HomeMy WebLinkAboutAIS PLANNER 7/2/2007
~-:::.- -I~'-
:;/-;-/
~
Meeting Date:
Meeting Type:
Department:
Staff Contact:
Staff Phone No:
Estimated Time:
July 2, 2007
Regular Meetmg
Development ierv ces
Andy Lunbrrd
x3784
20 mmutes
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
SPRINGFIELD
CITY COUNCIL
ITEM TITLE:
ACTION
REQUESTED:
ISSUE
ST A TEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS:
DISCUSSION:
VACATION OF ONE BLOCK SEGMENT OF B STREET PUBLIC RIGHT-
OF-WAY BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST, CASE
NO. LRP2007-00019
Conduct a PublIc Heanng and FlfSt Readmg for the followmg AN ORDINANCE
V ACATING A 66 FOOT WIDE BY 264 FOOT LONG PORTION OF PUBLIC
RIGHT OF WAY SHOWN IN BOOK 1, PAGE 1 OF PLAT RECORDS OF LANE
COUNTY, OREGON, DATED APRIL 5, 1872.
On May 7, 2007, CIty CouncIllilltIated an actIon to vacate publIc nght-of-way for the
segment ofB Street between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East to facIlItate
development of a secure polIce parkmg lot and ancIllaI)' bmldmg servmg the
Spnngfield JustIce Center.
Attachment 1: Staff Report, Fmdmgs and SummaI)' of PublIc TestImony
Attachment 2' Maps showmg the proposed vacatIOn and B Street overvIew
Attachment 3' Memo from PolIce ChIef Jerry SmIth
Attachment 4 Testunony from Bob Foster (vanous dates)
Attachment 5: Testunony from Scott Olson dated March 28,2006
Attachment 6 Testunony from Scott Olson dated June 12,2007
Attachment 7: LIst of PublIc Meetmgs held for JustIce Center 2005-2007
Attachment 8: Planning CommiSSIOn RecommendatIOn
Attachment 9. Ordmance
On February 28, 2006, the Spnngfield CIty CouncIl considered four SIte optIons for
the Justice Center project The site optIOn selected by the City CouncIl utIlIzes CIty-
owned property whIch IS located between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East, and
which extends from A Street to the mid-block alley north ofB Street. The selected
SIte optIOn mcorporates a one-block segment ofB Street nght-of-way mto the
development area for use as a secure polIce parking lot, and a bmldmg pad for an
< ancIllaI)' bmldmg serving the JustIce Center
The subject nght-of-way IS a 66-foot WIde by 264-foot long segment of publIc street
running east-west along the northern edge ofthe eXIstmg polIce and courts parkmg
lot. The CIty owns all abuttmg tax lots that have frontage on the publIc nght-of-way
proposed for vacatIon. The Planrung CommISSIOn held a Public Heanng on June 5
and 19,2007, and adopted a recommendatIOn m support of the proposed vacatIOn at
the PublIc Heanng meetmg on June 19,2007.
~
Date Received: 7 j; /2007
Planner: Al / I
\
't;;.. __
~ " '.... (
A TT ACHMENT 1
V ACATION REQUEST
STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS
Case No. LRP2007-00019
APPLICANT
The C1ty of Spnngfield and Spnngfield PolIce Department
REQUEST
The vacatlOn ofa 66-foot wide by 264-foot long segment of publIc street nght-of-way.
LOCATION OF PROPERTY
The publIc nght-of-way (ROW) proposed to be vacated IS a segment ofB Street located between 4th
Street and PlOneer Parkway East. The nght-of-way lIes on the boundary between Tax Maps 17-03-35-24
and 17-03-35-31.
BACKGROUND
The publIc nght-of-way proposed for vacatlOn 1S part of the downtown gnd street system, and was created
w1th plattmg of the Map of Spnngfield (later referred to as the "Extended Survey of Spnngfield") m
1872. There are e1ght C1ty-owned propert1es (Map 17-03-35-24, Tax Lots 13900-14100 & 14300, and
Map 17-03-35-31, Tax Lots 1500-1800) that are d1rectly adjacent to the subject nght-of-way All of the
parcels w1th frontage on the subject nght-of-way are presently used as parklOg lots for the publIc, C1ty
employees and the Spnngfield polIce Department. Slte Plan approval for the Spnngfield Justice Center
was 1ssued July 25, 2006 and offiCIal groundbreakmg for constructlOn 1S to be Imtiated on June 28, 2007
The approved plan for the JustIce Center bU11dlOg 1S not dependent upon the subject nght-of-way area.
Withm the downtown area, B Street extends from MIll Street east to 16th Street, a d1stance of about 16
city blocks or 6120 feet (1.16 mIles) The one-block segment of nght-of-way proposed for vacatlOn is
264 feet long and compnses approxunately 4% of the length ofB Street (Attachment 2).
On June 19,2007, the Plarmmg ComIlllsslOn concluded a PublIc Heanng for the proposed nght-of-way
vacatlOn, and subsequently passed a recommendation of approval of the vacatlOn to the City Counc1l.
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE APPLICABLE CRITERIA
Spnngfield Development Code (SDC) 9.060(3) establIshes cntena for vacatlOn ofnght-of-way that must
be met m order to approve tills request. The followmg findings address each of the cntena.
(a) The Vacation was initiated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
Fmdmg 1. Oregon Rev1sed Statutes (ORS) SectlOn 271 130(1) reads as follows. "The czty govermng
body may znitzate vacatIOn proceedll1gs authOrized by ORS 271 080 and make such vacatIOn Without a
petztlOn or consent of property owners Notzce shall be gzven as prOVided by ORS 271 110, but such
vacatIOn shall not be made before the date set for hearing, nor if the owners of a maJorzty of the area
affected, computed on the baszs provided zn ORS 271 080, obJect zn wrztzng thereto, nor shall any 'street
area be vacated wzthout the consent of the owners of the abuttzng property if the vacatIOn wzll
substantzally affect the market value of such property. unless the czty govermng body provzdes for paying
damages ProviSIOn for payzng such damages may be made by a local assessment, or In such other
manner as the czty charter may provzde."
Findmg 2 ORS 271.080(1) prov1des for vacatlOn of" ..all or part of any street, avenue, boulevard, alley.
plat, public square or other publiC place.:." In accordance w1th ORS 271.080(1), the vacatlOn actlOn
ATTACHMENT
1-1
Date Received: 7h.boo7
Planner: Al ! / '
\ L .
reqUlres "a descnptlOn of the ground proposed to be vacated, the purpose for which the ground IS
proposed to be used and the reason for such vacatIOn."
Findmg 3' The Spnngfield City Councll imtlated the vacatIon actIOn at the regular meeting on May 7,
2007. The nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn IS generally depicted and more specifically descnbed m
Exhibit A to tills staffreport. The purpose of the vacatIOn IS to retam the segment of vacated pubhc
nght-of-way m publIc ownersillp, and to use the area for constructIOn of a secure pohce parkIng lot and
ancillary bUlldmg servmg the JustIce Center
Fmdmg 4 In accordance with ORS 271.130(1), the decIsIOn on the vacatIOn actIOn Will be made at a City
Council meetmg, and after PublIc Heanngs before the Planning CommIsSIon and Council
Fmdmg 5 All propertIes that dIrectly abut the segment of publIc nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn are
owned by the CIty of Springfield.
ConclusIOn. The proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn complIes 'Yith Cntenon (a).
(b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.110(1);
Fmdmg 6 In accordance with ORS 271.110(1), publIc heanng notlces were placed m the newspaper of
general cIrCUlatIOn (The Register Guard) on June 15 and 22,2007. AddItlonally, a pubhc heanng for the
Plannmg COllumssIOn recommendatIOn to City Council was held on June 5 and 19,2007.
Fmdmg 7 In accordance wIth 271 110(2), publIc notlce of the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn actlon was
posted at two conspIcuous locatIOns unmedtately adjacent to nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn (at the
northeastern corner adjacent to 4th Street, and at the southwestern corner adjacent to PIOneer Parkway
East)
Fmdmg 8' In accordance with SDC 271080, adjacent landowners and residents/tenants wltilln a 400-foot
radIUS of the 66-foot by 264-foot lmear nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn were notified by mall PublIc
heanng notlficatIOn was sent out for both the Planmng CommIssIOn and City CouncIl meetmgs. People
that provided testunony at the Planmng ComllllSSIOn publIc heanng also were notlfied by mail of the CIty
Council publIc heanng.
ConclUSIOn: The notlficatIOn prOVided for the proposed right-of-way vacatIOn complIes with Cntenon
(b).
(c) Approval of the vacation would be consistent with provision of safe, convenient and reasonably
direct routes for cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles as provided in OAR 660-0012-0045(3);
Fmdmg 9 As stated m Oregon AdmmIstratlve Rules (OAR) 660-0 12-0045(3)(d), "safe and convenzent"
means bzcycle and pedestnan routes, facllztles and Improvements whIch'
(A) Are reasonably free from hazards, partIcularly types or levels of automobile traffic which
would mterfere With or discourage pedestnan or cycle travel for short trzps, '
(B) PrOVIde a reasonably direct route of travel between destmatlOns such as a transIt stop
and a store, and -
(C) Meet travel needs of cyclists and pedestrians conSIdering destznatlOn and length oftrzp,
and conslderzng that the optImum trip length of pedestnans is generally ~ to 1;2 mile
Fmding 10. In accordance With OAR 660-012-0045(3)(d), vacatIOn of the subject right-of-way and
closure to pubhc travel would not mterfere With or dIscourage pedestnan, cycle or vehIcle travel on the
adjacent public street system due to exceSSIve traffic or other unusual hazards East-west traffic ,
1-2
Date f<8ceived: 7 ~ 12007
Planner: AL 7';
,\ .
.1
circulatIOn can be accommodated on adjacent local and collector streets - partIcularly A Street, whICh IS
located less than 300 feet to the south.
Fmdmg 11' In accordance with OAR 660-012-0045(3)(d), vacation ofthe subject nght-of-way would not
result m pedestnan, cyclIst or vehIcle tnps that are more than 14 mIle from bemg a dIrect route of travel
between destmatIOn pomts Figure 1 Illustrates approxlIDate travel dIstances for all potentIal modes of
travel from one SIde of.the vacated nght-of-way to the other Should the segment ofB Street be vacated
and closed to publIc travel, the maXImum out-of-dIrectlOn distance for passage from the eastern end of the
subject right-of-way (at 4th Street) to the western end of the nght-of-way (at PIOneer Parkway East) would
be about 600 feet (< 1/8 mIle) for bIcycles and vehIcles usmg surface streets VehIcles and bIcycles have
the optIOn of usmg eIther A Street or C Street for the east-west segment of the tnp The out-of-dIrectlOn
dIstance would be even less for pedestnans usmg the publIc SIdewalk system, or bicycles and vehIcles
passmg through the mid-block alley north ofB Street. The use of the mid-block alley for east-west
passage IS not a preferred route for vehIcles, but IS depIcted on Figure 1 for IllustratIve purposes
Fmdmg 12' Pedestnan passage through the east-west mId-block alley north ofB Street can be
accommodated wIthIn the existmg 14-foot Wide paved surface. However, If It is determmed that
addItIOnal pedestnan facIlItIes are requrred for mamtammg safe passage through thIS alley, thIS
reqUirement could be Implemented at the tIme of SIte Plan ModIficatIOn for the JustIce Center A Type II
Major Site Plan ModificatIOn Will be requrred upon vacation of the publIc nght-of-way in order to
mcorporate the former publIc nght-of-way mto the SIte plan area.
Fmdmg 13' ProvISIon of travel routes for cyclIsts, pedestnans and vehicles would be Via the eXistmg
publIc street, alley and Sidewalk system The approxlIDate travel dIstances shown on Figure 1 assume
travel around the penmeter of each route, and short-cuttmg through parkmg lots or slIDIlar open areas IS
not conSIdered.
Fmdmg 14' There are eXisting SItuatIOns m downtown Spnpgfield and elsewhere throughout the City
where portIons of the gnd street system are not connected and out-of-drrectlOn travel IS requrred for
cyclIsts, pedestnans and vehIcles Nearby examples mclude portIOns of A Street east of 1 th Street; A, C,
D and F Street east of 14th Street, 8th and 9th Streets north of G Street; and G Street west of 4th Street.
Fmdmg 15 A Traffic Impact AnalYSIS (TIA) was prepared by an mdependent traffic engmeering
consultant to evaluate the lIDpacts of the proposed right-of-way vacatIOn (Sprmgfield Justice Center
ReVised Task 2 Report _ Traffic Impact Study, Access Engmeenng, July, 2006) The TIA examined the
eXIstmg and post-vacatIOn street system in the VIclOlty of the JustIce Center and evaluated the pOSSible
Impacts of the proposed nght-of-way vacatiOn to vehicle movements and the performance of nearby
mtersections The TIA concluded there would be mlllllnallIDpact on the downtown transportatIon system
wIth the proposed vacation of publIc nght-of-way
Fmdmg 16. The TIA prepared for the proposed nght-of-way vacatIon also concluded that no traffic
mItIgatIOn actIOns would be reqUired to ensure safe and effiCient flow of traffic m the VICIruty of the
JustIce Center Among the slIDplest and most effectIve measures to structure traffic movements m the
area Will be strateglc placement of dIrectIOnal signage for the Justice Center. The TIA suggests pOSSible
measures to discourage traffic from travelIng to and from the downtown core usmg nearby res~dentIal
streets, mcludmg placement of STOP SignS at key mtersectlOns and mstallmg curb extensIOns to prevent
undeSirable turnmg movements
Fmdmg 17 SpeCial vehlcles, such as tranSit buses, can be accommodated on adjacent publIc streets
(pnmarily A Street). There IS one tranSit stop for west-bound buses that IS located wlthm the segment of
B Street proposed for vacatIOn RelocatIOn of the bus stop can be done m consultatIOn with Lane TranSit
DIstnct.
1-3
Date Received:
Planner: Al
7~~M
II
.-
;Gl
;Gl
.....
:0
.1t1
/'1 .... . " , :.-
t ... '\.... ... ,.... ......"...... ~ ~...'- ,... ...::: ", ...~..........." ..:.,...::-..~ ... I \
.~ I ".""-~. .. ,,~'\ ,'" I.~.
J '\ (;,.... ' '_._..._...' ,/\: r
:(jj
;Gl
;....
;0
;0
;M
; 1
) :
~
t ,
Figure 1 - Approximate Travel Distances
"V ~ I ) ~
[ r I .(
I " : r
.... .
Ql:
Gl;
....
~:
on:
t""'.
1 .
r l
-;5UU reet
-300 feet
/
.....
/
....
~ --"
-300 feet
(
I I
....
(/)
eu
lJ
,~:_--_..."-_._-----,------' :>.
eu
~
L-
eu
a..
L-
\"
~Q) \,
c
o
II 0: ~
I I I I I
.
II
1-4
I)
,
~.
'. r
:..
;Gl
~
;0
.It)
:....
'1
--.
---- ....
-)
.....
Q)
-._~ Q)
. L-
..... I
(j)
:5
~
J
I~
L
c-
.
".
.... I.....
j
C Street
"
B Street
,/
'-
\
.or
1
A Street
'-
;"\ tC.
Main Street
~l:=
1\ r;:::.
Right-ot-way proposed
tor vacation
Travel directions and
approximate distances
Out-ot-direction travel
directions and distances
Date Received: -, '- ~
Planner: Al 1;-
I '
.
ConclUSIOn Staff have concluded that the proposed nght-of-way vacatlOn wlll have no adverse effect on
safety, connectIvity or mamtammg reasonably dlrect travel routes for pedestnans, cychsts and velucles
As proposed, the publIc nght-of-way vacatIOn comphes wIth Cntenon (c) ,
(d) Whether a greater public benefit would be obtained from the vacation than from retaining the
right-of-way in its present status; and
Fmdmg 18. The nght-of-way presently contams a two-lane collector street wIth Sidewalks on both SIdes.
