HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PLANNER 6/19/2007
~l.. _
4'
-<~,
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF MEETING: June 19,2007
FROM:
Andy LImbrrd
01-
PLANNING COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Spnngfie1d Planmng CommIssIOn
SUBJECT:
Request for VacatIOn ofPubhc
RIght -of-Way
ISSUE
The Plannmg CommissIOn is requested to conduct dehberations for a request to vacate a 66- foot wIde by 264- foot
long segment of B Street located between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East The Planmng CommlssIon wIll
decIde whether to advlse the CIty Councll to approve, approve With condItions or deny the request.
DISCUSSION
On February 28, 2006, the Spnngfield CIty Councll considered four site options for the Justice Center project The
site optIOn selected by the CIty Council utIhzes CIty-owned property whlch 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 slte
option mcorporates a one-block segment ofB Street nght-of-way mto the development area for use as a secure
police parkmg lot, and a bUlldmg pad for an anclllary bUlldmg servmg the Justice Center.
The Clty CouncillrutIated the street vacatIOn action (Case LRP2007-000l9) at the regular meetmg on May 7, 2007.
The pubhc nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn conslsts of a 66-foot wide by 264-foot long segment ofB Street
extendmg from the western edge ofthe 4th Street right-of-way through to the eastern edge of the PIOneer Parkway
East right-of-way The street is located lmmedlately to the north of the pubhc and pohce vehicle parkmg lots
servmg the Clty-owned bUlldmgs frontmg onto A Street.
A Pubhc Heanng for the proposed vacation was held on June 5, 2007 and the wntten record was held open for an
additional seven days followmg the heanng. Seven people testified m favor of the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn
and two people submltted testimony opposmg the vacatIOn. At the Pubhc Heanng, Mr. Scott Olson provided
verbal testimony opposmg the vacatIOn and requested that his preVlOUS testimony submltted on March 26, 2006 for
the Justice Center Dlscretionary Use and Zone Change requests (DRC2006-000 13 & ZON2006-00007) be entered
mto the pubhc hearing record (Attachment 4) AddltIonally, Mr. Olson submltted written testimony opposing the
proposed vacatIOn dunng the extended pubhc heanng record (Attachment 5).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the vacatIOn request based on the attached findmgs.
ACTION REQUESTED
Advlse the Clty Council to approve the vacation request at a pubhc heanng by motIon and sIgnature of the attached
recommendation by the Planning CommissIOn Chairperson.
ATTACHMENT 1. Staff Report and Fmdmgs
ATTACHMENT 2. Memo from Pohce CluefJerry SmIth
ATTACHMENT 3. TestImony from Bob Foster opposmg the proposed vacatIon
ATTACHMENT 4. Testimony from Scott Olson dated March 28,2006
ATTACHMENT 5. TestImony from Scott Olson dated June 12,2007
ATTACHMENT 6. Memo from Jim Polston regardmg alley Sidewalk
ATTACHMENT 7. Maps showmg the proposed vacation area and B Street overview
ATTACHMENT 8. RecommendatIOn to City CouncIl
Date R.eCeived:-1/4~ 7
Planner: Al
.'
... ,
ATTACHMENT 1
V ACATION REQUEST
STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS
Case No. LRP2007-00019
APPLICANT
The City of Spnngfield/Spnngfield Pohce Department
REQUEST
The vacatiOn of a 66-foot wide by 264-foot long portion of street nght-of-way.
LOCATION OF PROPERTY
The segment ofB Street nght-of-way (ROW) proposed to be vacated IS located west of 4th Street and east of
PIOneer Parkway East m downtown Springfield The pubhc nght-of-way hes on the boundary between Tax Map
17-03-35-24 and Tax Map 17-03-35-31
{
BACKGROUND
The affected segment ofB Street was created as pubhc nght-of-way with plattmg of the ongmal Map of Springfield
m 1872 There are eight City-owned propertIes (Tax Map 17-03-35-24, Tax Lots 13900, 14000, 14100 and 14300;
and Tax Map 17-03-35-31, Tax Lots 1500-1800) that have frontage on the nght-of-way area proposed for vacatIon.
From a functIonal perspectIve, the subject nght-of-way IS part of the downtown gndded street system and is
designated as a City collector street
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY
Nme people proVIded testunony at the Planmng COffirlllSSIOn Public Heanng on June 5, 2007. seven supportmg the
vacatIOn and two opposed Mr Bob Foster and Mr. Scott Olson submItted written testImony pnor to and dunng the
extended pubhc heanng record for this vacatIOn request (Attachments 3-5) The submitted testunony opposmg the
vacatIOn is cntIcal of the proposed vacatron and the CIty'S recent adoption of new vacatron critena, but does not
speCIfically address the relevant cntena of the Spnngfield Development Code 9.060(3).
At the pubhc heanng, the Plaruung CommiSSIOn mqurred about the potentIal for mcorporatmg a SIdewalk mto the
mid-block alley north of the secure pohce parkmg lot servmg the JustIce Center A response from Jun Polston,
ASSIstant Project Manager for the JustIce Center Project IS attached for the Planmng CommiSSIOn's mformatIOn
(Attachment 6)
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA
Spnngfield Development Code (SDC) 9.060(3) estabhshes cntena for vacatIon ofnght-of-way where the property
will remam m pubhc ownershIp and WIll contmue to be used for a pubhc purpose. The followmg findmgs address
each of the cntena.
(a) The Vacation was initiated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
Fmdmg l' Oregon ReVIsed Statutes (ORS) SectIon 271 130(1) reads as follows "The City governing body may
Inztzate vacatIOn proceedzngs authOrized by ORS 271 080 and make such vacatIOn Without a petitIOn or consent of
property owners NotIce shall be gzven as proVided by ORS 271 110, but such vacatIOn shall not be made before
the date set for hearzng, nor zfthe owners of a majority of the area affected, computed on the baSIS prOVided zn ORS
271 080, object zn,wrztzng thereto, nor shall any street area be vacated WIthout the consent of the owners of the
abuttzng property if the vacatIOn Will substantzally affect the market value of such property, unless the city
governing body proVides for payzng damages PrOVISIOn for payzng such damages may be made by a local
assessment, or zn such other manner as the City charter may prOVide."
Fmdmg 2. ORS 271 080( I) proVides for vacatIOn of "...all or part of any street, avenue, boulevard, alley, plat,
publzc square or other publzc place. " In accordance WIth ORS 271 080(1), the vacatron actron requITes "a
A TT ACHjYlENT
1-1
Date, Received: (//f /.It;d7
Planner: AL i /
.
..,
descrzptwn of the ground proposed to be vacated, the purpose for which the ground is proposed to be used and the
reason for such vacatwn."
Fmdmg 3 The Spnngfield CIty CouncIl mltIated the vacation actIOn at the regular meetmg on May 7, 2007 The
nght-of-way proposed for vacatIon IS generally depIcted and more specIfically descnbed in Exhibit A to thIS staff
report. The purpose of the vacatIOn is to retam the segment of vacated publIc nght-of-way m publIc ownershIp, and
to use the area for construction of a secure polIce parkmg 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 future CIty
CouncIl meetmg, and after PublIc Hearings before the PlaIll11ng 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 Spnngfield
ConclUSIOn The proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn complIes wIth Cntenon (a)
(b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.110(1);
Fmdmg 6' In accordance wIth ORS 271 110(1), publIc heanng notIces were placed m the newspaper of general
cIrculatIOn (The Regzster Guard) on May 18 and 25, 2007
Fmdlng 7: In accordance WIth 271.110(2), publIc notIce of the proposed right-of-way vacation actIon was posted at
two conspicuous locatIOns Immediately adjacent to right-of-way proposed for vacatIon (at the northeastern comer
adjacent to 4th Street, and at the southwestern comer adjacent to PIOneer Parkway East).
Fmdmg 8' In accordance WIth SDC 271 080, adjacent landowners and resIdents/tenants wltlnn a 400-foot radIUS of
the 66-foot by 264-foot lInear right-of-way proposed for vacatIOn were notified by mail.
ConclUSIOn. The notIficatIon provIded for the proposed nght-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 AdmmlstratIve Rules (OAR) 660-0l2-0045(3)(d), "safe and convement" means
bzcycle and pedestrzan routes, faczlztzes and zmprovements whzch:
(A) Are reasonably free from hazards, particularly types or levels of automobde traffic whzch would
mtelfere With or discourage pedestrzan or cycle travel for short trzps,
(B) Provide a reasonably direct route of travel between destmatwns such as a transit stop and a store,
and
(C) Meet travel needs of cyclists and pedestrzans consldermg destmatwn and length of trzp, and
conszderzng that the optzmum trip length of pedestrzans IS generally ~ to 0 mde
Fmdmg 10: In accordance WIth OAR 660-0 1 2-0045(3)(d), vacatIOn of the subject nght-of-way and closure to
publIc travel would not mterfere WIth or dIscourage pedestrian, cycle or velucle travel on the adjacent publIc street
system due to exceSSIve traffic or other unusual hazards. East-west traffic 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 1A mIle from bemg a direct route of travel between destmatlOn
pomts. FIgure 1 Illustrates approXImate 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-dIrectIOn dIstance for passage from the eastern end of the subject nght-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
1-2
Date Received: ~~YUt')7
Planner: Al
....
Figure 1 - Approximate Travel Distances
'V
~
I ) U
I J II
[
..(
'\ ;/
-3UU reet
~.
,t
".
r
r---
~; ~
~: :~
~. ~
0:
~: ~
~: ~
It 1 -300 feet_ ~"i
jJ-- ";j
/~~ j~
I '-i..., ,:' . /:1\
.1" ,.,~.""", ", -....
1,,,, ~'" -~t',', ",o:j:",
'\ I ':..~':". ", , ..::,.. H'-" " ...... .. \: "
...
~ :~
~ :~
0" :....
o :0
~ :0
I :~
: I
/
I'
...
, J,~
-I :
~
-300 feet
(
p.J
en
CUI
.u i:
>-
cu
3
.:x:
~
cu
a..
~
, ,'1' .
