charac-
ter and community values, and to enhance community life.
Effective growth management practices have led to a follow -on strategic planning pro-
cess, Central Point Forward. Through this process, the City has updated its 1998 Strate-
gic Plan, including the overall community vision, goals and actions aimed at implement-
ing its desired future. Central Point has also created a plan to revitalize its downtown,
along with adopted Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policies and implementing
land use regulations, and has promoted consolidated land use and transportation mas-
ter planning. The same have resulted in significant TOD development within the city,
including one large project that is now substantially built out.
Central Point is committed to planning and facilitating the building of master planned
communities that contain a diversity of uses including mixed housing types and residen-
tial densities, parks, open spaces, civic areas and commercial uses that contribute in a
positive way to the city's character. City plans and land use regulations require natural
features to be incorporated as living assets within new neighborhoods. The City active-
ly promotes new and more efficient planning practices that include mixed use and high-
er density nodal development. In addition to facilitating livable neighborhoods, the
City's practices are also aimed at controlling and minimizing land consumption in order
to preserve important farm land. Central Point has also sought to establish its own iden-
3 Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, Chapter 3, Figure 3.2: RPS Proportionate Population Allocation. Increase is
relative to estimated base 2010 population.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 3 of 26
Residential
Em to ment
Urban
al
IlRe We2
opula-
Land
Jobs
Land
Developed
and
tion
(acres)
(acres)
(acres)
es)
41i,400
Allocated S0,766
1,121
6,716
779
900
Planned Inside UGB
7,536
406
2,224
258
664
Urban Reserve Land Demand
13,230
715
4,493
521
164
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 the City's small town charac-
ter and community values, and to enhance community life.
Effective growth management practices have led to a follow -on strategic planning pro-
cess, Central Point Forward. Through this process, the City has updated its 1998 Strate-
gic Plan, including the overall community vision, goals and actions aimed at implement-
ing its desired future. Central Point has also created a plan to revitalize its downtown,
along with adopted Transit Oriented Development (TOD) policies and implementing
land use regulations, and has promoted consolidated land use and transportation mas-
ter planning. The same have resulted in significant TOD development within the city,
including one large project that is now substantially built out.
Central Point is committed to planning and facilitating the building of master planned
communities that contain a diversity of uses including mixed housing types and residen-
tial densities, parks, open spaces, civic areas and commercial uses that contribute in a
positive way to the city's character. City plans and land use regulations require natural
features to be incorporated as living assets within new neighborhoods. The City active-
ly promotes new and more efficient planning practices that include mixed use and high-
er density nodal development. In addition to facilitating livable neighborhoods, the
City's practices are also aimed at controlling and minimizing land consumption in order
to preserve important farm land. Central Point has also sought to establish its own iden-
3 Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, Chapter 3, Figure 3.2: RPS Proportionate Population Allocation. Increase is
relative to estimated base 2010 population.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 3 of 26
tity, independent and apart from nearby Medford and other Rogue Valley cities. Conse-
quently, the City's goals have served to attract new residents. With its growing popula-
tion, the City has moved away from its former identity as a bedroom community.
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 already within the UGB. 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.
The City's west side growth results in a preferable compact form than growth to the east
of the freeway, which is more distant from the City center and is impacted by airport
noise and hazard overlay. In an effort to improve access to downtown from east of the
interstate, Central Point has set improved the Upton Road overpass. Heavier employ-
ment land uses and is setting aside funds to improve the Pine Street Interchange. Heavi-
er employment land uses are more compatible on the east side of the freeway where
proximity to freeway and the airport provide logistical advantages to industry.
The City will increase its employment and industrial land base, both to balance jobs and
housing, and to provide more immediate services to a growing population. Consistent
with benchmarks in Central Point's comprehensive plan, the current level of 9 to 10
acres of employment land per 1,000 residents will be increased to 15 acres per 1,000
residents.
Location and access to Interstate 5 make Central Point attractive for regional and inter-
state transportation, warehousing, and distribution firms. Recent development in-
cludes the USF Reddaway truck terminal, expansion of the Knife River4 regional offices,
and the partial development of the Airport Orchard industrial site. Professional, scien-
tific, and technical service firms have also been attracted to the City.
Central Point is committed as a community to accept a considerable share of the re-
gion's future population growth; however Urban Reserve Planning in the City of Central
Point is faced with the following challenges:
• To the north, agricultural land and severe natural hazards and regionally im-
portant natural resources constrain future urbanization. These include the Up-
ton Slough drainage basin with broad floodplain and associated wetlands, a high
concentration of intact vernal pool wetland habitat, and a generally intact oak
savannah habitat. See, Atlas Maps 13 (Vernal Pools by Nature Conservancy Con-
servation Codes), 19 (Physical Features - Hydrology Map, Central Point), and
Appendix IV - "Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Phase One
Status Report."
• The City of Central Point shares its eastern and southern boundaries with the City
of Medford, precluding growth in those directions. See, Atlas Map 2 (Jackson
County Comprehensive Plan Map).
4 Knife River is a large aggregate and heavy construction company.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 4 of 26
• There are exception lands to the west, and the largest concentration is located in
the southwest adjacent to the Urban Growth Boundary and extending to the
foothills of the West Valley slope and in the vicinity includes some of the re-
gion's best agricultural soils and active farmlands. See, Atlas Map 20 (Agricul-
tural Lands by Soil Capability Class - Central Point), Map 14 (Soils by Irrigated
Agricultural Class - Region), and Map 15 (Agricultural Lands Composite Analysis
Map).
3.2. CITY GROWTH GUIDELINES AND POLICIES
The stated goal of the City's current urbanization element is "To provide for an orderly
and efficient transition from rural to urban land use."
An urban growth boundary and urbanization policies were first established in 1978 by
joint action of the City of Central Point and Jackson County. The location of the growth
areas planned through year 2000 and the juxtaposition of planned land uses within the
urban growth boundary were intended to maximize the potential of the City's existing
and secondary arterial streets as well as the considerable potential of the Seven Oaks In-
terchange Area which was then and continues to be designated jointly by the City and
County as an Area of Mutual Planning Concern. Much of the area within the urban
growth boundary and to the west of the Southern Pacific railway (now, California & Or-
egon Pacific - CORP) at that time was planned for industrial development. The area east
of the freeway was designated for low, medium, and high density residential develop-
ment. However, in 1998, the City and Jackson County modified the Urban Growth
Boundary and Policy Agreement with Jackson County to allow a redistribution of land
uses within the City, and the City revised its comprehensive plan to reflect this redistri-
bution. The land west of the railway was redesignated for residential development, and
lands east of the freeway were redesignated for General Commercial, Neighborhood
Commercial, General Industrial, and Light Industrial development.
The redistribution of land uses in the original urbanization policies was necessary to
improve the efficiency of freight transportation and to attract more local jobs by provid-
ing employment land in the vicinity of the airport and close to freeway access in ex-
change for heavy industrial land along the railroad for which oblique angle street inter-
sections with Highway 99 were not conducive to freight truck turning movements. Re-
designation of area west of the railway to residential use also served to separate indus-
trial development from the City's core residential and downtown business districts.
This allowed the City to respond to growing residential demand pressure with a
— neighborhood concept1l. The concept dates back to the City's original Urbanization
Agreement to avoid inefficiently designed or located developments at the fringe of the
urbanizable area and to ensure the maximum efficiency of the circulation and public fa-
cility systems.
The City's agricultural zoning policies contained within the Urban Growth Boundary
Agreement apply only to areas within the urban growth boundary or Seven Oaks Area
of Mutual Planning Concern. Pursuant to the Agreement, lands within the urbanizable
area which supported farm uses would be encouraged, through zoning and appropri-
ate tax incentives, to remain in farm use for as long as economically feasible (as de-
termined by the property owner). This policy reflects statewide policy regarding the
retention of agricultural tax deferments for lands within urban growth boundaries.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 5 of 26
3.3. URBAN RESERVE AREAS AND LAND USES
URBAN RESERVE AREAS
The City of Central Point's
Regional Plan Element
includes eight (8) urban
reserve areas totaling
1,721 gross acres, of
which 1,492 acres have
been classified as
Reasonably Developable
acreage. The urban
reserve areas are
distributed around the
perimeter of the City's
urban growth boundary
City (see map).
The remainder of this
section will discuss each
urban reserve area. The
selection process that
determined each of the
urban reserve areas is
presented in Appendix B.
A
CENTRAL
POINT
Log*nd
Urban Reserve Areas
CP 1B To Roed
CP -1C S— Road
CP -28 Wdaon Road
CP.3 Eaq Pme btl l
CPID Bea, C—k
CP3M Grenl Road
�. CP 6A Taylor Road
CP-68 Beaty Lena
Un— Grown B—d"
Urban Reserve
Gross
Reasonably
Area
Acres
Developable
Acres
CP -113
544
441
CP -1C
70
60
CP -213
325
282
CP -3
36
N
CP -4D
83
52
CP -5
31
19
CP -6A
444
386
CP -613
188
162
TOTAL
1,721
1,492
Central Point
Urban Reserves Areas
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 6 of 26
AREA CP -1B (TOLO ROAD AREA)
This area is approximately 544 acres. The majority of the area is located north of Inter-
state 5 and west of its junction with Highway 99. The area is currently planned for a va-
riety of uses, including Industrial, Aggre-
gate, Rural Residential, and Agricultural. Tolo Road A *a(cP4B)
The primary and dominating use of the
land is Industrial - 224 acres. A small
portion of this area extends south of In \
terstate 5 to Willow Springs Road to in-
clude property owned and occupied by Er-
ickson Air Crane. The property is the site
u
of a major valley industrial employer with
facilities already connected to the City's
municipal water supply and the RVSS
sewer system. The Tolo area also contains
approximately 148 acres of land designat-
ed Agricultural Land, 48 acres of which
were concluded by the RLRC to be part of
the Commercial Agricultural Bases.
The 1984 Urban Growth Boundary and Policy Agreement (updated in 1998) between
the City and Jackson County designated lands in the vicinity of the Seven Oaks Inter-
change as unique because of the transportation facilities present. The area was desig-
nated 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.
However, much of the land within the Area of Mutual Planning Concern is intensively
farmed and has been identified as part of the region's commercial agricultural land base.
The Tolo area includes only the northern portion of the original Seven Oaks Interchange
Area of Mutual Planning Concern. It also includes existing county exception and non -
resource areas that are largely devoted to industrial uses already. The city's compre-
hensive plan addresses proximity to the interchange as an opportunity to develop
transportation- dependent uses (such as trucking terminals and freight forwarding fa-
cilities) in the area.
Central Point currently lacks attractive and suitable sites for new industrial develop-
ment. The Tolo area's industrially -zoned sites could accommodate new industries and
the expansion of existing industrial uses. The properties in this area are currently
planned and zoned for industrial use by Jackson County and may be developed, pursu-
ant to ORS 197.713, with industrial uses including buildings of any size and type that
may be served by on -site sewer facilities notwithstanding land use planning goals relat-
ed to urbanization (Goal 14) or public services and facilities (Goal 11)6. A county ap-
5 In 2008, Jackson County re- designated an 8.4 acre EFU zoned parcel within the RLRC area to Aggregate Remov-
al. Consequently, that land is no longer designated as Agricultural Land an no longer meets the Regionally adopted
criteria for commercial agricultural land base (Appendix VI I— Commercial Agricultural Land Base Criteria) .
6 ORS 197.713 provides: "Industrial development on industrial lands outside urban growth boundaries; except ions.
(1) Notwithstanding statewide land use planning goals relating to urbanization or to public facilities and services, a
county or its designee may authorize: (a) Industrial development , including accessory uses subordinate to the in-
dustrial development, in buildings of any size and type, subject to the permit approval process described in ORS
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 7 of 26
proved truck -train freight transfer site already exists near the interchange for the Cross
Creek Trucking Company. The Hilton Fuel and Supply Company and North Valley In-
dustrial Park are also, with Erickson Air Crane, significant existing employment lands
within the CP -113 area.
To ensure that the interchange is able to function and continue to operate within the
State's mobility standard over time, designation of CP -113 as an Urban Reserve is to be
subject to the following condition adopted by the RPS Policy Committee:
Prior to the expansion of the Central Point Urban Growth
Boundary into the CP -1B area. ODOT, Jackson County and Cen-
tral Point shall adopt an Interchange Area Management Plan
CLAMP) for the Seven Oaks Interchange Area.
Consequently, and subject to the above IAMP condition, CP -113 was found to be suitable
for Urban Reserve designation as it will efficiently accommodate identified urban land
needs, has reasonable access to public facilities and services including sewer and water
(Atlas, Map 5 - Water and Sewer), and is and will continue to be predominately devoted
to industrial uses in a manner compatible with nearby agricultural and forest activities.
Regional buffering standards will improve the current situation. Also, designation of the
Tolo Area CP -113 will provide a substitute land base for the previously adopted Seven
Oaks Interchange Area of Mutual Planning Concern which will be retained as Agricul-
tural land rather than preserved for future Industrial use.
CP-1B URBAN RESERVE BY EXISTING AND POTENTIAL
Gross Acres: Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
544 Developable Space/ arks
Acres: 441 A
Proposed Uses 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
AREA CP -1 C (SCENIC ROAD AREA)
This study area consists of about 70 acres located near the northwestern corner of Cen-
tral Point's corporate city limits and UGB. It extends from Jackson Creek to Griffin Creek,
with Scenic Avenue defining its southern edge.
In this subarea (and unlike other areas in Central Point) a right- angled railway crossing
is possible to Highway 99 and the same is necessary to correct the existing oblique angle
railroad crossing which now exists at the intersection at Scenic Avenue and Highway
99. Correcting the angle of intersection is important to serve Central Point's objective of
providing for a higher density master planned Transit Oriented Development neighbor-
hood on land west of the railway. The needed road connection would extend north
215.402 to 215.438 and to applicable building codes, in an area planned and zoned for industrial use on January 1,
2004, subject to the territorial limits described in subsections (2) and (3) of this sect ion. (b) On -site sewer facilities to
serve the industrial development authorized under this sect ion, including accessory uses subordinate to the indus-
trial development. (2) Subject to subsection (3) of this sect ion, a county or its designee may consider the following
land for industrial development under this sect ion: (a) Land more than three mi les outside the urban growth bound-
ary of every city with a population of 20,000 individuals or more; and (b) Land outside the urban growth boundary of
every city with a population of fewer than 20,000 individuals. (3) A county or its designee may not authorize industrial
development under this sect ion on land within the I, commercial or residential development in the area zoned for in-
dustrial use. [2003 c.688 §1; 2005 c.666 §1]"
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 8 of 26
from Scenic Avenue on the east side of
the highway before crossing Highway
99 in a perpendicular alignment; the
triangular parcel at the northwest cor-
ner of the projected intersection is
necessary to ensure that its geometry
is safe and efficient. The new railroad
crossing includes a four way traffic sig-
nal as a component of the overall im-
provement.
Scenic Road Area (CP -1C)
Currently, a 12 -inch water line extends \
the length of Highway 99 from the city \
boundary to the Erickson Air Crane fa-
cility, at the edge of CP -1B. Other water and sewer lines are near CP -1C inside the city
limits. As such, new infrastructure to serve the CP -1C area will not require extensive
public or private infrastructure investment and urban uses can be more cost - effectively
delivered. The northern portion of the area is developed with approximately 15 resi-
dences.
Within the subarea are three parcels totaling 50 acres which have been found by the
RLRC to be a 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 parcel fur-
ther to the east is bordered by the City on the east, by exception land to the south, and
partially bordered by exception land to the west. The last parcel, west of the highway,
is bordered by Jackson Creek to the west and by Scenic Avenue to the south. The area in
total contains over 20 residences. Given the proximity to the existing urban growth
boundary, the juxtaposition of the agricultural land between highly parcelized rural res-
idential exception areas and the municipal boundary on two sides, it was concluded that
the area may be reasonably developed with urban uses. Moreover, urbanization of this
area in a manner compatible with the remaining nearby farmland to the north, given its
limited contiguity with that area and the City's agreement to implement the Region's ag-
ricultural buffering standards and conceptual urban reserve planning requirements,
helped lead to the conclusion of suitability.
The City intends to promote a master planning effort for this area to ensure more effi-
cient urban development that incorporates nearby natural features including Griffin
Creek into the neighborhood design, creates appropriate agricultural buffers, and es-
tablishes an internal street network that minimizes access onto Highway 99. The com-
parative environmental, energy, economic, and social consequences are, in the balance,
concluded to support the suitability of CP -1C for Urban Reserve inclusion.
CP-1C URBAN RESERVE BY EXISTING AND POTENTIAL LAND-USE TYPE
Gross Acres: 70 Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 60
Proposed Uses 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 9 of 26
AREA CP -2B (WILSON ROAD AREA)
This area, approximately 325 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 existing municipal boundary also defines this area's eastern and
western boundaries. Area CP -213 includes a mixture of designated agricultural and rural
residential uses. Of this, the RLRC found that 197 acres of the total was a part of the
Commercial Agricultural Base. About 20 percent of the area contains oak savanna, and
some areas have ponded sources of irrigation water.
Interstate 5 currently divides the Wilson Road Area (CP -213)
City, and Central Point believes it is
important to maintain a proper ur-
ban form by closing the loop along ,—R4
the city's northern boundary to per-
mit, among other things, the installa-
tion of looped municipal water mains
to ensure proper pressure for fire
flows; non - looped water mains pro-
duce significantly less pressure and
flow. The County Roads Department,_
in cooperation with ODOT, recon-
structed the Upton Road bridges in r
2008. This strengthened the connec-
tion between northeast and northwest Central Point. The City also determined the area
to be suitable to provide a needed connection of the east -west leg of Upton Road west-
ward to Gebhard Road.