Upon vacahon of the right-of-way, the subject area would be mcorporated mto the project area and used
for secure pohce parkmg and JustIce Center ancIllary facihtIes, The nght-of-way would be closed to all
pubhc travel. The Spnngfield Pohce Department adVIses that a secure parkmg lot - close to the Justice
Center bUllding _ protects pubhc property (mcludmg polIce vehIcles and case eVIdence stored m the
ancIllary bUlldmg) and enhances emergency response hmes as respondmg officers do not have to cross
pubhc streets to reach thelr vehIcles.
Fmdmg 19. Jerry Smlth, Spnngfield ChIef of Pohce, submltted a memo m support of the proposed right-
of-way vacatlon (Attachment 3) wluch reads as follows
ImDortanc~ of B Street Closmg tfJ the JustIce Fact/itv Prorect
"The purpose of thIs memo is to summarzzefor the Planning CommISSIOn the Importance of clOSing B
Street as part of the Justice Center project As deSIgned, the area currently occupied by B Street
would become part of a fenced and secured parking area
. ClOSing B Street IS necessary for the securzty of portIOns of the facllzty The planned JustIce
facllzty mcludes an anclllalY buildl11g that WIll be a repOSlt01Y for eVIdence In criminal cases,
storage for polzce and court records, and storage for speczalzzed police equipment and weaponry
ClOSing B Street WIll allow the entire anCillary but/ding and parking lot to be fenced In,
SIgnificantly Improvmg the security of these records and eVldentzary Items WIthout the securzty
fenCing in place. the anCillary building as deSigned does not prOVide suffiCIent secunty for these
Items
. Closmg B Street Will prOVide secure fleet and employee parlang To date, Department vehIcles
and employee pal king has not been secured by fenCing While thIS does not cause Significant
Issues during normal worlang hours, the Department has expenenced damage to fleet vehicles,
and employees have suffered damage to their personal vehIcles, dUring late evening and early
mormng hours Damage has rangedfrom paint scratches to slashed tIres and broken windows.
. Closmg B Street Will Improve the safety of polzce officers and CItizens The street closure WIll
allow officers responding to emergency calls from inSIde the bUilding to access theIr vehicles
WIthout crossing a publzc rIght of way. thereby redUCing the rIsk of an aCCident durzng an
emergency response
. ClOSing B Street Will prOVIde a secure area for evacuation of mumclpal jat/ prisoners The
fenced area Will serve as an outdoor holding areafor mumclpaljall pnsoners In the event that
the Jat/ must be evacuated WIthout the street closure and fencmg, there will not be an area
outSIde the mUniCIpal Jazl adequate and acceSSIble for holdmg prisoners Instead, an evacuation
event would necessitate the uncontrolled release of all mumcippl Jail prisoners "
Fmdmg 20: As described m the statement from the PolIce ChIef, the vacated nght-of-way Will be used
for secure pohce parkmg and IS also deSIgned to provide a fenced-m area that IS large enough for
evacuatlon of jaIl pnsoners m the event of an emergency. Provlsion of a secure muster area for evacuated
1-5
Date Received: 7 hZ-/ btJz..,...,
Planner: AL '/ .
. ,
"
pnsoners provides a direct benefit to the Jail staff, polIce personnel, and the public.
Fmdmg 21' As noted m the PolIce Ch1efs statement, ensunng respondmg polIce officers do not have to
cross a publIc street m order to reach therr vehIcles enhances safety for both Police Department personnel
and publIc users of the street system
Fmdmg 22. Passage of the PublIc Safety ballot measure m 2005 that secured publIc fundmg for the
Justice Center project demonstrates Spnngfield reSIdents' commitment to the project Comparatively few
people wIthm the CIty regularly use the segment of B Street proposed for vacatIOn However, all
Spnngfield reSIdents (and VISitors) benefit from a strong polIce presence wIthm the commumty.
~onclusIOn Staff have concluded that the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn serves a greater benefit to the
publIc than retammg the one-block segment of nght-of-way m ItS present status. The proposed vacatIOn
also provides drrect benefits to the City's Police Department, wh1ch ultlmately benefits Spnngfield
reSIdents, As proposed, the nght-of-way vacatIOn complIes WIth Cntenon (d).
(e) Whether provisions have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remain in public
ownership.
Fmdmg 23. The vacated nght-of-way is to be incorporated mto the JustIce Center development, whIch IS
a publIcly-funded project. Ownersh1p of the JustIce Center bUlldmg and the land on whICh It is to reSIde
(wh1.ch mcludes the pOrtIon of nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn), IS to remam With the CIty of
Spnngfield.
Fmdmg 24. Upon vacation ofthe nght-of-way, the land ownershIp automatIcally reverts to the City as It
owns the abutting property Because the ownersh1p of the vacated nght-of-way does not pass through a
third party (wh1ch could occur If there were pnvately-owned parcels fronting onto the nght-of-way),
remalmng in publIc ownership IS assured.
Fmding 25' A clause has been added to the enactmg ordinance (Attachment 9) providmg that m the event
the vacated nght-of-way ceases to be used for Justlce Center purposes It shall revert to public nght-of-
way
Conclusion: The proposed nght-of-way vacatlon complIes with Cntenon (e).
CONCLUSION .:~.
In summary, the proposed right-of-way vacation' (a) allows construction of a publIcly funded project
approved by a vote ofthe publIc; (b) mcreases law enforcement's publIc presence m the downtown core
through constructlon of a PolIce, Courts and J all faCIlity; and (c) prOVIdes constructIOn features that
increase the secunty and safety to the CIty'S PolIce Department and the general publIc dunng operatIOns.
The loss of publIc good m terms of veh1cle, pedestnan and bicycle connectlvlty has been demonstrated to
be minlll1al and wlthlll State statutes for connectIVIty under Critenon 9.060(3)(c) ofth1s report and can be
reasonably mItIgated.
I
Based upon the above findmgs and testlll10ny contamed herem, Staff concludes that the proposed nght-
of-way vacatIOn for a JustIce Center faCIlIty (mcludmg jail, courts and polIce statIOn) serves a greater
benefit to the general publIc than retammg the one-block segment ofnght-of-way m ItS present status. As
proposeq, the nght-of-way vacatIOn ~omplies WIth Cntenon 9.060(3)(a-e)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the proposed vacatIon
1-6
Date Received: .., h,j)f;o7
Planner: AL / / .
. ,
. .
ACTION REQUESTED
Approval of the requested nght-of-way vacatIOn by adoptIOn of the attached VacatIOn Ordmance at the
Second Readmg on July 16, 2007.
('
1-7
Date Received: 7/J-/2errJ
Planner: AL / /
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND STAFF RESPONSES
Nme people provIded testImony at the Planmng CormmsslOn publIc heanng for the proposed nght-of-way
vacatlOn, seven m favor and two opposed. Wntten testunony opposmg the vacatlOn was recelved from
Bob Foster (Attachment 4) and Scott Olson (Attachments 5 and 6). Mr Olson has provided statements m
hls testunony dated June 12, 2007 that staff wish to address here
Statement 1: "I am disappointed that the CIty has steadfastly refused to consider any alternatives dUring
the project development process which consIdered tradeoffs m the functIOnal and space program With the
assoczated sIte constraints"
Staff Response The SIte planmng for the Justice Center project exarmned a Wide variety of deSIgn
optlOns mcludmg underground parkmg, onentatlOn of the jaIl and polIce/courts bUlldmg onto dlfferent
streets, expanslOn to adjacent (not cIty-owned) properties, and possIble alternate sites m the downtown
area (agam, not city-owned) About 15 possible site plan optlOns were lrntlally developed m consultatIon
With publIc, stakeholders, staff and the JustIce Center project team The optlOns were critIcally evaluated
and four alternatlves were developed for City CouncIl to select for a preferred deSIgn optlOn Mr. Olson
acknowledges that tradeoffs were made, but staff contend that the functlonal and space program was only
one factor exammed dunng the prelunmary SIte plannmg phase.
Statement 2' "Twelve years ago the City Improved B Street at a cost of $875,000 The Improvements to
the collector street were pazd for with federal funds If B Street is severed from the arterial at PIOneer
Parkway. Immedzately adjacent to the proposed street closure, B Street Will no longer functIOn as a
collector As a local street, the Improvements would not have been elzglble for the federal Investment In
the street Improvements The value of B Street both In terms of Improvements and functIOn has not been
consIdered In CIty deCISIOns to pursue the street closure The value of the Investment the public made m
Improvmg B Street In 2007 constructIOn costs IS over $1 2 mIllIOn It has been suggested that the CIty
could be oblzgated to repay the federal government if the street is mdeed closed"
Staff Response: A portlOn ofB Street from 14th Street to PlOneer Parkway East (apprOXImately 4,400
l1neal feet) was rehabilItated in 1997 at a total cost of $759,676 11 (Project #1-882). The apportlOned
project cost for the subject one-block area (approxunately 300 feet or 7% of the 4,400-foot long project
area) would be about $52,000.00 A fundmg transfer was arranged WIth Oregon Department of
TransportatlOn (ODOT) that mvolved SubstltutlOn of elIgIble federal funds With state funds The CIty
used a $400,000 federal allocatIOn to obtam more tunely state fundmg ($376,000) for the entrre project.
Based on the lIneal footage, the state-funded portlOn of the one-block segment proposed for vacatlOn is
less than $26,000. As a result of the fundmg transfer WIth ODOT (and because the funds were prOVided
to the CIty WIthout "stnngs attached"), there IS no drrect federal mvolvement WIth the B Street upgrade
project and the city would not be requrred to repay any government agency - state or federal- Ifthe one-
block segment of the street IS closed to pubhc traffic AddItionally, the remaming 13 blocks ofB Street
from the mtersectIon of 4th Street to 14th Street are not affected by the proposed vacation and WIll remalO
open to publIc travel.
Statement 3: "The City approved a zone change from MIxed Use Commerczal/Nodal Developmen{ to
Publzc Land and Open Space/Nodal Development because a JustIce Center is not lzsted In the MVC/NDO
DIstrict None of the staffreports revlewmg the project['s) hIstory have mentioned thefact that several
months pnor to malang the zone change applzcatlOn the City added JustIce Centers as an allowed use m
the PLO/NDO zone The project was not an allowed use at the sIte at the time the City asked voters to
fund the project,"
Staff Response. ThIs statement IS not entrrely true or false. The speCific use of "JustIce Center" was not
listed in the Public Land and Open Space (PLO) Dlstnct at the tune voters approved the concept of
havmg a large-scale faCIlIty combmlOg polIce, law courts and murncIpal jail constructed m Spnngfield
1-8
Date Received:
Planner: AL
.., 4Pan
! / /
. ,
However, key components ofthe JustIce Center, mcludmg courts, admmIstratIVe offices and publIc
offices (mcludmg detentlOn facIlItIes) are mdlVldually lIsted m the PLO and MIxed Use Commercial
(MUC) Dlstncts, and were already present on the SIte It IS notable that publIc offices are lIsted as a
PermItted Use m the MUC Dlstnct
Although there IS proVISIon m the Spnngfield Development Code (SDC) for mterpretmg new or
undefined uses that are slITular to already-defmed uses (or that could be reasonably grouped mto a
famIlIar category) the City logIcally deemed It desirable to have the JustIce Center specifically defined
and lIsted m the applIcable Development Code distnct To tills end, the CIty facIlItated reVIew and
approval of the JustIce Center development by adoptmg necessary Development Code amendments once
the project fundmg was secured, and pnor to selectmg a preferred SIte optIOn The Code amendments
were adopted through standard, state-mandated publIc procedures that mvolve publIc notIficatIOn, pubhc
heanngs and acceptance by the state Department of Land ConservatIOn and Development (Case
LRP2005-0003l). It also should be noted that a JustIce Center IS not an "allowed" use, but IS lIsted as a
DiscretIOnary Use whIch reqUIres an addltlOnal public reVIew and land use approval step. Approval of the
DiscretIonary Use - allowmg for further conSideratIOn of a JustIce Center at the selected 10catlOn - was
granted by the Plannmg CommISSIOn on Apn118, 2006 (Case DRC2006-00013) after a pubhc heanng.
When the JustIce Center slte optIOn was selected by CIty CounCIl, the 14 CIty-owned tax lots Within the
footpnnt of the Justice Center were zoned a combmatlOn of Mixed Use CommerCial (eight lots) and
Pubhc Land and Open Space (SIX lots) A rezomng of the eIght MUC lots to PLO was completed to
create a umform zonmg for the entIre project SIte (Case ZON2006-00007) The rezonmg was approved
by the Plannmg CommIsSlOn on Apn118, 2006 after a pubhc heanng.
Statement 4. "The City hasfazled to appropnately provldefor publzc znvolvement In a meanzngful way
throughout the planmng process A Citizen advlsOIY committee (CA C) was formed 'to prOVIde mput
throughout the deSign process In regard to outward design of the facllzty and ItS relationship to downtown
Sprmgfield' 1 volunteeredfor the CAC and dUring my mtervIew for the poSItIOn I znformed the CIty
counCil of my opznIOn With respect to the street closure and zndlcated a deSire to work on appropriate
alternatives "
Staff Response: Mr. Olson IS cntIcal of the City's "failure to appropnately provide for publIc
mvolvement" Mr. Olson has served as a member of the Citizen AdVISOry Committee for the Justice
Center. The CAC has met over a dozen times since the project mceptIOn to dISCUSS the vanous SIte
planrung Issues affectmg the JustIce Center ThIs does not necessanly mean, however, that all
recommendatlOns of the CAC or ItS mdIvIdual members have been adopted by the JustIce Center Project
Team, the Plannmg CommIsslOn or CIty CouncIl In ills testImony, Mr Olson acknowledges that the
maJonty of CAC members voted m favor ofthe site design optIOn eventually selected by CIty CounCIl.
In addItIOn to the regular CAC meetmgs, there have been numerous pubhc open house meetmgs,
mformatlOn seSSlOns, newspaper advertisements, medIa announcements, CIty websIte postmgs, and
neIghborhood mall-outs over the 18+ month penod smce the JustIce Center project was formally lllltIated.
A lIst of publIc meetmgs for the JustIce Center project (from prelunmary dISCUSSIOns through to fmal SIte
selectIOn and bUlldmg deSIgn) IS attached to tills staff report as mformatlOn (Attachment 6).
The public meetmgs dIscussed above do not mclude at least seven formal land use actIOns undertaken to
faCIlItate the Justice Center project, all of which reqUIred publIc notIficatlOn (see Table 1 below)
AddItIOnally, at hIS request, Mr. Olson has been personally notIfied of\publIc heanngs pertalmng to the
JustIce Center, partIcularly the B Street vacatlOn Despite the numerous mallouts, advertIsed publIc
heanngs and multIple land use actlOns that have occurred up to this pomt - all of whIch have made
overtures for public and stakeholder mvolvement - Mr. Olson IS among the few mdlvlduals that have
submitted any testunony m oppOSItIon to the Justlce Center project None of the land use actlOns
approved to this pomt have been appealed.