/(])\.
c:
~ 0
II 0: ~ I I , I I
I
I
lID
'. --' (])
~
en
.r:
~
J
I~
-
1-3
'--
r
..........
/
.....
C Street
.'\
/
.1
-,
,/
"
B Street
",
r
/
A Street
----r-
')
.'
Main Street
~L
.\ r
Right-of-way proposed
for vacation
Travel directions and
~
approximate distances
Out-of-directlon travel
directions and distances
Date Received: /6If~07
Planner: AL / ....
>'"
'"
.~
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-dlrectIOn dIstance would be even less for pedestnans usmg the pubhc
sIdewalk system,' or bIcycles and vehicles passmg through the mId-block alley north of B 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' Provision of travel routes for cychsts, pedestnans and vehIcles would be VIa the eXlstmg pubhc street,
alley and sIdewalk system. The approXImate travel dIstances shown on Figure 1 assume travel around the
penmeter of each route, and short-cuttmg through parkmg lots or sunllar open areas IS not considered.
Fmdmg 13 There are eXistmg SituatIOns in downtown Spnngfield and elsewhere throughout the CIty where
portIOns of the gridded street system are not connected and out-of-dlrection travel is reqUlred for cyclists,
pedestnans and vehIcles Nearby examples mclude portIOns of A Street east of 12th 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 14 A Traffic Impact AnalysIs (TIA) was prepared by an mdependent traffic engmeenng consultant m
support ofthe proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn (Spnngfield Justzee' Center Revised Task 2 Report - Traffic Impact
Study, Access Engineenng, July, 2006) The TIA exammed the eXlstmg and post-vacatIOn street system m the
vlcmlty ofthe 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 mmunallmpact on
the downtown transportation system With the proposed vacatIOn of public nght-of-way
Fmdmg 15. The TIA prepared for the proposed nght-of-way vacatIon also concluded that no traffic mitIgation
actIons would be reqUlred to ensure safe and effiCIent flow of traffic m the VIClruty ofthe JustIce Center. Among
the SImplest and most effectIve measures to structure traffic movements m the area WIll be strategIC placement of
directIOnal signage for the Justice Center The TIA suggests pOSSIble measures to dIscourage traffic from travelmg
to and from the downtown core usmg nearby residential streets, mcludmg placement of STOP SignS at key
mtersectIOns and msta1hng curb extensIOns to prevent undeSIrable tummg movements
Fmdmg 16 Special vehIcles, such as tranSIt buses, can be accommodated on adjacent pubhc streets (pnmanly 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
)
ConclusIOn. Staff have concluded that the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn WIll have no adverse effect on safety,
connectIVIty or mamtammg reasonably dIrect travel routes for pedestnans, cyclists and vehicles. As proposed, the
pubhc right-of-way vacation complies 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 17 The nght-of-way presently contams a two-lane collector street WIth SIdewalks on both Sides Upon
vacatIon ofthe nght-of-way, the subject area would be mcorporated mto the Spnngfield JustIce Center and used for
secure pohce parking. The nght-of-way would be closed to all pubhc travel The Spnngfield Police Department
adVIses that a secure parkmg lot - close to the JustIce Center bUlldmg - protects pubhc property (mcludmg police
vehicles and case eVIdence stored m the anCillary bUlldmg) and enhances emergency response times as respondmg
officers do not have to cross public streets to reach theIr vehIcles.
Fmdmg 18. Jerry SmIth, Spnngfield Cillef of Police, submitted a memo m support of the proposed nght-of-way
vacatIOn (Attachment 2) WhICh reads as follows
Imoortance orB Street Closznfi to the Justice Faclhtv PrOJect
"The purpose of this memo IS to summarz=efor the Plannzng Commlsszon 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
1-4
Date Received: ~!y~n
Planner: AL
.'
-, '
fenced and secured parkzng area
. Closzng B Street IS necessary for the security of portions of the fa cilz ty The planned JustIce facllzty
zncludes an anclllmy buddzng that WIll be a reposItory for eVIdence zn crlmmal cases, storage for polzce
and court records, and storage for speczalzzed polzce eqUIpment and weapomy Closzng B Street WIll allow
the entIre anCIllary building and parkmg lot to be fenced m, significantly Improving the security of these
records and eVldentzary Items WIthout the secunty fencmg m place, the anczllaJY buildmg as desIgned
does not provzde suffiCIent secunty for these ztems
. Closmg B Street WIll provIde secure fleet and employee parlang To date, Department vehzcles and
employee parkmg has not been secured by fencmg Whzle thIS does not cause sIgnificant zssues during
normal workzng hours, the Department has experienced damage to fleet vehIcles. and employees have
suffered damage to theIr personal vehicles, durl11g late evening and early mornzng hours Damage has
ranged from pamt scratches to slashed tIres and broken wmdows
. Closzng B Street wzlllmprove the safety of polzce officers and cztlzens The street closure WIll allow
officers responding to emergency calls from mSlde the buddmg to access thezr vehIcles WIthout crossmg a
publzc rzght of way, thereby reduczng the rzsk of an acczdent durmg an emergency response
. Closmg B Street wzll proVIde a secure area for evacuatIOn of mUnlczpal Jad przsoners' The fenced area
WIll serve as an outdoor holdmg area for mUnicIpal Jazl prisoners zn the event that the Jad must be
evacuated WIthout the street closure and fencmg, there WIll not be an area outsIde the mUnicIpal Jad
adequate and accessIble for holdzng prisoners Instead, an evacuation event would necessItate the
uncontrolled release of all mUnicIpal Jad prisoners "
Findmg 19: As described m the statement from the Pohce 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 evacuatIOn of jaIl pnsoners
m the event of an emergency PrOVISIOn of a secure muster area for evacuated pnsoners proVIdes a drrect benefit to
the jaIl staff, pohce personnel, and the pubhc.
Findmg 20- As noted m the Pohce Ch1efs statement, ensuring respondmg police officers do not have to cross a
pubhc street in order to reach therr veh1cles enhances safety for both Police Department personnel and publIc users
of the street system
Fmdmg 21. Passage of the Pubhc Safety ballot measure in 2005 that secured publIc fundmg for the Justice Center
project demonstrates Spnngfield reSIdents' commItment to the project. Comparatively few people wlth1n the CIty
regularly use the segment ofB Street proposed for vacatIOn However, all Spnngfield reSIdents (and v151tors)
benefit from a strong polIce presence wlthm the commumty.
ConclUSIOn. Staff have concluded that the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn serves a greater benefit to the pubhc
than retammg the one-block segment ofnght-of-way ill ItS present status The proposed vacation also proVIdes
dIrect benefits to the CIty'S Pollee Department, wh1ch ultimately benefits Spnngfield reSIdents As pfoposed, the
nght-of-way vacatIOn comphes WIth Cntenon (d).
(e) Whether provisions have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remain in public ownership_
Findmg 22. The vacated nght-of-way IS to be mcorporated 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 (whIch
mcludes the portIOn of nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn), IS to remam WIth the CIty of Spnngfield
Fmdmg 23. Upon vacatIOn of the nght-of-way, the land ownershIp automatically reverts to the CIty as It owns the
abuttmg property. Because the ownershIp of the vacated nght-of-way does not pass through a thrrd party (wh1ch
could occur If there were pnvately-owned parcels frontmg onto the ng4t-of-way), remammg m publIc ownershIp IS
1-5
Date Received: /6)?~7
Planner: Al 1-'
~ ~ ' .
assured.
ConclUSIOn The proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn complIes wIth Cnterion (e).
CONCLUSION
In summary, the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn. (a) allows constructIon of a publIcly funded project approved by
a vote of the publIc; (b) mcreases law enforcement's pUb~lC presence m the downtown core through constructIOn of
a PolIce, Courts and Jail facIlIty, and (c) provIdes constructIon features that mcrease the secunty and safety to the
CIty'S PolIce Department and the general public dunng operatIons. The loss of publIc good m terms ofvelucle,
pedestnan and bIcycle connectlVlty has been demonstrated to be mmunal and wlthm State statutes for connectIvIty
under Cntenon 9.060(3)(c) oftlus report and can be reasonably mItIgated
Based upon the above findmgs and testImony 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 of nght-of-way m ItS present status As proposed, the nght-of-way
vacatIon complIes WIth Cntenon 9.060(3)(a-e).
RECOMMENDATION
RecommendatIon of approval of the proposed vacation to the CIty Council.
Date Received: 6~f/;o~7
Planner: Al / /
1-6
~ ' ' .
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE
May 16,2007
TO: Andy Limbird
FROM' Jerry Smith, PolIce Chief
SUBJECT: Importance ofB Street Closing to the Justice FacIlity Project
The purpose of this memo is to summarize for the Planmng Commis~lOn the Importance closmg
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 secunty ofportlOns of the facility: The planned
Justice facility includes an ancIllary building that WIll be a repOSItory for eVIdence in
crimmal cases; storage for polIce and court records; and storage for speCIalIzed police
equipment and weaponry. Closmg B Street will allow the entire ancillary bmlding and
parking lot to be fenced in, sIgnificantly improving the security of these records and
evidentiary items. Without the security fencing m place, the ancillary building as
designed does not provide sufficient secunty for these items.
. Closing B Street will provide secure fleet and employee parking: To date, Department
vehicles and employee parkmg has not been secured by fencmg. WhIle this does not
cause signIficant issues dunng normal working hours, the Department has experienced
damage to fleet vehicles, and employees have suffered damage to their personal vehicles,
dunng late evemng and early mornmg hours. Damage has ranged from paint scratches to
slashed tires and broken windows.
. Closmg B Street will improve the safety of police officers and citizens: The street
closure will allow officers responding to emergency calls from inside the bmlding to
access theIr vehicles without crossing a public nght of way, thereby reducing the risk of
an accident dunng an emergency response.
. Closmg B Street will provIde a secure area for evacuatIon of municipal jail pnsoners:
The fenced area will serve as an outdoor holding area for municipal Jail prisoners m 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 holdmg prisoners.
Instead, an evacuation event would necessitate the uncontrolled release of all mumcipal
jail prisoners.