Public infrastructure, in the form of sewer lines and gas lines, already extend into CP -213.
Water lines exist in city subdivisions east of Gebhard Road and north along Table Rock
Road. These water lines can be extended into CP -213. This area also is critical for extend-
ing storm drainage from the exception area south of Wilson Road and from other areas
closer to Bear Creek.
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 City plans to
protect CP -213's natural resources by incorporating them into a master plan, and will al-
so require agricultural buffers to protect nearby agricultural lands that remain in pro-
duction.
City planning staff has and is collaborating with the Jackson County Fair Board in its
master planning efforts. The Jackson County Expo property is slated to become a recrea-
tional /parks regional centerpiece in the future, similar to Stewart Park in Roseburg.
Consequently, the comparative environmental, energy, economic, and social conse-
quences are deemed, in the balance, to be positive for urban land suitability.
URBAN RESERVE BY
Gross Acres: Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
325 Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 282
Proposed Uses 81% 0% 0% 6% 13%
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 10 of 26
AREA CP -3 (EAST PINE STREET AREA)
This 36 -acre study area abuts and is located
north of East Pine Street. It is bound on the
south and east sides by the existing munici-
pal boundary and to the west and north by
the Jackson County Fairgrounds. Bear Creek
and its associated floodplain cross this ar-
ea's eastern edge. Peninger Road traverses
the area's southwest corner. The majority
of this area is currently designated Aggre-
gate Resource.
East Pine Street (CP -3)
Water and sewer infrastructure either ex-
ists or is planned to serve the area. The East
Pine Street Transportation Plan includes
recommendations for improvements to the
I -5 interchange and reconfiguration of fair-
ground access; this may dictate the type and
the amount of new commercial uses along North Peninger Road.
The 100 -year floodplain of Bear Creek within this area does not entirely constrain the
site but may limit uses to regional parks, open space or tourist commercial uses. Conse-
quently, the area is concluded to be, in the balance, suitable under Goal 14 for an Urban
Reserve designation.
CP-3 URBAN RESERVE BY EXISTING AND POTENTIAL
Gross Acres: 36 Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 27 *dL
Proposed Uses 0% 0% 0% 58% 42%
AREA CP- 4D(BEAR CREEKAREA)
This Urban Reserve area exists as a
triangular- shaped tract that runs
along the northeastern side of Inter-
state 5. The area has approximately
83 acres, approximately two- thirds of
which is currently designated Agricul-
tural and is owned by Jackson County.
The southerly third of the area is des-
ignated as Rural Residential land and
is owned by the City of Central Point.
Both tracts are part of the Bear Creek
Greenway. None of the land is or has
in recent history been in agricultural
production and the soils are of low ag-
ricultural suitability (Class IV -VII,
where not built as roadway or within
the Bear Creek floodway). This area
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 11 of 26
also has environmental constraints. The eastern third of this 83 -acre area is within the
100 -year floodplain of Bear Creek and is also impacted by wetlands. The City expects to
use this area for passive recreation, dedicated open space, or parks adjacent to and in
connection with the Bear Creek Greenway.
At the northeast corner of CP -4D there is a one -acre parcel of exception land zoned Ur-
ban Residential (UR -1). This property has an existing residence and abuts the City limits
and residentially zoned lands to the east. The property also abuts agricultural lands to
the north. As an exception area, it was deemed appropriate to include the property
within this Urban Reserve as first priority land. However, it is recognized that the prop-
erty abuts agricultural land and as such, future development of the property will be sub-
ject to compliance with the agricultural buffering standards to be implemented as part
of this Plan. Because of the existing residential character of the property, and its proxim-
ity to other developed residential lands, it was deemed appropriate to include this par-
cel in CP -4D.
CP-4D URBAN RESERVE POTENTIAL
Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 52
Proposed Uses 1% ~�0% 0% 99% 0%
AREA CP -5 (GRANT ROAD AREA)
Area CP -5 has approximately 31 acres lo-
cated immediately west of city limits, east Grant Road Area (CP 5A)
of Grant Road, and south of Scenic Avenue. ( 1 \ \_ _�
Most parcels within the area are designat-
ed as Rural Residential exception land. A EIEF 7
10 -acre parcel is designated as Agricultur-
al land at the area's southern end. The
parcel contains a walnut grove, Christmas
trees, and a dwelling with accessory uses s
located southwest of the creek. A small
pasture and two barns are on the creek's <
opposite side. Because the creek runs
through the property and portions are in
residential use, the property's effective
farmable portion is significantly less than
ten acres; no adjacent parcels are available
for farm use in conjunction with this prop-
erty. Jackson Creek and its associated 100 -year floodplain follow Grant Road except
where they cut through the EFU parcel. The riparian areas create a significant physical
barrier from the larger tract of farmland to the west and reduce the need for fencing.
Consequently, the area can and will provide for urban needs in a manner that is compat-
ible with nearby agricultural lands. There are no nearby forest lands or uses.
CP-5 URBAN RESERVE BY EXISTING AND POTENTIAL LAND-USE
Gross Acres: 31 Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 19
Proposed Uses 91% 0% 0% 9% 0%
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 12 of 26
AREA CP -6A (TAYLOR ROAD AREA)
This area consists of 444 acres. The CP -6A area is adjacent to city limits, and could easily
be served by services from the Twin Creeks TOD or from existing collector roads, such
as Beall Lane, Taylor Road, and Scenic Avenue. The circulation plan for this area is a
natural extension of the Twin Creeks TOD, and of histor-
ic east -west roads such as Taylor and Beale. Taylor Road Area (CP -6A)
Public water, sanitary sewer and natural gas maps indi-
cate that this 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 discharged into existing systems. The Twin
Creeks TOD uses passive water treatment. Central Point
intends to require passive water treatment for new de-
velopment in this area.
Approximately two - thirds of the land in this urban re-
serve is currently designated for agriculture, and was
recommended by the RLRC as part of the Commercial
Agricultural Base. The remaining one -third consists of
exception lands planned Rural Residential. Soils in this
area are Class 3 with limited amounts of Class 2. Agri-
cultural use has been limited to livestock grazing or has
otherwise remained fallow.
The area is generally free of any severe environmental constraints that occur elsewhere
around the City, and proximity to the downtown core is conducive to urban centric
growth objectives that minimize vehicle trip lengths and durations and the same repre-
sents a positive consequence under all of the ESEE factors. Central Point's experience
with TOD design on the west side of the City has been extremely positive and has fos-
tered positive social relationships in the community. In the balance, it is concluded that
the comparative ESEE consequences for urbanization are positive. In combination with
the other Goal 14 location factors, CP -6A is determined to be suitable and appropriate
as an urban reserve. The City believes that there are more natural linkages from the ar-
eas west of Grant Road to the Downtown core and many other Central Point neighbor-
hoods.
'WITAU] 1,4 MIA 0111 1114 W11 D1 RVA
. .�
rocs Acres: Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
444 Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 386
Proposed Uses 76% 0% 0% 20% 4%
AREA CP -6B (BEALL LANEAREA)
This 188 -acre area is located immediately south of CP -6A which, along with Beall Lane,
defines its northern boundary. The southern boundary is defined by Sylvia Road, its
west boundary is Old Stage Road, and the east boundary is defined by the 100 -year
floodplain of Jackson Creek which runs along Hanley Road. Current plan designations
are primarily Rural Residential, with two developed areas that are designated Agricul-
tural.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 13 of 26
The area generally is comprised
of rural residential parcels rang- Beall Lane Area (cP -16B)
ing from small to fairly large
acreages (up to 13 acres).
There is an existing network of
local order streets in a block pat- '
tern that lends itself to further
and more intensive urbaniza-
tion. Redevelopment potential is
feasible for the area given exist-
ing large lot parcelization and
the existence of a well defined A
gridded transportation network.
This area has long suffered serious water problems that would be resolved by extension
of municipal water. The City has received reports of failing septic systems within this
area. Extension of urban services will serve to mitigate or prevent potential negative ef-
fects that failing septic systems may have on aquifers in this area (upon which others
depend for drinking water).
Central Point Little League operates a baseball field facility on a 14.5 acre parcel within
one of the two Agricultural land inclusions in CP -613. The baseball property constitutes
the majority of the acreage within this Agricultural land inclusion. Two EFU zoned par-
cels having approximately five aggregate acres, exists between the baseball fields and
the Rural Residential land to the north. These two parcels are used by the Central Point
Council, Boy Scouts of America for its facilities and activities. The Boy Scout property is
not nor likely will be used for farming in the future (other than incidental not - for - profit
farming by Boy Scouts). Both the Central Point Little League property and the Boy
Scout property are classified under the Employment land use type and will be restricted
to the sub - classification land use type — Institutional 11 per Section 4.1.9.4. The second in-
clusion of Agricultural land is located near the geographic center of CP -613 and is com-
pletely surrounded by Rural Residential exception lands. Together, these inclusions
have approximately 19 acres.
URBAN BY POTENTIAL
Gross Acres: Reasonably Residential Aggregate Resource Open Employment
188 Developable Space /Parks
Acres: 162
Proposed Uses 90% 0% 0% 0% 10%
4. REGIONAL OBLIGATIONS
The City agrees to comply with all applicable requirements of the Regional Plan, Chapter
5, which follow below. The City may not unilaterally amend these requirements.
4.1. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ORS 197.656(2)(B)(C)
To effectuate the Regional Plan, Jackson County shall adopt the Regional Plan in its en-
tirety into the County Comprehensive Plan. The Participating cities then shall incorpo-
rate the portions of the Regional Plan that are applicable to each individual city into that
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 14 of 26
city's comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances, and shall reference the Plan as
an adopted element of Jackson County's Comprehensive Plan. After the County and all
participating cities have completed the adoptions, the amendments must be submitted
to the State of Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development for acknowl-
edgement by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. Only after acknowl-
edgement does the Regional Plan become effective.
Progress following the acknowledgement of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan
by the State of Oregon will be measured against a number of performance indicators to
determine the level of compliance by participating jurisdictions with the Plan or the
need to refine or amend it. The measurable performance indicators listed below are
those identified as necessary for the acknowledgement of the Plan and as appropriate
for monitoring compliance with the Plan.
4.1.1. County Adoption. Jackson County shall adopt the Regional Plan in its entire-
ty into the County Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinance.
4.1.2. City Adoption. All participating jurisdictions shall incorporate the portions
of the Regional Plan that are applicable to each individual city into that city's
comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances, and will reference the Plan
as an adopted element of Jackson County's Comprehensive Plan.
4.1.3. Urban Reserve Management Agreement. Participating jurisdictions desig-
nating an Urban Reserve Area (URA) shall adopt an Urban Reserve Manage-
ment Agreement (URMA) between the individual city and Jackson County per
Oregon Administrative Rule 660- 021 -0050. Adoption shall occur prior to or
simultaneously with adoption of the URAs.
4.1.4. Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement. If there is an incon-
sistency between this Plan and an adopted Urban Growth Boundary Manage-
ment Agreement (UGBMA), the city and Jackson County shall adopt a revised
UGBMA. When an inconsistency arises, provisions in this Plan and associated
URMA shall override the provisions in the UGBMA, until the UGBMA is updat-
ed.
4.1.5. Committed Residential Density. Land within a URA and land currently
within an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) but outside of the existing City Limit
shall be built, at a minimum, to the following residential densities. This re-
quirement can be offset by increasing the residential density in the City Limit.
Eagle Point 6.5 7.5
Medford 6.5 7,
Phoenix 6.6 7.6
Talent , 6.6 ._ =r:T Jr7r,
4.1.5.1. Prior to annexation, each city shall establish (or, if they exist already,
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 15 of 26
shall adjust) minimum densities in each of its residential zones such that
if all areas build out to the minimum allowed the committed densities
shall be met. This shall be made a condition of approval of a UGB amend-
ment.
4.1.6. Mixed - Use /Pedestrian - Friendly Areas. For land within a URA and for land
currently within a UGB but outside of the existing City Limit, each city shall
achieve the 2020 benchmark targets for the number of dwelling units (Alterna-
tive Measure no. 5) and employment (Alternative Measure no. 6) in mixed -
use /pedestrian - friendly areas as established in the 2009 Regional Transporta-
tion Plan (RTP) or most recently adopted RTP. Beyond the year 2020, cities
shall continue to achieve the 2020 benchmark targets, or if additional bench-
mark years are established, cities shall achieve the targets corresponding with
the applicable benchmarks. Measurement and definition of qualified develop-
ment shall be in accordance with adopted RTP methodology. The requirement
is considered met if the city or the region overall is achieving the targets or
minimum qualifications, whichever is greater. This requirement can be offset
by increasing the percentage of dwelling units and /or employment in the City
Limit. This requirement is applicable to all participating cities.
4.1.7. Conceptual Transportation Plans. Conceptual Transportation Plans shall
be prepared early enough in the planning and development cycle that the iden-
tified regionally significant transportation corridors within each of the URAs
can be protected as cost - effectively as possible by available strategies and
funding. A Conceptual Transportation Plan for a URA or appropriate portion of
a URA shall be prepared by the City in collaboration with the Rogue Valley
Metropolitan Planning Organization, applicable irrigation districts, Jackson
County, and other affected agencies, and shall be adopted by Jackson County
and the respective city prior to or in conjunction with a UGB amendment with-
in that URA.
4.1.7.1. Transportation Infrastructure. The Conceptual Transportation Plan
shall identify a general network of regionally significant arterials under
local jurisdiction, transit corridors, bike and pedestrian paths, and asso-
ciated projects to provide mobility throughout the Region (including
intracity and intercity, if applicable).
4.1.8. Conceptual Land Use Plans. A proposal for a UGB Amendment into a desig-
nated URA shall include a Conceptual Land Use Plan prepared by the City in
collaboration with the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization, ap-
plicable irrigation districts, Jackson County, and other affected agencies for the
area proposed to be added to the UGB as follows:
4.1.8.1. Target Residential Density. The Conceptual Land Use Plan shall pro-
vide sufficient information to demonstrate how the residential densities
of Section 4.1.5 above will be met at full build -out of the area added
through the UGB amendment.
4.1.8.2. Land Use Distribution. The Conceptual Land Use Plan shall indicate
how the proposal is consistent with the general distribution of land uses
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 16 of 26
in the Regional Plan, especially where a specific set of land uses were part
of the rationale for designating land which was determined by the Re-
source Lands Review Committee to be commercial agricultural land as
part of a URA, which applies to the following URAs: CP -113, CP -1C, CP -4D,
CP -6A, CP -213, MD -4, MD -6, MD -7mid, MD -7n, PH -2, TA -2, TA -4.
4.1.8.3. Transportation Infrastructure. The Conceptual Land Use Plan shall
include the transportation infrastructure required in Section 4.1.7 above.
4.1.8.4. Mixed Use /Pedestrian Friendly Areas. The Conceptual Land Use Plan
shall provide sufficient information to demonstrate how the commit-
ments of Section 4.1.6 above will be met at full build -out of the area add-
ed through the UGB amendment.
4.1.9. Conditions. The following conditions apply to specific Urban Reserve Areas:
4.1.9.1. CP -113. Prior to the expansion of the Central Point Urban Growth
Boundary into the CP -113 area, ODOT, Jackson County and Central Point
shall adopt an Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for the Seven
Oaks Interchange Area.
4.1.9.2. CP -4D. Use of CP -4D is predominantly restricted to open space and
park land with the exception of an existing one acre homesite.
4.1.9.3. No roadways are to extend North, East, or West from CP -4D.
4.1.9.4. CP -613. Development of the portion of CP -613 designated as employ-
ment land is restricted to Institutional uses.
4.1.9.5. CP -113, CP -1C, CP -213, CP -3, CP -4D, CP -6A, CP -613. Prior to the expan-
sion of the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary into any Urban Reserve
Area, the City and Jackson County shall adopt an agreement (Area of Mu-
tual Planning Concern) for the management of Gibbons /Forest Acres Un-
incorporated Containment Boundary.
4.1.10. Agricultural Buffering. Participating jurisdictions designating Urban
Reserve Areas shall adopt the Regional Agricultural Buffering program in Vol-
ume 2, Appendix III into their Comprehensive Plans as part of the adoption of
the Regional Plan. The agricultural buffering standards in Volume 2, Appendix
III shall be adopted into their land development codes prior to a UGB amend-
ment.
4.1.11. Regional Land Preservation Strategies. Participating jurisdictions have
the option of implementing the Community Buffer preservation strategies
listed in Volume 2, Appendix V of the Regional Plan or other land preservation
strategies as they develop.
4.1.12. Housing Strategies. Participating jurisdictions shall create regional
housing strategies that strongly encourage a range of housing types through-
out the region within 5 years of acknowledgement of the RPS Plan.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 17 of 26
4.1.13. Urban Growth Boundary Amendment. Pursuant to ORS 197.298 and
Oregon Administrative Rule 660- 021 -0060, URAs designated in the Regional
Plan are the first priority lands used for a UGB amendment by participating cit-
ies.
4.1.13.1. Land outside of a city's URA shall not be added to a UGB unless the
general use intended for that land cannot be accommodated on any of the
city's URA land or UGB land.