1-9
Date Received: 76/~
Planner: AL II
., II l
Table 1
I Public Involvemert for Justice Center (Planning and Land Use Actions)
I Plannlno Action Case Number Public Involvement Opportunities
Development Code Amendment to LRP2005-00031 PublIc Heanngs November 1,2005, November 28,
add "Justice Center" to ArtIcle 23 2005, January 4,2006 & January 17,2006
Zone Change ZON2006-00012 PublIc Heanngs March 21 & Apn118, 2006
300-foot maIlout notificatIon to neIghborhood
PublIc Heanngs March 21 & Apnl 18, 2006
300-foot maIlout notificatIOn to neIghborhood
PublIc Heanngs June 20, 2006, July 5, 2006,
July 17, 2006 & September 18, 2006
400-foot maIlout notification to neighborhood
300-foot mallout notification to neighborhood
PublIc Heanngs March 13 & 19,2007
DiscretIOnary Use
DRC2006-00013
VacatIon of mid-block alley
LRP2006-000 19
Site Plan Review
Development Code Amendment to
modIfy Article 9 VacatIOn cntena
Vacation of one-block segment of
B Street
DRC2006-00033
LRP2007 -00002
LRP2007-00019
PubllG Heanngs June 5 & 19,2007
PublIc Heanng July 2, 2007
i 400-foot mallout notIficatIOn to neighborhood
Statement 5 "The City cannot ensure contmue[ d) pubhc ownership [of the vacated portIOn of pubhc
nght-of-way) because It does not own the property untzl it 15 vacated Once vacated there IS no way of
preventmg future City counczls from sellmg the property to a pnvate party"
Staff Response Agam, thiS statement IS not entirely true or false. The CIty has latitude m Its use of
publIc nght-of-way and could close the street to publIc travel temporanly or permanently wIthout
vacatmg the nght-of-way The JustIce Center project IS mtended to be a long-term (50+ year) occupant of
the selected SIte However, to address thIS Issue, a clause has been mserted m the enablmg ordmance that
causes the vacated area to revert to public nght-of-way 10 the event the vacated nght-of-way ceases to be
used for JustIce Center purposes (Attachment 9)
Statement 6 "The street vacatIOn cannot meet any of the three cntena previously established In the
code "
Staff Response The "prevlOus" cntena referred to by Mr Olson have been superseded by Development
Code amendments to Article 9 (VacatlOns) cntena adopted Apnl 2, 2007 The subject vacatlOn request
was submitted after the cntena came mto effect Therefore, thIS statement IS Irrelevant to the subject
vacatlOn request.
1-10
Daie Received:
Planner: AL
7 P htlo7
II
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-Of-WAY VACATION
PORTION Of B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
SUBJECT AREA
Sp/1llgfield, OR
-00
-0)
0>-
::J{p
::J
(1)/J
:"1(1)
(")
)> ~.
r<
CD
c.
i
~ _ L
,
I
--t -
J - !
I
r- I
-r-- __1
I
J
,
!
,
,
II-
i !
I :~~
-j
I-r-
I j
Jll
"
\J
.A'7'
r 1
)>
-t
-t
"')>
10
-":I:
s:
m
z
-t
I ,n.l
I I
" -
,V' ;'1 :( Ii
\ r b, ~
;y! j I Ii I
,P: ~;,
1- -: ,I ,f III
L
'-I
,
! j
I IJ ,
-I ,I
, , j i , ,
L
~,(
Urban Growth Bomdary
Sl1"lngfield cny LJmots
,..,
-........~
t
..._.,-~
.AJ _ 7Js_ "......0 It'anvlltlt:J I'"" C1Q':C1npc11l) ,1111 proJur.(
L~ ~ {E1~~(l.UIIm.DII,e.V'OIU.bU''''for..", Io.D....,/omfJBlI<lnU'"
-... filIIIIP' II"O,.ltlll}' cnor O"'UAOII IT fDS'MII,J UtDct31rar:yo/thu pl"OJllcl
-*
1- :
j
o
05
Mole
. .
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
i T--;- 'I
i--' ! I I
F..:-'- ~_J " .-1 _! _u__--L __ J
l Wj ---~ -71 ! ':~- ~ --r--'
: I I , I
! , ; Ll
---;
~- _:_=:_j ;~~~_~~_:_~T_L; ~----._-~-
I ; Ii, j-!;--- l I
,~l I 1 >1 I !': I '
__,> en _ 'I I: '
BS,T W '_ ~--- --.
--~----
__~ . 1 i; 1>- f ji I :----,----"1 . ~'.i"':~..
, or. 1--,' , ~, ,I -1-1 i I I .
> 'I- I ! 1-. '- I I- r~ ";
_~__-<< :~~_,;..~ __ I :::.::: n__~_~__ Cf) > I I _,' en ___ I ---- U) , It.,........r,
'-----'"1 I 1 a::;--- --~-~- ;. M_ , ----:::; ~ J:'- --~
I I ~ : ;15l;;, ~~; r - ~r---
~ tr J I 1>- J 1 ; I: I i "Cti I J ; V'>I I! I
--- w ---.~ lL-_~L- ~_w______LJ :...~_: '
__ ~___ l~l
,Q -:-:~ --;-'1
J Q..l : c.. il !!'---;
-r--_ :_,___. Lj ffi I " ,'-1
I' , '!!!! ,1-- II i I, ,I
j, ~ 0 lj 'I'
ii:-1' ill
MAIN ST
I . I iJ c;-;-rr" "
, I,! II ji 1 I
~-- ;-~---- r-~l_ULLjl~:
~_~~~ I
, It!
\ i
l-'
f;
SUBJECT SllE
\1
-----.'
~=..:.::::- -
--~rN--
;--==- ----=-~ ::.-:,-: - -:-'
'.
~- t-- ---
"
; l~--
-i-~ 1-- "---,
__l..._'___
--,----- ------
I
~ I
\~ : I I, J
. -- -.-, ~:_-=~-=-;::;......:_---
---- ....---
.- ----,------
;-~ i
,
----- r~-'
,
'--
~-------,-~
,
AST
--;---
~----'
,
_~__w..
,
\_-~--
--~::",.,...
.r..........~~/r
~/
~-~-::::.==
I----~
II
....._....J-..-- --"
I
'"
1'-.
/~ / ~~- --r----
/~/ ,,-,.""
-~-
"
- ---~
~-------...
:',,-=~A:~ - ,- ~-j
~_ ~_~ w__..:.--==--='::--::
I
1---
- --- --- -'- ___-1
'-A-:J
.....I...~...D
1iiL~
\
\
,_Ii
L_;I~
---
\ l~
I,
, I
1-1_J
'----~_~_ .L-
~- -..,-- --~
I
n
,
!
~ ~~~ ml_j
I '
, ' '
'-I
I ;
! .
r--
I I
1
I
I
>--
I '
i..____
I, ,
----- - -~"
s- T - ~ --;--i
; '-I' I
-
;:--~--::..:,
, >! \
EST
, ~- ----'--'1
:l :
i
H
r~,
, ,
I
r--~
I
I
I !
LL'
~ ~ -~-- --
,...- -~-
, ,
, I
\_-~~-
Ii '--j
; 1
I' I
---...J
__L
DST
; I
,----- -----'
i
~,~r-;
_ -4.. ..~ 4_J.~__ -.l
1 1 ----~
I Ill. ;
I ,; ,
, I I
-......J 1....___~1
--,-- -
! I Ii . I
, I
Spnngfield, OR
,--
, ' ,
) l ,
-........ ........------"- ~"""
,
T""':";::::
i I
,
......~-~-, ,
,
;:-===-
"--~ ---.
1 '
~
-.--.: -.!..~~~,
f- ~-, ---------
I
l-~
,
e--
I ,
! J
Ij-~l
I'
I I
, i
;-- ~-I-~-
=:
t-~-~
~ J
-~_____J
l._~
;-;-,---......---
,
I ,
I '
, r-~
::::.:-;==:-=:;::..._:;-:.::;;~-
; I ;
-._--:..._~_.
I 1--
r--'"! i---
r
,
1--: ,
-.J __L __
I - -----;
, I
-----,--
r-'-
I
1-_ J
[---;---,
~! i :-----
~ -~--:.-~~ ~~-----~-~~
I- ' ,
j f, cc I
_: ~_LJ LJ_ I ! I
, ,
1 ,
~-
r-~:-!
,I 'I'
, ,
_ ==_~_-=:~~~_~~~=_]i~-
--. -___ _.... ~-....~- --L.. ~~
; - .-;;-T:-:
: I;' i ,
_-1...1 ..tH_:L:
r----I-
r-
I
',-
"
"
~:':l- ------1
---
--
-~-"
~~--:_-~.
-~"--
~----,
1~--
...---
L/'~
/"
'"
-~ --------.-- ',-----
------ ---
----._~--....::..~..._----...
--- .....~:---~- ~--
1'----......
L_
I '
,
--...J
,
---_..l
.---
~ ..---~~
;---
'lhWf an no WQfTanner that acronp:lnl' tJlIS prodUCL
[kef1 Q.uume aU r erpafUun/J n'for unv lass or damage ami ng
from am' error omwlon U' JDS'lJonall1lDCClIracy 0[V1I1 prodUCT
o 100 200 Feet
2-2
May, 2007
Datel ~ecejved;
Planner: AL
74/UfJ7
/ /
. . ..
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
SUBJ ECT SllE
Spnngfield. OR
,----__---1
I
,
17-03-35-24
i
13900
14000
14100
14300
---;
I
264 00'
N
,<0
I{)
'<0
SITE
en
co
<0
<0
8 STREET
---__J
I-
CI)
i1i
>-
<(
~
~
c::
<(
a.
c::
w
w
z
o
a.
264,00'
1800
- 1600 1500
I 1700
1900 17-03-35-31 I-
CI)
! J:
I-
'<t
---
I
,
!
!
I
I
I
,
A STREET
----- -----
------.
' _ _.R__~__
I I
i : ;
: I i
......1l;II....I.D
~~
Then are no warran~ IJuu acrorrpan)' dlls product
Cke13 assume alJ respotlSlbllltJ'for am loss or damage amI ng
from an\' error omISSIon (T jDSIIUJnDl ",accurrJcyoflJm product
o
50
100 Feet
May, 2007
2-3
Datel Received: 7 h/ztXJ7
Planner: AL ---f-7
. . .
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
SUBJ EeT SITE
Spnngfie!d, OR
- ------_ -______ _-1__
17-03-35-24
13900
14000
14100
14300
- ---------!
I
264 00'
,
: - - ------------- - --- -------.-1-'u- - --- - _,____u, on'U ------
, ~ pavmg _____n__________u_ _
. m
: ~ -----.-------____uu_____l~~~~__._______~_~~_~~~~____m______m__ ;
B STREET
I-
(f)
<(
W
>-
<(
~
~
0::
<(
a.
c:r:
w
w
Z
o
a.
264:00'
r-- -------------
1800
1700
1800
1500
17 -03-35-31
I-
(f)
:r::
I-
'<t
1900
I
---~
,
-- -~- ~_.
__.J..___
-'
A STRE ET
------~-
,
,
;----:-~
; I~
"-.NI:I,,..L.6
~~-~
There are no warrannes thai ocronpam thu prodllCt
Ue~ assume ail respanslblilo'!orOnl' less or damage arISing
./roman\- error OtJUSSlon rr p'sltJonalmQCQ.JraryojlhlS product
o
50
100 Feet
May 2007
2-4
Date Received:
Planner: AL
7~kn
/ / .
B STREET OVERVIJEW
\tn \ ~ ~~ < ~I ; .' ~I '0':: il '_A o. 7U1
,m' ~ ~I ~ -1Hlfl, I L - i - ~ -, ~
ITl\w'~\ > II ~iI ~Hi In. I~nl I I~- ~ I
I ,I ~ \\ f. ct: I '>- II r-I Ii - v --' I - --.
I '11 \\ <11 ~ I ~. -. "'II '" I q 1L tii'l t;-rt Iii
rl. ~ I ~H -~~ -'I 1("-
ll: I" -'I!;;II t;: t=1j ~ ~;: ~I )
- : "+ ~ I~ [J II ..
"" ~ ~ \" -:..-:~-'" :,~,.~2. ~: ~ "iC, ~ :..<.-~l-._r- JL. "" r- _ ~ ,- -~ r: I \ Iii
, @,'> \ ~ ~ '~~'_I ~ ~ ,-:;:--::- _ ~~E&-"""'''' I -~,t" '0_"" -- ,- -"~ 1-""."",.
1,~, ~\ J I ,1- I "I"" I '0 r.. . ",; . -'" ,^'. '-"-"'~~ - ,,', ',' '-"-.~::'-
Yf " ~ \ II 'I . -, I I ~ ~
r,~y&" I I , l:--ll Jl IL :=tc::a^ ...J ~
%'~~*,,_ - 5:)\. II I i ,I, I 'I . II }'
v~ ~ >; r" II1J /I '-.'. I II I~
~, !J I~r-' J ~~ 'c----- u
... .. ~ ~\..r~->>?~~-: ..~~->><<(." ~ I ::::--J ~
'@' ~fl\' ~
~~v~' ~
~ ~~..., ~ ~\ J"
~ ~~ ~ . r v//., ".
,*:\l>~ '*':. I) ""'~, ~<".",,,*,, '--
\8 ~ -ir ?<::^%"(':,"*,,, .
'~ <!>@" ,"__ '/o?;; ~,>
'w.#~ ' '~~
~< ....~.. I '1:..~ifk', -:-.".
~ ~~ ,I' I '~'~ ~~ ~ ff'", "^,"
, ~0 ~~-r\.~, I 'r - - --=;) ",~ '~R.*'av~~,d'j.'~)" '"
, \& <-<* .. _ U '<u. :>~.... ,>;;:;." ":@" -::-....
~O ?%~... '" f!f ~'f!f..~ ~ fitf,~r; Y"~,
~~ '%vA?~\ ;~'~~~'x%~~v.<." ~ % ~.lf% :i;'}%,~""-...,
,~ '3!;V.. - ~ % '.:m:' ,,"''' ,>", = >:'~::"" '"~ '"
~ ,,~ ~ ' " ~,~<,y y,;y'y',~, '>/J"~"'"
.. ..%"'~ ./ _ I .....d-- ., -;"//- ~~ %~~ ,~-*/ ~ ~. ~",,,
.' -
~-.-1l
1
II
~
'"
~I
\7 ~I :1
II N ~l
'_L-
I n --
oJ
U
~'/r-
~
'"
~
U)
:r:
I-
<0
Iii
Iii! Iii
~
'"
:r:
~
:r:
~
~
c
:z
"
"
=0
:r: I-
b! ~
N N
i
I
U\
/8~
-1
~/(
cr.
:r:
~
~
'"
~
'"
:r:
I;;
'"
II
~
'"
:r:
~
~
"'.
'W
I
,
,
,.
/'I~
Total Length of B Street
From Mill Street to 16th Street. 6117.83 Feet (1.16 miles)
o 250 500 Feet
Date.1 Received:
Planner: AL
0,...4~~
...--
, ... a
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE
May 16,2007
TO. Andy LImbIrd
I
FROM: Jerry SmIth, Police Chief
SUBJECT: Importance ofB Street Closmg to the JustIce FacIlity Project
The purpose of this memo IS to summarize for the Planning Commis~IOn the Importance closing
B Street as part of the Justice Center project. As designed, the area currently occupIed by B
Street would become part of a fenced and secured parkmg area.
. Closing B Street IS necessary for the security of portIons of the facIlIty' The planned
JustIce faCIlity mcludes an ancillary buildmg that will be a repository for eVIdence m
crimmal cases; storage for polIce and court records; and storage for speCIalized polIce
eqUIpment and weaponry. Closing B Street wIll allow the entIre anCIllary bUIldmg and
parking lot to be fenced m, significantly Improving the security of these records and
evidentiary Items. Without the security fencmg m place, the ancillary buIlding as
designed does not provide sufficient security for these items.
. Closing B Street WIll provIde secure fleet and employee parking: To date, Department
vehicles and employee parking has not been secured by fencmg. \Vlule this does not
cause significant issues dunng normal working hours, the Department has exp~nenced
damage to fleet vehicles, and employees have suffered damage to theIr personal vehIcles,
dunng late evemng and early mommg hours. Damage has ranged from paint scratches to
slashed tIres and broken wmdows.
. Closing B Street WIll improve the safety of polIce officers and citizens: The street
closure WIll allow officers respondmg to emergency calls from mside the building to
access their vehIcles WIthOUt crossing a public right of way, thereby reducmg the risk of
an aCCIdent during an emergency response.