ATTACHMENT
DatEl Received: 6;/~tJ7
Planner: Al /
2-1
. ' ,\ ~ *.(.?L{b"-3~a-r) ~ll'vt~ -%f~~( C(17? I ;
(Z) A ( L", I /'lr.-IJ /0':sA n rL ~4 \!JK '"'
C::::P~ . rJ.Ul.V/ I ~c--r + y /<-lM1:l' UJ~S5ICl1/
\, -1 yeq[7;70 -t/vt- doS.tOQ ~ J) Sfreef- :
, a;t Lf~ 07 ~ is /If:e!;y -h h~,YJe/I ·
~ T ~~ /l1D/onsh WGC{'Id~
s~ ~.4rY<?V\It?~~~ ~ :
declc!ed. -h r;R~ ~ <'-JiM j. - -gnu.
y'LA, e> 11. U:.::S... I '1-1 Ct ;?'" '. !.. ./ ~ IY--C i
:l~II;~~ ~ ft-.R [;3;::07 ~~J I
~{}ftA UN- ~~ ~ ~ .
~^~-<<,?l~;~~r'~ :
lJ r/Z1.~ B S'1resd b ~ it 0 ~ ~ 7J i
-:;-e- (I c:fe5) - ~ (.5* 0) 1)3-;--: ~ ~ i
- ~/-.f-7~ ~ ~::5~ t,
~~ lif,:-)~.7---f~ ~~~~[~_ ~~~';
~1!?-7 ""0...--- '~-~-:"'~~~L,"-- ,--> ~ ~..~~. ~ " I
I "- .......~v'- '-I. ;J,~~,~ -- V' ...... :
...1--- eo-c4 /7~ /d'dO:" ~ jr~ ~ /1-;;.:
~ L::k~ ~~ ..p ~~
/Yf-d" 6z5 ~ ~_ -/0 5b?"iv '/~~ ;rg ~:
~Jij;~ P6sf~/~ · B ~od- s~ .
'Ie> ~ ~ -ftrJ ~0l ~ ! ( f::R.. lA.A-Q ~ ·
CZo-e (j-p[ we.s't psI. ~
-1- ~ 0-<J Q..Vo/~ 0.:..( SjJrzl1.'j(}dj~
tihV'd->>J 5CZ;; ~ ~/ ~,'. So -:r,u.
~ ~~ SSY_ (f~ k0
~ +}j~fa~~1Sl'
I~' ~~tv-R)ccf-~ CO(
jJ5f,~ sfp-07';fo.ff~~
3-1
ATTACHMENT
· '~ ~. ~. ;0; ~ jJqyt::~ ~ CA -'!~ _ '
e{;f/lA/v~ 4A-^- S~-~)~ - SI f~
\, /A1. reO]!J:ff. 7fvZM- :r;U ~.s r/~, e<rr.[) ~
'. 7fW;f;/~c~~~ ~~,
i/JL/-l!a.;'rL;~ ~ r~ V~ ~.,aQJ-- ~
;fM.-. 7~~~~'!
~I v-.:5i:vj ~ cf' dav0 ~ !Bs::t. . ,
~ ~~ Skq~~ ,,';
OJ~~IJ~ ~ ~""4:J Gl{ B;:iP-~:
~a/~ /u~~., . ,l'
::r -f I s.~ tt.. LA~ a COIL U€C1;-eO'L~ -g' i
C~) /I~ G~ ~~ IA;. A 1/UV ~) ~~
(~ ~~) A __ (). - --:--- / f/ ~~1 ~
j'v -' ()- ~ v(~ ,cu...... - -12
l w~/IJ~)0aJ~'CJ~.:5~
~ (cr4')~ tt~ "V' /y-~ <=L -
110 o-f d> .)JO'W j-f-/S'~ -;.e; ~-:--.L q ~~.
-F-r ~ ~QMS' (iI:: /'tAo-!onvG~._?
h/GF~/~--ft--o-~~#~ ~
~o~..PO~'_'~ ~/~7P4.C~
'f6 oLD ~ S~?'~ ~ r/
. ~ r<e]rd;~' /hiSJA 'fJ~
~rVVlCLZI~ ~v( -it--e- pr~o~ ~ ~~ ).
d- fP4-rr8 %~.3~/ik 14>~~4-r\ JlrI~
D/1cJ2 ~'-- ~ ~~eaJ} tw ~ '/<t~
~ ~ (3 S;:iZ. ~ c::ef/ ~-~S~Yf(! ~
~~ ~D)~XfV1fJ;~~ -Ie ~~1~ c" 1.-Cn~J
1-::.. - . (f;rW'" c/ ..!:ze..J1q 11t. - a;::t--r I ~ -:: ~ ";1'-P<
:r~ ~ /~{ I~ ~a oS ~ (jA.'5"Ii-
f,' h>- ~~ ~;<-(~i ~ VAR
. ~~tV~lH"~~sf+~kR.~
~~CLd"""~1_.,,9?(?f1t{J (/k q (~(~k LV~~
I-~~~ 0 h" ---!-YEe. < I ~ ~~ Il.v~-io g.si:f- 'to
6tC~ 1/ 5j ~:c~ ffe::?1fi it-05fl~~4
3-3
c 'I
'. I I .
.. I ~~ ~~~r /p!*el1 / dVl,:.. C/Iy ~cil /4'~.6;
\. -l.~~~4:~ :
~saf /t; JJ/ocL tfI' l ~ ~ ~
t-rtA.;jti j>I e~U(q~ ._~
"7 ttj -Pr1A/ /1 q jf)(~ ~
I tt ClJl1tJ8lI&ce /0 6-e 10 ~
~ A-~7 C 'Yf :.tv.~ (6 ~ ~
, 4_ ~
/1 /?/ /jjrc I~~ ~'
l7tU/{; t-/ ~ ell /' ~A"dn .~ ~,'
:r.~ I;kr-t ,{/J ( ~vr c,
/fOvvt fo (I~ 13 5; ft; Ju ~/li
~ c(8sd " .. jon t7 .. 10-
.t -f1 ~?S ". ~
'-J ft-L ~ c;f ft-.e ~ 711
;U~/ ~ ~ .u-zK;; ~
i1d iJ~-fJ-z~cf M.AJ ~ . /~,
~,p-, 4~~
tflolJaz ~;L ~ ~. ~- CljIv( VePy
~ 'h ~f3SY!~~
6J6'~- , c
;J:- U~ at 5)J1t1JGd;;~IIj;~
J ~9/1A. dh/A.J/ ~-p, ..Jl~ J' ~
3-5
. .:.j)~;14 7~/' /p/lcel1 J dttA C )' ~cil H~~ ·
\ -l.~ ~ W21ZkJ C(~ :
\ ~sd Iv JJ/ocL 11 'p % ~
L-jt4 tf5tQ j>I ef'tWt~ .~~~
:[ ty (/M/ If .qjf)(~ ~~
i C1. cattJ81I e<<ce Yo he . to ~
'; ~ k!7 c' y :f-o. ~ ft; &0
'-: ff dI; !)Ir~ I ~~ /.1 /' ~A'" 07 .~
:r~ ~ /fl({f ~V7"
, 110M' fo ~ f3 sf j?J M ~/
~ clQsd ~tJQn C --,
.j-f i~?S- . ~
~ -ft-L ~ t;f fk--e ~ 7/l _
jU~/ ;r;-- tJWiVj .~ ~
. -I1d. iJ~-(J?>tf IWtAJ ~ . . /~.
rz -;T 4~
tfJOIJCfL ~)L - ~. ~- CljIv( Vet:y.
~ . 'h ~13$74~~
6J6~- ~ '
;;j::' U~ cd 5)7fttJGdI !I:b~
-I- ~/1A, dh/A~ ~-P''- ~ :J,-~
, 3-6
I
~-
vv~ be~ -"Ir ~. ~tdI~/f
v~ (0 ~ ~/. /tJc
~ to ~ ~sP ~~j$?
" J ALr/;i<"
~ %r1I1~~ ",p -P~ _ - . Of ,td--
~\Pf ( ~
~~Af~~~/~
~ tf C;OS~ t!:jf{3~2!f? ;k5 ~
'ftr~'~- ~~~
" / r'lo~~
61~~ ~ v;U(!Let.e~k~
6/oCUr ~ ,lfFe~ ~ ~
1M- . p ~.t; ucr4 j)y-ftoJ
~. ~~~~.
fJ~ M cOl^
h. _ ,;--;5 .9. ~
~Z~j~~/~t~~
J)/~,. J~/J/ fd ~ J/nv;J -;e; ~
r~ -r='" ~~k6r~ -
4tM ~ "AU,-7! '.8r ~ en'lf~
~ ~wf1;t}jf1i;~;fe '/z? ~ek:d0 ~.. -.~ "
rn.. 1t5 ~:J~y Lv /-fiW07 ~4:t: .~~i:J fMiJ;;,.rze ~ r/t M "
~.WlJ-:(-nh'-; J 5~~:-^7 (' f(;r(:" - ~~f7?lJlI. ~
, 1_ _n'-i'" /.,l~~ A _.. JA ,,~-;~JA1J ~~ ~~)>JF:il.
, .
,. .
1\'
~..
~
~\
\sl.
,
-0
~
.O)~
u
'DL.:
,''-' Q)
<Dc:
_c:
\u ctf
:)0:
, (.
~-
. vv~ U ~ Affr dr ~teII"--/1
,v~Io~~/~
~ to ~ ~5f ~qzi~
, , } ~
~ %r101dHVjJ~~ _ _ - q ..{aL-
~( ij:
~~~~~~;11
~ tlf c hsM.-C f}f{3 2f? .;fJ U0
'fJ/~.~.- 4~~
... / r ';b~.~ t~~
~--e ~ V;U(!ffl--e ~ ~
tJf' ~ 10 . Ilk: bu--{ ~ ~
-/1JL . ;0 ~ -t; Ud~ ;b-fto)
tiI!-- fJ ~ tN; ry07 ~;:Z ejb
h . r-49~'
~Z ~j~~/~t~~ui
JJ/~ I. J_/J/;..d ~ JI/I1V1) TEJ ~
r~ ~ ~~k{;v~-
~ ifV\1V ~JuI__7!- 8}J ~ 8Yr51~
~ ~~~)(-1ifl~ie ;b ~e~ ~--. _.~ \
6-h /6 ~:f:T 1.>>.HtW07 y--~ ~ <jq !u(J;;r/ze ~ ~%. "
~ m7:r-n'" r-/ ' 1". 5t~~ f;~ - R~ft41. ~
,I. _n~ 1--l{YZP~ A.._ JA 0 .( );kU;rlJ ~~ ~~)>J::~V.