4.1.14. Land Division Restrictions. In addition to the provisions of Oregon Ad-
ministrative Rule 660- 021 -0040, the following apply to lots or parcels which
are located within a URA until they are annexed into a city:
4.1.14.1. The minimum lot size shall be ten acres;
4.1.14.2. Development on newly created residentially zoned lots or parcels
shall be clustered to ensure efficient future urban development and pub-
lic facilities, and this shall be a condition of any land division;
4.1.14.3. Land divisions shall be required to include the pre - platting of future
lots or parcels based on recommendations made by the city government
to which the urban reserve belongs;
4.1.14.4. Land divisions within a URA shall not be in conflict with the trans-
portation infrastructure identified in an adopted Conceptual Transporta-
tion Plan; and
4.1.14.5. As a condition of land division approval, a deed declaration shall be
signed and recorded that recognizes public facilities and services will be
limited as appropriate to a rural area and transitioned to urban providers
in accordance with the adopted URMA.
4.1.15. Rural Residential Rule. Until the City of Ashland adopts an Urban Re-
serve Area, the minimum lot size for properties within 1 mile of the Urban
Growth Boundary of Ashland shall continue to be 10 acres, as outlined in Ore-
gon Administrative Rule 660- 004- 0040(8)(c).
4.1.16. Population Allocation. The County's Population Element shall be updat-
ed per statute to be consistent with the gradual implementation of the adopted
Plan. If changes occur during an update of the County's Population Element
that result in substantially different population allocations for the participating
jurisdictions of this Regional Plan, then the Plan shall be amended according to
Section 5 of this Chapter of the Plan.
4.1.17. Greater Coordination with the RVMPO. The participating jurisdictions
shall collaborate with the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Organization (RVMPO)
to:
4.1.17.1. Prepare the Conceptual Transportation Plans identified in Section
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 18 of 26
4.1.7.
4.1.17.2. Designate and protect the transportation infrastructure required in
the Conceptual Transportation Plans identified in Section 4.1.7 to ensure
adequate transportation connectivity, multimodal use, and minimize
right of way costs.
4.1.17.3. Plan and coordinate the regionally significant transportation strate-
gies critical to the success of the adopted Regional Plan including the de-
velopment of mechanisms to preserve rights -of -way for the transporta-
tion infrastructure identified in the Conceptual Transportation Plans; and
4.1.17.4. Establish a means of providing supplemental transportation funding
to mitigate impacts arising from future growth.
4.1.18. Future Coordination with the RVCOG. The participating jurisdictions
shall collaborate with the Rogue Valley Council of Governments on future re-
gional planning that assists the participating jurisdictions in complying with
the Regional Plan performance indicators. This includes cooperation in a re-
gion -wide conceptual planning process if funding is secured.
4.1.19. Expo. During the first Coordinated Periodic Review process for the Re-
gional Plan, Jackson County shall consider including the land occupied by the
Jackson County Expo to the City of Central Point's Urban Reserve Area.
4.1.20. Agricultural Task Force. Within six months of acknowledgement of the
Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, Jackson County shall appoint an Agri-
cultural Task Force made up of persons with expertise in appropriate fields,
including but not limited to farmers, ranchers, foresters and soils scientists,
representatives of the State Department of Agriculture, the State Forestry De-
partment, the State Department of Land Conservation and Development, Jack-
son County, and a RPS participating city.
The Agricultural Task Force shall develop a program to assess the impacts on
the agricultural economy of Jackson County arising from the loss of agricultur-
al land and /or the ability to irrigate agricultural land, which may result from
Urban Growth Boundary Amendments. The Agricultural Task Force shall also
identify potential mitigation measures to offset those impacts. Appropriate
mitigation measures shall be applied to Urban Growth Boundary Amendment
proposals.
4.2. INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES ORS 197.656(2)(B)(D)
The state requires that participants in an RPS process delineate the factors, mecha-
nisms, or outcomes that constitute the most compelling reasons for participants to
comply with the Regional Plan over the identified planning horizon. Accordingly,
the Participants have agreed to the following:
4.2.1. INCENTIVES
4.2.1.1. Continued regional cooperation through the 5 -year review process
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 19 of 26
and 10 -year coordinated periodic review may improve the region's abil-
ity to respond to challenges and opportunities more effectively than it
does presently.
4.2.1.2. Adherence to the adopted Regional Plan may provide the region with
a competitive advantage, increase the attractiveness of the region to long-
term investment, and improve southern Oregon's profile in the state.
4.2.1.3. Adherence to the adopted Regional Plan may produce significant re-
ductions in transportation infrastructure costs by minimizing future
right -of -way acquisition costs, encouraging mixed- use /pedestrian-
friendly development, and improving the overall long -range coordination
of transportation and land use planning.
4.2.1.4. Adherence to the adopted Regional Plan will provide participating
jurisdictions with population allocations that are predictable, transpar-
ent, and based on the relative strengths of the different participating ju-
risdictions.
4.2.1.5. The adopted Regional Plan offers compelling regional justifications
and state agency support for Tolo and the South Valley Employment Cen-
ter that may not have been available to an individual city proposal.
4.2.1.6. Adherence to the adopted Regional Plan will permit jurisdictions to
implement the flexibility provided by the concept of the "Regional Com-
munity", in which cities, in the role of "regional neighborhoods ", enjoy
wide latitude in their particular mix, concentration, and intensity of land
uses, as long as the sum of the regional parts contributes to a viable bal-
ance of land uses that is functional and attractive to residents and em-
ployers and in compliance with statewide goals.
4.2.2. DISINCENTIVES
4.2.2.1. The region's failure to adhere to the adopted Regional Plan may
damage its competitive advantage, the attractiveness of the region to
long -term investment, and southern Oregon's profile in the state.
4.2.2.2. Adherence to the Regional plan may be a rating factor for MPO
Transportation Funding. Transportation projects of jurisdictions not ad-
hering to the adopted Regional Plan may be assigned a lower priority by
the MPO when considered for funding.
4.2.2.3. Jackson County may reconsider the population allocations of juris-
dictions signatory to the Agreement not adhering to the adopted Regional
Plan.
4.2.2.4. Participating jurisdictions not adhering to the adopted Regional Plan
will need to provide corrective measures in order to have a UGB amend-
ment approved by the County.
4.2.2.5. The failure of a participating jurisdiction to adhere to the adopted
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 20 of 26
Regional Plan will compromise its ability to implement the concept of the
"Regional Community ", and will not provide the participating cities with
as wide a latitude in their desired individual mix, concentration, and in-
tensity of land uses.
4.3. MONITORING ORS197.656(2)(b)(E)
4.3.1. Monitoring. Participating jurisdictions shall maintain a monitoring system
to ensure compliance with the Regional Plan and future amendments. Specific
indicators against which performance will be judged are listed in Section 2 of
this Chapter. Monitoring to ensure compliance with the adopted Regional Plan
will be a shared responsibility.
4.3.1.1. Regional Plan Progress Report. On a regular basis, beginning in 2017
and every 5 years thereafter, all participating jurisdictions shall partici-
pate in a regular Regional Plan review process. Jackson County shall initi-
ate the Regional Plan review process by providing notice of the Regional
Plan review to each participant and requiring that each participant sub-
mit a self - evaluation monitoring report addressing compliance with the
performance indicators, set out in Section 2 of this Chapter of the Region-
al Plan, to the County within 60 days after the date of the notice.
A standardized format for the review and report shall be developed by
Jackson County and agreed upon by the jurisdictions. The reports shall
include descriptions of their jurisdiction's activities pertinent to the Re-
gional Plan for the preceding five -year period, analysis as to whether and
how well those activities meet each of the performance indicators, and a
projection of activities for the next five -year period. Jackson County will
distribute these monitoring reports to all participants and make them
available to the public.
4.3.2. Coordinated Periodic Review. On a regular basis, beginning in 2022 and
every 10 years thereafter the participating jurisdictions in the Regional Plan
may, at their discretion, participate in a process of coordinated Periodic Re-
view. This process may be initiated by any of the participating jurisdictions but
requires agreement between all participants to proceed.
4.4. CORRECTIVE MEASURES AND PLAN ADJUSTMENTS ORS197.656(2)(B)(F)
4.4.1. CORRECTIVE MEASURES
4.4.1.1. If a Regional Plan Progress Report indicates that a particular city is
not meeting the performance measures, the city shall propose corrective
measures as an addendum to the Regional Plan Progress Report. The
corrective measures shall be approved by the Policy Committee.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 21 of 26
4.4.1.2. Cities that choose to expand their UGBs into land not designated as a
URA will be required to go through the Regional Plan minor or major
amendment process prior to or concurrent with any other process.
4.4.1.3. If land outside of a URA is included in a UGB while URA land remains
available to that city, an equivalent amount of land shall be removed from
the remaining URA land. Land removed shall be of equal or higher
priority in relation to the land included. Additionally, if land determined
part of the region's commercial agricultural base by the RLRC is included,
the land removed shall also be land with that designation (if available).
4.4.1.4. A proposal for an UGB amendment will be required to demonstrate
how the Regional Plan performance indicators have been met. A UGB
amendment will not be approved by the County unless the Regional Plan
performance indicators have been met or corrective measures are
proposed which demonstrate how the performance indicators will be
met.
4.4.1.5. Approval of a UGB amendment shall be subject to the condition that
it be zoned and developed in a manner consistent with the Conceptual
Land Use Plan submitted in the UGB amendment proposal. After the UGB
Amendment has been approved, all subsequent Comprehensive Plan
Amendments by a city to amend land uses which will result in an
inconsistency with the Conceptual Land Use Plan shall be reviewed,
modified as appropriate, and approved by the county prior to
development. The amendment shall be processed as a Type 4 permit.
4.4.1.6. A UGB amendment to add land not designated as a URA shall only be
considered through a quasi - judicial application when the land to be
added is industrial.
4.4.2. REGIONAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
4.4.2.1. Regional Plan Amendment Responsibility. Processing
amendments to the adopted Regional Plan shall be the responsibility of
Jackson County, and shall only be proposed by the governing authority of
a participating jurisdiction. In acknowledgement of the collaborative
process by which the adopted Regional Plan was created, Jackson County
shall have available the assistance of the participating jurisdictions
through a Technical Advisory Committee and Policy Committee. Both
committees serve on an as- needed basis, and both serve in an advisory
capacity to Jackson County as follows:
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 22 of 26
4.4.2.1.1. Technical Advisory Committee. The TAC shall be comprised of
planners and senior -level staff from signatory jurisdictions and
agencies, and each signatory shall have one vote, irrespective of the
number of participating representatives. Recommendations to the
Policy Committee or directly to Jackson County shall be made by at
least a supermajority vote (simple majority plus one) of a quorum of
signatory jurisdictions and agencies.
4.4.2.1.2. Policy Committee. The Policy Committee shall be comprised of
elected officials or executive staff from signatory jurisdictions and
agencies. Each signatory jurisdiction shall designate a voting and
alternate voting member, and each signatory jurisdiction will have
one vote. Recommendations to Jackson County shall be made by at
least a supermajority vote (simple majority plus one) of a quorum of
jurisdictions. State agencies, the MPO, and Rogue Valley Sewer
Services, while Signatories, shall not be voting members of the
Policy Committee.
4.4.3. Regional Plan Amendment Type. When an amendment to the adopted
Regional Plan is proposed, Jackson County shall make a preliminary
determination regarding whether the proposed amendment is a Minor
Amendment or Major Amendment, as defined below, shall notify signatory
jurisdictions and affected agencies of the County's preliminary determination,
and shall solicit input. Based on its preliminary determination and input
received, Jackson County shall review the proposed amendment according to
the procedures for Minor Amendments or Major Amendments set out below.
Proposed amendments to the adopted Regional Plan shall adhere to the
following provisions:
4.4.3.1. Minor Amendment. A minor amendment is defined as any request
for an amendment to the adopted Regional Plan that does not conflict
with the performance indicators and does not propose an addition of
more than 50 acres to a city's URA established in the adopted Regional
Plan or more than a 50 -acre expansion of the UGB into non -URA land.
In the case of Ashland, which did not establish a URA during the
development of the Regional Plan process, a proposal to establish a URA
or expand its UGB of not more than 50 acres shall be considered a minor
amendment.
Should a city exceed its limit of 50 acres for adding to its URAs during the
Planning Horizon for the Regional Plan, it may not use the minor
amendment process for further additions to its URA. Should a city exceed
its limit of 50 acres for expanding its UGB into non -URA land during the
planning horizon, it may not use the minor amendment process for
further expansions of its UGB into non -URA land.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 23 of 26
Any participant jurisdiction may initiate a minor amendment to the
adopted Regional Plan. The proposing jurisdiction must clearly identify
the nature of the minor amendment, and specify whether the minor
amendment would require any other signatory jurisdiction to amend its
comprehensive plan. Should any signatory jurisdiction other than the
proposing jurisdiction and Jackson County be required to amend their
comprehensive plans as a result of the proposed minor amendment, the
affected signatory jurisdiction shall be a party to the minor amendment
proceeding.
Jackson County's process and the proposing jurisdiction's process for a
minor amendment to the Regional Plan shall be equivalent to the state
and local processes required for a comprehensive plan amendment.
Signatories and agencies shall be provided with notice of the County's
and proposing jurisdiction's final decision on each minor amendment
within five working days of the adoption of the final decision.
4.4.3.2. Major Amendment. A major amendment is defined as any
requested amendment to the adopted Regional Plan that does not meet
the definition of a Minor Amendment.
If multiple signatory jurisdictions are involved in a single request for a
major amendment, a lead jurisdiction shall be selected by the affected ju-
risdictions.
Notice containing a detailed description of the proposed change shall be
forwarded by Jackson County to all signatories and affected agencies.
Staff from signatory jurisdictions and agencies shall meet as a Technical
Advisory Committee and generate a recommendation to the Policy Com-
mittee by vote of at least a supermajority of a quorum (simple majority
plus one).
Decision - makers from signatory jurisdictions and agencies shall meet as
a Policy Committee and consider the proposal and the Technical Advisory
Committee recommendation. The Policy Committee shall generate a rec-
ommendation to Jackson County by vote of at least a supermajority of a
quorum (simple majority plus one).
Should an existing city or a newly incorporated city desire to become a
participating jurisdiction, increased population shall be added to the re-
gional projected population adequate to accommodate the projected
population growth of the newly incorporated city for the remainder of
the Planning Horizon for the Regional Plan. The addition of a newly in-
corporated city to the Regional Plan, the establishment of Urban Reserve
Areas and other such actions shall be accomplished through the major
amendment process.
Jackson County's process, and the proposing jurisdiction's process, for a mi-
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 24 of 26
nor or major amendment to the Regional Plan shall be equivalent to the state
and local required process for a comprehensive plan amendment, in addition
to the Regional Plan - specific provisions. Signatories and affected agencies
shall be provided with notice of the final decision on each major or minor
amendment within five working days of the adoption of the final decision. Ju-
risdictions or agencies shall be noticed according to Table S.I.
Table 5.1 Jurisdictions . Agencies to Receive Notification of
Adopted the
Jurisdiction or Agency -
Proposed
Routine
As Needed
City of Eagle Point
X
City of Central Point _ _
X
City of Medford
X
City of Phoenix
X
City of Talent
X
City of Ashland
X
Oregon Department of Transportation
X
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development
X
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
X
Oregon Economic and Community Development Department
X
Oregon Department of Agriculture
X
Oregon Housing and Community Development Department
X
Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization
X
Rogue Valley Sewer Services
X
Medford Water Commission �i
X
Rogue Valley Council of Governments
X
Rogue Valley Transit District
X
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
X
_
Division of State Lands
X
Ashland School District #5
X
Central Point School District #6
X
Jackson County School District #9
X I
Medford School District 549C
X
Phoenix- Talent School District #4
X
Eagle Point Irrigation District
X
Medford Irrigation District
X
Rogue Valley Irrigation District
X
Talent Irrigation District
X
Jackson Soil and Water Conservation District
X
S. URBAN RESERVE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
The creation of urban reserves required the adoption of an Urban Reserve Management
Agreement (URMA) between the City and Jackson County. All development within the
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 25 of 26
City's Urban Reserve Areas will be regulated in accordance with the URMA. The ap-
proved URMA for Central Point's Urban Reserve is presented in Appendix C of this ele-
ment.
6. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
Development within the Tolo Area is currently regulated by an existing Urban Growth
Boundary Management Agreement ( UGBMA). A review of the current UGBMA finds that
there are no inconsistencies between the UGBMA, the Regional Plan, and the URMA. A
copy of the UGBMA is presented in Appendix D.
City of Central Point
Regional Plan Element Page 26 of 26
Exhibit 116"
Ak -
CENTRAL
POINT
I
Legend
Urban Growth Boundary Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Civic and Open Space
E3 Urban Reserve Areas Very Low Density TOD Corridor r-, Neighborhood Commercial Light 1111111 parks and Open Space
Future Land Use Low Density 0 TOD District = Community Commercial W General ft Civic
subject to the Regional Medium Density 0 General Commercial
Plan Element and URMA
0 High Density
Central Point
Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Adopted by Ordinance No.
CC Map Pl."IRMCOmPW URA
4-
Exhibit "C"
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT (CITY), OREGON
AND JACKSON COUNTY (COUNTY), OREGON
FOR THE JOINT MANAGEMENT OF THE CENTRAL POINT URBAN RESERVE
WHEREAS under ORS 190.003 to 190.030, and 197.175, et seq. City and County are authorized to enter
into intergovernmental agreements and are required to prepare and adopt Comprehensive Plans consistent
with Statewide Planning Goals; and
WHEREAS City and County have previously entered into an intergovernmental agreement setting forth
their rights and responsibilities within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and outside the incorporated
City boundaries and this Agreement remains in full force and effect; and
WHEREAS under OAR 660 - 021 -0020, City and County are authorized to establish Urban Reserves and
City and County have adopted an Urban Reserve as well as plan policies and land use regulations to
guide the management of this area pursuant to OAR 660- 021 -0020; and
WHEREAS City and County recognize the importance of providing an orderly transition of urban
services from County to City jurisdiction and administration as the Urban Reserve transitions from a
rural to an urban character; and
WHEREAS ORS 190 -003, et seq. requires that an intergovernmental agreement relating to the
performance of functions or activities by one unit of local government for another shall be adopted and
shall specify the responsibilities between the parties;
NOW, THEREFORE, City and County agree as follows:
1. Definitions
BOC: Jackson County Board of Commissioners.