. Closmg B Street will provide a secure area for evacuatIOn of mumcipal jail prisoners:
The fenced area will serve as an outdoor holdmg area for mumcipal jaIl prisoners in the
event that the Jail must be evacuated. Without the street closure and fencing, there will
not be an area outsIde the mUnICIpal jail adequate and accessible for holding pnsoners.
Instead, an evacuation event would necessitate the uncontrolled release of all mUnICIpal
j ail prisoners.
Date Received:
Planner: AL
7P/2aJ7
1/
ATTACHMENT
3-1
, ,...
t;l).Q c{ r ' SfJ 1"{ tt70'~ 'f?,F",1J /I( ~ 17/ V L{t/I c? :;:- () c:
~. 1 Ie{ l, l/ 1~/q/1I1PrS;------ --~------~
--....
-1-' --tA /(11< !;P'<< ,Ii C( t/t? Q prc'6 [O:vr -
biz; c/()/17Q o-f-f !3 s+ a-)'~. Q~ MC?rf-€{/I~q:/'
, , ' ~cn },u;/.U';f,/ , I
h ~{t;fd ~ ;;r/5lTr1.j/J0/1c::.e ~'1S')~ /5-
not C)( JCJc:Jc/ ;~ C'{f Cf// pur- S'<<r
,- ~ a /0/ MDto<:. t?
t~ ~S~I\/r~ t6,Cr~ry
~c:{11 c1cJwl1 ;f Sf Cfr7 /Vt?k C' ~574 (" q
I
rES' ,.t:lo .L _ " '0
I~ s~ C? j4.,J;~r .s-fr~~ '~<i!
C -J-- d~~ u /~cfler5f~~ ~ ~ I~
~ ,6/.(');'/ ,V( ~NScn"t1 J24. 1'/1 <?11~
fU,/t Cr(! Spr}f1 ;c-6(.-, /7or -blx* C? IV!ct;-'P/ /'
sfv-<€'ef fo do it15~j', AI1~ i.:;: ?u:-~ ~
to v-r:i?"e ~ ~1'1d'~ ,p:/s ~~;/1 ~0'U~~
h-t-d-' ls- f1te ,/-J055!hlt/~ ;-I- ~~' ,
t;iLflf/ ~ u~ Ilu iu-e t-u11f voir[ ~ '
;T 1L-()/~ r &VIII 1Jbi2~ 8-f~ ,
f;07tf221 ~/;-"~ ftJ f;ih 'J/_L..J- d~<< 0~1::~ -rl I
~~ UrY!:t1/ 11c:. -c<T ~/S t//~j/~
;;r 9CMJIj 5~ jJn5<:-'1u:J/ if Mc:)Y~ ~~.~
.:r~ ~ /11 -((N.lO)'" C)-f! -r;~ C?(rr€l/1. / ,
CO'1s"f{f'ud/o--rr I~ -b;d:Y(~'1 C'-ccif$5" io (~
H~I pd oA)CJ? -t1,-<,?t onVrQ;: uJ~ =! y ~
:r:- uJCYJc&--r urtv-J ti1.?,I-e' ~ ~ '
o.kO<<',i- :.r1i)5'~'r~~ 1Vt€e/1I'?J-- ~-'
) f :7 (4-1f7~ ~ -::z d',-duY
"-
~
i
. C' ..
fG~ o~(./r ~V11'
~ -(1~ ---fid' c17I?(C&U~~ d!41ror
()?JIb5/dr4 ~ ~ I/~ !:u.R v~
()~psR (I~ (~. .
-J -f' -t(~ . {;Jdb<l C{ ~ ~
:1 [LJ c-vd uofe &5? . . /
. -r ~ (1g ~ IY2iJ~?IYP .(,'''o'~_
~ ~(//J -P'
r-~ f~ ~&{/tf1~ -50 Or! .1/
d~Jc/ <
p. 1 -~~ nq, Av&1-f~ ~
vi/! vJCVJ uP1.:..:e~' cifr2--0tj
uJO.</~~~ cii . &tf Pi~ .
,b~ ~ i/ .J'tJA 369 (we~/./)5i#/
ll{f ( ". ' ./' V#~<1 0 5jJrAyfJelb1/JI<
#flJ~. ~ ~ .' . 97Yl7
') /~ e'& ~. pl5(7Lh-3'100
. I..);' /1 tJ
1)oi1i^ 1 f /)v- ~
~~I
Date Received: r t../2IJb1
Planner: Al I /
RF:CFTVED
JUN 0 5 2006
BY: ac;z
4-2
. ~. . 4
'J9~ 5}V)J
P lea:S:::: 0( {/ 110f {ja cede
8 5/ ~ tj tit if g) , RF.r;pTV8D
;r w{;Jt/ld -fl'hd rk;siE8~::07
u
. r' (
/VI1J~r 1/1. C{)1l tJeflleqcp - a/i()!/( l
-fZJ -(M c! if !Jq/(.-- elSt tda(#I1J ~
~ !lbrdY, 1
P!~4:Z recc};6l~ par~111 r -:
C4Y5 d 5~ 1(}~;1'1 6/etJtctJ l~
11151#(( ~ ~ -8:sf. ~ ...cr; ~~
~[d -:j.2M";-~Nc ~- '
-fIlii \5?(re r ~ ~
fU S# ~J (j:Je B a&/f.jJ --- &vf-
W f"1e k{~ rW -,- ~~
F ~ ~c6s)K) fl sf,' ~
per;;i d~edh J _ t-jiJttg ~C(Ft~ - . . .~
J r: flof dloff? III ~~~~&dl ~ ~ .
. -ft~ .5/, H2b~ [rJ&i-}-W} / I
f1tvJfI c!?J5IJrf!! _ ~r~}gf ~
4-3 ?1k1 oes--f ]PI;,dt-/ ~
/];-'""),'10 -f)dR1GJI. 9//177
,'/5, ;jw7ll ~ ~ 15 ~ &/
1'1~ 13tz1 ~
IYeuo?v ,__ J I t. j/I ~ V
, ,~~ c--c r~' ry;2 cQL.
f f\ V ev'.6q/~, :t::6
r rec</j;z~ fttr1 oro6ceh0 wI!! cl .
. der# F ,7" t:U12
1151 ~-. ~ ~~~~
::r: @ uJcJd: 4: f -(U! 5fJirrw;+?e/'c/
!/);rctM C(J c? 5'Ae/o-Of S>&'(AA4/~<ZU
I Ii . 0 -5'6 I. -!1tf2 L'0 r~vY o#.en. - ,
a WI W/r-rei?f'1 ~ (j (0 /
:r r~C1(7U 1kt a.d:7 /;y;t4~ ,pre 5X_~' ~
!Jill r~ dill ~ ~ ,~5LJ J(/ u)(j'((::
-JtuI Wr:UJ WI.$tA E 1) ~ aJ ~-
!led ~~~'j,,1A 461C :if tulll, M ~/f.-P ~~
(+~&P- r- txJl(( ~ -jZJ prr LI Uo/J
Y-~ u'--71 51f1,; cZ 7' d7 /v~ C IVLr7<<Z 7J'
6VV\' ' ;to jV1a~ ~ 1/~ ~
U'1ii1sJ!: u
~Iate Received: 7/;/ltxJ7
anner: AL I /
4-4
. ,4-f'.!tJy! .::r (.~ ~i's-~ t/~ ~ ~~~O\ fJ~ ~0.4le ~ ~L-n4
; ..-4 . . ' - tJ \ / '-O-J'--L-if-
A <\."-,b/;"" v.c'c~J kss ~ -/U.e /'~ uAR- ~ ~.+,'6 ,'<ef' {3'~"rt:
"-"1-1;11<[11 1 S a 1-~/.6ItXi)-Io .-/r/ver:s' ~ +~ ~'3-r -lJ.-::JI.
'. Ul. ' _ ,] r CJcJ,v(f'/A.c:;Y1. S'@\-J e
rTi>fJe -{'(IS cCt"11 ~ c?oc:'rro."Kl 'Sdcrf,'d/l'
prec..x:.l/ I It/]c:x.>-<:- io 4' I~
~
I
c:.n
-00
mID
~!t
m;G
:-!m
)>~
,- -.
Cii
R-
----.-..\
,,~
-~
~
UNIVERSITY..OF OREG.ON
C Chemic~l PhysIcs Institute
" ~1AO Wl}!j!melte Hall
~~-;o....,..; ~~7403
'';~;r~;->O' it? /:; f?;;5fe/ /.
3.6 <=1 0e5.T jJ5i/f;
_'f/r)I?;6e&2;di
. f:UGE'NE o~ i.::q,+
> '
D 1 Fet~ 20\):1 P'r'~ 2 L
It-~&r~: ~/rPl ~,4~b(/&
f ! a ll171 {II CV fVl;v1 ~ 55/C/'/1
:2;25 F;-fYIt ST,
-"7
_5fr)l-rjr(~oR 977"71
--~-~
...""'.........",.~.
::,'- _~._,-..... ,-1.-:''': 11./"1.,,1.1,,/1,"11,,.1.1,,1.11,,1/1.1/1./11.1"1,1/111.,,1
. . ",P~ /-17"- Le/tel1 J dttA ?Iy ~d/ fi1~~
. .J,~ ~ Wazk; C{~ :
ffO(Ps:ef (0' iJ/ocL ~ fJ % ~
4iJ .;jli ~ eF'H.{QI1@>{Ify -lli!4~~::!
'7 tJ (1M! If Q(N~ ca~
iC1. CfJI1tJ8lImce fo 6-e io ~'
~ kj7 C yf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Hd;t;fJrUVj(az~/1 "/:";'07'~ ~\
:r ~ ~ ,U)( ~v/ ~~
!JIM fo ~ 13 sf ~ Iu ~/ i~
v ro~
fl{f't c~5d " ~t7Dn t7 "CJ a.
. --f ,'- ~A~~';t? is' - ~'
~ f/\.-,(,Tl/VV V""'/ _
~,f1J- ~ 1f -(t--e ~ 7/l
jLJ~/ ;r vwVj ~ ~
i1d- iJ N -I?n c tt tU3CAJ ~ . /~,
~T 4~~
{/1o/Jaz 4dfL . T CUM VePy
~ ~ rb ~ 13 Sf! ~cf4d
006 ~. ' , ~
;;p- U~ &! 5)7ft{JGdI ~II~~
J- h-.~//P/1A dhlA~ ~-P '- !jJ~ J 62f2ao
4-6
.. 4" .
'~-
{/Cl~ ~~ 1fr ~ ~wl/f
v~ (o~ ~-Wuc
c&or>~ to ~ {{Sf? czJ-q:zi.2f7.
_ ',' ~5
/!IV'- %r7~1i?~4 ' ' . OJ ,w.
~~~~~~;/1'
. ~ 11 clOS'~ !3;{~6S3f2. .)b ~
'fr~'~-- ~~~
. / r'lo~~
~ p;t u;;u(!L&.e~,~~
!5z' o~ !tFe j,A0 ~ ~
ft-;L p ~ .t; rJ0'4 J)J-fto)
Wi! fJ ~ ~ ~07 7::1/l~ 4e
~4; rf49~ ~
~~ ~j~~1 ~t~~
IJ/~.. UJ/ lid (JU/Jlnvy 7e'J ~
r~ (0""' ~-It--e.kKfr~-
~ ~ 6[fJM,.:tB~ ~ 8Y1'1f~
~ ~~ 71il~~)h ~e~ ~.. -.~
En1 it5 ~:!~'f h /{rJijO/ y-Cr;C; Co~ iUCJ;;,'l'ze $:''7''M
~ iLvrFr-nn ( , 1/. 5t~ {(;;?f!: - R~~I. ~
. 1_ _n'-r 1-<(;YZPv:t l' "/ hk.ih1J (I ~.' J t>s,-y;
,/ _.. J A.I _ ....... - r/; j,),.C177 I ,J..-,.//cJf .
I
1\
r
l
(\,
-0
~
.- -'
B<C
(l)L.:
6t:Q)
(iJC
.....C
mm
cO:
- " -1:(7Lfb--3QUI) 5)1t~1~'f~79f-=#( C(/~
. "8 A 7 I ~ ,I /"Ir'_.D IiJ / "515 V1 fl ~)1l4 \!J"p- I? /
. c::j:./ fld..1. ' P1.U vI L-I VluYGf + Y III ,,{/[ I; Wtfi{/l{fS51 CPll
. -J r~q[77o -t/vz c)o5.CVS2 ~ 13 SIted-
a:t Lf~J}~ is Irf:e/l; -h A~~
~ T~~ /Y1C;/c:>r~Le:)oqld~
s~ ~a'rrqVlj,pfl&?d~~ ~__
declc!d. -I---If.JrtRJ..1l&s ~ ,,--;'1M /.. -01 I~
ytAe:-llieS/1 'tf-1~p C( I_I ~ C/t1~
,JJ~i1;~~ Wv-d ft-r<~ ~ ~ ~
~{}fiA ~~l'~~
~. --f--co -<<A~(~ ~ r" ~ ·
tJ (~~ B ~-j-re2J fa ~ ~ ~~ 7'J ~,-
~ (I des) ('S-f 0) J)!s-;---: ~ ~\
.- ~/v-7~ ~ o/DP 0't9r?~ ^,
~',-I-- ;: )~ - --4- ,/ /;---11, '--I ~ 0 ----- .
'v C9..-.f' '7 t...k:J T'u ... ~ t - , . '- -g
.-.. ,,-, - '. - (' - ---=-- ';;.- , >
_.~" _ ,'1 .,. ~ -" '; ____...::F -';::: _ 1....... __ '_.. ~ .-
f- - ~,~' -,'-:"--'-- , fJ" ,..r .. ~ '-.-' ,~--~" tfj ~ Q)~
. ~ ,-, ~'-' ., -- -,1.1'- r~' --.:. - 'I "- ' "
. - / - -'~';:7' ~- . ---'-"1 15 i..:
r ~ ~ lA/-7 Jr~ ~ ::r-*~
~L:-k~~-6J&' > II 00:
;yLl%' 6z5 ~ ~_. ---k> 7b2.~/~ ~~ -
~~ fW'- pCJ$f Offi c:z . B ~ S'~
b~ ~-6n tre5'/~L(~.~ ~
CZo-ea--vt We:5Y- psi. ~
-.f u.rzrz..& 0-<J 4. vc>lu~o.:;f- S fJ n x;t;'ef!J \
t ikJ V4 '5 C!?J z:1/t-Oti2 ~/ ~. S C3 .-:r /U.
~ ~ ~ SS!. il-~ kg
~-
Mop ~}J ~fa'jo ~ ISl
;'~' ~ ~~}y' ~ Cd(
Jj5f,~~ sf-r-ei;td J?o~q
- - 4-8
. '"SA J!' (' <-tY7N fJ; ~ jJCZVKL-ci '/ ~ .. ,
e[ ;f/!AA,~ CVJ.- &~ - p~~ f"" l? Y
rJ!], red] b5f. 7lVlf :Ft{ ~~ ~.Ccrrj) Ya
IJW;f;~e~~J~ ~~
itJ2fllaMll~ ru--erP4 r~ ~vuv 0 ~~
IIM-.. T~~~i-a 1
~I v-.5'CVj fl-o;p do:;:! ~ Jl:;;:;f. i,
~~~~qfl~~ ~.\
0]~~0~ ~~.C>V{ B~
/'. /' -'" _. / (1;' * .if t:7 C7 . .~ <i!
Lo I ~.?'</~ (U -~7 [~, ' (J) ~
::;;-1 I s ~~ ~ aC0f( U'€Pt;-€.C1.c.z i ~
C'~) JitR- r;;:~ ~-r~ IA' A .uUV .~ k 00..
(C{ ~,~).. () '"''-'~- / [/ ~
['I/' _ n. ~ v(~~ ~
l~--e W~ 1J.01~~ 1_"1 '_lC .