I. l f .
J9~ 5/rrl
fJ /ea~ 0( c) 1101 //a ca--k-
B 51' ~ q 1i iff?) , RF,(;ETVED
;{ wtJf1/d -f1'f1d r41s iEB1t~Oi
Iv
,..' (
/Vl1)tJr lit cOil tJefllel1cp - drl()11I J
-ftJ 1M cl If 1Jq/(.- e/81' tda(/f"J f:; ~'
{At f/IJ nifr . , 1,
P/a:Z recd)tJ7rffzr parfJfll r . i~
C 4: r5 d 5 {71'tif I ()eJ;l-~;/1 C;'!&r ~ : ~
00..
;f\5f~f( ~ ~ -8$f- ~ .,.67
~(d;- ?'.2M";-~~- ~ ~
1M sure' ~ &vi-
tv- 5# ~ tis;e 11' ~.-
cd- e kwft rtK ~ ~
~ ~ vuJlc6s)t~ g yL . ~
per;;1 c:t/lr'AfM cd- _ ~ ~!!-f?t~ - . . .~
;t,.. t1;;f'Jlc;/I!Z /11 ~ c c~ ~d 1,.FA K \
t?~~ "'+) dl!f7. C~)/IA J '~7 ~ \
.Y1 -r' . -.J' 'So ~e.r' ~)'
1 ~fI c!i)5dre _ _' '<!;fdS(ec/ .u./" \'-'1, '
3 9 ~ / a ({)eS"';-)) 5-r'~ 'V
.::J b k /J y)o'l ~ ..()A"// ~I c:;7/f/7
. '.
: -::p~ 51 rfJ
I
fJ lea~ 0/ c) ,l1of 1/01 cce/e
B 5/ (fd- If 1!r J- f? ) , RF.~P,TVED'
y: tJGJt{/d -find r4.;-s i~07
. r' (
. /V11)c:Jr //tcollfJCf/le'ftr;p- dr!r/IIlJ
,;. -m fM c/1 Actl/.- eLBt tda(!1~J J;
{At . tl1Jriff-
P/t:c:t:Z recc!l5lcfrq partifll r
C4Y5 cd 5~ /{)~;/1 C/&ttdW
Ifts-fd-d'/I ~ ~ $$(- ~ _,.t7l
~ .d- ::;.2NJ! +~ :Yf;-,- ~ JF"
1M Gttl?? . . ~
ru S~ ~ (jse B~ -. Au;!-
Ld e krrcuJ rtK -,- ~~
~ ~ e-w-ef C60/~ If sf ~
perM df1r'AIh J - ~ ~~~ - . ..~
It'" I'/df'J/a1f? III ~ c Co ~ 1,.&7 r\ "
-f~ 5/, ~c~fMJ'~/ ~ "
~fI c!r::J5j,(re _ . 80 ~ .~)'
3-10 9&C1 tJeff- ))5-1# / ~
k /I ..---;." a -f)d'~1 {)I. 97777
l' ~ ~
(6:- ::F w71 f ~ c:>--1-<+ '
Iv{ ~ ! 3 14 . ~ /-crtv'-vl di.-f' '
~~ _~ ::r: ~ 'pi! ~?J .
/ fl V ev-6cd(J ,- ry c.eu::6
.J re;~~ pro6Cfhly wl(! c/a2Q
i 11 ,!-i ~~ '/ ~~-
! J-- ~ U)c1rk q ~ - /U 5f7r;~-Hef'if
! t/JrcUj <{J c? 5'heloOf s.~/~<V'
. c:( (Jd~er/ ~ if6 -/0 --I1-e i//;r~ offen...
:r t.ect(/U k cd!;; ~ e'l-C yr-. /)11 ~
?rJ;/f r~ sf7!1 ~ ~ - 5LJ fl/ uJ(j'lk
{iuTwrq ~ E 7s ~J L(Pt-
w ~'j tJ1A 467 C :if tvll! /v? ~ cL)tl~.
(+~_ r tV/il ~ -h ;ZV~-/ - q ~ -V
~ (1'-71 5 ~ " c:Ef ,7 t?7 /v~ C ~ ?J
Mn. ;t;; ;v10/<? ~ ec: 1 ~ 6';r"
u1'\ -8 sf. · ()
~Iate ~eceived: t.1fk
anner: Al /' /~ 7
\
\
'.
3-11
. '.
.'
fJ5: :; will Ix:' ~ 07' L." -
1'1~ /314 . - u ru-'V'tA ~
~~ ~ :;;~ /P// ~?)
f 11 V et'bccf!; ; , PvUj' :2 ~
.J re:~~ pro6~hly WI!! c/a22
i /l ~-j ::z~ ~ ~~-
i. J-- /tJ uJCJrK q -/ /1--e 5~r;'7--Pe/'if
! tIJr-c1Aj ?(,J cz yAe/o-01S ~/~€l.5'
t{ (jc:;lu#eff/ ~ tr -h -fb- t/'I, r~ o#en...
:r r'f!cr [iu 1ke dL;; ~ 1lr;- C y-. Ol" k(.ffi
i !1J1(( ~ sfJll /pR ~ - Sd :j?li ulellk .
i-f01wq ~ E 1s ~c:J ~-
i :r~'lO-U 467CcJ3f cullf, 6-e /4~ 0~
; ( ~&P- C tV/!! ~ -jZJ ~ q J4;o i
: ~ un 5A 'v' cS# 7't?? Iv~ C ~ ~
! c1AA ;to fV10/e' ~ r ~
'~~y ~
.,
-f
\
\ ,
\'
./
3-12
~
.
...
"'.", '. . ft(1.J'II.::r.,~ P'1.1s~ t/~ "7 ~C, 0-<< fl""""""" ~-:"/ ~ ~~
~.\1l. ~,\;",b ".. v;.c~ k:s:s 72f ~ /~ ~ "'0 f1<...,<.k ,,= ,"-V' f3' ~ p;
c'-'f;II'lt! IS a'r~IIJ~'-Io drivelS' ~...{~ 02..",,L.LJ$
" ".' U' - /J r QcJrf.1.fUcYt S'@\-.le
11 pfJ€ -thIS CC(l1. ~ qC/erT~ I 'Sdq-/-;d/l .
preva/ I IVlet.>-< -jo ~ I~
W
I
......
W
'"00
me
:Ja>
:J
(l);D
:"'!(l)
o
)> 92.
.<
(l)
0..
j~
,,~
~
~
"J
.-~~ ".-- ~ -- ---
UNIV,ERSITY-OF oR.EG-ON -
~hemr&J PhyslCs Inshtute '
- 240 Wlllamette Hall
'" ,--....~c ~7403
',~;;>, ESt) h F0.sfe/ / ,.
.3'.6 '1 4Je5.-tJJ5~
5Ir)t?reiJ2~1
djj~-- ; rIIlcry ~~6f.&
flaf/f/'f1'l WrvlM/55fVl1
:2;2-5 FIf-lIl S"f.
_--, ----7
Sfr)'rl,,!circJR <17Lf /1
::s-.. _} --,~. ;..::=...' 1. /I r /.,1. "1.1,, II... 11.. .1,1., I,ll f! 1".1,,,111.11"'/ " '1'11'
j " .
!j)f2 C?r SI}, ,q-f',efc/ (';4. ~ YVff]eS';' ()6 '.
I (. l / /-7c..c /111 Pr5 '7 _______ ~
\" -1- -f/tlf11< r Ii czC/(?' a pro6{pP.-t -
IJ I z; cl<) 1170. o-f -f 13 S+ as' /.2,-. Q Ij "c< rf-€ n~ q: /'
" . ~<<7 j,ui~/ /
'io 6l~/(d ~ LJr/stn15jJcJl/c:.e ~S';~ "
, (/ / lIS
not Cr /Dc:Jq ;~ C(f q// r-o/"" S'<<r ~
r~ d 1# JvjD(''<. €? ~
~ s~ .'\(/y~ -;6 cr7 ~
~~I/ c/ou/11 ;f Sf: I dT7 A1:i-k C Sf. .( q ~
r<e:s: /rJ", .L. ~ .~ ~
. I ~ s~ Cl 64-s-;er v--fr~_ l;l L: ·
4 ~~
c -J- vr I/~ U//lcfled~ ~ ~ . ~~ .
~ ht<)(./ <1 ~JrlSt7ZU .e4 /'f1 <?dt~
~t err SprJI1 /~G(~. /70-!- -6/ack q I'V/q~'1
sf~e/ Iv de? -(/175/ Au# ~ ~ ~
fc; ~ ~ (U-'1~~ .-~/:; ~~;/z PW~<J~
~ !5' flU' ~!hllr~ ;-I- ~ ~' ,
I.. :If ~ ~ Ilk /~ w/(I vole q~~1/ ~
KJ U{ / '// L /:.~ ,() --L? /:7- v~
7T ~ r t-z)111 '<JtO-i'- cyz;r y::; T~ '
I;~ ~/;-R~l 16 r;zA 5'/ -I- a'~ ~~ /<' I
~~ Ut7/rl1J i1o... .-d-r ~ /s frh<.;R'] <&
.::r dn:!MJIj .5~ jJnSd>7!4/tr-JI'fI,1dYe' ~~-'-
,f~ ~ /11 -fQuoro--P y~ c?trr<ef/l-;:- "
COl1Sf'vudt'&r1 7~ .h(d:ic?~ C:CCceJ<S '10, (/'~
(-f~, p@ o-f0CR -t1-< ~Of'MQ/ U-J~ :i_Yo'"
-T tLJ&tcfrvr /-'~ ~~re ~ ~
0../ 0<< f' '-(Ii) 5~"t ~ !ked h1 -ee-/i P1/5-- ~
1 ,.:7t;5 f7~ ~ -7 d4J
.) l<< .
t<A~ ~ --r- -0,-,.~
-( ~ r"1-
\ ~ ~ -tfd ci-H (c ~
" COn5/drzt ~ _+ ~'/ I? ~ d!;,.~ It (~( !