Comprehensive Plan: State - acknowledged comprehensive plan adopted by City or County.
Council: City of Central Point City Council.
LDO: Jackson County's Land Development Ordinance.
Non - resource Land: Land that is not subject to the statewide Goals listed in OAR 660-004 -
0010(1)(a) through (g) except subsections (c) and (d).
Planning Services: Legislative activities, such as adoption and amendment of comprehensive
plan text and maps, adoption and amendment of land use regulations, and quasi-judicial
processing of land use actions.
Resource Land: Land that is subject to the statewide Goals listed in OAR 660- 004- 0010(1)(a)
through (g) except subsections (c) and (d).
Page 1 of 8
Urban Growth Boundary (UGB): The boundary separating urban and urbanizable lands in and
adjacent to City from rural lands under County jurisdiction.
Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreement (UGBMA): The current agreement
between County and City concerning the management of the lands within City's urban growth
boundary. Such agreements may be alternatively referred to as "Urban Growth Management
Agreements" (UGMAs), "Urban Growth Boundary Agreements" (UGBAs), "Urban Area
Management Agreements" (UAMAs) and "Urban Growth Boundary and Policy Agreements"
(UGBPAs).
Urban Reserve (UR): Lands outside of a UGB identified as highest priority (per ORS 197.298)
for inclusion in the UGB when additional urbanizable land is needed in accordance with the
requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 14.
Urban Facilities and Services: Basic facilities that support urban development in accordance
with a Comprehensive Plan and that are primarily planned for by cities but also may be provided
by counties or districts. Urban facilities and services include, but are not limited to: fire
protection, sanitary facilities, potable water delivery, storm drainage facilities, streets and roads
(including bike lanes and sidewalks), planning, zoning and subdivision control, health services,
parks and recreation facilities and services, transportation and community governmental services.
2. Intent and Purpose of Agreement
The intent and purpose of this Agreement is for City and County to:
A. Enhance long -range planning in the Urban Reserve,
B. Maintain and improve coordination and communication between City and County.
C. Develop consistent policies and procedures for managing urban growth and development
within the Urban Reserve.
D. Minimize impacts to property owners, local governments and service providers related to
the transition of property from within the Urban Reserve to within the Urban Growth
Boundary.
3. Urban Reserve Planning and Zoning
A. OAR 660 - 021- 0040(2) requires that development and land divisions in exception areas
and on non- resource lands must not hinder the efficient transition to urban land uses and
the orderly and efficient provision of urban services. In accordance with this and other
requirements in State law, the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan and Land
Development Ordinance will specify an appropriate minimum parcel size for new land
divisions in the UR and the following provision will apply:
Prior to approval of any new development, property owners must sign a deed
declaration acknowledging that existing or proposed development on their
Page 2 of 8
4.
property may be impacted by future urbanization, including the installation of
public utilities and streets.
B. Per OAR 660- 021 - 0040(3), for exception areas and non- resource land in the UR, zone
amendments allowing more intensive uses, including higher residential density, than
permitted by acknowledged zoning at the time of execution of this Agreement shall not
be permitted. This regulation shall remain in effect until such time as the land is annexed
into the City.
C. Per OAR 660 - 021 - 0040(4), resource land that is included in the UR shall continue to be
planned and zoned under the requirements of applicable Statewide Planning Goals.
Process for Exercising Responsibilities in the Urban Reserve
A. Per OAR 660 - 021 - 0050(1), unless otherwise agreed to, designation of the local
government responsible for building code administration, enforcement of land use
ordinances, and land use regulation in the Urban Reserve shall be:
(i) Prior- to inclusion within the UGB.
(ii) After inclusion within the UGB:
(iii) After annexation into the City
County
Per current agreement (e.g., UGBMA)
City
B. Per OAR 660 - 021 - 0050(2), designation of responsibility for the current and future
provision of sewer, water, fire protection, parks and recreation, road maintenance and
improvements, and stormwater facilities within the UR are described below and shown
on the map attached hereto and incorporated herein as "Exhibit 1."
C. Per OAR 660 -021 - 0050(3), the terms and conditions under which responsibility for the
provision of urban facilities and services will be transferred or expanded in the UR are
described in Section 5, below.
D. Per OAR 660 - 021 - 0050(4), and to ensure involvement by affected local governments and
special districts, procedures for notification and review of land use actions in the UR to
ensure involvement by affected local governments and special districts are as follows:
(i) All land use actions shall be processed by County. After receiving an application
or developing a proposal, County will request comments from City and other
affected local governments and special districts concerning the requested land
use action. County will provide these parties with 45 days notice before the first
hearing of any proposed County Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan map,
zoning map or zoning regulation amendment in the Urban Reserve.
(ii) Upon request for comments on a land use action in the UR, City and any other
affected local governments and special districts will have an opportunity to
recommend approval, recommend approval with conditions, or recommend
denial of the land use action. In consideration of City's comments, County will
Page 3 of 8
recognize that City has a unique interest in ensuring the efficient transition of the
UR area from rural to urban land uses.
(iii) County staff will incorporate any comments received into the staff report and
present them to the initial and final hearings body. Additional comments by City
or other affected local governments, or special districts, concerning the land use
action will be heard and considered as part of County's land use hearing process.
5. Transition Policies Relating to Service Responsibility in the Urban Reserve
A. Sanitary Sewer Service. There will be no provision of these services in the UR until City
and /or Rogue Valley Sewer (RVS) services are available consistent with the provisions of
Statewide Planning Goal 11, its implementing regulations, and the regulations of the
respective sanitary sewer service provider. Subsequent to annexation, City may require
hook -up, per City standards, to sanitary sewer services. Nothing in this provision shall
limit the ability of individuals to provide individual services, under provisions of
applicable State and local law(s), on their own private property within the Urban Reserve.
The attached map (Exhibit 1) depicts City's UGB and city limits, within which sanitary
sewer service is the responsibility of City and /or RVS. County has no sanitary sewer
service responsibilities.
B. Potable Water Service. There will be no public provision of these services in the UR until
urban services are available consistent with the provisions of Statewide Planning Goal 11
and the regulations of the respective public water provider. City shall be the sole and only
public provider of water, except for existing water districts. Nothing in this provision
shall limit the ability of individuals to provide individual services, under provisions of
applicable State and local law(s), on their own private property within the Urban Reserve.
The attached map (Exhibit 1) depicts City's UGB and city limits, within which potable
water service is the responsibility of City. County has no potable water service
responsibilities.
C. Fire Protection. Jackson County Fire Protection District #3 has primary responsibility for
fire protection services within the UR and the UGB. City has primary responsibility for
fire protection services within the city limits. The attached map (Exhibit 1) depicts the
boundaries described above.
D. Parks and Recreation. County provides parks and recreation services outside of City's
limits (including the UR and UGB), while City provides these services within City's
limits.
E. Road Maintenance and Improvements.
(i) County Roads. County maintains county roads within the UR. County will retain
jurisdiction and be responsible for the continued maintenance of these road(s)
until annexation by City. When City's UGB is expanded into the URA, County
will require (e.g., through a condition of approval of UGB amendment) that City
assume jurisdiction over the county roads within the proposed UGB at the time
of annexation into City regardless of the design standard used to construct the
Page 4 of 8
road(s) and regardless of when and how the road(s) became county roads. The
transfer shall occur without compensation and City shall not impose other
conditions that might otherwise be allowed under ORS 373.270(6). County shall
ensure the pavement condition of the road(s) is in good or better condition at the
time of the transfer as determined by county's Pavement Management Grading
S_ sy tem.
When a proposed UGB amendment will result in a significant impact to a county
road(s) already within City's limits, or existing UGB, such that the proposed
amendment depends on said county road(s) for proper traffic circulation, then a
nexus is found to exist between the proposed UGB expansion and said county
road(s). Where such a nexus exists, the county may require, as a condition of
approval, the transfer of all, or portions of, said county road(s) within the existing
UGB or City's limits at the time of annexation, regardless of the design standards
to which the road is constructed. This transfer shall occur without compensation
and shall not be subject to other conditions that might otherwise be allowed
under ORS 373.270(6). County shall ensure the pavement condition of said
road(s) is in good or better condition at the time of the transfer as determined by
county's Pavement Management Grading System. The parties deem the
following roads within City's UGB or City's limits to have such a nexus:
• Grant Road, Beall Lane to 2660' North of Taylor
• Scenic Avenue, Hwy 99 to 230' West of Hwy 99
• Taylor Road, 200' West of Silver Cr. Dr. to Grant Rd North
• Upton Road, Peninger Road to 2380' East of Peninger
• Wilson Road, Table Rock Road to 480' West
For county roads within City's limits or UGB not listed above, City shall not be
required to assume jurisdiction as part of this Agreement.
(ii) State Highways. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) maintains
state highways within the UR. ODOT retains jurisdiction and maintenance
responsibilities on all state highways in the UR after inclusion within City's UGB
and after annexation by City except where jurisdiction is transferred to City or
County by separate agreement.
The attached map (Exhibit 1) depicts roads within the UR where, if the road is publicly -
maintained, either County or ODOT has responsibility for road maintenance and
improvements. Upon annexation, City will assume jurisdiction along with road
maintenance and improvement responsibilities over the entire right -of -way of said road(s)
currently maintained by County within the annexation area. The exception to this is South
Stage Road, which will remain under County jurisdiction.
F. Stormwater Management. County provides limited, if any, public stormwater
management services within the UR. City provides stormwater management services
within the City's limits. Transition of public stormwater management responsibilities
from County to City will occur upon annexation by City. The attached map (Exhibit 1)
Page 5 of 8
depicts the UR wherein County has responsibility for public stormwater management
services until annexation by City.
G. Special Districts. City must agree to the formation of any special district within the UR
prior to the approval of the formation of the district by County. This provision shall not
apply to County -wide service districts formed under ORS Chapter 451.
H. Service Expansion Plans. As the future provider of water, sewer, parks and recreation,
road maintenance and improvement, and stormwater management services in the UR,
City shall prepare and update service expansion plans and these plans shall be consistent
with the UGBMA between City and County. These plans shall provide a basis for the
extension of services within the UGB and shall be referred to County for comment.
6. Review, Amendment and Termination of this Agreement
A. This Agreement may be reviewed and amended at any time by mutual consent of both
parties, after public hearings by the Council and the Board of Commissioners.
B. Any modifications to this Agreement will be consistent with City and County
comprehensive plans and state law.
C. Staff from City and County will attempt to informally resolve any disputes regarding the
terms, conditions, or meaning of this Agreement. For any disputes not resolved through
this informal process, the Council and the BOC will meet jointly in an attempt to resolve
those disputes. Either party may request the services of a mediator to resolve any dispute.
D. This Agreement may be terminated by either party subsequent to dissolution of the Urban
Reserve. Such termination shall proceed through a properly noticed public hearing
process.
JACKSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CITY OF CENTRAL POINT CITY
COUNCIL
Dennis C. W. Smith, Chair
Hank Williams, Mayor
Page 6 of 8
John Rachor, Commissioner
Allen Broderick, Councilmember
Don Skundrick, Commissioner Bruce Dingler, Councilmember
Carol Fischer, Councilmember
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY.-
Kelly Geiger, Councilmember
County Counsel Kay Harrison, Councilmember
City Attorney Ellie George, Councilmember
Page 7of8
EXHIBIT 1
r�
CP -1e
ii
i aeao�no `.
SCENAV cp-1c
_ r
i
VAYLOR
Imo- I 1_ CP -6A .r c
Central Point
- - -_ - CP -66 Y
Drag LEGEND Y� Masc»cn�.RY
- , _ WON", Oeweloprrt�nf
Central Point Urban ::Z: . .... ,......, o 02 OA 00 sero/oss
Reserve Area
Page 8 of 8
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
Exhibit "D"
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
Page 1 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
17.71. URBAN /AGRICULTURAL CONFLICT MITIGATION
The regulations in this section apply to urban land in the urban growth boundary
that was added from the urban reserve shown in the Regional Plan Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. The basis for these regulations can be found in the Greater
Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem- Solving Plan (Regional Plan), Volume II, Appendix
III.
17.71.100 Purpose
The purpose of these standards is to mitigate the potential for conflict be-
tween farming activities and urban uses. These provisions implement a poli-
cy mutually adopted by the City and Jackson County in the Regional Plan.
The mitigation provisions of this Section seek to achieve the following objec-
tives:
1. Minimize the impacts of urban development on agricultural pro-
duction activities.
2. Minimize the potential for complaints about agricultural practices
and activities.
3. Ensure the continued use of agricultural land for agricultural uses.
4. Minimize potential conflict by developing a well- defined boundary
between agricultural and urban uses. The best boundary will be
one that minimizes conflict in both directions.
17.71.200 Definitions
The following definitions apply only to this Section
A. Agricultural Land Uses.
The use of land for the cultivation and husbandry of plant and animal prod-
ucts, including agricultural activities permitted on land zoned Exclusive Farm
Use (EFU).
1. Classification. Agricultural
a. Intensive Use (I). The agricultural lands in this category:
i. Are composed of Class I -IV agricultural soils; or
ii. Support existing or scheduled plantings of long -term
crops with a height at maturity exceeding four (4) feet.
b. Passive Use (P). The agricultural lands in this category:
Are composed of predominately Class IV soils, can
demonstrate an unbroken or essentially unbroken 25-
year history of agricultural inactivity or grazing use, and
which have either of the following: (i) greater than 50%
Page 2 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
hydric soils or (ii) greater than 50% shallow soils (sur-
face to bedrock) of less than two feet in depth; or
ii. Are composed of greater than 50% of Class VI or poorer
soil; or
iii. Are outside of an irrigation district's boundary and out-
side of areas suitable for future expansion of a district,
as determined by the district.
B. Mitigation Area.
A management zone of varying size, shape, and characteristics between dif-
ferent land uses that uses combinations of mitigation elements to buffer be-
tween agricultural land and urban land uses.
C. Mitigation Element.
A physical or legal feature within a mitigation area that mitigates an adverse
impact. A mitigation element may consist of vegetation, transportation and
utility corridors, natural barriers, deed restrictions, or other natural or man-
made features.
D. Spray Drift.
The airborne movement of agricultural chemicals onto a non - target area.
E. Urban Receptor. Sensitivity of:
1. Urban Receptor, Higher - Sensitivity (H):
a. Residential use.
b. Motel, hotel, or hostel.
c. Place of worship; public meeting facility.
d. Childcare center, kindergarten, school, university, or other
educational institution.
e. Medical center or hospital.
f. Public or quasi - public use, such as library, park, etc.
g. Other similar uses.
2. Urban Receptor. Lower - Sensitivity (L):
a. Commercial use, except for any defined as higher -
sensitivity urban receptor.
b. Industrial use.
Page 3 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
c. All other uses not classified here.
17.71.300 Description of Impacts Requiring Mitigation
A. Spray Drift.
Principally, spray drift is caused by agricultural chemical use, but can apply
to urban use of agrochemicals. Separation between urban and agricultural
uses is the preferred tool to mitigate the impact of the spray drift, employing
either large setbacks or a combination of smaller setbacks and a tree buffer.
B. Trespass and Vandalism.
Trespass and vandalism are often considered by farmers to be the most seri-
ous adverse potential impact to agricultural operations in proximity to urban
areas. Climb- resistant, trespass- inhibiting fences and /or hedges in the miti-
gation area are the means of reducing these impacts, as is placing the buffer
in individual ownership (such as larger urban lots with strict setback re-
quirements).
C. Odor.
Odor is one of the less important agriculture - related adverse impacts. Unless
there are site - specific reasons why mitigation of odor is critical (such as the
presence of a livestock feed lot), issues with odor are sufficiently addressed
by requiring that owners of new urban development within 1,000 feet of ag-
ricultural land receive notice through an explicitly worded deed declaration
of the potential adverse impacts to which they will likely be exposed as a re-
sult of living within 1,000 feet of agricultural land.
D. (Dust. Smoke. and Ash.
Like odor, this grouping of potential adverse impacts is one of the least im-
portant agriculture - related issues in the region, and, like odor, can be ad-
dressed by the use of a deed declaration.
E. Run -off.
Stormwater and irrigation run -off arise from both urban and agricultural us-
es, and can adversely impact agricultural operations as well as urban health
and livability. Impacts may be avoided or significantly reduced by employing
erosion - prevention and erosion- control measures during construction, and
by an adequate stormwater plan for urban development that takes into ac-
count impacts from and on the adjacent agricultural land.
F. Noise.
Noise is an impact arising from agricultural operations. This Section contains
no noise mitigation requirements, but applicants are encouraged to consider
community design and construction practices that provide some level of
noise mitigation. Recommended methods may be found in Appendix III of the
Regional Plan.
Page 4 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
17.71.400 Application Steps
A. Applicability
The provisions of this Section 17.71 apply to the development per-
mit applications, and their associated review procedure per Section
17.05. Table 17.05.1, Summary of Approvals by Review Procedure,
listed below where the land proposed for urban development is
within the initial boundaries of urban reserve established in the
Regional Plan Element and abuts other land zoned Exclusive Farm
Use (EFU):
a. Land Division (Partition and Subdivision tentative plans
only);
b. Planned Unit Development;
c. Conditional Use Permit;
d. Site Plan and Architectural Review.