/ ~~V V - ~~~) ~ f
~ (CX::-&.-.{7(7efJ tt~ -v /T-~ <;L.lU2do~ - '
110 o.{l c-. .))dW ;f-IS~'- ~ ~ Qi:i-kJS~ ~
FT .~ $::::t?M:5' (,- ~ /'1A o-;Or'i06 ~ ~
h!O~/~~-~~~~ ~
S3-w o'~ ~ · -' ~ . \d'7 /~ d-r' t-Lto~
tv oLo ~S; ~ c7 ./
~ r<?J[d, ~ -t-ht's I rJ ~ ~
~r/lll1Ql'''!7 I '1 --/t-e- prdYo:'-<J ~ "R-Q. ~~ )- _
~ 'fP+- (j'lJ % ,.5~ Ilk '{t.p cP~h'\ ""~ ~
D/lcJ2 ~'- ~ a.pl%~ tu ~ · l<t~
~ ~ f(3:]:;tl-. J ~ J -ft.-u' s- 3fbY f(! .
f~ fiJo,-.1.- '/11 ~ ~ ~ 5.~' ks;; c.. .... J 'J. ~ J
~ _ _ . d:r"'" ,,;, A-! -zeJ!<, 1"-' d ;:tno..,{ -::- " - _ ,;. - t?JJ.... .. r22 ';:f-f<<.
~ c&.-z, ~)e r / 01J2SL-( I~ -~ ~'8 '" S <)A'Sf
rit;e!2 b-~~~H~J' ~W?
r .fedwo-a:f1 ~'1 ~ ~ srrf! ~"'- k..e. ~
..,; ~ cu::r ~1.. . 5ea"i"5 (; k q -{-.:.rr; j;~ L<.!""",,;:~- d;:r"
6~~ h > J-n'6G5 . ~ 10 SAu-R- ~3 ~ rb rpf- '7C.
/ v ,P.e~~e ~!fA -I+o~P/tdJ(';~ ~ <
,. .
Submittal to the record of the city of Springfield
Planning Commission
Discretionary Use,and Zone Change Request (Justice Center) -
Case N urn bers
DRC2006-000 13 (Discretionary Use Application)
ZON2006-00007 (Zone Change Request)
March 28, 2006
Submitted by:
Scott E. Olson, P.E.
1127 B Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Comments and assertions of error In the staff report findings and' conclusion are
presented below. Portions of the staff report are rephcated'wlth my comments In anal
font following. The staff report Identifies the criteria for approval with summary
concluslonary findings with little or no diSCUSSion of how the application supports the
findings No indication that the applicant has addressed any of the approval criteria In
the application IS presented In the staff report.
The staff report includes;-
Proposed Findings In Support of Discretionary Use Approval
Criterion (1): The proposed use conforms With the apphcable:
(a) ProvIsIOns of the Metro Plan;
Finding' The Metro Plan speaks in broad terms about development in the greater
Eugene/Springfield urban area, and there are no policies specifically related to Justice
Center or correction facilIty projects. However, the proposal is consistent with the Metro
Plan objectives for siting public/government buildings and services in nodal development
areas such that population and employment are concentrated in well-defined areas with
good transit service and a mixture of compatible land uses (Metro Plan Chapter II-E(4)).
Finding: The Metro Plan's Public and Semi Public plan designation provides for the
accommodatIon of major government facilities and office complexes. Springfield's
Public Land and Open Space zoning district Implements this plan designation in the City.
The Justice Center, a large public facility, is proposed to be located within thiS plan
designation and, therefore, is consistent with the Metro Plan Chapter II.
Comments
The staff report fatls to IdentIfy that the TransPlan Goals, Object(Ves, and PolIcIes have
been adopted mto the Metro Plan The followmg IS extracted from TransPlan:
Under state law, TransPlan is a functional plan of the Metro Plan. The Metro Plan is the
official long-range general plan (public policy document) for the region comprised of the
1 Of 16
ATTACHMENT
5-1
Date Received:
Planner: AL
7f /;007
I
,. .
cities of Eugene and Springfield and metropolitan Lane County The Metro Plan
establishes the broad framework upon which Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County make
coordinated land use decisions. As a functIOnal plan, TransPlan must be consistent with
the Metro Plan. Metro Plan amendments required for consistency will be adopted by the
elected officials concurrent with the adoption of TransPlan.
TransPlan strategIes include nodal development and transit-supportIve land use patterns,
new and expanded TDM programs, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), in addition to roadway
projects that benefit pedestrians, bicycl ists, and motorists All of these strategIes can
increase the attractiveness of transportation modes other than the smgle-occupant vehicle
(SOY). The integration of transportation and land use planning is especially important to
support compact urban growth, which provides for more pedestrian-, bicycle-, and transit-
friendly environments, rather than urban sprawl that ,supports auto dependency.
The TransPlan policy framework (Chapter Two) and implementation actions (Chapter
Three) are structured around three fundamental components of transportation planning:
1. Land use.
2. Transportation demand management, and
3. Transportation system improvements.
The land use component of transportation planning is addressed by TransPlan policies
and implementation actions that encourage meeting the need for transportation-efficient
development patterns, such as nodal development and transit-supportive land use
patterns. These development patterns reduce trip lengths and auto dependency and
support transit, bicycling, and walking.
Clearly, The first crltena of "The proposed use conforms with the applicable:
(a) PrOVISIOns of the Metro Plan;" Includes consistency with the applicable elements of
TransPlan. Again from TransPlan
Goal #1: Integrated Transportation and Land Use System,
Provide an integl'ated transportation and land use system that supports choices in
modes of travel and development patterns that will reduce reliance on the auto and
enhance livability, economic opportunity, and the quality of hfe.
Definition/Intent: This goal recognizes the need to jntegrate transportation and land use
planning to enhance lIvability, economic opportunity, and quality of life. Integration
supports transportation-efficient development patterns and choices in transportation
modes that reduce reliance on the auto
C/osmg off a collector street at It'S mtersectlOn with an artenal street, dIVertmg collector
street traffic to adjacent local street, shuttmg off pedestnan and bicylce public ways,
I
seekmg vanances to street connectIVity and block length standards m a nodal
development overlay zone IS not consistent wIth thiS goal
2 Of 16
Date Received: 74./~"1
Planner: AL I /
5-2
, . .
Goal #2: Transportation System Characteristics
Enhance the Eugene-Spnngfield metropolItan area's quality of life and economic
opportunity by providing a transportatIOn system that is:
a) Balanced,
b) Accessible,
c) Efficient,
d) Safe,
e) Interconnected,
f) Environmentally responsible,
g) SupportIve of responsible and sustaInable development,
h) Responsive to community needs and neighborhood impacts, and
i) EconomIcally viable and financially stable.
Definition/Intent: The goal is to provide an overall transportation system that provides
for all of these needs. Transportation decisions on specific facilities and services will
require balancing some characteristics with others. '
a) A balanced transportation system is one that provides a range of transportation
options and takes advantage of the inherent efficiencies of each mode.
b) An accessible transportation system is one that serves all areas of the community and
offers both residents and visitors convenient and rellable transportation options.
c) An efficient transportation system is one that is fast and economic for the user,
maximizes the mobility available through existing facilities, and leverages as much
benefit as possible from new transportation facilities
d) A safe transportation system is one that is designed, bUIlt, and operated to minimize
risk of harm to people and property and allows people to feel confident and secure in
and around all modes of travel
e) An interconnected transportation system is one that provides for ease of transfer
between different modes of travel, such as auto to bus' or bicycle to rail.
f) An environmentally responsible transportation system is one that reduces
transportation-related environmental impact and energy consumption.
g) A transportation system that is supportive of responsible and sustainable
development integrates transportatIOn and land use planning in support of
transportation-efficient development.
h) A transportation system that is responsive to community needs and neighborhood
impacts is flexIble and adaptable, and addresses transportation-related impacts in
residential areas.
i) An economically viable and financially stable transportation system is one that is
cost efficient, financially feasible; and has sufficient, ongoing financial support to
ensure transportatIOn system investments can be operated and maintained as desired.
Closmg off a collector street at It'S mtersectlOn with an artenal street, dIVertmg collector
street traffic to adjacent local street, shuttmg off pedestnan and blcylce public ways,
seekmg vanances to street connectIVity and block length standards m a nodal
development overlay zone IS not consistent with thiS goal
3 Of 16
5-3
Date Received" 7/;/2/;tp{)7
Planner: AL . I ~
, . .
TransPlan Objectives
Consistent with the Metro Plan, the following definition is used for TransPlan
objectives:
An objective is an attainable target that the community attempts to reach in striving
to meet a goal. An objective may also be considered as an intermediate point that
will help fulfill the overall goal.
Objective #1: Accessibility and Mobility
Provide adequate levels of accessibility and mobility for the efficient movement of
people, goods, and services within the region.
Definition/Intent: Accessibility refers to physIcal proximity and ease of reaching
destinations throughout the urban metropolitan area. This objective supports the need for
multImodal accessibility to employment, shopping, other commerce, medical care,
housing, and leisure, including adequate public transit access for people who are
transportatIon disadvantaged. This objective also supports the need for improved access
for tourists to destinatIOns. Mobilityis the ease with which a person is able to travel
from place to place. It can be measured in terms of travel time. Access and mobility are
provided at different levels on different classes of transportation facilities. For example, a
local street has a high level of accessibility for adjacent residences and businesses, with a
low level of mobility for non-local traffic An arterial street has a lower level of
accessibilIty, with a higher level of mobility for through movement of travelers. Local
jurisdictIons WIll determine what constitutes adequate levels of accessibility and mobility
and what is efficient movement of people, goods, and services wIthin the region. Provide
adequate levels of accessibility and mobility for the efficient movement of people, goods,
and servIces within the region.
Closing off streets, reroutmg a collector street at It'S mtersectlon wIth an artenal street,
dlvertmg collector street traffic to adjacent local street, shuttmg off pedestnan and
~ blcylce public ways, seekmg vanances to street connectIvIty and block length standards
m a nodal development overlay zone IS not consistent with thIs objectIve
Objective #2: Safety .
Improve transportation system safety through design, operations and maintenance,
system improvements, support facilities, public information, and law enforcement
efforts.
Definition/Intent: TransPlan Goal 2 sets forth safety as a key charactenstic of the
deSIred transportation system This objective supports the need for taking a
comprehensive approach to building, operating, and regulating the transportation system
so that travelers feel safe and secure.
ThIS objectIve did not mtend to result m street closure because It IS unsafe for the polIce
to need to cross a publIc street to get to the secured vehIcle parkmg area The
objective IS aImed at makmg the street a safe place for all of us,
Objective #3: Environment
4 Of 16
Date Received: 7/.;1 /~7
Planner: AL / .
5-4
.... .
Provide transportation systems that are environmentally responsible.
Definition/Intent: This objective places a priority on fulfilling the need to protect the
region's natural environment and conserving energy in all aspects of transportation
plannIng processes. The primary intent of this objective can be met through compliance
with all federal and state regulations relevant to environmental impact and consideration
of applIcable environmental impact analyses and practicable mitigation measures in
transportatIOn decisIOn-making processes. Significant benefits can be achieved from
coord mating the environmental process with the transportation planning process, such as
early identification of issues and resources, development of alternatives that avoid or
minimize impacts early in the project development process, and more rapid project
delivery. The region's need to reduce transportation-related energy consumption can be
met through increased use of transit, telecommuting, zero-emissions vehicles,
ridesharing, bicycles and walking, and through incre~ased efficiency of the transportation
network to diminish delay and corresponding fuel consumption.
This proposals street closures do not suppprt this objective because It limits access to
the transit station, inhibits walkmg, bicyclmg, and created out of directIOn auto travel
Objective #5: Public Involvement
Provide citizens with information to increase their awareness of transportation
issues, encourage their involvement in resolving the issues, and assist them in
making informed transportation choices.
The applicant created a Citizen adVISOry committee to assist with sitmg Issues but has
refused to consider project altematlves that are wlthm the fmanc,al limitations of the
project and keep the streets open The adVISOry committee recommendation to the City
Council was to, conSider alternatives to the closure of B Street but the Council voted to
proceed with street closures The applicants testimony at heanng was maccurate with
repect toJhe consltency with the committee's recommendation and the subsequent City
Council action and direction to staff ThiS application also mappropnately ties the street
vacation to the discretionary use approval through the proposed conditions of approval
yet has not addressed the vacation approval cntena or done the necessary public notice
for a street vacatIOn,
Objective #7: Policy Implementation
Implement a range of actions as determined by local governments, including land
use, demand management, and system improvement strategies, to carry out
transportation policies.
The land use policies m thiS area were denved from thiS objective of TransPlan and It's
dependance upon Nodal Development and creatIOn of attractIVe modal chOices The
proposed use IS mcons/stent with the followmg poliCies of TransPlan
Land Use Policy #1: Nodal Development
Apply the nodal development strategy in areas selected by each jurisdiction that
have identified potential for this type of transportation-efficient land use pattern.
5 Of 16
-'
OU(CI ((\;Jcelveo:
Planner: AL
5-5
7/:J-/2dY7
I /
-' .
The nodes will be pedestrian-fnendly environments with a mix of
land uses, including public open spaces that are pedestrian-, translt-, and bicycle-oriented.
Land Use Policy #2: Support for Nodal Development
Support application of the nodal development strategy in designated areas through
information, technical assistance, or incentives.
Policy Definitionllntent: The intent of this policy is to encourage nodal development
through public support and incentives, recognizing that there is public benefit to the
transportation and land use efficiencies of nodal development.
Land Use Policy #3: Transit-Supportive Land Use Patterns
Provide for transit-supportive land use patterns and development, including higher
intensity, transit-oriented development along major transit corridors and near transit
stations; medium- and high-density residential development within 1;4 mile of transit
stations, major transit corridors, employment centers, and downtown areas; and
development and redevelopment in designated areas that are or could be well served by
existing or planned transit.
Policy Definitionllntent: The intent of this policy is to encourage more concentrated
development and higher density housing in locations that are or could be served by high
levels of transit service. By doing so, transit will be more convenient for a greater
number of businesses and people and, in turn, the higher levels of transit will be
supported by more riders.
Land Use Policy #4: Multi-Modal Improvements in New Development
Require improvements that encourage transit, bicycles, and pedestrians in new
commercial, public, mixed-use, and multi-unit residential development.
Policy Definition/Intent: This policy supports efforts to improve the convenience of
using transit, biking, or walking to travel to, from, and within newly developed and
redeveloped areas. This policy recognizes the importance of providing pedestrian and
bikeway connections within the confines of Individual developments to provide direct,
safe, and convenient internal pedestrian and bicycle circulation.
Land Use Policy #5: Implementation of Nodal Development
Within three years of TransPlan adoption, apply the ND, Nodal Development
designation to areas selected by each jurisdiction, adopt and apply measures to
protect designated nodes from incompatible development and adopt a schedule for
completion of nodal plans and implementing ordinances.
Policy Definition/Intent: This policy was added at the request of the Department of
Land Conservation and Development. The nodal development strategy antIcipates a
significant change in development patterns within proposed nodes. Development of
theseareas under existing plan designations and zonmg provisions could result 10
development patterns inconsistent with nodal development. This policy documents a
commitment by the elected officials to apply the newlND nodal development Metro Plan
designation and new zoning regulations to priority nodal development areas within three
years of TransPlan adoption, subject to avaIlable funding.
6 Of 16
Date Received: 7h/uo7
Planner: AL / /
5-6
...
TDM Policy #2: Parking Management
Increase the use of motor vehicle parking management strategies in selected areas
throughout the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
Policy Definition/Intent: Parking management strategies address both the supply and
demand for vehicle parking They contribute to balancing travel demand wlthm the
region among the various modes of transportation available. To promote parking equity
in the region, consideration should be given to applying parkmg management strategies at
a region-wIde level, in addition to downtown centers.
The proposed use will sprawl surface parkmg thoughout a slgmficant portion of the
property wlthm the Nodal Development z(;me, e/Jmmatmg potential for development
more consistent with the objectIVes of the zO(1e.
TSI System- Wide Policy #1: Transportation Infrastructure Protection and
Management '
Protect and manage existing andfuture transportation infrastructure.