((MJVl [/J-r I !rf:::e ~ v~ '
CJtpsR (Iv0 (~.
..j -f -f~ t<fl:P4 C1{ tpt:e ~
:1 W~ uofe&5? /
. 1- ~CfR- ~ ~5P -{ro~ .
r f~ 4- e,?62ft~-50 CHI .I /
~tvJ.~ . dJ c;41 dJ~~/ :
-O();I~~ &6' ~~ . !
'{'J2 r .JfJII 369 &J0J/J)51#/ .
l\~.' -' ~~~~ 5/rfrt?f;e/b1/CJI(
/~ I~~' -, q7V77
~<~ 0 ·
Date Received' t / /
Planner: AL . / }/Htl1 .
\
RECETVED
JUN 0 5 2006
BY: ac;C
3-17
,a l' .
Submittal to the record of the city of Springfield
Planning Commission
Discretionary Use and Zone Change Request (Justice Center)
Case N urn bers
DRC2006-00013 (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 replicated with my comments In arlal
font following The staff report Identifies the cnteria for approval with summary
conclusionary 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 applzcable:
(a) PrOVISlOns 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 s~rvice 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 falls to Identify that the TransPlan Goals, ObjectIVes, 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 polley document) for the region comprised of the
1 Of 16
ATTACHMENT
Date Received: ;fY7<<J7
Planner: AL
4-1
~. l 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 TOM programs, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), in addition to roadway
projects that benefit pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. All of these strategies can
increase the attractiveness of transportation modes other than the single-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:
I. 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 criteria of "The proposed use conforms with the applzcable:
(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 integrated 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 opportumty, and the quality of life.
Definition/Intent: This goal recognizes the need to integrate transportation and land use
planning to enhance livability, economic opportunity, and quality of life. Integration
supports transportation-efficient development patterns and choices ill transportatiOn
modes that reduce reliance on the auto.
Closmg off a collector street at It's mtersectlon With an artenal street, diverting 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
2 Of 16
Date Received: '~~~7
Planner: Al 7 r I "
4-2
~ tJ .
Goal #2: Transportation System Characteristics
Enhance the Eugene-Springfield 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 reliable 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.
ClOSing off a collector street at It'S intersectIon WIth an arterial street, dIverting collector
street trafftc to adjacent local street, shutting off pedestnan and blcylce publIC ways,
seeking vanances to street connectIvIty and block length standards In a nodal
development overlay zone IS not consIstent WIth thIS goal
3 Of 16
4-3
Oak, f'~eceived' t1"/UJ01
Planner: Al '. '1 > .
. ,-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
multlmodal 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. Mobilityls 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 withm the region.
Closmg 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 characteristic 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' ~;;'1.~7
Planner: AL 1 p
4-4
~) J It
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
coordinating 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~sed efficiency of the transportation
network to diminish delay and corresponding fuel consumption.
ThiS proposals street closures do not support thIS objective because it limits access to
the transit station, mhlblts walkmg, blcyclmg, and created out of dlTectlon 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 sltmg Issues but has
refused to consider project alternatives that are within the fmanclalllmltatlons 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 to the consltency with the committee's recommendation and the subsequent City
Council actIOn and dlTectlon to staff ThiS application also Inappropriately ties the street
vacation to the discretionary use approval through the proposed conditions of approval
yet has not addressed the vacatIOn approval critena or done the necessary public notice
for a street vacatIOn
Objective #7: J>olicy 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 In 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 mconslstent 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
4-5
Date Received:
Planner: Al
6~fk7
/ /
" .
The nodes will be pedestrian-friendly environments with a mix of
land uses, including public open spaces that are pedestrian-, transit-, 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 Definition/Intent: 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 y.. 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 Definition/Intent: 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 withm proposed nodes. Development of
theseareas under existing plan designations and zoning provisIOns could result in
development patterns inconsistent with nodal development. This policy documents a
commitment by the elected officials to apply the new/ND 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 fieceived: ffPet77
Planner: AL
4-6
"
."
TDM Policy #2: Parking Management
Increase the nse oj[ motor vehicle parking management strategies in selected areas
throughout the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
Policy DefinitionlIntent: Parking management strategies address both the supply and
demand for vehicle parking. They contribute to balancmg travel demand within the
region among the various modes of transportation available. To promote parking equity
in the region, consideration should be given to applying parking management strategies at
a region-wide level, in addition to downtown centers.
The proposed use wIll sprawl surface parkmg thoughout a slgmflcant portIon of the
property wlthm the Nodal Development zone, ellmmatmg potentIal for development
more consIstent wIth the objectIves of the zone
TSI System- Wide Policy #1: Transportation Infrastructure Protection and
Management
Protect and manage existing and future transportation infrastructure.
Policy Definition/Intent: This policy calls for the protection and management of
transportation facilities for all modes, within the limits of available funding, in 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 investments and facihties is
crucial. Strategies related to access management, TDM, and land use can be
implemented to reduce tnps 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 manner. An intermodal trip 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: - 11;1~o7
Planner: AL 7' /--
4-7
va ..
Ellmmatlon of eXlstmg improved publIc corndors to avoId walkmg across the street IS not
consistent with thiS poltcy
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, b~sed 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
. I
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 poliCY
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 DefinitionlIntent: 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 ODOT corridor studies. All roadway system
Improvements will also be consistent with other adopted policies in TransPlan.
The proposed use IS not constent with thiS poltcy
TSI Transit Policy #1: Transit Improvements
Improve transit service and facilities to increase the system's accessibility,
attractiveness, al1ld' convenience for all users, including the transportation
disadvantaged 'population. .
Policy Definition/Intent: 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:
Planner: AL
'/;1/7al7
/ / I
4-8
II<
This policy also supports maintaining existmg facilities in good conditio~.
By restnctmg pedestnan accesslbiltty 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 who use public
transportation. BRT is also expected to help the region maintain conformity with federal
air quality standards. BRT, combmed with nodal development, is a key strategy in the
region's compliance with alternative performance measures for th~ TPR.
Closure of streets wlthm the neighborhood of the transit station IS not constent With thiS
poliCY or the very slgmfcant mvestf]1ent the publiC IS makmg the BRT system.
TSI Bicycle Policy #2: Bikeways on Arterials and Collectors
Require bikeways along new and reconstructed arterial and major collector streets.
C/osmg 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
adJomIng properties. -
The proposed use IS not constent With thiS 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: t~'1 /20~ 7
Planner: AL 7 '-I .
4-9
0,}
_ Policy Definition/Intent: This policy supports the provision of pedestrian connections
between adjacent land uses, improved pedestrian access to transit stops and stations, safe
and convenient pedestrian street crossings, and pedestrian amenities, including lighting
In more developed areas, such as downtowns, pedestrian design features improve the
accessibility of destinations.
The proposed use IS not constent WIth this policy
TSI Pedestrian Policy,#2: Continuous and Direct Routes
Provide for a continuous pedestrian network with reasonably direct travel routes
between destination points.
Policy Definition/Intent: 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 IS 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 conditIon 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 r..pport 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 funding 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 policy The city's approval cntena and staff
report continue 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: /t;)1~()/
Planner: AL ;-
4-10
...
Springfield community shall be encouraged to locate in the downtown area. Within
the downtown, governmental uses, including 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 detennmed If It IS consltent WIthout dIscussion
about what they are? What does the NOO 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) SpeclGl use standards m thIS Code;
Finding: In accordance with SDC 23. 1 OO(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 cnterla applIes to thIS appltcatlon of dIscretIOnary use approval There need to be ,
findmgs that thIS applIcatIon is consIstent with the SpeclGl use standards m thIS Code.
The staff report contmues;
Criterion (2): The site under consideratIOn IS SUItable for the proposed use, consldermg
(a) The locatIOn, SIze, deSIgn and operatmg characteristIcs of the use (operating
characterzstlcs mclude but are not lzmlted to parkmg, traffic, nOise, VIbratIOn,
emISSIOns, lzght, glare, odor, dust, v,s,b,lzty, 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 publtc street IS not SUItable for the proposed use as a secured poltce compound and
IS not campa table WIth the neIghborhood or the eX/~tmg publIC use of the street The
applIcant nor staff have addressed the locatIon sIze or operatmg characteristIcs of a jad
m addressmg thIS crltena The relationshIp of the JaIl and the church entrances should
be addressed A jail IS not an offIce
11 Of 16
Date Received: t ~r..1o~ 7
Planner: AL 7' 1 ~
4-11
.,
(b) Adequate and safe cIrculatIon eXIsts for vehIcular access to andfrom the proposed
site, and on-site circulatIOn and emergency response as well as pedestrian, 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 parking 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 stated that the secure
parktng area IS not reqUired for emergency evacuatIon and IS not Ilkey the pnmary
evacuatIon route.
(c) The natural and phYSIcal features of the Site, mcludl_ng but not lzmlted to, riparian
areas, regulated wetlands, natural stormwater management/dramage areas and
wooded areas shall be adequately considered in the project deSign,
Finding: There are no existing natural and/or physical features that will be affected
by the proposed Justice Center.
(d) Adequate publtc facllztles and serVIces are avmlable, includmg but not lzmlted to,
utllztles, streets, storm dramage facllzties, samtary sewer and other publzc
infrastructure '
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 determmed 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
Revie\\;' application. -
The trafflc analYSIS had not yet been revIewed by cIty staff at the tIme thIS ftndtng was
prepared The testImony at the heanng whIch tndlcated that the reported tncreased
traffic volumes on C Street would not reqUire mItIgatIOn IS not consistent with cIty
Imposed requirements on other recent developments tn the cIty WIth over 1,000 vehIcles
per day on a local street.
Criterion (3). Any adverse effects of the proposed use on adjacent propertIes and on the
publzc can be mitIgated through the'
(a) ApplzcatlOn of other Code standards, for example buffermgfrom less mtenslve uses,
12 Of 16
Date Received: 0'?~o7
Planner: Al / -.
