The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPacket, Planning Commission PLANNER 6/19/2007 v. ... , .J >!- MEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DATE OF MEETING: June 19,2007 FROM: Andy Llmbrrd ot- PLANNING COMMISSION TRANSMITT AL MEMORANDUM TO: Spnngfield PlanD1ng CommIssIon SUBJECT: Request for VacatlOn of PublIc RIght-of-Way ISSUE The Plannmg CommIssIon IS requested to conduct delIberatlOns for a request to vacate a 66-foot WIde by 264-foot long segment ofB Street located between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East The Plannmg CommISSIon will declde whether to advIse the CIty CouncIl to approve, approve WIth condItIons or deny the request DISCUSSION On February 28, 2006, the Spnngfield CIty CouncIl conSIdered four sIte optIOns for the Justlce Center proJect The sIte optlOn selected by the City CouncIl utIlIzes Clty-owned property wmch IS located between 4th Street and PIOneer Parkway East, and which extends from A Street to the mId-block alley north of B Street The selected site optlOn mcorporates a one-block segment ofB Street nght-of-way mto the development area for use as a secure polIce parkmg lot, and a bmldmg pad for an anclllary bUl1dmg servmg the Justlce Center. The CIty Councl1lrutlated the street vacatIon actIOn (Case LRP2007-00019) at the regular meetmg on May 7, 2007 The publIc nght-of-way proposed for vacatlOn conSIsts of a 66-foot WIde by 264-foot long segment ofB Street extendmg from the western edge ofthe 4th Street nght-of-way through to the eastern edge of the PlOneer Parkway East nght-of-way The street IS located Immediately to the north of the publIc and police vehIcle parkmg lots servmg the CIty-owned bm1dmgs fronting onto A Street. A PublIc 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 submitted testlmony opposmg the vacatIOn At the PublIc Heanng, Mr. Scott Olson prOVIded verbal testlmony opposmg the vacation and requested that hIS previous testimony submItted on March 26, 2006 for the Justlce Center Dlscretlonary Use and Zone Change requests (DRC2006-000 13 & ZON2006-00007) be entered mto the publIc heanng record (Attachment 4) Addltlonally, Mr. Olson submItted wntten testlmony opposmg the proposed vacation dunng the extended publIc heanng record (Attachment 5). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the vacatlOn request based on the attached findmgs ACTION REQUESTED AdVise the CIty CouncIl to approve the vacation request at a publIc heanng by motlon and SIgnature of the attached recommendatlon by the PlanD1ng CommISSIOn Chairperson A TT ACHMENT 1. Staff Report and Fmdmgs ATTACHMENT 2. Memo from PolIce CruefJerry SmIth ATTACHMENT 3. Testlmony from Bob Foster opposmg the proposed vacatIOn ATTACHMENT 4. Testlmony from Scott Olson dated March 28,2006 ATTACHMENT 5. Testimony from Scott Olson dated June 12,2007 ATTACHMENT 6. Memo from Jll11 Polston regardmg alley Sidewalk ATTACHMENT 7. Maps showmg the proposed vacatlOn area and B Street overvIew ATTACHMENT 8. RecommendatIOn to CIty CouncIl Date Received: Planner: AL " , ~I#/;P;L ~ v. -d A TT aCHMENT 1 V ACATION REQUEST ST AFF REPORT AND FINDINGS Case No. LRP2007-00019 , APPLICANT The City of Spnngfield/Spnngfield PolIce Department REQUEST The vacatIOn of a 66-foot wIde by 264-foot long portlOn of street nght-of-way. LOCATION OF PROPERTY The segment ofB Street nght-of-way (R6W) proposed to be vacated IS located west of 4lh Street and east of PIOneer Parkway East m downtown Spnngfield The publIc nght-of-way lies 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 publIc nght-of-way wIth plattmg of the ongina1 Map ofSpnngfield 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 vacatlon. From a functlOnal 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 CommIssIon PublIc Heanng on June 5, 2007' seven supportmg the vacatlon and two opposed Mr. Bob Foster and Mr Scott Olson submItted wntten testImony pnor to and dunng