Policy Definition/Intent: This policy calls for the protection and management of
transportation facil ities for all modes, withm the limits of available fundmg, 10 a way that
sustains their long-term capacity and function. Given the limited funding for future
transportation projects and operations, maintenance and preservation activities, the need
to protect and manage existing and future transportation mvestments and facilities is
crucial. Strategies related to access management, TDM, and land use can be
implemented to reduce trips and impacts to major transportation facilitIes, such as
freeway interchanges, thereby postponing the need for investments 'in capacity-increasing
projects.
Closmg B Street, a collector street of recent reconstruction with federal fundmg
assistance, and dlrvertmg traffic to local streets not constructed to the same standard IS
mconsltent wIth thIs poliCY
TSI System- Wide Policy #2: Intermodal Connectivity
Develop or promote intermodallinkages for connectivity and ease of transfer among
all transportation modes.
Policy Definition/Intent: An intermodal transportation system is one that includes all
forms of transportation in a unified, connected manQ.er. An intermodal tnp is one that
involves two or more modes between the trIp origin and destination. Intermodallinkages
are the transfer points along the way, such as Park-and-Ride lots. In transit, intermodal '
transfers allow providers to serve a greater segment of the population. For freIght,
intermodal transfers-allow shIppers to take advantage of the economies of each mode,
such as truck and rail, to achieve the most cost-effective and timely deliveries of goods.'
TSI System-Wide Policy #3: Corridor Preservation
Preserve corridors, such as rail rights-of-way, private roads, and easements of
regional significance, that are identified for future transportation-related uses.
7 Of 16
Date Received: ? 1.2//'kIJ7
Planner: AL 'j .
5-7
EllmmatlOn of eXIsting improved publIC comdors to avoId walkmg across the street IS not
consIstent with thIs polICY
TSI System- Wide Policy #4: Neighborhood Livability
Support transportation strategies that enhance neighborhood livability.
DefinitionlIntent: Transportation-related impacts on neighborhood livability include
excessive intrusion of regional vehicle movement on local residential streets, excessive
vehicle speeds, and excessive traffic noise. Strategies aImed at improving flow on
arterials, such as access management measures, may draw traffic from neighborhood
streets that, based on travel characteristics, should be properly using the arterial
The proposed use is not constent WIth thIS poltcy
TSI Roadway Policy #1: Mobility and Safety for all Modes
Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists,
pedestrians, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing
roadway system improvements.
Policy DefinitionlIntent: This policy supports the design and construction of systems
and facilities that accommodate multiple modes. It also supports consideration of the
needs of emergency vehicles in the design and construction of system improvements.
The proposed use IS not constent WIth thIS poltcy.
TSI Roadway Policy #3: Coordinated Roadway Network
In conjunction with the overall transportation system, recognizing the needs of
other transportation modes, promote or develop a regional roadway system that
meets combined needs for travel through, within, and outside the region.
Policy Definition/Intent: The regional roadway system must meet the travel needs of
motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians, and commercial vehicles. Characteristics
of such a roadway system include adequate capacIty and connections to roads entering
the region. TransPlan roadways will be coordinated WIth the Lane County TransportatIOn
System Plan (TSP) roadways and aOaT corridor studies. All roadway system
improvements will also be consistent with other adopted policies in TransPlan.
The proposed use IS not constent WIth thIS polICY
TSI Transit Policy #1: Transit Improvements
Improve transit service and facilities to increase the system's accessibility,
attractiveness, and convenience for all users, including the transportation
disadvantaged population.
Policy DefinitionlIntent: Continued improvements to the transit system, including
enhancements to the existing transit service, exploration of transit fare alternatives that
increase ridership and new and improved transit facilities for passengers, will make
transit a more attractive transportation alternative and encourage increased use of transit.
8 Of 16
Date Received: 7 h hIJ07
Planner: Al /7 .
5-8
..
This policy also supports maIntaining existing facilities in good condition.
By restnctlng pedestnan accessIbIlIty the proposed use IS not constent wIth thIs polIcy
TSI Transit Policy #2: Bus Rapid Transit
Establish a BRT system composed of frequent, fast transit service along major
corridors and neighborhood feeder service that connects with the corridor service
and with activity centers, if the system is shown to increase transit mode split along
BRT corridors, if local governments demonstrate support, and if financing for the
system is feasible.
. BRT, when combIned with other system Improvement, land use, and demand
management strategies, is expected to increase the share of riders wh,o use public
transportation BRT is also expected to help the region maintain conformity with federal
air quality standards BRT, combined with nodal development, is a key strategy in the
region's compliance with alternative performance measures for the TPR.
. -
Closure of streets within the neIghborhood of the transit station IS not constent wIth thIs
polIcy or the very slgmfcant Investment the publtc is making the BRT system
TSI Bicycle Policy #2: Bikeways on Arterials and Collectors
Require bikeways along new and reconstructed arterial and major collector streets.
Closing collector streets IS not consist wIth this polICY
TSI Bicycle Policy #3: Bikeway Connections to New Development
Require bikeways to connect new development with nearby neighborhood activity
centers and major destinations.
Policy DefinitionlIntent: This policy recognizes the importance of proVIding bicycle
connectIvity between new development, neighborhood activity centers, and major
destinations. When new development occurs, connectivity to the regional bIkeway
system must be provided. In cases where the existing or planned street network does not
adequately provide bicycle connectivity, paved bikeways should be provided within
reSIdential developments and should extend to neighborhood activity centers or to an
eXIsting bikeway system within one-half mIle of residential developments. Major
destinations may include, but are not limited to, nodal development centers, schools,
shopping centers, employment centers, transit stations, and parks This policy does not
imply that a developer would be required to provide bikeways through undeveloped
adjOIning properties.
I The proposed use IS not constent wIth th,s polICY
TSI Pedestrian Policy #1: Pedestrian Environment
Provide for a pedestrian environment that is well integrated with adjacent land uses and is
designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking.
9 Of 16
Date Received: 7~L7
Planner: Al ~
5-9
...
Policy Definition/Intent: This policy supports the provision of pedestrian connections
between adjacent land uses, Improved pedestrian access to Jranslt stops and stations, safe
and convenient pedestrian street crossings, and pedestrian amenities, mcluding lIghting.
In more developed areas, such as downtowns, pedestrian desIgn features improve the
accessibility of destinations
The proposed use /s not constent wIth this po/Jcy.
TSI Pedestrian Policy #2: Continuous and Direct Routes
Provide for a continuous pedestrian network with reasonably direct travel routes
between destination points.
Policy DefinitionlJ[ntent: This policy supports an actIve program to develop pedestrian
pathways (e.g., sidewalks), especially in proximity to major activIty centers. A
continuous pedestrian network is free of gaps and deadends and overcomes physical
barriers that inhibit walking. Direct routes between destination points are important
because out-of-direction travel discourages walking. "Reasonably direct" means either a
route that does not deviate unnecessarily from a straight line or a route that does not
involve a significant amount of out-of-direction travel for likely users.
The proposed use /s not constent wIth thIs polIcy
Finance Policy #2: Operations, Maintenance, and Preservation
Operate and maintain transportation facilities in a way that reduces the need for more
expensive future repair.
Removal of a street in excellent condIt/on IS not consistent wIth thIs policy
Finance Policy #5: Short- Term Project Priorities
Consider and include among short-term project priorities, those facilities and
improvements that support mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly nodal development and
increased use of alternative modes.
Policy Definition/Intent: This policy supports consideration and programming of
facilities and improvements that support nodal development and the increased use of
alternative modes. Examples of such investments include fundmg incentIves for
implementation of nodal development, funding ofTDM programs, and improvements
made to the transit and bike systems.
The proposed use is not constent wIth thIs po/Jcy The CIty'S approval cntena and staff
report contmue below
(b) Refinement plans;
Finding: The proposal is consistent with provisions of the Downtown Refinement
Plan, including recent amendments made to allow consideration of Justice Center
proposals within the Plan area. The Downtown Refinement Plan - Land Use
Element, General Policy #2 contains the following enabling policy in support of the
proposed Justice Center development: "Civic and governmental uses serving the
1 0 Of 16
Date, Received: 7/.z hA9n'1
Planner: AL ~
5-10
Springfield communIty shall be encouraged to locate in the downtown area. Within
the downtown, governmental uses, includmg City Hall, the Justice Center and jail,
the library, Willamalane and SUB offices, shall be encouraged to locate and expand
along A Street."
Along the street not m It
(c) Plan DIstrIct standards;
Finding: The proposal is consistent with provisions of the Public Land and Open
Space District (PLO), as Justice Centers are listed as a Discretionary Use in the
district.
What are the standards? How can It be determined If It IS consltent wIthout dIScussIon
, about what they are? What does the NDO desIgnation mean? ThIs cntena has not
been addressed by the appltcant or staff
(d) Conceptual Development Plans, or
Finding: There are no conceptual development plans for the subject development
area.
(e) Specwl use standards In this Code;
Finding: In accordance with SDC 23 100(a-b), the applicant would be required to
address special use standards applicable to this proposal at the time of Site Plan
Review application.
ThIS cntena applIes to thIs appltcatlon of dIscretIonary use approval. There need to be
findings that thIs appltcatlon IS consIstent wIth the Speczal use standards m this Code
The staff report contmues;
Criterion (2): The site under comlderatlOn IS suitable for the proposed use, consldermg:
(a) The locatIOn, ~/ze, design and operatmg characteristics of the use (operatmg
characterIstics mc/ude but are not lzmzted to parkmg, traffic, nOIse, VibratIOn,
emissions, lzght, glare, odor, dust, vlSlbzllty, safety, and aesthetIc consIderatIOns,
where applzcable),
Finding: The proposed Justice Center will be OrIented to streets that already serve
the downtown commercial area. and will occupy City-owned land already used for
municipal police and'court functions within Springfield. Conceptual site design has
prOVIded for separation from residential uses to the north, and the operational
characteristics of the Justice Center will be compatIble with existing office,
commercial and institutIOnal uses in the immediate vicinity
The public street IS not sUitable for the proposed use as a secured polIce compound and
IS not campa table wIth the neIghborhood or the eXlstmg pUblIc use of the street The
applIcant nor staff have addressed the location sIze or operatmg charactenstlcs of a jad
m addressmg this cntena, The relatIonship of the JaIl and the church entrances should
be addressed A jaIl IS not an office.
11 Of 16
Date) i~eceived: 7 h/'Z(J07
Planner: Al / / I
5-11
,I
(b) Adequate and safe cIrculatIOn eXIsts for vehicular access to and from the proposed
site, and on-site clrculatlOn and emergency response as well as pedestrzan, bicycle
and transIt cIrculatIOn,
Finding: The proposed Justice Center will be served by the existing grid street
system of downtown Springfield, including Pioneer Parkway East which is
classified as a minor arterial Sidewalks and on-street bicycle routes already exist
to provide non-motorized access to the site. The site will be desIgned such that
access points and on-site circulation patterns are safe, effective, and recognize the
operatIOnal characteristics of the surrounding street system.
Finding: The secure parkmg lot located on the north side of the facility will
provide a secure area for jail inmates in the event that the facility is evacuated
providing for public safety in the event of an emergency response.
Bicycle, pedestnan, and traslt clrcualtlOn will be Impeded by the proposed use A traffic
Impact analysIs typically reqUired by the city for thIS type of application was not
submitted With the applicatIOn The project architects have stateCf that the secure
parkmg area IS not reqUired for emergency evacuatIon and IS not Ilkey the primary
evacuation route
(c) The natural and phYSical features of the site, I11cludl11g but not hmlted to, rzparian
areas, regulated wetlands, natural stormwater management/dramage areas and
wooded areas shall be adequately considered m the project design,
Finding: There are no existing natural and/or physical features that will be affected
by the proposed Justice Center.
(d) Adequate pubhc facIlztles and services are avazlable, mcludmg but not hmited to,
utilitieS, streets, storm dramage faclbtles, samtary sewer and other public
mfrastructure
Finding: The Development Review Committee I held a meeting to review the
proposed conceptual site plan, DIscretionary Use, and Zone Change requests. Staff
and Springfield Utility Board representatives have determined that sufficient
capacIty exists in the adjacent street and utility system to allow consideration of
DIscretionary Use and Zone Change requests. Specific details on utilIty servicing
and other potential effects on public facilIties would be finalized with a Site Plan
Review application.
The traffic analYSIS had not yet been reviewed by cIty staff at the time this findmg was
prepared The testImony at the heanng whIch mdlcated that the reported Increased
traffic volumes on C Street would not requIre mitigation IS not consistent WIth city
Imposed reqUirements on other recent developments m the cIty wIth over 1,000 vehlc/~s
per day on a local street '
Criterion (3). Any adverse effects of the proposed use on adjacent properties and on the
pubhc can be mitigated through the
(a) AppbcatlOn of other Code standards, for example buffermgfrom less mtensive uses,
12 Of 16
'-
Date Received: 7/2-/'UI07
Planner: AL ! / I
5-12
"
mcreased setbacks, etc ,
Finding: The proposed Justice Center has been intentionally sited on the block between
A Street and B Street to increase separation from existmg residential uses on C Street.
Site design strategies also will include building entrance orientation, landscaping,
screening and other mechanisms to minimize the impact to nearby residential and
institutional uses.
Other than avoldmg any Improved use at all of the properly abuttmg the residential
neighbors, the applicatIOn does not address how entrances, (which the architect
dlscribed as akward) landscapmg, (which there may not be any room for) screenmg or
other mechanisms are bemg proposed to address this cntena
(b) Site Plan Review conditions of approval, where applicable,
Finding. CondItions of approval may be applied to the Site Plan Review for the proposed
Justice Center to address specific site development issues if the DIscretionary Use and
Zone Change requests are approved.
What does where applicable mean? If It means dunng site plan review then that IS
where thiS cntena would be located not under discretionary use approval cntena There
should be eVidence and findmgs that IS seems likely or at least possible that thiS
proposal can comply With the code reqUirements
(c) Other condztzons of approval that may be reqUired by the Approval Authority,
Finding: The use of public right-of-way is necessary to implement the site design, as
proposed, and additional conditions may be part of the decision if deemed appropriate by
the Approval Authority.
(d) A proposal by the applicant that meets or exceeds the cited Code standards and/or
conditIOns of approval
Finding: The Justice Center proposal will meet or exceed all relevant Code'standards
required for approval of the DiscretIOnary Use and Zone Change.
How can the adverse affects be mlt'gated through future conditions or code standards?
The staff findmg fatls to address how the proposed street vactlon can meet the
standards for a street vacation or any of the PLO/NDO zone standards.
Conclusion: The staff has reviewed the application and supporting evidence submitted
for the Justice Center Discretionary Use approval. The staff recommends support for the
request as the proposal meets the stated criteria for Discretionary Use approval as listed
above. In the event that new or contradictory representation that could lead to a different
conclusion is introduced at the public hearing for the Discretionary Use request, staff will
undertake additional analysis and prepare findings to address this testimony. '
As proposed, the Discretionary Use application will require the vacation of B Street so
that the right-of-way can be developed with a secure parking lot. A secure parking area is
integral to the normal functions of the jail and police station, and also serves an important
13 Of 16
Date Received: 7 /2-- ~7
Planner: AL /! ~ .
5-13
role as emergency evacuatIOn space for jail detainees in accordance with standards of the
National Fire ProtectIOn Association (NFPA) 101 Life Safety Code.
The segment of 4 th Street between A Street and B Street also will require vacation as it is
part of the dedIcated parking area for the complex. To allow this to occur, staff
recommends that the following conditions of approval are endorsed by the Commission:
'-
Staff Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. Pnor to Final Site Plan Review approval for development of the Justice Center, the B
Street right-of-way between 4 th Street and Pioneer Parkway East shall be vacated.