4-12
. .,.
Increased setbacks, etc.,
Finding: The proposed Justice Center has been intentionally sited on the block between
A Street and B Street to increase separation from existing 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 avoldrng any Improved use at all of the property abuttrng the residential
neighbors, the applicatIOn does not address how entrances, (which the architect
dlscnbed as akward) landscaping, (which there may not be any room for) screenrng or
other mechamsms are berng proposed to address thiS cntena
(b) Site Plan Review condltwns of approval, where applzcable;
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 during site plan review then that IS
where thiS cntena would be located not under discretIOnary use approval cntena There
should be eVidence and findrngs that IS seems likely or at least possible that thiS
proposal can comply With the code reqUirements
(c) Other condltwns of approval that may be requzred by the Approval Authorzty,
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 applzcant that meets or exceeds the cited Code standards and/or
condztions of approval
Finding: The Justice Center proposal will meet or exceed all relevant Code standards
rl?quired for approval of the Discretionary Use and Zone Change.
How can the adverse affects be mitigated through future conditions or code standards?
The staff frndrng fads 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 supportmg 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 ofB 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: ~;;f.~07 _
Planner: AL /"
4-13
oJ
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: ,
I. Prior 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 Zoning 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 of B Street bet:veen Pioneer Parkway East and 4 th Street, as the perimeter travel
distance would exceed the parameters established by the SDC.
The follOWing IS taken from the city's Site Plan Review Package Submittal ReqUirements
and the Spnngfleld Development Code
4 Copy of the deed and a prehmmary title report Issued wlthm the past 60 days documentmg ownershIp
and hstmg all encumbrances If the applicant is not the property owner, wntten penmsslOn from the
property owner IS reqUired
5. Right-of-Way Approach Penn It 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 Engmeer where the
proposed development will produce more than 250 vehicle trips per day m accordance With the current
version of the Transportation Engmeers TnI' GeneratIOn InfonnatIon Report
Before the Planmng Commission or Hearings OffiCial can approve a Discretionary Use request,
there must be information submitted by the applicant which adequately supports the request In
revIewing a request, the City must consider both the pOSItive and negative elements of a
DiscretIOnary Use Iequest 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:
Planner: AL
,Jfk7
/ J
4-14
<I
request will be denied or delayed It is recommended you hire a professiOnal planner or land use
attorney to prepare your findmgs. '
Discretionary Use Criteria Checklist (SDC 10.030)
1. Except for private/public elementary and middle schools and certain wireless
telecommunIcations systems facilities, a Discretionary Use may only be allowed if the Planning
CommissiOn finds that the proposal conforms with the following cnteria.
a. The proposed use shall conform with existing uses in terms of scale, lot coverage, design,
intensity of use and operatmg characteristics.
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 zoning district.
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 existmg
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 bUlldmg nght to the street ThiS proposal can not comply with the
street vacatIon catena whIch include no loss of any benefical use UntIl the city can
demonstrate theIr abIlity 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.
(a) Additional information mcluding 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.
(t) 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: 6/f~1
Planner: AL I /
4-15
. " .
Director prior 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 following 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 provisions 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 public right-of-way, publicly owned
land or PartitiOn or Subdivision Plat.
ARTICLE 11, VARIANCES
11.013 APPLICABILITY.
The Variance provisions apply:
(l )To buildings, structures and lots/parcels;
The vanance provIsions of the city code do not apply to the vacatIOn of streets The
vacation cnteria refer speCifically to the street conectlVlty and block length standards
Respectfully submitted to the City,
Scott E. Olson, P.E.
1127 B Street
16 Of 16
Date Received: t/;'1/u,tJ 1
Planner: AL I /
4-16
, ~
Submittal to the Record
City of Springfield
Street Vacation Request
Case No. LRP 2007-00019
Testimony in opposition
June 12, 2007
I L) T7" ~~,1 lJ'};: D
r'- rt4 -" ,\, .
,jUN 1 2 2007
BY:--- t1 GV(
~
Submitted by: Scott E. Olson, P.E.
1127 B Street
Springfield Oregon
I have been Involved with the planning and development of !rye urban form for more than 30 years I
feel privileged to live and work within SIX blocks of Spnngfield's CIty Hall I am attracted here In part
by the potential we have to make Springfield even better th~n it already is. The fact that our street
gnd is stili largely intact IS essential to my feelings about this area and its Mure
We are consldenng development of a Justice Center in a highly sensitive lOCation at the Interface
between our prized 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 fabric 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 with each other. Success demands both
the nght mix of functions and the right facilities. In fact It is our insistence upon developing a
compatible 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 within the larger context of the area, then It belongs in a
different place Our land use planmng process requires that we work our way down
from macro broad state WIde goals, down to comprehenSIVe plan polICIes, to development
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
codes,
"
It seems to me that the Justice Center planmng has somehow become reversed and is asking us hON
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 during the project
development process which considered tradeoffs In the functional and space program wrth the
associated ~ite constraints. Placement of a lower cost anCillary budding Within a street nght 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
Date Received:
Planner: AL
t/FI/~67
- / I
5-1
..
When considenng the srting of a JustJce center In downtown Spnngfield we should ask two questions;
1) How does Including this activity contnbute to the desired vrtallty of the area? And 2) How does the
facility contribute 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 jusbce center can not fit harmOniOUsly within the reqUirements for a
healthy town center and preserve the integnty 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 facility, 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 opportunity before us now We must not be short sited
and sacrifice the integnty of the greater community to accommodate the Inflexible requirements of city
staff. The public has very narrowly supported the project In bOth bond and jail operabons elecbons
The projects approval can hardly be conSidered a mandate to ignore our land use polICY and give the
police anything they ask for including a collector street so they can park nexfto the door and store paper
records and stolen bICYcles In what IS now the city street -
I along WIth many others worry that our local efforts to solve what has become a cnsis in the Lane
County criminal 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 mE:asure
were unaware as I was that the new jail would not do anything with the felony offenders accountJng for
85% of Spnngfield's 2004 charges The felony criminals will contJnue through the Lane County
revolving door while Spnngfield locks up the misdemeanor offenders. How many of ITrf neighbors
understood that the closed 31ll 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 activrtJes could contnbute to the vitality of the downtown if sited with sensitMty to the
requirements of the larger community and neighborhood.
If the JustJce Center IS to be built In the downtown area, we need to find a way to have It fit In and to
contnbute to the greater function of the area while respecbng 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 Inappropnately presumed In the development of the preliminary planning and cost
estimating that the street right 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 arterial at
B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing
Scott E Olson, P E
Date Received:
Planner: AL
2
~r001
5-2
.
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 m 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 govemment 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 appropriately 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 B 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 arterial street system which has been designed to
accommodate through travel as opposed to access to abuttmg property as local streets do
Further, the street gnd IS almost entirely mtact in this area of Springfield. No other
neighborhood has developed the degree of street connectivity as exists in this histoncal core
of the Springfield community. The traditional street system has become increasingly 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 pedestrian 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 Springfield.
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 in the
MUC/NDO Dlstnct. None of the staff reports reviewing the projects history have mentioned
the fact that several months pnor to making 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 appropriately provide for public involvement in a meaningful way
throughout the planning process A Citizen adVISOry committee, (CAC) was formed "to provide
input throughout the design process In regard to outward design of the faCility and its
relationship to downtown Springfield". 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
mdlcated a desire to work on appropriate 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 CAe However the committee was told It
was for their mformation 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 being Included in the project.
Later In 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 majonty of the CAC and ultimately adopted by the city councIl.
8 Street Vacabon, Testimony Opposing
Scott E Olson, P E
3
Date Received: t/;f/.2PDJ
Planner: AL / /
5-3
~
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 planmng process from the very beginnings of this project
In which no meanmgful consideration has been given to alternatives to closing B Street. This
effort has resulted in a failure to comply with Goal 1 requirements for the entire Justice Center
Planning process.
Staff has consistently refused to even discuss alternatives to closmg 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 dnve 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 pedestnan over-crossing of B Street have
been rebuffed by police statements that such a faCility would be vulnerable to driving under it
with a bomb. We also need secure parking for the police to prevent keying of their personal
vehicles or slashing tires which hardly seem to justify sacnficing 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 critena 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 m the intent
Ensurmg 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 nght of way Technically the
public does not own the right 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 cntena 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, Zomng ReqUirements and other local code
requirements IS an obVIOUS attempt to aVOid compiling with the local adopted policy and code
reqUirements Additionally staffs findings that adding 46% to the length of the deSirable X
mile pedestrran tnp length IS not consistent with accepted pedestnan planmng pnnciples
B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing
Scott E Olson, P E
4
Date Received:
Planner: AL
,Jf/PJIJ7
/ /
5-4
, ~
Further "Whether a greater public b~nefit would be obtained from the vacation than from
retaining the right-of-way In Its present status" lacks any cnterla or measures grounded in.any
adopted public policy and are purposefully vague and amorphous It IS clearly a relatively
crude attempt to avoid complYing with the land use policies of the city.
The street vacation can not meet any of the three cnteria 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 Zoning
District, the Nodal Development Overlay, and the Code Cntena. The cntena related to the
street closure have not been addressed during 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 variance 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 pohce are asking for instead of how we can build
consistent With our community 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
~ate ~eceived:
, ::'1 t ~..
-\
5-5
5
;/;jJfio I
~
MEMORANDUM
CitY of Springfield
To: Andy Limbird, Planner n
From: Jim Polston, Assistant Project Manager
Date: June 11,2007
Subject: Sidewalk in the alley north ofB Street
/
r
As a result of the request from the Planning Commission meeting of June 5th, I have looked into the
effects of installing a sidewalk in the alley north of the secure parking area of the Justice Center The
request was to install a three foot wide walkway along the alley to make pedestrian travel quicker and
safer at this mid-block location.
A three foot walk IS acceptable under the Americans with Disabilities Act as long as a five foot wide
passing lane is incorporated at least every two hundred feet. This could be accommodated in this area;
however there are other factors to conSIder prior to requmng_a walk in this area.