2. A pre- application conference is required for all applications subject
to the provisions of this Section 17.71.400(A)(1).
3. Different degrees of mitigation are required of the applicant based
on the following factors: the sensitivity of the adjoining urban use
to agricultural impacts; the impact being buffered; the intensity of
uses on the adjacent EFU land; and whether the mitigation area is
to be mid- or long -term.
4. Mitigation elements established under this Section shall not be re-
moved or reduced unless the adjacent EFU land changes to a non-
agricultural zoning district.
B. Application: Agricultural Impact Assessment Report.
As part of any land use or development application listed in Section
17.71.400(A) where the agricultural mitigation standards in Section
17.71.500 apply, an applicant shall supply the Community Development De-
partment with a report entitled "Agricultural Impact Assessment Report"
(AIAR). The purpose of the AIAR is to provide the approving authority with
sufficient evidence to determine agricultural intensity (active or passive) and
to evaluate the applicant's proposed method of complying with the provi-
sions of this Section 17.71.
1. Map showing the zoning of land adjacent and within two hundred
(200) feet of the property proposed for urban development.
2. A description of the type and nature of agricultural uses and farm-
ing practices, if any, which presently occur on adjacent lands zoned
EFU and sources of such information. The information thus re-
Page 5 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
quired, if applicable, shall include:
a. Method of irrigation.
b. Type of existing agricultural product produced or sched-
uled plantings within one year of projected development
completion date.
Types of agricultural production and practices for the five
preceding years.
d. Method of frost protection.
e. Type of agricultural equipment customarily used on the
property.
3. Detailed information obtained from the Natural Resources Conser-
vation Service (NRCS) concerning soils which occur on adjacent
lands zoned EFU, and whether the land has access to water for irri-
gation.
4. Wind pattern information.
5. A description of the measures proposed to comply with the re-
quirements of Section 17.71.400(D).
6. The persons who prepared said report and all persons, agencies,
and organizations contacted during preparation of the report.
7. All statements shall be documented, sources given as reference, and
any other detailed information needed to substantiate conclusions
should be provided in the appendices.
8. If the applicant is requesting a deviation from the standards of this
Section, the Agricultural Impact Assessment Report shall not be
deemed to be complete unless accompanied by the Conflict As-
sessment and Mitigation Study described in Section 17.71.600 and
the recommendation of Jackson County's Agricultural Buffering
Committee, or a letter from Jackson County indicating that no such
recommendation is forthcoming.
C. Review Process
Using the definitions of these classifications herein and the evi-
dence of the AIAR, the approving authority shall determine:
a. Whether adjacent agricultural uses are intensive or passive
at the time the urban development application is filed and
accepted by the City; and
Page 6 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
b. Whether the applicant's proposed mitigation plan meets
the standards of Section 17.71.500.
2. The approving authority shall approve, approve with conditions, or
deny the AIAR and its proposals and conclusions.
D. Mitigation Requirements
1. All mitigation elements will be sited on urban land unless arrange-
ments have been made with the adjacent agricultural land owner to
site some or all elements on agricultural land.
2. Mitigation for Intensive Agriculture. To minimize or mitigate the
potential adverse impacts associated with the proximity of urban
and agricultural land uses, the following measures shall be under-
taken by the applicant when urban development is proposed adja-
cent to land which is in intensive agricultural use:
a. Setbacks as illustrated in Section 17.71.500, Figure 1, either
alone or in conjunction with a tree buffer;
b. Tree Buffer as illustrated in Figure 1 and described in Sec-
tion 17.71.500(B) and (C);
c. Screening Shrubs (only in conjunction with a tree buffer) as
described in Section 17.71.500(D);
d. Trespass- Inhibiting Hedges /Fencing as described in Sec-
tion 17.71.500(E);
e. Deed Declaration.
All urban land proposed for development which lies within one
thousand (1,000) feet of an EFU zoning district boundary shall be
subject to a deed declaration that requires the owners and all
successors in interest to recognize and accept common, custom-
ary and accepted farming practices which may produce noise,
dust, odors, and other impacts. The deed declaration shall be in a
form approved by the City. After the deed declaration is signed it
shall be recorded in the official records of Jackson County, and
copies shall be mailed to the owners of adjacent agricultural
lands zoned EFU.
f. Maintenance Program.
Land adjacent to an EFU zoning district boundary shall be sub-
ject to a restrictive covenant that provides that the perpetual
maintenance of mitigation - related fencing, the perpetual horti-
cultural care and maintenance of trees, shrubs, and hedges that
are used for mitigation, and the maintenance of other mitigation
elements shall be solely the responsibility of the owners and all
Page 7 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
successors in interest of property subject to the covenant. The
covenant shall be in a form approved by the City. After the cove-
nant is signed it will be recorded in the official records of Jackson
County.
g. Runoff.
Measures appropriate to the circumstances present shall be un-
dertaken by the applicant to mitigate adverse impacts which oc-
cur from periodic naturally occurring runoff and inadvertent ag-
ricultural irrigation runoff.
3. Mitigation for Passive Agriculture.
To minimize or mitigate the potential adverse impacts associated with
the proximity of urban and agricultural land uses, the following measures
shall be undertaken by the applicant when urban development is pro-
posed adjacent to land in passive agricultural use:
a. Setbacks as illustrated in Section 17.71.500(A), Figure 1, ei-
ther alone or in conjunction with a tree buffer;
b. Tree Buffer as illustrated in Figure 1 and described in Sec-
tions 17.71.500(B) and (C);
c. Screening Shrubs (only in conjunction with a tree buffer) as
described in Section 17.71.500(D);
d. Trespass- Inhibiting Hedges /Fencing as described in Sec-
tion 17.71.500(E);
e. Deed Declaration. A deed declaration as described in Sec-
tion 17.71.400 (D) (2) (e).
Maintenance Program. A restrictive covenant guaranteeing
perpetual maintenance as described in Section
17.71.400(D)(2)(0.
g. Runoff. Measures as described in Section 17.71.400(D)(2)
(g)•
E. Alteration or Removal of Mitigation Measures
The mitigation measures required by the approving authority may be altered
or removed entirely when the zoning of the adjacent agricultural land is
changed from EFU zoning. No alteration or removal of the mitigation ele-
ments shall cause the removal of fencing or landscaping which is required to
meet other buffering or landscaping requirements.
Page 8 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
Figure 1. Illustration of Tree Buffer & Setback Options
Urban II Agricultural
side side
300' 200' 100'
300' 200' 100'
Symbol
Key: '�` Structure Tree buffer (by no. of rows)
Page 9 of 18
I/H option 1
or
I/H option 2
IA\
Ja-
I/L option 1
or
I/L option 2
P/H
n
P/L
300' 200' 100'
Symbol
Key: '�` Structure Tree buffer (by no. of rows)
Page 9 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
Figure 2. Three -Row Tree Buffer
URBAN SIDE
TRESPASS - INHIBITING HEDGE /FENCE
O �. r ?
ST
15-25 ft. •
row3
CONIFERS
I" 1 row 2
Ali
row 1
d r r
SCREENING SHRUBS
AGRICULTURAL SIDE
17.71.500 Mitigation Standards
A. Illustration of Tree Buffer /Setback Combination Options
1. Figure 1 illustrates the tree buffer /setback combination options for
applicants.
a. The `tree' symbol illustrates the number of rows required
under each option.
b. Minimum structure setbacks are represented by the `struc-
ture' symbol ranged along a linear scale showing distance
from the urban /agricultural boundary. Setbacks apply to
any structure. Setbacks do not apply to eaves or similar
structural elements.
Page 10 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
2. Figure 1 does not depict screening shrubs; however, that element is
required when a tree -based buffer is used and when the tree spe-
cies in the first row on the agricultural side will not provide suffi-
cient foliage cover to ground level.
3. Key to abbreviations used in the Figure:
I - Intensive use agricultural land
P - Passive use agricultural land
H - Higher- sensitivity urban receptor
L - Lower- sensitivity urban receptor
4. The letter pairs "I /H ", "I /L ", "P /H ", and "P /L" indicates the types of
agricultural /urban adjacencies that determine the extent and
make -up of the tree buffer and setback elements. The options
shown under each adjacency type may be used at the discretion of
the applicant.
5. Where there is a mix of urban uses, the buffer design shall protect
the most sensitive use among them.
B. Tree Buffers
Three -Row Buffer (as required for I /H, option 1). Depending on the
species used, the minimum possible tree buffer width is 50 feet; the
maximum is 100 feet. The buffer shall be composed of at least two
different conifer species.
2. Two -Row Buffer (as required for I /L, option 1, and P /H, option 1).
Depending on the species used, the minimum possible planted
buffer width is approximately 40 feet; the maximum is approxi-
mately 65 feet. The buffer shall be composed of at least two differ-
ent conifer species.
3. Row Spacing and Offset. The purpose of the row -by -row offset is to
mitigate the effect of individual tree mortality and to compensate
for the individual differences between trees.
a. Three -Row Buffer
Offset: Set off the second row by one third the spacing
distance of trees (ST) in the first row; set off the third
row by another third. Refer to Figure 2 for clarification.
ii. Spacing of Rows: The distance between rows will be de-
termined using the following formula, where SR is the
spacing distance between rows, D1 is the widest foliage
diameter of the tree species in one row when it reaches
a height of 30 feet, and DZ is the widest foliage diameter
Page 11 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
of the tree species in the next row when it reaches a
height of 30 feet:
SR = 0.5(D1 + Dz) + 4
b. Two -Row Buffer.
i. Offset: Set off the second row by half the spacing dis-
tance of trees (ST) in the first row. Refer to Figure 3 for
clarification.
ii. Spacing of Rows: Use the same formula as for Three -
row Buffers, above.
Table 1. Calculation of tree spacing within rows for narrow- and broad - diameter
trees
Higher- Intensity Buffer
Lower- Intensity Buffer
Narrow
Broad
Narrow
Broad
ST =
ST =
ST =
ST =
single- species row 1.25D
1.1D
0.95D
0.81D
two- species row 0.625(Dl + Dz)
0.55(Dl + DZ)
0.475(Dl + Dz)
0.4(Dl + D2)
D = Typical foliar diameter of a tree species when 30 feet tall. The diameter is measured at the widest extent of a pyramidal
conifer.
ST = Tree spacing within rows; calculated as a multiple of tree diameter.
Note: When planting more than two species in a row, use the two species with the widest diameters to calculate spacing.
4. Tree Spacing within Rows. Tree spacing within a row is based on
the greatest foliar diameter of a given tree species when it reaches
a height of 30 feet. Coniferous trees vary from narrow pyramidal
forms (e.g., Atlas cedar) to broad pyramidal forms (e.g., Norway
spruce), so the following table contains calculation methods for
each.
5. Minimum Tree Height at Planting: 5 -6 feet, balled and burlapped.
6. Permitted Tree Species.
a. Applicants may use any species of conifer trees provided
the tree species is resistant to or will not harbor agricultur-
ally harmful insects or diseases.
b. A list of recommended species is available in the Regional
Plan, Appendix III.
Page 12 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
C. Transitions Between Buffers of Different Intensity
The principal purpose of the tree buffer is to mitigate spray drift; spray
height is the primary factor in determining whether a higher- or lower -
intensity buffer is required. To lessen the amount of spray being carried past
a transition between the two types of buffer, the applicant will extend the
buffer 75 feet beyond the end of the higher - intensity buffer, as shown in Fig-
ure 4.
Figure 3. Two -Row Tree Buffer
URBAN SIDE
TRESPASS - INHIBITING HEDGE /FENCE
SCREENING SHRUBS
AGRICULTURAL SIDE
D. Screening Shrubs
1. Screening shrubs are used only in conjunction with tree buffers.
2. If the first row of trees on the agricultural side of the tree buffer
does not have foliage down to ground level, install screening
shrubs is to provide sufficient foliage cover to close the gap. If the
first row of trees on the agricultural side of the buffer provides foli-
age down to ground level, then screening shrubs are not required.
3. The mature height of the shrubs shall be 125 percent of the antici-
pated ground -to- foliage bare space of the average mature specimen
Page 13 of 18
City of Central Point
ricultural Buffering Ordinance
of tree species.
4. Permitted Screening Shrubs.
a. Applicants may use any species of screening shrubs provid-
ed they are resistant to or will not harbor agriculturally
harmful insects or diseases.
b. A list of appropriate species is available in the Regional
Plan, Appendix 111.
Figure 4. Buffer Overlapping for Transition
orchard
orchard
row crops
nursery
orchard
Higher -
Intensity
Buffer
75 ft.
Lower-
In a transition between Intensive and Pas -
Intensity
sive Use parcels, the Intensive Use buffer
Buffer
will extend 75 feet adjacent to the Passive
use parcel before shifting to a Passive -Use
buffer.
75 ft.
Higher -
Intensity Buff-
er
E. Trespass- Inhibiting Hedges and Fences
1. Hedges and fences may be used separately or in combination to in-
hibit trespass onto agricultural land.
2. Hedge Standards
a. Spacing and Number of Rows: one or more rows, whichever
is sufficient to create an eight- foot -wide (8') buffer at ma-
turity.
b. Spacing within Rows: as appropriate to eliminate gaps
within three (3) years of planting.
Page 14 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
c. Overall Height:
No less than five (5) feet if being used solely as a tres-
pass inhibitor.
ii. If doubling as screening shrubbery, the hedge needs to
cover any bare space between the ground and the low-
est branches of trees in the central portion. Mature
height shall be 125 percent of anticipated ground -to-
foliage bare space of average mature specimen of tree
species being screened.
d. Permitted Trespass- Inhibiting Species. Applicants may use
any species of trespass- inhibiting hedges provided they are
resistant to or will not harbor agriculturally harmful insects
or diseases. A list of appropriate species is available in the
Regional Plan, Appendix III.
3. Fence Standards
a. Minimum fence height: six (6) feet.
b. Fences shall be climb resistant.
c. Install gates only when necessary for maintenance of the
mitigation area.
F. Other Design Requirements
1. Mid -term mitigation area
a. The agricultural land being protected by a mid -term buffer
may eventually be converted to urban uses; therefore, a
mid -term buffer may be designed for eventual conversion
to urban uses.
b. Mid -term buffer design shall be based on the following fac-
tors:
i. The most likely time period it will remain as a buffer;
ii. The specific use to which the buffer will likely be put to
once the agricultural land is urbanized: conversion to
housing, to roads, or to recreational use for the commu-
nity.
c. Alternatively, the applicant may defer development of an
appropriate portion of the urbanizing land bordering agri-
Page 15 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
cultural land until such time as the agricultural land is no
longer zoned EFU.
Irrigation. The establishment of an irrigation system is mandatory
for vegetation buffers. Must be designed by a licensed professional,
and should be site and species specific, as appropriate. The opera-
tion and maintenance of the irrigation system must be part of the
buffer's overall maintenance plan contained in the deed declara-
tion.
3. Road Placement. It is always preferable to not bisect buffers with
roads due to the wind - funneling effect they create. If a road is una-
voidable, it should be as narrow as possible, not straight, and
should not be oriented to the prevailing wind. It should be noted
that even a road with an acceptable orientation and design will
permit some degree of increased spray drift to pass through the
buffer area, and will also pose a greater risk of trespass.
17.71.600 Deviations
A. Deviations from Provisions
1. A proposed mitigation design that deviates from the provisions may
be approved by the approving authority per the following process.
2. A mitigation design does not deviate when existing elements con-
sistent with the purpose of the buffer are incorporated, as de-
scribed following:
For mitigation without tree buffers the requirements of lin-
ear distance can be achieved by elements such as the fol-
lowing:
i. Man -made or natural features such as infrastructure
rights -of -way, roads, watercourses, wetlands, rock out-
crops, forested areas, and steep slopes;
ii. Non - farmable areas of the agricultural land being buff-
ered (including yards, storage areas, roads, and all
structures);
iii. Publicly owned land without consistent present or pro-
jected public use (as determined by the public entity
owner);
iv. An easement on agricultural land purchased by the ap-
plicant;
Page 16 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
v. Other open areas (except undeveloped rural residential,
commercial, or industrial parcels) that are considered
appropriate to the purpose of the buffer.
b. For mitigation with tree buffers the approving authority
may allow the requirements to be partially or fully satisfied
by existing areas of trees and shrubs, as long as their miti-
gation effect is essentially the same as that intended by the
requirements in Section 17.71.400(D). If the characteristics
of the existing vegetation do not meet the requirements in
Section 17.71.400(D), and cannot substitute in full or in
part for an adequate tree buffer, then the area can either be
incorporated into the design at half its mitigation value (for
example, a 20- foot -wide riparian area would be calculated
as 10 feet of tree buffer) or it can be left out of the tree
buffer and be calculated at its original width (20 feet of ex-
isting vegetation would be considered as 20 feet of bare
land).
When an applicant proposes a mitigation design that deviates from
the minimum standards in this Section, the applicant is responsible
for the preparation of a Conflict Assessment and Mitigation Study
(CAMS), which shall be evaluated by an Agricultural Buffering
Committee appointed by the Jackson County Board of Commission-
ers. The Committee will make a recommendation to the City's ap-
proving authority regarding the acceptability of the deviation.
4. Conflict Assessment and Mitigation Study (CAMS).
a. The CAMS shall:
Determine the present and likely future agricultural
land uses, practices, and activities with the potential to
cause adverse impacts to adjacent urban development.