2. Prior to Final Site Plan Review approval for development of the Justice Center, the 4 th
Street right-of-way between A Street and B Street shall be vacated. The Planning
Commission may choose to apply additional conditions of approval as necessary to
comply wIth the Discretionary Use and/or Zone Change criteria.
Additional Approvals
The subject applications are the first steps in a series of development applications for
Planning Commission and Council consIderation in order to allow development of a
Justice Center at the proposed location. If the Planning Commission approves the
Discretionary Use and Zonmg Change requests, an application would be taken to Council
for a Type II TransPlan amendment to remove the affected portion of B Street from the
collector street network. Application also would be required to have the affected portions
of B Street, 4 th Street;and the alley between A and B Streets vacated. If a TransPlan
amendment applIcation is submitted, the Planning Commission would be required to
provide a recommendation to City Council on that matter and proposed street and alley
vacations. A variance to the block length requirement also would be required upon
vacation ofB Street between Pioneer Parkway East and 4 th Street, as the perimeter travel
distance would exceed the parameters established by the SOC.
The followmg IS taken from the cIty's SIte Plan ReVIew Package SubmIttal ReqUIrements
and the Spnngfleld Development Code.
4 Copy of the deed and a prelImmary tttle report Issued withIn the past 60 days documentIng ownership
and IIstmg all encumbrances If the applicant IS not the property owner, wntten penUlsSlOn from the
property owner IS requITed.
5 RIght-of-Way Approach Permit application must be provided where the property has frontage on an
Oregon Department of TransportatIOn (ODOT) faCIlity
6 Traffic Impact Study must proVide four (4) copies of the study prepared by a Traffic EngIneer where the
proposed development Will produce more than 250 vehicle trips per day In accordance WIth the current
versIOn of the TransportatIOn Engmeers Tnp Generation Information Report
I?efore the Plannmg Commission or Hearings Official can approve a Discretionary Use request,'
there must be mformatlOn submitted by the applicant whIch adequately supports the request In
reviewmg a request, the City must conSIder both the pOSItive and negative elements of a
DiscretIOnary Use request. All of the Discretionary Use Criteria must be addressed by the
applicant. If InsuffiCIent or unclear data is submItted by the applicant, there is a good chance the
14 Of 16
Date Received: ? hkfJ7
Planner: AL "0
5-14
.'
request wIll be deOled or delayed, It IS recommended you hire a professional plarmer or land use
attorney to prepare your findmgs,
Discretionary Use Criteria Checklist (SDC 10.030)
1 Except for pnvate/publIc elementary and mIddle schools and certain WIreless
telecommunicatIOns systems facilIties, a Discretionary Use may only be allowed if the PI arming
CommISSIOn finds that the proposal conforms with the following cntena.
a. The proposed use shall conform with existmg uses in terms of scale, lot coverage, design,
intenSIty of use and operatmg charactenstIcs.
b. The proposed use shall not generate more traffic on local streets or more demand for publIc
faCIlItIes than would permItted uses in the same zomng distnct.
c. The proposed use conforms with applicable Metro Plan polIcies and applIcable descriptIons
of Land Use DeSIgnatIons shown on the Metro Plan DIagram ExpanSIOn of an existing
DiscretIOnary Use shall be exempt from conformance with Metro Plan land use deSIgnations.
3.050 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL. -
(3) An application shall consist of items required by this Code and the following:
(a) An explanation stating the nature of the proposal and information that may have a
bearing in determining the action to be taken, including findings demonstrating
compliance with applicable approval criteria.
(b) Evidence that the property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership or
control of the applicant, or that the applicant has the consent of all owners of the affected
property to act on their behalf.
The cIty proposal depends upon the use of conSIderable property for whIch they do not
yet have control The proposed use depends upon the use of parkmg faCIlIties north of
Fourth Street whIch are not cIty owned. The cIty also need to complete street vacatIons
pnor to havmg a buildmg nght to the street ThIS proposal can not comply WIth the
street vacatIon cntena whIch mclude no loss of any beneflcal use Until the cIty can
demonstrate theIr ablltty to effect the street vacatIOn they do not have control of the
street for theIr faCIlIty
(c) The legal descriptIon and assessor map and tax lot number of the property affected by
the application.
(d) AdditIOnal mformation includmg maps, site plans, sketches and calculations as
required
by applicable Sections of this Code or in information packets provided by the
Development Services Department.
(e) The required number of copies of the application.
(1) Payment of the applicable applicatIOn fee at the time of application submittal. No
application WIll be accepted WIthout payment of the appropriate fee in full, unless the
applicant qualifies for a fee waiver.
10.020 REVIEW.
(3)A complete application together with all required materials shall be submitted to the
15 Of 16
Date Received: 7h 60.17
Planner: Al / /,. I
5-15
Director pnor to the review of the request as specified in Section 3.050, Application
Submittal.
ARTICLE 9, VACATIONS
9.060 CRITERIA OF APPROVAL.
(2) Where the proposed Vacation of public rights-of-way, other City property, or PartItIOn
or Subdivision Plats is reviewed under Type IV procedure, the City Council shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Vacation application. The application shall
be approved if the Vacation is found to be consistent with the followmg approval criteria.
(a) The VacatIon shall be in conformance with the Metro Plan, TransPlan, the Conceptual
Local Street Map and adopted FunctIOnal Plans, and applicable Refinement Plan diagram,
Plan District map, or Conceptual Development Plan;
(b) The Vacation shall not conflict with the provisiQns of Springfield Municipal Code
1997, and this Code, including but not limited to, street connectivity standards and block
lengths, and
(c) There shall be no negative effects on access, traffic circulation, emergency servIce
protection or any other benefit derived from the pubhc right-of-way, publicly owned
land or Partition or Subdivision Plat.
ARTICLE 11, VARIANCES
11.013 APPLICABILITY.
The Variance provisions apply.
(l)To buildmgs, structures and lots/parcels;
The vanance provIsions of the city code do not apply to the vacation of streets The
vacation cntena refer specrncal/y to the street conectivlty and block length standards
Respectfully submitted to the City,
Scott E Olson, P.E
1127 B Street
16 Of 16
Date Received:~k7-_
Planner: AL '
5-16
Submittal to the Record
City of Springfield
Street Vacation Request
Case No. LRP 2007-00019
Testimony in opposition
June 12, 2007
- ---- ~ --- ---.--.
\ __- r'''- ,. - r ;
\ sc' -'
\ - :') '007,
'\ I'"~ S!.. ~; L
I ' " I ~
I
lay: .. ~~i~ ----====-
Submitted by: Scott E. Olson, P .E.
1127 B Street
Springfield Oregon
I have been Involved WIth the planning and development of the urban form for more than 30 years I
feel pnvlleged to live and work within SIX blocks of Spnngfield's City Hall I am attracted here In part
by the potenttal we have to make Spnngfield even better th"m It already IS, The fact that our street
gnd IS sttlllargely Intact IS essential to my feelings about thiS area and Its future
We are consldenng development of a Justice Center In a highly sensrtlve location at the Interface
between our pnzed historical neighborhood, the town's commercial center and the Willamette River
We can not create new hlstoncal town centers The ones we have are special places and deserve
careful consideration of any plans to Significantly change their character The street gnd and open
public ways are the underlYing fabnc from which we create the sense of place and Vitality we seek
AchieVing the kind of place we deSire requires that we carefully conSider both what activities we place
there and how those activities are located and Interrelated wrth each other Success demanps both
the nght miX of functions and the nght facilities In fact It IS our Insistence upon developing ~
compattble mix of activities and their interrelationships that must gUide the decision making process
We must not compromise the larger area for the functionality of any Single element. If a
function can not be made to fit wrthin the larger context of the area, then it belongs In a
different place. Our land use planning process requires that we work our way down
from macro broad state wide goals, down to comprehenSive plan poliCies. to development codes,
refinement plans, and finally site Specific developments. ThiS IS the context In
which we must proceed With all new development proposals I believe this IS particularly
true when we are working on the development of a public faCIlity
It seems to me that the Justice Center planning has somehow become reversed and is asking us how
we need to modify our planning framework to accommodate the project Instead of how can the project
be developed to fit the area's plans
I am disappointed that the city has steadfastly refused to consider any altematives dunng the project
development process which conSidered tradeoffs In the functional and space program wrth the
associated site constraints, Placement of a lower cost anCillary bUilding wrthln a street right of way 'IS
an example I do not see how thIS project can be made feasible at the selected site unless the
elements that have been lumped Into the building program can be open to diSCUSSion and
reconSideration
ATTACHMENT
6-1
Date R.eceived:--.74/~D7
Planner: AL
r .
When consldenng the sItIng of a Justice center In downtown Spnngfield we should ask two questions,
1) How does Including this activrty contnbute to the desired vItalrty of the area? And 2) How does the
facIlity contnbute to our overall sense of place? If this project reqUires a three block area without
intervening streets then we are looking in the wrong place I am totally convinced that we are far better
off dOing nothing In thiS situatIon then we are to proceed with the wrong project
If the functional demands of a JustIce center can not fit harmoniously within the reqUirements for a
healthy town center and preserve the IntegrIty of our public ways and spaces, then It simply needs to
be located elsewhere If concessions need to be made they should to be In the functIOnal
requirements of the new facilrty, not the function of the neighborhood and greater community
This area IS evolVing and the nght things Will happen if we are patIent and responsIVe when
opportunity presents Its self We may have an opportunrty before us now. We must not be short sited
and sacnfice the IntegrIty of the greater community to accon:modate the InfleXible requirements of City
staff The public has very narrowly supported the project In bOth bond and Jail operatIons electIons
The projects approval can hardly be conSidered a mandate to Ignore our land use policy and gIVe the
police any1t}lng they ask for Including a collector street so they can park next to the door and store paper
records and stolen bicycles In what IS now the crty street
I along with many others worry that our 10C<il1 efforts to solve what has become a cnsls In the Lane
County cnmlnal JustIce system may be confounding the problems and aggravatIng a more holistic
regional solution I wonder how many others of the 53% of voters that supported the bond measure
were unaware as I was that the new Jail would not do anything with the felony offenders accountIng for
85% of Spnngfield's 2004 charges The felony cnmlnals will continue through the Lane County
revotvlng door while Spnngfield locks up the misdemeanor offenders How many of my neighbors
understood that the closed 3rd floor of the Lane County Jail IS empty and available for 100 additional Jail
beds if we can only find a way to staff It. .
I believe It IS past tIme for the city to proVide Its police and court with decent facilities I also believe
that those actMttes could contribute to the vrtallty of the downtown If sited with sensftrvrty to the
requirements of the larger communrty and nelQhborhood
If the Justice Center IS to be built in the downtown area, we need to find a way to have It fit in and to
contribute to the greater function of the area while respecting the historical framework of Its public
ways If that can not be achieved, then we must locate a site better suited to the secunty and space
requirements whICh were Imposed upon all of the altematives conSidered In the project development
process
The City inappropriately presumed In the development of the preliminary planning and cost
estlmatmg that the street nght of ways were available for Incorporating Into the new Justice
Center FaCIlity. The fact that the pOSSIbility of street closures was mentioned In the ballot
measure does not have any meaning In the context of the land use approval for thiS project,.or
exempt the city from adhenng to their own land use poliCies and code reqUirements The '
police chief has testified that plan to build across B Street was based upon the lower cost to
bUild into the street.
Twelve years ago the City Improved B Street at a cost of $875,000 The improvements to the
collector street were paid for With federal funds If B Street is severed from the artenal at
B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing
Scott E Olson, P E
2
Date Received" 7//f~7
Planner: AL
6-2
Pioneer Parkway, Immediately adjacent to the proposed street closure, B Street will no longer
function as a collector As a local street, the Improvements would not have been eligible for
the federal Investment In the street Improvements The value of B Street both In terms of
Improvements and function has not been considered In City deCISions to pursue the street
closure The value of the Investment the public made In Improving B Street In 2007
construction costs Is-over $1 2 million, It has been suggested that the CIty could be obligated
to repay the federal government If the street IS Indeed closed
The City contracted for a traffic study of the Impacts of the proposed closure of B Street The
study is appropnately focused on the capacity of the adjacent streets to absorb the diverted
traffic Street capacity has never been the Issue related to the closure of 8 Street A local
street and a collector can and often do look the same Two travel lanes With parking on both
sides of the street The ability of A and or C Streets to handle the Increased traffic should
never have been questioned The Issue-IS about the function of the streets, and maintaining
the effectiveness of the collector and artenal street system which has been deSigned to
accommodate through travel as opposed to access to abutting property as local streets do.
Further, the street gnd IS almost entirely Intact In this area of Spnngfield No other
neighborhood has developed the degree of street connectivity as eXists In this hlstoncal core
of the Spnngfield community The traditional street system has become Increasmgly valued
by urban planners as we struggle With how to reduce our Impacts on greenhouse gas
emiSSions and global warming Closure of B Street In a Nodal Development Overlay Zone
whIch emphaSizes pedestnan and bicycle mobility IS clearly moving In the wrong direction and
IS inconsistent With all of the adopted land use policy In the City of Spnngfield
The City approved a zone change from Mixed Use Commercial/Nodal Development to Public
Land and Open Space/Nodal Development because a Justice Center IS not listed m the
MUC/NDO District None of the staff reports revieWing the projects history have mentIoned
the fact that several months pnor to makmg the zone change application the City added
Justice Centers as an allowed use in the PLO/NDO zone The project was not an allowed use
at the site at the time the city asked voters to fund the project
The city has failed to appropnately prOVide for public Involvement In a meaningful way
throughout the planning process A citizen advIsory committee, (CAC) was formed "to prOVide
mput throughout the deSign process In regard to outward deSign of the faCIlity and its
relationship to downtown Spnngfield" I volunteered for the CAC and dunng my interview for
the pOSition I Informed the City council of my opinion With respect to the street closure and
indicated a deSire to work on appropnate alternatives.
City staff and their consultant developed a Functional and Space Program prior to formation of
the CAC The draft document was presented to the CAC However the commIttee was told It
was for their mformatlon only and they would have no input on the contents of the space
program The Functional and Space Program was adopted by the City council Without public
hearing or any changes to the consultant's recommendations The public was not proVided
any opportUnity to partiCipate In what was bemg mcluded m the project.
Later m the process every alternative conSidered Incorporated all of the elements of the space
program, Ultimately all of the alternatives exceeded the project available funds but the
closure of B Street was the lowest cost alternative conSidered - That alternative was
supported by a majority of the CAC and ultimately adopted by the City council
B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposmg
Scott E Olson, P E
3
Date Received: 7/;. /Ja/1
Planner: AL ---r;
6-3
, .
No attempt was ever made to develop an alternative that was within the available funds and
respected the land use reqUIrement for new development In this zone including the closure of
streets City staff has orchestrated a planning process from the very beginnings of this project
In whIch no meaningful conSideration has been given to altematlves to closing B Street This
effort has resulted In a failure to comply With 80al1 requirements for the entire Justice Center
Planning process,
Staff has consistently refused to even discuss alternatives to clOSing B Street and steadfastly
argues, often In absurd ways why the street should be closed In last weeks hearing the
police chief stated more than once that If officers responding to an emergency must cross the
street to reach their vehicles, ultimately one IS gOing to be so distracted with responding that
they Will run In front of a car and be hit One must question the Wisdom of such statements
when we are trusting that same indiVidual to get In a police crUIser and drive 50 miles per hour
down my reSidential street and appropnately handle deadly weapons. Such arguments
demonstrate the desperation With which supporting arguments for the street closure have
been constructed
Other absurd arguments have been constructed throughout the planning process On at least
two separate occasions suggestions to construct a pedestrian over-crossing of B Street have
been rebuffed by police statements that such a faCIlity would be vulnerable to dnvlng under It
with a bomb We also need secure parking for the police to prevent keying of their personal
vehicles or slashmg tires which hardly seem to justify sacnficlng the functionality of a million
dollar collector street Arguments about police response times seem equally absurd from my
perspective.