1. If the sidewalk is mstalled within the alley nght-of-way it will give vehicles less space to
maneuver making the alley less safe for them, while offering only limited protectIon to the pedestrIan,
unless the sidewalk is raised behind a curb.
2. The sidewalk (whether in the R-O-W or not) would likely need to be installed on the south side of
the alley because existmg conditions on the north SIde, such as poles, fences and driveways would make
construction along the north side problematic
3. The CIty of Springfield Engineering Design Standards calls for the minimum sidewalk width to
be five feet. While it does not specifically mention SIdewalks along alleys, sidewalks along residential
and cul-de-sac streets are to be five feet mmimum.
4. The Springfield Development Code requires a five foot WIde landscape setback along the north
side of the Justice Center ProJect. If this sidewalk IS installed m the alley one of two problems occurs.
A. If the sidewalk is to be included m the landscape buffer then It reduces size of the
plantmg area whIch creates conflicts between code sections, impacts the survival of the landscape
plantmgs by reducing planting area and creates opportunities for tree roots to damage pavement.
B. If the SIdewalk IS installed between the alley and the landscape buffer then the secure
parking lot would have to be redesigned. It appears that to accommodate tills situation the secure lot
, would lose at least six parking spaces. It would also elimmate open space currently reserved for the
expanSIOn of space m the ancIllary buildmg lost during value engmeering. .
4. The SIdewalk would have to be built behmd a curb or to road speCIfications or vehicle traffic
would damage the SIdewalk not deSIgned for vehicle traffic
In discussing this WIth the Engmeering and Traffic Divisions of Public Works it was suggested that
allowing pedestrIans and bicycles to use the alley without a sidewalk is an acceptable solution, because
most., if not all, alleys currently have this type of shared use. Also the pavement width in the alley IS
sufficient for shared use. The alley IS a low speed area, by ordinance, and that mixing uses in thIS
situation should not be a problem here because It has not been a problem m other locatIOns. In thIS case
the design of the secure parking lot also ehmmates several ingress/egress points to the alley greatly
reducmg the amount of traffic that access the alley Finally the street-side SIdewalk system in the area
wIll be unmterrupted throughout the area givmg people the option to detour to A or C Streets If they do
not feel safe shanng the alley
As a result it is my recommendation to leave the deSIgn as is and allow pedestrians and vehicles share the
alley for mid-block access, without a SIdewalk, should they choose to do so.
ATTACHMENT
Date Received:$9.luo7
Planner: AL 1 -
6-1
IlL
I
-.'
\
. WHITE S1RIPING
(TYP.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
L...::::::;::::
""
'"
~
o
o
~'
----_: . - .-. --=.~ - -
- -- --- ----="-.
SiD AI: P\IM'T f5\ Sill I:ONC. {2"\
\e:Y L OJRS (TtP.)iCV i' _'
9-9 7 -2;-:,=r=- ~-l- ..., - - ijg ~......
,F I ." r1 . ______1'
~<'> :11.
b;i \1,
<I- a I
!Ul I
0<> " I
all; ~ , I
-'"
C:c ~;
... 0 I,
I
I
I
I
''ll''1
/~II
t; JI:
e "I
= I
i2 I
. ~ I
~jl
Y<HI'tE SlRlPIIilG e ' I I -
~~} u :- -JI f
~ r ..,..~'I I
; =,o;@-~::;~ 1~d.cG;
(2) PARKING STAtrS a:::L ~ ~ ~, .
(1) tl c. STAL&. \l2Y ~ _ _ :l~ ~
T' . ,r=' Ji '''. I~ , :;3.;
-- 'I",
--'~ !
,~
~~CT:C_-TTcC::1 /. I _ -
~~
~~
....~
~ : :~. .. ,tt1.FARllNr:Y4 \. -- _
'I - ~ sm I:ONC. (2) -
I CURB (T'tP.)~
. YIHl1'E. SlRlPINr: c:oNC RViDER fU\
{TfF'.J 1---.; WI WHEEl,. ST_ElPS \e:Y.
~ I ____ . 7j P.ARIONG STAUS
~ > ,* ~rH~ :_,=~;'-~Lr_"~~~r-)
€ ~, I ~ )<, 'Sill I:ONI: (2~i~
=___.... ~ ~ I;. iii : CURB (TW.JiE;? I
-f~ I -'.:I ..,.1 Ancillary I:
~z I ~~ m I I
:: ~ I <> S g: Building I .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~! Expansion !
-... \1 II -... I I
1D.5 es ~ I ~ I
~ 8 1\ \ g (---~ I , 1 '" \ ~
:- 1 - -=-::-=-~ - - i
I f .~
I I !." Sill I:ONC. (z"\ - I
I I Q ! OJRB (TtP) ieJI =--t .
sm. I<C: PIIM'T ffi ': H
~(:rt<'} W : I
TT
~'
I'
_--!. ----
.
""
....
-+
,8
lZl
: I X
~
~J
..-/ STIL CONC'. fi\
..J;; / CURB (:NP.)ieY
- J1 ~ CR~SSHATCH(i~
li) A.. -'\...c:r-..~a.. :"' ,,,:"rr"",
[~I~ G~ =-~ Y~__~:~t::_-~---
. SAWCU
/33+62.
~ /~~ST.
33+57
/ y. 33+62.
t :l---4
"., -
"
Q
'"
- i
J
~\.
By moving the landscape buffer to the south by five feet all other dimensions WIthin the
lot must also be moved south by five feet. The dark line on the drawing above,
represents a critical area, which when moved south will cause the parking spaces along it
to be narrowed below a useable size and therefore must be eliminated. Also note that
while we anticipated losing a few spaces when we expand the ancillary building, the shift
caused by the sidewalk will impact the size of the building as well.
Date Received:
Planner: AL
6/1'1/ 2fJC7
/ I
6-2
-.I
I
--"
)>
-4
-4
)>
()
I
~
m
z
-4
~:; 0
(~ m
i2ro
mAJ
-'ro
o
~ (l)
.J.> _.
r-<
CD
0..
,,~
~
,,~
t
~
II>
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
SUBJ ECT AREA
Spl1/1gfield, OR
, \
,
,
!'
~ - ',' -I
I
, "
:i k.
;1 /,
<', J
. }
~..,. ~~ ^
g ::ip,.:<J.'d(, ;.",,':; ii.. \,1,,;.
.,..f~11''''1' -,I'
(, I '-~..: t.~,,~~'~,I~ ""'i. : I l";~jj17';;~i':L
q .; , , f' ,. '_,. ,;---:;,;": <'i' , i ,: <H :'1 , .'-
j~~' "':-..! -/ ~ -' ~^,r ~O'J ~ ,.9- ~ ~ d I - l " t t' ~ ~ \ \. -'._ ~ I A , 1
.'(\ , .""..(,,~ ..__-- I '<I ~~.;."'-'~" ~' "~-lt,,
". \'~ '1~'-"'1 f...... ..' "'~
. :, . ~~\,:. ..., " I' ....: . _ I ,,' #'\ ',. ; !',: '", 'I!r~ '"
,., :,\~' '~" ",' :" .~v'j'.(' ,,' " I ...., . l;!',x',,'t. 'Ill ,.;r:J.~" " k~jl' . l' '-":'\
..." ~ ~ ~ / Jj:: -<."~' ~ '",} !~t; t ~,' <... ~ ,:'f / \~~: ~:~LAn~Ao,,'.-:...'" ^~~~~ /'-f~<, ,'I !' ,"- "'~^f---.l- i - "j f'
h- ~ ,. i <,,<<' i~;:~'< ,~~r~~{<y""~ /> ><'J,<:>hr- -'J)"" .'/..I<vl....t-",../ ~T..~f"~".1T1T ~"t
"'- ,~~~~: ~~::~;?~,,;" ~." J',<;'" ':;;;\,},':"", '~~,:~'r:J:/I~~t:,.:>: _;j~,1i 'n~:.!~;
," '~, \" \ ' ) i, " y'~ ) "'1,'! ';;' d. ,;:"', ,""";",' H" {!/", ";1 . \ ,::,,:,,'';'-:~ i'
", )-",:n.~~:. '~' .' I :,,' ", ,/, ',' " , ,{ 1:\ t'" r:-;.-./ ,~-' "".: :;': ~ > '.' ,
\1 '- 'roo I, ~ ".. A ,:eft ' . '.>. )1, j,.-, , , .S' '1 1 . ,
,',' ' ....;/.), "tC';' ,,J.~{~~,:'}jl~,,,(J'-... .... ;;"tf-..!L,'/ ),:, ",."','i' 'Y:
t. ,~,...."",. " "'~ l;-n' t, . '.._.._n.. 1 ,..<1_. '.', . \' '., > I'M. !
. 'I ., "'" ~J'"l r l M'l' , _~' "'1' "" ' ' t., ,
,_' ~ ,:t>~_ ~llrJr..~ld14{z i" r. '" :'\r-r':\ ......t'"--' 1 > \
1 j , '--\.:, ,. . ,-- ,A f' .........c....., u '. -' '1 L..._., "tn_-,' I
, ,,- 1\ 9.!>....~~H...;.~' J"V J -'-.? ~, ~ > t., ~~J.,' l L__ l \
.... , I "'<< ,,' ..... I ;' \' j 1 :\'. ,,' I 'f '
, .,',.' l' '. ' =-='
, ." 1\" ' .t.., ' ~,:,-..' . ! :r:\ r ,-~, .
\.'~... ! , ,...;, , '--~.._., (/ '
! '."~" <~~~,': :' i i''-~ " : I
". " t: R;""" J:\ "--"'('
<.. ?> \;. ~, 'I' 1,
...;:<<<< ~ /\ ~.. t\. 'i ' I
(>
1'_ . ~ ,/;. F,
'\' ;:',' / ' ,. !--~
,
~i
. i
1 Jl
\ '
r
~fi
'. ,
, tl:;
, "
'\l
! I 1
I:
, ,
1 ,
Urban Growth BOllldary
SJl'lngfi eld City l1mlls
~iii
--
'1< l
," I
! ,
1-- --.. ~f
I /'
o
05
Mile
Ther~<lTe",,,w<fTTa,,d~ IllalQLI:onp>l"> IhuproJ"ct
{hen Q.JS..nu~ all rupom,b,l, n (or g"y 10.11 or d,rmag" ..ruIng
from'llI) t:nT}r lIml.S.u"" (T JD.lII'Qm~/mo...Cllruc) oflhuproJ.d
."