Base the determination of likely agricultural practices
on factors such as soil type; topography; parcel size,
shape, and location; infrastructure; microclimatic condi-
tions; regional agricultural practices and crops; and the
farming history of the adjacent agricultural land and
surrounding similar parcels.
ii. Determine how the proposed urban development
would likely impact the management and operation of
nearby agricultural lands. All owners of EFU -zoned land
within 1,000 feet of the land proposed for development
shall be asked for an interview, and the findings of those
interviews will be included in the CAMS.
Page 17 of 18
City of Central Point
Agricultural Buffering Ordinance
iii. Identify the land uses, practices, and activities that may
cause adverse impacts and the extent of the impacts,
from both the urban use as well as from the agricultural
land. Quantify the impacts, where possible, in terms of
frequency and duration of activities to determine the
impacts. As part of this evaluation, the CAMS shall con-
sider the likely future uses determined in (i) above. The
buffering mechanisms that are proposed shall be suffi-
cient to accommodate these potential future uses. The
current financial viability of a particular crop will not be
considered an important limiting factor in determining
potential future use.
iv. Propose a set of buffering measures that will achieve
acceptable buffering outcomes, which may include, but
are not limited to, the siting of residences, size and ge-
ometry of lots, separation distances, communal open
space, vegetation, natural landscape features, acoustic
features, and so forth.
v. Propose the means by which the proposed buffering
measures will be monitored and maintained. This in-
cludes responsibility for implementing and maintaining
specific features of the buffer areas to ensure continued
effectiveness. Acknowledgment of the authority respon-
sible for ensuring compliance with any agreement will
be plainly cited.
vi. Establish a timeline for the development that establish-
es when the buffer will be installed.
b. The recommendations of the Agricultural Buffering Com-
mittee, if any, shall be included in the application. The ap-
plication shall not be considered complete without such
recommendations or a letter from Jackson County indicat-
ing that no such recommendations are forthcoming.
S. The approving authority may accept the recommendation of the
Agricultural Buffering Committee in whole or in part and make
findings for its acceptance, partial acceptance, or rejection.
6. Any approval of a deviation does not create a precedent for any
subsequent requests for deviations from the standards of Section
17.71.500,
Page 18 of 18
Exhibit "E"
FINDINGS OF FACT
FOR
THE GREATER BEAR CREEK VALLEY REGIONAL PLAN
Before the City of Central Point Planning Commission the consideration of a resolution recommending adoption
of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, including the adoption of a Regional Plan Element as a new
element of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan, an amendment to the Central Point Municipal Code,
adding Section 17.71, an amendment to the Official Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designating the Urban
reserve Areas, and approval of an Urban Reserve Management Agreement between Jackson County and the City
of Central Point (File No. 09017 and 12015)
Applicant: City of Central Point ) Findings of Fact
140 S. Third Street ) and
Central Point, OR 97502 )Conclusion of Law
PART LINTRODUCTION
These findings address adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Regional Plan, amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan adding a new Regional Plan Element and amending the Land Use Plan Map to include the Urban Reserve
Areas, and amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to add a new Section 17.71 creating agricultural buffering
standards, and approval of an Urban reserve Management Agreement. These findings have been prepared in
accordance with Section 17.05.500 and Section 17.96 as apply to legislative amendments to the City of Central
Point Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Including this introduction these findings will be presented in five (5) parts as follows:
l .Scope and Nature of the Land Use Action
2.Findings of Fact
3.Procedural Findings
4.Legal Conclusions
5. Summary Conclusions
1 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
PART 2.SCOPE AND NATURE OF THE LAND USE ACTIONS
Adoption of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (the "Regional Plan ") will be effectuated by the City of
Central Point by way of post - acknowledgement plan amendments and intergovernmental agreements, including
the Regional Problem Solving Agreement and the following:
1.Adoption of the Regional Plan;
2.Amendment of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the Regional Plan Element
as a new element of the Comprehensive Plan, which will serve as a coordinated urban reserve plan
between the City of Central Point and Jackson County;
3. Amendment to the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan Map to designate the
Urban Reserve boundaries for the City of Central Point;
4. Amendment to the City of Central Point Municipal Code adding a Section 17.7 1, Agricultural
Buffering Regulations; and
S.Approval of an Urban Reserve Management Agreement.
The above amendments (the "Amendments ") will be submitted jointly with Jackson County and other
participating cities in the manner of periodic review consistent with the Collaborative Regional Problem Solving
Statute set forth in ORS 197.652 to 197.656 and pursuant to OAR Chapter 660, Division 25, Section 175 relating
to review of Urban Reserve area designations.
PART 3.FINDINGS OF FACT
Based upon the evidence received during the public hearing and in the public record, the City of Central
Point Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact and reaches the following conclusions.
Where factual conflicts arose, the City of Central Point Planning Commission has resolved them consistent with
these findings.
1. Pursuant to Chapter 197 and 227 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, and in conformance with the
Statewide Planning Goals, the City of Central Point's Transportation System Plan, Comprehensive
Plan, and Municipal Code (CPMC, Chapter 17, Zoning) have been acknowledged by the Oregon
Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC).
2. The City of Central Point has amended the Comprehensive Plan since initial adoption and
acknowledgement to satisfy periodic review requirements and to meet the needs of the City through
Post - Acknowledgment Plan Amendments from time to time.
3. The Oregon Legislature adopted House Bill 3482 in the 1996 Special Legislative Session. House Bill
3482 established the statutes at ORS 197.652 to ORS 197.656 to engage in collaborative Regional
Problem Solving. In the 1999 to 2001 biennium, the Department of Land Conservation and
Development ( "DLCD ") awarded a grant to commence the local collaboration process under the
Regional Problem Solving statute. In the 2009 legislative session, the Oregon Legislature
substantively amended ORS 197.652 to ORS 197.656 through House Bill 2229, but Section 18 of that
bill provides, "Section 13 of this 2009 Act and the amendments to ORS 197.652, 197.654, 197.656
and 197.747 by sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of this 2009 Act apply to collaborative regional problem -
solving processes commenced on or after the effective date of this 2009 Act." Accordingly, the
Planning Commission finds that the amendments that are the subject of these findings comply with
the Regional Problem Solving Statutes at ORS 197.652 to ORS 197.656 as they existed to prior the
2009 legislative session amendments.
2 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
4. The Planning Commission finds that a Regional Problem Solving Agreement, entitled "Greater Bear
Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Agreement" (the "Agreement ") was signed by the City of
Central Point and all Regional Problem Solving participants and appropriate State of Oregon
agencies prior to initiating the City of Central Point land use hearings process to consider the
Regional Plan and Amendments that are the subject of these findings.
The acknowledged City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan contains 9 Elements. Adoption of the
Regional Plan would result in the adoption of Volume 1 of the Regional Plan as a new Element
(Element 10) of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan. Volumes 2 and 3 of the Regional Plan
are to be incorporated as part of the comprehensive plan data base in support of the Regional
Plan Element.
The Planning Commission finds that Chapter 1 of the Regional Plan is an appropriate introductory
section which establishes the regional planning area, planning horizon, project background, planning
process (including citizen involvement and appropriate State agency involvement), identified
regional problems, community buffering recommendations, regional land preservation strategies,
regional agricultural buffering standards, and commercial agricultural land base recommendations.
7. The Planning Commission finds that Chapter 2 of the Regional Plan results in reasonable growth
planning and growth policy for the planning within the Greater Bear Creek Valley. The Planning
Commission finds that the growth planning in Chapter 2 is based upon appropriate background
studies, reasonable assumptions (found in the Appendixes of Volume 2 of the Regional Plan), and a
coordinated consensus among the participating cities. The Planning Commission further finds that
Chapter 2 serves as an adequate factual basis to estimate urban land needs in a manner appropriate
to the 50 year planning horizon for the designated Urban Reserves. The Planning Commission also
finds that Chapter 2 adequately describes the regional transportation analysis conducted as part of
the regional planning process and describes the coordination between the region and the Rogue
Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization.
8. The Planning Commission finds that Chapter 3 appropriately explains the requirements and
application of the Urban Reserve Rule and the Urban Reserve selection process undertaken by the
region. The Planning Commission further concludes that Chapter 3 describes the application of
the Urban Reserve Rule in the context of a Regional Plan, which is the subject of a planning
project adopted under the Regional Problem Solving Statute.
9. The Planning Commission finds the Chapter 4, and more specifically sub - chapter 4.CP, which applies
to the City of Central Point, is based upon appropriate Geographical Information System (GIS)
mapping and statistical analysis, background studies, and an analytical approach for the establishment
of Urban Reserves, pursuant to OAR 660 Division 21.
10. The Planning Commission finds that adoption of the Regional Plan will result in the adoption of
Volumes 2 and 3 of the Regional Plan as background studies and graphics as reference documents
that provide factual support and an explanation of the analytical methods used and upon which the
Regional Plan is appropriately adopted. The Planning Commission finds that the maps in Volume 3 of
the Regional Plan were intended to match the amendments to be depicted on the official
Comprehensive Plan Map.
11. The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment for the City of Central Point adopted through the Regional
Plan establishes and maps the Urban Reserves for the City of Central Point consistent with the Urban
Reserves established in the Regional Plan.
3 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
PART 4.PROCEDURAL FINDINGS
Post Acknowledgment Plan Amendments are subject to the procedural requirements of ORS 197.610 -615.
Further, OAR 660, Division 18 (Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendment Review Rule) is directly applicable
to these amendments. Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendments to the City of Central Point Comprehensive
Plan that are based upon and /or implement agreements reached by Regional Problem Solving Participants shall
be submitted in the manner set forth in ORS 197.628 to 197.650 for periodic review, pursuant to ORS 197.656
as it existed prior to House Bill 2229 pursuant to Section 18 HB 2229 of the 2009 Oregon Legislature. ORS
197.626 requires the establishment of Urban Reserves for cities larger than 2,500 to be submitted in the manner
of Periodic Review; adoption of the Regional Plan as Element 10 of the City of Central Point Comprehensive
Plan establishes Urban Reserves for the City of Central Point. For the foregoing reasons, the Planning
Commission finds the nature of the amendments require submission in the manner of periodic review.
Consistent with the above general procedural findings, the Planning Commission finds the procedural
requirements of the aforementioned statutes and administrative rule have been met based on the facts
presented below. Where procedural issues arose, the Planning Commission has resolved them consistent with
these findings.
l .The Planning Commission finds that the Regional Plan, as recommended, contains background
procedural findings that fairly characterize and describe the process to define the Regional Problems,
reach a Regional Problem Solving Agreement between the participants, and the development of a
draft regional plan sufficient for proper technical review. The background procedural findings
contained therein are herewith incorporated and adopted as the City of Central Point's own.
2.The Planning Commission finds that the Regional Plan, as recommended, is consistent with the
framework of the Urban Reserve Rule and incorporates the substantive background findings that
support the policy and land use choices made since the inception of RPS.
PART 5.LEGAL CONCLUSIONS
The City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan and its implementing ordinances are acknowledged by the State
of Oregon as being in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals. Amendments must comply with applicable
local procedural requirements and result in a Comprehensive Plan that continues to comply with State
statutes, the Statewide Planning Goals and applicable Oregon Administrative Rules. Statewide Planning Goals 1
through 14 are applicable to the City of Central Point.
Based upon the evidence and arguments presented and the above procedural and substantive findings, the
Planning Commission concludes as follows with respect to the Regional Plan and the Amendments:
LProcedural Conclusions:
1. LThe City of Central Point collaborated in the initial development of an agreement to participate
in Regional Problem Solving and signed the agreement as a Participant. Following the signing
of the Participants Agreement, the Community Development Director initiated Planning File
09017. The Planning Commission concludes that this planning project is legislative in nature,
and is thus exempt from the processing time lines of ORS 227.178.
1.2.The local proceedings were processed in accordance with the adopted and acknowledged
procedures for adoption of Type IV legislative text and map amendments to the City of Central
Point Comprehensive Plan and legislative map amendments to the Official Zoning Map, The
Planning Commission concludes the amendments have been processed consistent with the
4 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
procedural requirements at CPMC 17.05.500 and 17.96.
1.3.Proper notice was timely provided to DLCD on the appropriate forms for amendments
submitted in the manner of periodic review and has been processed at the local level consistent
with OAR 660 - 025 -0175.
1.4.The local proceedings were carried out in accordance with the procedures for Post -
Acknowledgement Plan Amendments set forth in ORS 197.610 -615 and interpreted in OAR
660, Division 18.
1.5.Local proceedings were properly conducted for local adoption and subsequent submittal of the
Amendments to DLCD in the manner of periodic review.
2. Substantive Compliance with Local Regulations
2.LThe Planning Commission concludes that CPMC 17.96 and 17.10 contain the criteria for major
legislative text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance
respectively. The Planning Commission concludes the subject amendments satisfy these
criteria because the amendments will implement a change in land use policy by allocating
future growth to certain communities in the planning area and establishing Urban Reserves.
The Planning Commission further concludes that amendments are consistent with and support
the stated legislative objectives for the establishment of Urban Reserves at ORS 195.139.
2.2.13ased upon its review of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan, the Planning
Commission concludes that the Regional Plan has implications for other Elements of the
Comprehensive Plan. However, the Planning Commission concludes that careful review of the
Regional Plan did not yield any direct conflict with any existing Comprehensive Plan Element
and therefore no other Element updates are necessarily required to ensure that the
Comprehensive Plan remains internally consistent.
2.3.Through this Amendments process, the Planning Commission concludes that the County and
the City of Central Point will jointly enter into an Urban Reserve Management Agreement
(URMA). The Planning Commission has reviewed the URMA for the City of Central Point,
and concludes that the URMA satisfies the requirements of OAR 660 - 021 -0050.
2.4.The Planning Commission concludes that adoption of the Regional Plan will establish a
Comprehensive Plan Map overlay for the Urban Reserves. The Planning Commission further
concludes that this overlay will function in the Comprehensive Plan in a manner similar to
other Comprehensive Plan overlays. The Planning Commission concludes the Urban Reserves
will be applied directly under the Regional Plan during and immediately following
acknowledgment review.
3. Substantive Compliance with Applicable Statutes:
3.1.ORS 197.175 require the City of Central Point to have and maintain a comprehensive land use
plan. The Planning Commission concludes the amendments, which are the subject of these
findings, are consistent in all ways and carry out these responsibilities.
3.2.ORS 195.025 requires and authorizes counties to act as the coordinating body for local land
use planning within their respective boundaries. The Planning Commission concludes that
adoption of the Regional Plan is authorized by ORS 195.025 and is consistent with Jackson
County's responsibilities to coordinate local land use planning in accordance with ORS
195.025. The Planning Commission specifically concludes that Chapter 2 of the Regional
Plan includes population and employment growth forecasts that are reasonable and
appropriate for long -range land use planning for the City of Central Point and participants.
5 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
The Planning Commission further concludes that these forecasts utilize reasonable and
appropriate assumptions to estimate future land needs for the individual cities within the
planning area in the context of a long -range land use plan, such as the Regional Plan.
3.3.ORS 195.036 requires Jackson County to maintain a coordinated population forecast for the
County and each of its incorporated cities. The Planning Commission concludes that the
Jackson County Comprehensive Plan contains the required coordinated population forecast for
the entire County out to the year 2040. The Planning Commission concludes that adoption of
the Regional Plan includes an extension of the adopted and acknowledged population forecast
and allocations out to the year 2060 for the specific planning area of the Regional Plan for the
City of Central Point and participants, which is consistent with and exceeds the minimum
requirements of ORS 195.036.
3.4.The Urban Reserve Management Agreement (URMA), pursuant to OAR 660 - 021 -0050, is
authorized by and conforms in all ways to the requirements of ORS 190.010 to ORS 190.030.
3.5.ORS 195.145(1)(a) authorizes local governments to cooperatively establish Urban Reserves,
and based thereupon, the Planning Commission concludes the Regional Plan cooperatively
establishes such Urban Reserves for the City of Central Point.
3.6.The Planning Commission's conclusions herein are consistent with RPS statutes that existed
prior to the 2009 legislative session amendments, which are still in effect for collaborative
regional solving projects initiated prior to passage of the 2009 law. The Planning Commission
concludes as follows with respect to the RPS statutes:
i.ORS 197.652 provides that regional problem solving programs shall be distributed
geographically throughout the state and the Planning Commission concludes that the
Regional Problem Solving project that is the subject of these findings is the first in this
portion of the State of Oregon.
ii.ORS 197.654 allows local governments and certain special districts to enter into a
collaborative regional problem solving process directed toward resolution of land use
problems in a region. The Planning Commission concludes that the planning area
addressed in the Regional Plan is properly considered a "region" under the statute
because it constitutes an appropriate urban sub -area of the County. Based upon the
Participants Agreement, the background findings in Chapter 1 of the Regional Plan,
and the supporting planning documents in the Volume 2 reference document, the
Planning Commission concludes that the City of Central Point was offered an
opportunity to participate and that appropriate state agencies have participated
throughout the process. Additionally, through this process, the participants have
come to an agreement on the goals, objectives, and measures of success for the steps
undertaken to implement the Regional Problem Solving process.
iii.ORS 197.656(1) provides that local governments may invite the Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DLCD) and other State agencies to participate in the
collaborative regional problem solving process and the Planning Commission
concludes that DLCD and other appropriate State agencies were invited and did in fact
participate consistent with that statute.
iv.ORS 197.656(2) provides that LCDC may acknowledge amendments to
comprehensive plans that do not fully comply with LCDC rules that implement the
statewide planning goals where the amendments are based upon an agreement among
all the local participants, the commission, and other state agencies and where the said
agreement contains required components. As to the required agreement components,
the Planning Commission concludes the Regional Problem Solving Participants
6 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
Agreement includes agreement among the participants on regional goals, optional
techniques to achieve the goals, measurable performance indicators toward
achievement of the goals, a system of incentives and disincentives to achieve the goals,
a system of monitoring progress, and a process for correction of the techniques if the
goals are not being achieved. The Planning Commission herewith incorporates and
adopts their conclusions of law below that the subject amendments comply with the
Statewide Planning Goals. The Planning Commission herewith incorporates and
adopts the conclusions of law below with respect to compliance with OAR 660 -021
and concludes that while the RPS process for selecting Urban Reserves differed
from the Urban Reserve Rule process (as outlined in Volume 1, Chapter 3, Section
5.2), the outcome of the process is consistent, on the whole, with the purposes of the
statewide planning goals.
v.ORS 197.656(6) allows for land that is part of the region's commercial agricultural land
or forest land base to be devoted to a use not allowed by those goals only if an
exception to those goals is taken. The Planning Commission concludes that the
Regional Plan includes provisions for regional growth in Chapter 2 consistent with
planning coordination requirements of ORS 195 and establishment of Urban Reserves
consistent with applicable provisions in ORS 195 and neither of these actions have any
effect on the permissible uses on agricultural land and /or forest land in Jackson
County.