Statements about the need to evacuate inmates to the secure parking area In B Street are
inconsistent With what the CAC was told about Jail evacuations. The secure parking area is
adjacent to the Police Courts bUIlding not the jail on the opposite Side of the block from B
Street The need for thiS function In B Street IS not part of the Functional and Space Program
and IS not the pnmary evacuation plan
The City has modified the code critena for a street vacation In an attempt to aVOid the
inconsistency With thiS project and the adopted land use policy The cntena tailored
speCifically to get thiS project around the land use policy Impediments to desired street closure
are not grounded m any adopted land use policy and are vague and misleading In the Intent
Ensunng that the vacated property Will remain In public ownership inappropnately assumes
that the public Interest IS better served by maximizing public property ownership of opposed to
protecting the publics legitimate Interests the function of the fight of way Technically the
public does not own the nght of way, but has an interest In the use for street purposes The
City can not ensure continues public ownership because It does not own the property until It IS
vacated Once vacated there IS no way of preventing future City councils from selling the
property to a pnvate party.
Substituting pedestnan and bicycle connection crltena from the states OAR, the minimum
required anywhere in the entire state for the speCifics of the local Comprehensive Plan,
Transportation System Plan, Refinement Plans, Zoning ReqUirements and other local code I
requirements IS an obVIOUS attempt to aVOid compiling With the local adopted policy and code
reqUIrements Additionally staffs findmgs that adding 46% to the length of the deSirable Y.t
mile pedestrian trip length IS not consistent With accepted pedestrian planning pnnclples
B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing
Scott E Olson, P E
4
Date Received: "7 P /Jt107
Planner: AL / /
6-4
,. .
Further "Whether a greater public benefit would be obtained from the vacation than from ,
retaining tne nght-of-way In Its present status' lacks any cntena or measures grounaed many
adopted public policy and 'are purposefully vague and amorphous It IS clearly a relatively
crude attempt to avoid complymg with the land use policies of the City,
The street vacation can not meet any of the three cntena previously established In the code
The CIty'S process has attempted to skirt or bypass addressing the street closure
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation System Plan, the Zomng
DIstrict, the Nodal Development Overlay, and the Code Cntena The cntena related to the
street closure have not been addressed dunng the zone change, the discretionary use
approval, the site reView, and now the street vacation, Somewhere In the approval process
the City must confront these Issues There IS no vanance that makes these policies go away
The City staff has the hierarchy of the project planning cntena reversed The community has
planned for the development desired In the downtown area Those plans are embodied in the
adopted public policy documents The approach to this project has been how we can change
the code to accommodate everything the police are asking for Instead of how we can build
consistent With our commumty plan and VISion
We can have both a Jail and a livable community ThiS project must conform to block and
connectivity standards Particularly since thiS is a Nodal Development Overlay zone which
relies on enhanced connectivity and pedestrian and bicycle mobility.
B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing
Scott E Olson, P E
5
Date Received: 7 ~ k7
Planner: Al --t-7
6-5
, ..
Cltv of SorinQfip.ld .Justice Center Prolect Public Meetina~
Date PublIc Input OODortunities IncludinCl Land Use ActIOns.
2005-01-18 City Council - JC Facility Planning
2005-04-18 City Council - JC Construction Contract Options
2005-06-13 City Council - JC Programming Consultant Contract
2005-06-20 City Council - Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate JC Programming Consultant Contract
2005-08-01 City Councll- Requests for Proposal for JC Architect
2005-09-26 City Council - JC Citizen Advisory Committee Application Interviews
2005-10-03 City Council- JC Recommended Architect
2005-10-24 Advertise Public Hearing for CM/GC Exemption Request
2005-10-25 City Wide Inforum Update on Project
2005-10-25 Citizen AdvIsory Committee (CAC) Meeting
2005-11-01 Planning CommisSion - Citizen Involvement Program
2005-11-01 Planning CommisSion - Public Hearing for Public Land and Open Space Dlstnct Amendments
2005-11-07 City CounCIl Regular Session. Public Heanng for CM/GC Exemption
2005-11-14 Report from Jail Operations Funding Task Force
2005-11-21 City CounCil Regular Session Review & Approval of Contract With Architect
2005-11-28 City CounCil Public Heanng for PLO Dlstnct Amendments
2005-11-28 Justice Center Functional and Space Program
City CounCil Regular Session CounCil AuthOrizes Contract negotiations w/ CM/GC Firm & Request
2005-11-28 to approve JC Functional & Space Program
2005-11-29 CAC Meeting
2005-11-30 CAC Meeting
2005-12-05 Spnngfield Justice Center - Recommended Construction Manager/General Contractor
2005-12-20 CAC Meeting
2006-01-04 Planning Commission Public Heanng for PLO Dlstnct Amendments
2006-01-17 City CounCil PubliC Hearing for PLO Dlstnct Amendments
2006-01-17 Justice Center Consultant Contract
2006-01-18 CAC Meeting
2006-01-23 Property Tax Levy for MUnicipal Jail Operations
2006-01-26 Justice Center Site Design Options
2006-02-09 CAC Meeting
2006-02-09 Justice Center Public Forum InVitation
2006-02-13 CAC Meeting
2006-02-21 City CounCil Regular Session Selects Schematic Design Program
2006-03-21 Planning CommisSion Public Hearing for Zone Change
2006-03-21 Planning CommisSion Public Heanng for Discretionary Use
2006-03-22 CAC Meeting
2006-04-18 Planning CommisSion Public Heanng for Zone Change
2006-04-18 Planning CommisSion PubliC Heanng for Discretionary Use
2006-04-26 CAC Meeting
2006-05-24 CAC Meeting
_ 2006-06-14 CAC Meeting
2006-06-14 Justice Center Open House InVitation ,
2006-06-20 Planning CommisSion Public Heanng for Vacatlpn Request (Public Alley)
2006-06-20 Planning Commission - Review of Justice Center Site Plans
2006-07 -05 CAC Meeting
2006-07-05 Planning CommisSion Public Heanng for Vacation Request,(Public Alley)
2006-07-17 City CounCil Public Hearing for Vacation Request (Public Alley)
2006-07 -17 City CounCIl Regular Session Approve/Not Approve Schematic Design & Cost Estimate
2006-08-23 CAC Meeting
2006-09-18 City CounCil Public Hearing for Vacation Request (Public Alley)
ATTACHMENT
-7-1
Date ~eceived: 7 h /k>o7
Planner: AL ' I I
.. t ·
2006-09-20 CAC Meeting
2006-10-18 Justice Center Open House Invitation
2006-11-15 CAC Meeting
2006-11-27 City Council Work Session Design Development Phase & Cost Estimate
2007-01-10 CAC Meeting
2007-01-16 City Council Regular Session Approval of Design Development Phase & Cost Estimate
2007-01-22 City Council Regular Session Approval of Design Development Phase & Cost Estimate
2007 -02-12 DIscuss Options for Naming of the Spnngfield Justice Center
2007-03-13 Planning Commission Public Heanng for Article 9 (Vacations) Code Amendments
2007-03-19 City Council Public Heanng for Article 9 (Vacations) Code Amendments
2007 -04-16 City Council Regular Session Accept/Not Accept Memeorandum of Understanding
2007-06-05 Planning Commission Public Heanng for Vacation Request - Public Right-of-Way
2007-06-19 Planning Commission Public Heanng for Vacation Request - Public Right-of-Way
2007-07-02 City Council Public Heanng for Vacation Request - Public Right-of-Way
7-2
Date Received:~/.2Pc!1.7
Planner: AL
.
s- ..
, .
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
RECOMMENDATION TO THE ,CITY COUNCIL
CASE NO. LRP2007-00019
NA TURE OF THE APPLICATION
VacatlOn of a one-block segment ofB Street located between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East
1. On May 7, 2007, the Spnngfield CIty CouncIl Irutmted the vacatIOn actIon m accordance wIth Spnngfield
Development Code 9 060(3 )(a), Planrung Case No. LRP2007 -00019 - City of Spnngfield Police Department,
apphcant
2. The applicatIon was illltIated ill accordance With SectIOn 3.050 of the Spnngfield Development Code TImely
and suffiCIent notIce of publIc heanng, pursuant to SectIons 14.030 and 9 050 of the Spnngfield Development
Code, has been provided
3 On June 5, 2007, a pubhc hearing on the vacatIOn request was held and the wntten record for submIttal of
publIc testimony was held open to June 12, 2007 The Development Services Department staff notes and_
recommendatIon together With the testImony and submittals of the persons testIfymg at that heanng have been
considered and are part of the record of this proceedlOg
CONCLUSION
Based on thIS record, the requested vacatIon applIcatIOn IS conSIstent With the cntena of SDC 9.030 Tlus general
findmg IS supported by the speCIfic findings offact and conclUSIOn 10 Attachm~nt A, VacatIon Staff Report
RECOMMENDATION
The Planmng CommissIOn hereby recommends the CIty CounCil approve the vacatIOn request at a pubhc heanng.
ATTEST
AYES: tI-
NOES: j"
ABSENT: I
ABSTAIN: 0
~tf
PlygpOmmiSSlOn Challperson
ATTACHMENT
8-1
Date Received: 7 i.J. /;It;tJ7
Planner: AL --T-J
.. i ..
VACATION
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A 66 FOOT WIDE, 264 FOOT LONG PORTION OF B STREET IN
BLOCK 1 OF THE MAP OF SPRINGFIELD, BOOK 1, PAGE 1 OF PLAT RECORDS OF LANE
COUNTY, OREGON, DATED APRIL 5, 1872
WHEREAS, the Springfield City Council has declared its intentIOn to vacate public right-of-
way m the City of Springfield; and
WHEREAS, the request for vacation was submitted m conformance with the provIsions of
ORS 271.080 et. seq., and WIth the provisions of ArtIcle 9 VACATIONS of the Spnngfield
Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the findings and testimony submItted by the applicant and those m support of
this vacatIOn satIsfy the cnteria of approval for vacatIOns found in Section 9.060 of the Spnngfield
Development Code; and
WHEREAS, such vacatIOn is m the best interest of the City in carrymg out its plans and
programs for the general development of the CIty; and
WHEREAS, lawful notIce of the proposed vacatIOn was publIshed and posted; and
WHEREAS, the Springfield Planning CommIssion conducted a publIc heanng on June 5,
2007 and June 19,2007 m the Council Chambers of Springfield CIty Hall, 225 FIfth Street,
Spnngfield OR and recommended unconditional approval ofthis public nght-of-way vacation
(LFlP2007-00019);and
WHEREAS, the Springfield City Council met in CouncIl Chambers, at 225 Fifth Street, on
Monday, the 2nd day of July, 2007, (FIrst Readmg) and on , the _ day of ,
2007, (Second Readmg) at the hour of7:00 p.m., to hear any objections to the proposed vacation
and persons appeared to object;
(Bar Code Sticker)
Return to: City of Springfield - City Recorder, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, OR 97477
Ordinance
-ATTACHMENT
9-1
Date ~eceived: 7/J /)oQ7
Planner: AL I /
. . 4
, .
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DOES ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS:
SectIOn l: The Council finds that the legal notlce of the heanng was lawfully publIshed and
posted, that ObjectIOns were made at the vacation hearing held, that the publIc interest will not
be impaIred by the vacation ofthe alley right-of-way, and that vacatIOn of SaId alley will be m the
best interest of the public and mcrease the benefit of the property mvolved.
Section 2: The public nght-of-way m the CIty of Spnngfield, as generally depicted on the
site map and more partIcularly described m the property legal descriptIOn WhICh are together
attached as Exhibit A of this Ordinance, IS declared to be vacated.
Section 3: The findmgs adopted by the City CouncIl in support of the alley nght-of-way
vacation are hereby made part of thIS Ordmance by reference.
SeCtIOn 4. This right-of-way vacatIOn is subject to the speCIal proviSIOn that in the event the
vacated nght-of-way ceases to be used for JustIce Center purposes It shall revert to public nght-of-
way.
Section 5: ThIS right-of-way vacatIOn IS subject to the establIshment of temporary
easements or lIcenses for eXlstmg utIlities located WIthin the right-of-way to be mamtained,
continued, repaired, reconstructed, renewed, replaced, rebUIlt or enlarged subject to the proviSIons
of said temporary easements or lIcenses.
Section 6: The City Recorder is dIrected to file certIfied copIes of thIS ordmance WIth the
Lane County Clerk, Lane County Assessor, and Lane County Surveyor.
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Spnngfield thIS _ day of
2007, by a vote of for and against.
,
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this
day of
,2007.
Mayor
"
u. '
~~ ~ (C~fj)
j"~~-~~~ ~_\.~~
~ :' _ -l-l-2.-'i l ~:1__
{;I- If: j'! ,\,lU,~{~tY
9-2
Date Received: 7 ~ k 7
Planner: AL --T7
Ordmance
- 2 -
., ~ ..
" .
ATTEST:
CIty Recorder
State of Oregon )
) ss
County of Lane )
Ordmance
ThIS lllstrument was acknowledged before me on
by
(N ame)
(POSItIon)
. ofthe City of Spnngfield.
as
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON
My commISSIOn expIres.
- 3 -
9-3
Date Received. .., ~ /JtJtl7
Planner: AL . I / .
... " '"
) ~
....
en
<C-
w ~
...
~
~
~
0:=
<C
Q.
0:=
w '0
w ~
z
o
-
Q.
13800
EXHmIT A
"' "/UU
S') ·
~
:!
:\
o
~
I-
W
W
~
I-
en
J:
I-
..q
'-6'
13
14,
5
33' ,".
1
v-.
I'
if; t
or
4
LJ.
...
n-
~
o
~
Beginning at the Southwest Corner of Lot 5 of Block 28 of the Map of Springfield, filed and recorded m Book I
Page 1, Plat Records of Lane County, Oregon, said pomt being the Northeast corner of Pioneer Parkway and B
Street In Springfield, Oregon, thence Easterly along the Northerly right of way of B Street, 264 feet, more or less,
to the Southeast corner of Lot 8, Block 28 of the Map of Springfield, which IS the Northwest corner of B street and
Fourth Street, thence leaving the B Street right of way and along the Southerly projection of the Fourth street right
of way, crossing B Street 66 feet. more or less, to the Northeast corner of Lot 1, Block 1 of the Map of Springfield,
said pOint bemg the Northeast corner of B Street and Fourth Street, thence along the Southerly right of way of B
Street, 264 feet more or less, to the Northwest corner of Lot 4, Block 1 of the Map of Springfield, said pOint bemg
the Southeast corner of Pioneer Parkway and B Street, thence leaving the B Street right of way and along the
Northerly projection of the easterly right of way of Pioneer Parkway, crossing B Street 66 feet, more or less, to the
pOint of beginning, all In the City of Springfield, Lane County, Oregon.
Ordinance
4
3 G
@O<
17 -03-35-24
"
14100 1-+200
.
0 ~
"
14000
6 14300
Q h
" <#
r
'!'
13900
5
,,~.. 7 , 61: 8
, , ,'" ,', " ,,' ' i
I ", "::' "," "~, '~' ", RiG~~-bF-WAY'~" , < <~>:>:
~" ," 3 " ' '~TO BEVACATED" ''.".,' ",'J
~ ~ ~... ..... ........ ..... ... .. .:;" ....... ....:- ~...... ~
t ' ' "'" ,,' ,<~',',' " ~" ,c::,'c., ,: t
.... ,"...... ,.................:::,... .. .. ...... "-.;' ',I
~' " ::.' ' , " ' " , . ," , ,
~- -..>.. ... .; -
6(,' 4" 66' 66' f:€' 33'
, 1800
o
..0
. 1700
o
~
1500 .
o
~
1600
1900
2
1
3
o
..rJ
4
L.;. :;
;! 17-03-35-31
C1 :.
r,
( 1: 1
~;tJ2' 34'
o 0
2100 ~ g
N~@
2400
E9
,2000
o
(\,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
- 4 -
9-4
Date Received: 7/.2 /kx17
Planner: At / / ;'