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
SUBJ ECT SITE
-~~ -~
I
, I
j--
i I
-~~~-::
_M~-r-!- -v
I
--- ;-,._-~--
_:-=r:..,--~--:,= ~-::-
.~ ~~-
-~-~ - -_. '"
~- ,~- ---~---
-,.,.-~ ~ -~
___--1_ __'
!
----".....-.._-
- --~ l - T---
I
~ ~-- ,----."...... ----
, I
J '
1;1
-,
~ __>/ w~ 1
<Jl "" !.':";;:--
',-\ '
,
---~~- ~
_____.J.._ _....
~ ...._"'u~-._~_;
_~_t
-- ~~ - ---- - -~-~-
~i ~~- --- ~- ~ -"'"
,
~-- "'-"~~~-
~~----f---
I
i" -- - -r----~
r-
----,,~
I
i
~. _':--.1
L___.___ - _,I
----<<,
~-""___H __
: - -~ -;r--- ~
- ---: -:-~l
i
...._~_. _.-_-..s- _!
I
~::.~
t__~_....M__
/
SAST
"~-,,...-
",~N ~-,
.. ""~ ~,
_ ~__.. ____ _ . _ M~""
, '
,
>~-- -....._--
_"j
_.' L ._
____....h__ _-,
I
I
I, I I
I L-_'-- --- L.-
~r-~--"";
, ;--. - -----
"
I,
r ~
"
, -~-~y~;.~ -
I '
j I' '
,11-
~A_':::".:.::::-:-=-
J
:--i
L -J _~l __1
1--"""""- J I "i
: '
--- ----" ->-.........--
EST
, I
~.-l_ ~J __ _ __J
DST
--------
__ v__ _ __...
- -, ------
:~~..C~T~
:;'K:= ;
:.... '-- !
- --_~___4
i
I-
en
i; I 1 ('-:--.--;-.--
_ ,__L-..! I ___ ___-'
\-[--;;;,
,;: I;"
_. ~ ....~~-'" -'-_.....- ---
""- r-----
~_~ L_ ~
~ -- ~ ~---..- - - ----- --,
1-'
__-l...__~ - CI) __ _ _--....-..!
eST W
:s:---___
~' -- j
':S: ' ,
~ '''':''-:C' _::=:.. ::-: ~ :.
a. ,~:;
__",~,J.._____~cr ) _/<
~.s~ :t1 ----- .----~~ ' --
~ ,--~- 6'---~- ---- ~ r-~-~----
, : i[ E~; ,! I
! ,0:: i
:--...--::.:..-...: tt1
l > Z'
o '
_ _____...:ii:.__IJ-L_>I_
MAIN ST
- ~~......-;
----"
-: -:-~-:::
~'~~
There are no WQTTQnher thai aa:Onplll1 thu product
UJUJ assume QJJ , erponstbd, h' {or am' IosI or danUJge arISIng
(rom am' t11'Of' OlVIIS$IOR U J1lSlfJlJflaJ 'nat:Olrocl'o(thlS product
7-2
;"r;r -----
_.:~ !-~~~~-=-
, ,
1 '
...._~~..._~--
v - _ _____-::::_ T~
....--~--'-
- ---------
/
o 100 200 Feet
--,
'---'
__ _ L_ ~_~
I 1 I
l.___ '_ _ _
A, T Y
1-----l
::-
- -i--
,. --""'l"-:
-_-:';":'_~~Nl
r
"1 '")..-:::..:;
Iii
~t-:-""":~ - -:::...;:-:-:.-..--
It:>
~ _ ~--
~___ .1
Spnngfield, OR
! !
, ,
~_.l.."""'A ___
- -~ -;--r----'
,
I '
'_ L 1.:
,
'- --
! _1
-::..=-::::---:.' .::.. :_~'":...::=:<
:-.-..-.-..J
:.--=-.-...:...::.....
I
I '
__..J_ _~__J__
---:--~ -- ----- -
,. ----j
j._---:-~:::..;:--..;;;:
I ,
~~ --........ - ~~ --
I --~- - - ~-----' __A
r~'"::.-::::';'--;--:-.:::::~-:;::::-";::
~"-T~~- -- --
I
----"'f---
-- _......__, v__
I-
en
J: ",
I-
CD
I
-- ---.
1__.. _I
.
May, 2007
Date Received:
Planner: AL
t//?/;ltJt'J7
I /
.. '" ..
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007-00019
SUBJ ECT SITE
Spnngfield, OR
__" ........J..
l..-..___ _ ..___A_____ _
"-- ------ --~-
I
,--- --- --. ---; --- ------ --;- --- ---. . - - .--.- --
17-03:35-24
,
13900
14000
14100
14300
264 00'
I
~-- -- ----_._- ~--" - -~'
,N
(0
It)
<0
SITE
en
co
(0
(0
B STREET
I-
en
~
ill
>-
~
5:
~
a:::
~
a..
a:::
ill
ill
Z
o
a..
264.00'
1800
1700
1600
1500
1900 17 -03-35-31
I-
en
I
I-
~
,
i------- _'k~""__ ---~-----~ -___ i
A STREET
+--_..
~~~
Thin! are no \t arrannes lhOJ acconpanl' thIS product
Users W"SJ~me ai' rerpon.nblllo for anI' loss or damage IJrlSl ng
finmam error omLWtJn fT p1SIIWnalmaCalraCyo!lhlSproducl
o
50
100 Feet
,
May 2007
Date Received: ff~?
P'anner: AL ;-
7-3
.. " ..
PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST
CASE LRP2007 -00019
SUBJ ECT SITE
Springfield, OR
___ ...__ ...~_ "YA_ __ ~_~ _1...~~ ___
~----- ~
;_ ~M~~ _ _~_-;
17-03-35-24
13900
14000
14100
14300
i'
264 00'
------~------
~ . ..--. ..-----.J--;;;;;,;;g.----.---- ---- .-------.-.----.-----------. en
, ~ --m-.-.---.----.--.____j.~~~~..__..____~_~~_~~~:m.____m_______ i
B STREET
I-
CI)
<{
w
>-
<{
~
~
a:::
<{
c...
a:::
w
w
Z
o
c...
264.00'
1800
1700
1600
1500
- -+- ~ ~"'-__ ___ ____AA
I-
CI)
I
I-
"<t
1000
17 -03-35-31
A STREET
-- .._, ---.
- -.- --
I
. .
~~
There an! no'" omzntJeS thai QC('f)1Tpom thiS product
~er$ assumea/J responslbd,n jor ani loss or damage OrtSl ng
Jromanl'l'Trof onlwron IT fDSluonal InOCOlrQC\ of/hIS product
o
50
100 Feet
1
May 2007
Date Received: 6/!L1./;,oL
Planner: AL 7
7-4
~LJI ~L '1 _IL
I~__ I ~
/c=J~~l_ ;/1 I
I ~ ~I \I ~I';I
,L.,. ~J ~---1~~
~!'~- ~-n I'~
. -'Tl---LJ -
) . ~'=/r=
~I,
....... I ~ ~
~. ~ ~ ~ ~ (J) 0
I I- :2
:x: I- en ('\
I- 0 T'"" "
m N N
IB: STREET OVERVIEW
(lj'1 "~, r
JH(/)~' " IL....!
1-1 . ~ li;
n! v: (/) I- co
~\~:'~I ir ~.[~~.~~
\ --{I' i' I I I .c_ JL
r I I I JLr
If It If'; L_ _~
II 1')1 'd" el II
1 ffi '1 -11 _ _ ,c- I '
'1 II ~ ~~Il -I~r ~r ~J: ~:H_ _--'! ~.II ." ".:
" j\ 1 ~ II "11 t1 , r II 11'- ..
~r'~ \\ -l =4' 1~-:1 I ,i _U-,-=II l-Bm'REC'i__::n ," " ~
\1 LJ=:JI 1 I I, IlJ L _ 'C
W\ 1--11l :=JI- - '1 I I I~- 'l ( J
\ Ir-:~ .--J'-=:J I L , , e
- ": II II=;J!-rlsJ::JI' i~~ 8 f ~
vm~~~! S-JL~ r::L ~ ~
--~/;"-~ ~
LJ
PRL---
I I~ --u
I ~~
51
-~I
-,I
.. s I
L
6117 83 Feet (1.16 miles)
G:. -7?:: ~"7"
Uale N8CeIVi9l1. .,?",r y -- --L~
Planner: AL
..
r
t
I
t:
I
I-
<0
=0
-'
'\
-~~"II.[
~ ~lJ
. - "
1-'
(J)
iE:
<0
(J)
J
..
/
11"=.
o 250 500 Feet
.,. ~ -
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CASE NO. LRP2007-00019
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
Vacation of a one-block segment of B Street located between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East.
1. On May 7, 2007, the Springfield CIty CounCIl IllltIated the vacatIon actIon in accordance WIth Spnngfield
Development Code 9 060(3)(a), Planrung Case No. LRP2007-00019 - CIty of Springfield PolIce Department,
applIcant.
2. The applIcatIon was'mItIated in 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 public heanng on the vacatIon request was held and the wntten record for submIttal of
publIc teshmony 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 hearmg have been
conSIdered and are part of the record of thIS proceedmg.
CONCLUSION
Based on thIS record, the requested vacatIon applIcatIOn IS conSIstent WIth the cntena of SDC 9.030. ThIs general
findmg is supported by the speCIfic findmgs of fact and conclUSIOn m Attachment A, VacatIon Staff Report.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planlllng CommIssion hereby recommends the CIty CounCIl approve the vacatIon request at a publIc heanng
ATTEST
Planrung Commission Chairperson
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABST AIN:
ATTACHMENT
Oa({;l f'(dCeived:
Planner: AL
t/;9.~7
/ j"'"
8-1