3.7.Substantive Compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules
i.The Planning Commission herewith incorporates and adopts the conclusions of law and
consistent with those conclusions, concludes the Regional Plan and associated Urban
Reserves for the City of Central Point comply with the Statewide Planning Goals.
ii.OAR 660- 021 - 0030(1) requires Urban Reserves to include at least a 10 year supply and
no more than a 30 -year supply of developable land beyond the 20 -year time frame
used to establish the urban growth boundary. The Planning Commission concludes that
Chapter 1 of the Regional Plan contains background findings which specify that the
Regional Plan is intended to supply land over a 50 -year period (a period of 30 years
beyond the 20 -year urban growth boundary time frame). The Planning Commission
further concludes that the amount of Urban Reserve land reasonably meets the total
projected land demand during that period.
iii.OAR 660- 021- 0030(2) provides for the analysis methods and approach to identify
suitable lands for consideration as Urban Reserves. The Planning Commission
herewith incorporates and adopts the background findings in Chapter 3 as the Regional
Plan's general explanation of the methods used to identify suitable lands for the all
cities. The Planning Commission herewith incorporates and adopts the background
findings and suitability analysis provided in Chapter 4, sub - chapter CP -4 to evaluate
and identify suitable lands for the City of Central Point's Urban Reserves. On the basis
of these findings and analysis, the Planning Commission concludes that suitable lands
for each of the City's Urban Reserves were identified using methods that appropriately
applied the factors of Goal 14. This resulted in a pool of suitable land that ensured the
application of the priority schema in Section 3 of this rule would result in Urban
Reserves that require the least, or have the least effect upon, resource land.
iv.OAR 660 -021 - 0030(3) establishes priorities for inclusion of identified suitable lands as
Urban Reserves. The Planning Commission herewith incorporates and adopts the
background findings and analysis in Chapter 3 and the background findings and
analysis in the sub- chapters of Chapter 4 devoted to the individual cities and on that
basis concludes the Regional Plan includes suitable land according to the priorities in
OAR 660- 021- 0030(3). As mentioned previously, the Planning Commission concludes
7 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
the RPS process for selecting Urban Reserves differed from the Urban Reserve
selection process (as outlined in Volume 1, Chapter 3, Section 5.2) but the outcome of
the process is consistent, on the whole, with the purposes of the statewide planning
goals.
3.8.Substantive Compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals
i.Goal 1: Citizen Involvement. The goal is to develop a citizen involvement program
that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the
planning process. The City of Central Point has adopted and publicized programs
for citizen involvement for their respective acknowledged comprehensive plans.
Consistent with the adopted program, the City of Central created several committees
in collaboration with the affected cities and public agencies for the Greater Bear
Creek Regional Problem Solving project, as described in the Regional Plan. These
included the Public Citizens Involvement Committee, Policy Committee, Technical
Advisory Committee, and the Resource Lands Review Committee.
In combination with the individual cities' outreach efforts as described in the
Regional Plan, the RPS process provided for citizen involvement- consistent with
the Goal l required components for a citizen involvement program. Adoption,
implementation, monitoring, and amendment processes all provide for continued
citizen involvement consistent with the Participant's Agreement and the
acknowledged Citizen Involvement Programs for the respective jurisdictions.
Accordingly, it is concluded that the Regional Plan project, including its
implementing agreements and comprehensive plan amendments and the overall
process, and the Regional Plan as it applies to the City of Central Point, complies with
Statewide Planning Goal 1.
ii.Goal 2: Land Use Planning. The goal is to establish a land planning process and
policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to
ensure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. The Regional Plan
results from a coordinated collaborative regional problem solving process, and is to be
adopted as part of the comprehensive plans for each of the participating cities and
Jackson County. The Regional Plan, consistent with Goal 2, includes identification of
issues and problems, inventories and other factual information pertaining to the
applicable statewide planning goals, evaluation of alternative courses of action and
ultimate policy choices, taking into consideration social, economic, energy, and
environmental needs.
The Regional Plan to be adopted by the participating cities and Jackson County will
be the basis for the specific implementation measures described therein. Adoption
shall be in accordance with public hearing procedures and will be reviewed and, as
needed, revised on a periodic cycle in accordance with the provisions in the Regional
Plan. The legislative process and the agreement provided for opportunities for review
and comment by citizens and affected governmental jurisdictions during preparation,
review, and revision of the plan and implementing measures. The plan proposes no
exceptions to the Statewide Planning Goals under Part II of Statewide Planning Goal
2. Consistent with Goal 2 Guidelines, the preparation and implementation of measures
of the Regional Plan was based on a series of broad phases over an approximately
ten -year period as described in Chapter I of the Plan. The regional problem solving
and planning process provided time for collection of factual information included in
the plan, which was refined many times to address problems and issues and to
define alternative solutions and strategies for development. The factual information in
the Plan includes a comprehensive GIS based mapping and inventory of the entire
planning area (Volume 3 — Atlas), the analyses in Chapters 2 through 4 of Volume
1, and the appended studies and research included in Volume 2. Studies therein
8 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
include the Phase I Status Report on Open Space, the Transportation Planning
Analysis Unit (TPAU) Modeling Report, the Regional Economic Opportunities
Analysis, the Regional Housing Needs Analysis, and the Regional Land Needs
Simulator and Population Allocation report.
The Regional Plan has been prepared in coordination with affected governmental
jurisdictions, and in a manner that allows it to be integrated as part of the
comprehensive land use plans of the participating cities and Jackson County.
Furthermore, the Regional Plan was developed to balance long term land use needs
over a fifty -year planning horizon. As the participating cities in the Region establish
the need to adjust urban growth boundaries over the next fifty years, the Regional
Plan will ensure that area appropriate for future urban needs is reserved and
available in a manner consistent with management implementation measures of the
cities' comprehensive plans, including land use and development ordinances, public
facility plans, capital improvement budgets, and annexation requirements.
The Regional Plan includes site and area specific measures related to urban reserve
areas, critical open space areas, buffering techniques, and generalized land use mix
and densities. Accordingly, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional
Plan as it applies to the City of Central Point,complies with the purpose, requirements,
and guidelines for land use planning as established in Statewide Planning Goal 2.
iii.Goal 3: Agricultural Lands. The goal is to preserve and maintain agricultural lands.
All agricultural land within the planning area subject to Goal 3, as defined therein and
as inventoried in the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan, is identified in Volume 3
(Atlas) of the Regional Plan. The Regional Plan coordinates urban reserve areas for
long range growth that will accommodate a doubling of the Region's urban population.
As cities demonstrate a need for additional land, long range growth will generally be
accommodated in areas that are adjacent or nearby (i.e., areas partially or wholly
within one - quarter mile) to existing urban growth boundaries.
The Urban Reserve Rule promotes development of a compact urban form by
requiring that local jurisdictions first consider the suitability of lands adjacent and
nearby existing urban growth boundaries for urban reserves, and to prioritize
lands for inclusion such that inventoried exception and non- resource lands within
the study area are assigned first priority for inclusion and high -value resource lands are
assigned lowest priority.
Additionally, through the Regional Plan, the City of Central Point is committed to
developing at increased residential densities and mixed - use /pedestrian friendly form.
The participants have also agreed to prepare and submit conceptual land use and
transportation plans at the time of an Urban Growth Boundary amendment. These
measures, in addition to other measures stated in Chapter 5 of the Regional Plan, will
ensure that future development takes place in a compact fashion, thereby reducing the
amount of agricultural land necessary to accommodate urban land needs.
The Urban Reserve Rule, at OAR 660 - 021 - 0040(4), requires resource land that is
included in urban reserves to continue to be planned and zoned under the
requirements of applicable Statewide Planning Goals. Accordingly, agricultural lands
included in urban reserve areas will continue to be designated by Jackson County as
Agricultural Land and zoned for Exclusive Farm Use while under County
jurisdiction. The planning horizon of the Regional Plan is fifty years rather than the
twenty years generally associated with urban growth boundaries. The stability
provided to agricultural producers may encourage investments in higher value, longer -
term crops, such as orchards and vineyards, and in operations that require
greater investments in infrastructure and processing. Finally, the Regional Plan
9 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
establishes practical, effective techniques for buffering farms from urban uses through
adoption by the participants of Regional Agricultural Buffering Standards.
The need for improved agricultural buffering throughout the region was reinforced
during the process of evaluating agricultural lands proposed for urban reserves.
Trespass and vandalism, arising from the juxtaposition to urban areas, was the most
commonly cited reason against designating agricultural lands in proximity to
cities as part of the commercial agricultural base. Based on first -hand experience
with the negative impacts arising from• inadequately buffered urban /rural interfaces,
members of the Resource Lands Review Committee developed "Guidelines for
Establishing Effective Buffers between Agricultural and Urban Uses ". The guidelines
provide separate buffering recommendations for chemical spray drift, noise, sediment
and storm -water run -off, trespass and vandalism, odor, and dust, smoke, and ash. The
guidelines also serve to ensure the continued use of farmland for farm uses, to
minimize potential conflict by a well- buffered boundary between rural agricultural
and urban uses, to minimize the impacts of urban development on rural agricultural
production activities and land resources, and to minimize the potential for
complaints about rural agricultural activities from urbanized areas.
Lastly, in response to public testimony, through the Regional Plan, Jackson County
committed to appointing an Agricultural Task Force. The Task Force is required to
develop a program to assess the impacts on the agricultural economy of Jackson
County arising from the loss of agricultural land and /or the ability to irrigate
agricultural land, which may result from Urban Growth Boundary Amendments and
to identify potential mitigation measures to offset those impacts. Appropriate
mitigation measures shall be applied to Urban Growth Boundary Amendment
proposals.
Altogether, since the Regional Plan does not allow for use of agricultural land subject
to Goal 3 in any manner inconsistent with the goal, ORS Chapter 215, OAR 660
Division 033, or the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development
Ordinance and because the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it applies to the
City of Central Point, includes substantial mitigation measures to reduce potential
impacts on agricultural lands, it is thereby concluded that the Greater Bear Creek
Valley Regional Plan complies with Statewide Planning Goal 3.
iv. Goal 4: Forest Lands. The goal is to conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land
base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically
efficient forest practices that ensure the continuous growing and harvesting of
forest 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. All Forest Land within the planning area
subject to Goal 4, as defined therein and as inventoried in the Jackson County
Comprehensive Plan, is identified in Volume 3 (Atlas) of the Regional Plan. The
Regional Plan, as explained above in relation to Agricultural Land, balances long
the range need for urbanizable land with the goals to preserve agricultural and forest
lands.
The cities within the planning area are generally far removed from the principal
forest land environments (i.e., areas suitable for commercial forest uses) as identified in
the Forest Lands Element of the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan. Consequently,
only the City of Medford and the City of Talent have identified any designated
forest lands as Urban Reserves. There is a 28 -acre enclave of Open Space Reserve
(OSR) zoned land proposed by Medford on the east side of Table Rock Road within
Urban Reserve area "MD-1". The subject OSR zoned land is adjacent to the
municipal boundary and is comprised of four parcels that are on the valley floor and
10 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
completely removed from any forested area. As mapped in the Atlas, the soils in the
vicinity are unrated for forestry and are predominately rated as Class IV for
agriculture. Consequently, the parcels were assigned priority (c)(2) for inclusion as
Urban Reserve upon a determination of urban land suitability as discussed in the
Medford element of Chapter 4 in the Plan.
Because there are no designated forest lands within the City of Central Point
Urban Reserve Areas the provisions of the Division 21 Urban Reserve Rule for
suitability, prioritization, inclusion, and continuation of resource land zoning within
an Urban Reserve and Goal 4 do not apply.
v.Goal 5: Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Resources, and Open Spaces. The
goal is to protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open
spaces. Pursuant to Goal 5, local governments shall adopt programs that will
protect natural resources and conserve scenic, historic, and open space resources for
present and future generations. Goal 5 listed resources that must be inventoried by
local governments are riparian corridors (including water and riparian areas and fish
habitat), wetlands, wildlife habitat, federal wild and scenic rivers, state scenic
waterways, groundwater resources, approved Oregon recreation trails, natural areas,
wilderness areas, mineral and aggregate resources, energy sources, and cultural areas.
Local governments are also encouraged to maintain inventories of historic
resources, open space, and scenic views and sites.
The City of Central Point's acknowledged Environmental Management Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. Protection programs are implemented through the regulations
included in the City of Central Point Municipal Code — Section 17.70 (Historic
Preservation Overlay Zone).
Adoption and implementation of the Regional Plan does not alter the City of Central
Point's Goal 5 resources or protection programs. The Regional Plan does not allow
new uses within the planning area, nor does it amend any urban growth boundary.
The Regional Plan does list significant open space resource sites identified through
the Regional Problem Solving process, and it does contain strategies for acquisition
of Critical Open Space Areas (COSA). However, OAR 660- 023 -0230 provides that
local governments may adopt a list of significant open space resource sites as an
open space acquisition program and are not required to apply the requirements of
OAR 660- 023 -0030 through 660 - 023 -0050 to such sites unless land use regulations
are adopted to protect such sites prior to acquisition. Goal 5 is, therefore, not
directly applicable to the Plan. Nonetheless, the Regional Plan emphasizes
conservation of open space for its important economic, cultural, and livability
benefits.
Conservation of Goal 5 resources was a fundamental consideration in the
development of a long range regional plan in the context of determining the
appropriateness and suitability of areas to accommodate future growth beyond
existing urban growth boundaries. The Regional Plan considers natural resources as a
major determinant of the carrying capacity of the planning area. For example,
vernal pool wetlands were found to severely limit the carrying capacity of lands to
the north of Eagle Point, around White City, and north of Central Point. In the area
north of Central Point, the vernal pool areas abut the Upton Slough, further limiting
the carrying capacity of that area. Preservation of open space between cities in the
planning area was also emphasized in the coordinated planning process as a strategy
for preserving the separate identity of individual communities. This resulted in the
use of Community Buffer Areas in the Urban Reserve Selection process as outlined
in Chapter 1 of the Regional Plan and as illustrated in Appendix V (Volume 3) of
the Regional Plan. Scenic trails and corridors are also important as a link between
11 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
distinct communities and have the added benefit of promoting exercise as a public
health matter.
In conclusion, although Goal 5 is not directly applicable to the adoption of the
Regional Plan, the plan embraces preservation of Goal 5 resources for present and
future generations and is thereby concluded to be consistent with the requirements of
Goal 5.
vi.Goa1 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality. The goal is to "To maintain and
improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state." Goal 6
requires that all waste and process discharges from future development when
combined with discharges from existing developments shall not threaten to violate, or
violate applicable state or federal environmental quality statues, rules and standards.
There is no LCDC interpretive rule for Goal 6. The Goal is not directly applicable to
adoption of the Regional Plan because the plan does not authorize development in the
present or the future. Rather, it will have the effect of restricting development in
areas designated as Urban Reserves in order to preserve the future urban suitability of
Urban Reserve lands. At the time urban growth boundary amendments occur and the
comprehensive plan and zoning maps are amended to authorize new uses, Goal 6 will
apply.
The Regional Plan also provides regional standards for buffering and separation
of land uses at the rural /urban interfaces to avoid conflicting requirements and
impacts upon the air, water and land resources. Collaboration involved in the
Regional Plan included the Land Conservation and Development Commission
(LCDC), the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), the
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), the Oregon Department of Housing
and Community Services (ODHCS), the Oregon Economic and Community
Development Department (OECDD), the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (ODEQ), the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA), the Rogue Valley
Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO), Rogue Valley Sewer Services
(RVSS), the Medford Water Commission (MWC), each of the participating cities, and
Jackson County.
Adoption of a long range regional plan will provide all the affected communities and
agencies a better understanding of where urban growth is likely to be directed in
order that facilities, policies, and strategies may be prepared appropriately to provide
for a future doubling of the region's urban population. Through the collaborative
process, it was found that the regional sewerage transmission and treatment facilities
managed by RVSS and the City of Medford are feasibly capable of providing for a
doubling of the population. Additionally, adoption of a long term regional growth
plan will also allow the local jurisdictions to better coordinate efforts to control
pollution and impacts to the region's land, air, and water resources. The participant
cities will ensure that overall residential density will be increased as urban growth
boundaries are expanded, and will promote nodal development to assist in mitigating
air quality impacts through reduction of vehicle miles traveled and mitigating water
quality impacts by reducing the ratio of impermeable area to open space.
It is therefore concluded that adoption of the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it
applies to the City of Central Point, is compliant with Goal 6 and will serve to
facilitate a coordinated regional approach to addressing Goal 6 as growth boundaries
amendments are needed in the future.
vii.Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. The goal is to protect people and
property from natural hazards. The goal requires local governments to adopt
12 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
comprehensive plans to reduce risk to people and property from natural hazards.
Natural hazards for the purposes of the goal applicable to the planning area are floods,
landslides, earthquakes, and wildfires.
The City of Central Point has an adopted Environmental Management Element in its
comprehensive plan which addresses wildfire, stream flooding, stream erosion and
deposition, high groundwater and pending, slope erosion, mass land movement, and
expansive soils. The Regional Plan includes comprehensive GIS based mapping
of the planning area. Areas severely limited by natural features or hazards were
identified and considered to determine whether the areas would or would not be
suitable to accommodate future urban land needed and to ascertain effective
buildable area available. Each of the areas selected for Urban Reserve designation
was found to be suitable for urban uses in general or, as indicated in Chapter 4 of
the Plan, for specific urban uses such as a park or greenway. As urban growth
boundaries are expanded, cities will determine more specific Goal 7 measures
appropriate for each area. While the lands remain rural as Urban Reserves, emergency
service providers will be identified in the applicable Urban Reserve management
agreements. Development will otherwise be subject to the existing acknowledged
natural hazard mitigation measures of the City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan
and its implementing ordinances.
It is therefore concluded that adoption of the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as
it applies to the City of Central Point, is compliant with Goal 7 and will serve to
facilitate a coordinated regional approach to addressing Goal 7 as growth boundaries
amendments are needed in the future.
viii. Goal 8: Recreational Needs. The goal is to satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens
of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary
recreational facilities. The goal establishes that the requirements for meeting such
needs, now and in the future, shall be planned for by governmental agencies having
responsibility for recreation areas, facilities and opportunities.The planning must
be in coordination with private enterprise, in appropriate proportions, and in such
quantity, quality and locations as is consistent with the availability of the resources to
meet such requirements. State and federal agency recreation plans are required under
the goal to be coordinated with local and regional recreational needs and plans.
Regarding recreation needs, the Regional Plan identifies generalized land need for
recreation /park use for each participating city as set forth in Chapter 4, and
addresses the need for intercity recreational trails and open space by requiring these
elements to be shown on the Conceptual Transportation Plans which are required to
be submitted at the time of a UGB amendment. The plan identifies lands that are
valued by the region as open space for environmental, aesthetic, cultural, and
recreational needs. Other specific measures in the Regional Plan are the designation
CP -413 as an Urban Reserve restricted to park use, analyses of the Bear Creek
Greenway segments within candidate growth areas to determine appropriateness for
Urban Reserve inclusion, recommendations for agricultural buffering areas to function
also as open space for recreation, and location of and need for private recreation areas.
Therefore, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it applies
to the City of Central Point, provides for the long range recreational needs of the
region in a manner consistent and in compliance with Goal 8.
ix.Goal 9: Economic Development. The goal is to provide adequate opportunities
throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and
prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The goal requires that comprehensive plans and
policies contribute to a stable and healthy economy in all regions of the state. Plans
shall be based on inventories of areas suitable for increased economic growth and
13 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
activity after taking into consideration the health of the current economic base,
materials and energy availability and cost, labor market factors, educational and
technical training programs, availability of key public facilities, necessary support
facilities, current market forces, location relative to markets, availability of renewable
and no- renewable resources, availability of land, and pollution control requirements.
The goal outlines specific requirements for comprehensive plans for urban areas (i.e.,
areas within an urban growth boundary).
LCDC's administrative rule at OAR Chapter 660, Division 9 directs cities to
coordinate with counties to adopt Goal 9 compliant plans for the respective urban
areas. The planning horizon of the Regional Plan extends well beyond that for the
growth boundary areas of the participating cities. Planning for long range
employment land needs is appropriately more generalized than that required for
urban area planning inside urban growth boundaries. Chapter 2 of the Regional Plan
explains the coordinated population allocation, employment growth projections, and
the associated land needs for housing and economic development over the long -
range planning period. The techniques employed to derive long range land needs
are also explained in detail therein.
A Regional Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) was prepared for and is
included in the Regional Plan. Adopted and acknowledged economic elements of each
city's comprehensive plans were also analyzed to establish that the Regional EOA
does not conflict with the adopted comprehensive plans. in recognition that
employment conditions and opportunities are dynamic phenomena that may change
over the long term, and that the planning horizon for the project is for the very long
term, the Regional Plan does not allocate all the projected employment need to
specific participants.
The Regional Plan does provide flexibility by allowing minor and major
amendments to the plan to address new employment opportunities that may arise.
Chapter 4 of the Regional Plan establishes the generalized ratio of employment to
overall land need by city in the suitability studies for each Urban Reserve area.
Areas found to have very strong comparative advantages to accommodate long range
regional employment land needs, such as the Tolo Area (CP -1B), are reserved
primarily for the identified employment land uses. The Regional Plan will reserve
an adequate long range employment land base in suitable locations for a variety of
commercial, industrial, and institutional uses, and will protect areas found to have
significant comparative advantages for regional employment in a manner that will
facilitate Goal 9 compliance as participating cities grow over the long range planning
horizon.
Therefore, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it applies to
the City of Central Point, complies with Goal 9.
x.Goal 10: Housing. The goal is to provide for the housing needs of citizens of the
state. Planning for long range land need for housing is appropriately more
generalized than that required for planning inside urban growth boundaries. Chapter 2
of the Regional Plan explains the coordinated population allocation, employment
growth projections, and the associated land needs for housing and economic
development over the long -range planning period. The techniques employed to derive
long range land needs are also explained in detail therein. The Bear Creek Valley
Housing Needs Analysis was prepared for and is included in the Regional Plan.
Adopted and acknowledged housing elements of each city's comprehensive plans were
also analyzed to establish that the Regional Plan does not conflict with the adopted
comprehensive plans.
Because the Regional Plan addresses the situation of a doubling of the region's
urban population, shorter term cyclical peaks and troughs in demand are normalized
14 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
over the long range planning period. Chapter 2 of the Plan explains in detail the
residential land need assumptions for the region by city, factors that would affect the
estimates, and how the Plan may be revised over time as cities update
comprehensive plans for their urban areas with more detailed studies. In Chapters
3 and 4 of the Regional Plan, existing land supply is related to the gross land
need estimates established in Chapter 2. Urban Reserves, as explained in Chapter
3, were then designated after studying surrounding lands for suitability and priority
to accommodate the identified land need. The Regional Plan establishes monitoring
and implementation measures in Chapter 5 to ensure that long range land needs and
regional objectives are met. Accordingly, it is concluded that the Regional Plan
reserves an adequate and coordinated supply of land to accommodate a projected long
range doubling of the Region's urban population, and is consistent with Goal 10. As
the participating cities expand urban growlh boundaries over the long range planning
horizon, the amount of land to be justified will be based on the more specific and
rigorous studies and analyses required for urban growth boundary amendments related
to a twenty -year land need and the commitment to increased residential densities
included in the Regional Plan. Urban Reserves resulting from the Regional Planning
process will ensure that suitable land is available in appropriate locations as the cities
grow.
Therefore, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it applies to
the City of Central Point, provides for the long range housing needs of the region in a
manner consistent and in compliance with Goal 10.
xi.Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services. The goal is to plan and develop a timely,
orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a
framework for urban and rural development. Pursuant to the Goal, urban and rural
development shall be guided and supported by types and levels of urban and rural
public facilities and services appropriate for, but limited to, the needs and
requirements of the urban, urbanizable, and rural areas to be served. The City of
Central Point Comprehensive Plan's Public Facilities and Services Element)
incorporates this concept the Implementing Policies, which is not amended by the
Regional Plan. Goal 1 I further requires that cities or counties shall develop and
adopt a public facilities plan for areas within an urban growth boundary containing a
population greater than 2,500 persons, and also that counties shall develop and adopt
community public facility plans for certain unincorporated communities outside urban
growth boundaries as specified by Commission rules.
The Regional Plan does not establish or amend existing urban growth boundaries.
Under the Goal 11, local governments shall not allow the establishment or extension
of sewer systems outside urban growlh boundaries or unincorporated community
boundaries and are generally limited from allowing public sewer service to rural
lands except as indicated in the Goal and the implementing LCDC rules (OAR 660-
011 -0060) or by exception taken in accordance with ORS 197.180 and Goal 2.
The City of Central Point comprehensive plan policies in the Public Facilities and
Services Element requires the same, and the implementing Land Development
Ordinance specifies acknowledged procedures for consideration of public
sewer service system establishment or extension to rural lands (Chapter 3).
The Regional Plan does not amend any provisions of the City of Central Point
Comprehensive Plan or its implementing ordinances related to sewer service.
Guidelines included for Goal l 1 address Planning and Implementation of the Goal.
The Regional Plan includes an analysis of all candidate Urban Reserve areas that
evaluates general suitability to accommodate identified long term urban needs in
relation to the Goal 14 location factors and the growth policies of the region.
Capacity of the regional sewer treatment and transmission facilities, public facility
and service interties between jurisdictions, and transitional agreements with
15 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
regard to Urban Reserve areas were considered in the Regional Plan and are
implemented through adoption of the Regional Plan, the Urban Reserve
Management Agreements, the Participant's Agreement, and mapping amendments
designating the Urban Reserves on affected comprehensive plan and zoning
maps. Accordingly, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as
it applies to the City of Central Point, is consistent with the Planning and
Implementation Guidelines of Goal 11 and with Goal 11 on the whole.
xii.Goal12: Transportation. The goal is to provide and encourage a safe,
convenient and economic transportation system. The Goal outlines required
elements to be included in a transportation plan, defines terms used in the goal, and
provides Guidelines for Planning and Implementation. LCDC's Transportation
Planning Rule (OAR Chapter 660, Division 12) more extensively addresses the
requirements for transportation planning, coordination, required elements,
consideration of needs, evaluation and selection of transportation alternatives,
financing, implementation, project development, timing for adoption and updates,
plan and regulation amendments, transportation improvement on rural lands, and
exceptions thereto. The City of Central Point has an adopted and acknowledged
transportation system plan that does not conflict with the Regional Plan's
transportation objectives.
ODOT's Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU) produced a report which is
included at Appendix VI of the Regional Plan. The report analyzed various land use
and transportation scenarios to determine potential impacts on the regional
transportation network as a result of development within the proposed Urban
Reserve Areas. The analysis concluded that the nodal development land use
scenario would have the least effect on congestion levels. As such, the participants
have agreed to a Performance Indicator (Chapter 5 of the Regional Plan) to develop
the Urban Reserves utilizing mixed - use /pedestrian friendly (nodal) form.
Chapter 2 of the Regional Plan also provides for and explains the strategies for
greater coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The
strategy states that the region will need an improved regional transportation network to
avoid state facilities serving a more disproportionate local arterial function. The
strategy identifies four candidate connector roads outside of the proposed urban areas
that would serve as transportation facilities. The MPO is to extend the study and
develop a prioritized list of long -term regional arterial improvements to serve the
Region's needs. Further study under the strategy will determine if Goal exceptions
will be required. The strategy also provides that the MPO will develop plans for least
cost right -of -way acquisition.
Chapter 4 of the Regional Plan contains the background findings for each
participating city's evaluation of candidate growth areas. Chapter 5 of t he Regional
Plan commits the participating cities to develop a Conceptual Transportation Plan
prior to an Urban Growth Boundary amendment proposal. The Conceptual
Transportation Plan shall identify a general network of regionally significant arterials
under local jurisdiction, transit corridors, bike and pedestrian paths, and associated
projects to provide mobility throughout the Region (including intracity and intercity, if
applicable) in order to cost - effectively protect these transportation corridors.
Furthermore, Chapter 5 requires the cities to collaborate with the MPO to: prepare the
Conceptual Transportation Plans; designate and protect the transportation
infrastructure required in the Conceptual Transportation Plans identified in Section
2.7 to ensure adequate transportation connectivity, multimodal use, and minimize
right of way costs; plan and coordinate the regionally significant transportation
strategies critical to the success of the adopted Regional Plan including the
development of mechanisms to preserve rights -of -way for the transportation
infrastructure identified in the Conceptual Transportation Plans; and establish a
means of providing supplemental transportation funding to mitigate impacts arising
16 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
from future growth.
It is concluded that the Regional Plan will function to further the
implementation of policies already established in the acknowledged City of
Central Point Transportation System Plan, and will provide for ongoing
coordination and updates of collective transportations plans of the MPO,
Jackson County, and the State of Oregon in a manner consistent with Statewide
Planning Goal 12. Additionally, because of the aforementioned reasons and the
fact that the Regional Plan does not affect the uses allowed on land proposed as
Urban Reserve Areas, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan
as it applies to the City of Central Point, complies with Statewide Planning Goal 12.
xiii.Goa113: Energy Conservation. The goal is to conserve energy. Pursuant to
Goal 13, land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and
controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms or energy, based
upon sound economic principles. The goal includes Guidelines for Planning and
Implementation. LCDC has not enacted interpretive rules directly related to Goal
13. However, the Division 21 Urban Reserve Rule can reasonably be
construed to incorporate and implement the goal in requiring that cities and
counties shall first study lands adjacent to, or nearby, the urban growth
boundary for suitability for inclusion within Urban Reserves. It also requires a
balancing of the Goal 14 location factors which include consideration of energy
consequences. The rule works in tandem with LCDC rules and statute relating
to urban growth boundary amendments to ensure that urban areas are planned in
an efficient manner which promote compact urban land form. The Regional Plan
supports the goal of conserving energy by concentrating development in areas that
are readily served by existing public facilities and services and near existing
urban growth boundaries, and in providing a development pattern that has the
potential to reduce the transportation- related per capita use of energy. The
Regional Plan provides for a significant increase in overall urban density to
accommodate a doubling of the regional urban population. Additionally,
through the Regional Plan, the participating cities have committed to a nodal form
of development which has the potential to significantly lessen transportation needs.
This will be demonstrated via Conceptual Land Use Plans and Conceptual
Transportation Plans per Chapter 5 of the Regional Plan.
The Regional Plan does not affect any identified energy resource in the region.
Accordingly, it is concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it
applies to the City of Central Point, complies on the whole with and will serve
to further promote Statewide Planning Goal 13.
xiv.Goal 14: Urbanization. The goal is 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. The goal requires that urban growth
boundaries be established and maintained by cities, counties, and regional
governments to provide land for urban development needs and to identify and
separate urban and urbanizable land from rural land.
Urban Reserves designated in the Regional Plan will implement and further Goal
14 with regard to any future establishment or change of urban growth boundaries
in the region. Establishment or amendment of urban growth boundaries is required
to be a cooperative process among cities and counties. The Regional Plan
functions to coordinate long -term urban growth in a regional context as a method
to achieve the Goal. The Regional Plan considers the land need requirements over a
period longer than the twenty years required by Goal 14 for urban growth boundaries,
but in a manner consistent with the Division 21 Urban Reserve Rule by providing an
adequate base to accommodate an additional ten to thirty years beyond the twenty year
17 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element
urban growth boundary need.
Long term land demand is analyzed in detail at Chapter 2 of the Regional Plan. The
location of Urban Reserves designated in the Regional Plan results from a
coordinated effort amongst the participant jurisdictions in consideration of the Goal] 4
location factors, the growth policies of the region, and the provisions and priorities of
the Division 21 Urban Reserve Rule. Chapter 4 of the Greater Bear Creek Valley
Regional Plan includes a detailed analysis of the study areas, urban suitability
determinations, and the assignment inclusion priorities consistent with the Urban
Reserve Rule methodology.
Future urbanizable land will be reserved pursuant to the Regional Plan, the
Participants' Agreement, and the URMAs to maintain the potential for planned urban
development until the need for additional urban land is justified through the growth
boundary amendment process and then until appropriate public facilities and
services are available or planned. Rural land under Jackson County's jurisdiction will
continue to be maintained as rural land where located outside urban growth
boundaries whether inside or outside of designated Urban Reserve areas, in
accordance with its acknowledged comprehensive plan.
In providing for an orderly transition from rural to urban uses in the long -term for
projected population, regional agricultural buffering standards included in the
Regional Plan will be adopted by the City of Central Point and other participating
cities and Jackson County to avoid the negative impacts that have previously
resulted at urban growth boundary interfaces with agricultural land.
It is therefore concluded that the Regional Plan, and the Regional Plan as it applies to
the City of Central Point, complies overall with Goal 14.
xv. Goals 15 through 19. These goals do not apply to the City of Central Point.
PART 6.SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS
Based on the evidence and arguments included in the record, the Planning Commission concludes that:
1. Proper public notice was given and public hearings were conducted in accordance with State law and
acknowledged local regulations, during which members of the public were provided opportunities to
present evidence and argument.
2. The amendments proposed through Planning File 09017 are in compliance with and further the City of
Central Point Comprehensive Plan by creating a long range plan for regional growth in the Bear Creek
Valley and by designating Urban Reserves to protect lands that are suitable for future urbanization
from uses and development that may be incompatible with future urban land uses.
3. Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment will ensure the City of Central
Point Land Use Plan Map depicts the Urban Reserves established by the planning action in Planning
File No. 09017 is consistent with the proposed Plan text amendments.
18 — Planning Commission Resolution File No. 09017/12015
Regional Plan Element