the extended publIc heanng record for thIS vacatlOn request (Attachments 3-5). The submItted testunony opposmg the vacatIOn IS cntlcal of the proposed vacatlOn and the CIty'S recent adoptlon of new vacation cntena, but does not specIfically address the relevant cntena of the Spnngfield Development Code 9 060(3) At the publIc heanng, the Planrung CommIssIon mqurred about the potential for mcorporatmg a SIdewalk into the mId-block alley north of the secure polIce parkmg lot servmg the Justlce Center A response from Jlffi Polston, ASSIstant ProJect Manager for the JustIce Center ProJect IS attached for the Planning CommIssIon's mformatlOn (Attachment 6). SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA Spnngfield Development Code (SDC) 9.060(3) establIshes cntena for vacatlOn ofnght-of-way where the property WIll rem alp. m publIc ownershIp and WIll contmue to be used for a publIc 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 1: Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) SectlOn 27 1 130( I) reads as follows' "The clly govermng body may l11ltwte vacatIOn proceedmgs authorzzed by ORS 271 080 and make such vacatIOn wlthout a petlllOn or consent of property owners Notlce shall be gzven as prOVided by ORS 271 110, but such vacatwn shall not be made before the date setfor heQl-lI1g, nor}fthe owners of a majOrity of the area affected, computed on the baSIS prOVIded m ORS 271 080, object m wntzng thereto, nor shall any street area be vacated WIthout the consent of the owners of the abuttmg property if the vacatwn wdl substantwlly affect the market value of such property, unless the Clty governlng body pro Vl des for payzng damages Provlsion for payzng such damages may be made by a local assessment, or In such other manner as the City charter may provlde." Fllldmg 2: ORS 271 080(1) proVIdes for vacatIon of" ..all or part of any street, avenue, boulevard, alley, plat, pubhc square or other publzc place. " In accordance With ORS 271.080( 1), the vacatlOn actlon requIres "a Date Received: tf9/2bP7 Planner: AL I / A TT ACH!YlENT 1-1 descriptIOn of the ground proposed to be vacated, the purpose Jor whlch the ground IS proposed to be used Qnd the reasonJor such vacatIOn." Fmdmg 3 The Spnngfield CIty CouncIl Imtlated the vacatIon actIOn at the regular meetmg on May 7, 2007 The nght-of-way proposed for vacatlOn IS generally depicted and more specifically descnbed m Exhibit A to thiS staff report. The purpose of the vacatIon IS to retam the segment of vacated publIc nght-of-way in publIc ownership, and to use the area for constructIOn of a secure pohce parkmg lot and anCillary bUlldmg servmg the Justlce Center. Fmdmg 4 In accordance WIth ORS 271 130(1), the decislOn on the vacatIOn actlOn WIll be made at a future CIty CouncIl meetmg, and after Pubhc Heanngs before the Planmng CommlsslOn and CounCIl. Fmdmg 5 All properties that dIrectly abut the segment of pubhc nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn are owned by the City of Spnngfield ConcluslOn The proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn comphes WIth Cntenon (a) (b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.110(1); Fmdmg 6 In accordance Wlth ORS 271.110(1), pubhc heanng notlces were placed m the newspaper of general clrculatlOn (The RegIster Guard) on May 18 and 25, 2007. Fmdmg 7: In accordance WIth 27l 110(2), pubhc notlce of the proposed right-of-way vacatlOn actIOn was posted at two conspicuous locatIons immediately adJacent to right-of-way proposed for vacatIon (at the northeastern corner adjacent to 4th Street, and at the southwestern corner ~dJacent to PlOneer Parkway East) Fmdmg 8' In accordance WIth SDC 27l 080, adpcent landowners and reSIdents/tenants wlthm a 400-foot radms of the 66-foot by 264-foot linear nght-of-way proposed for vacatIOn were notIfied by mall ConcluslOn: The notIficatIon prOVided for the proposed nght-of-way vacation comphes With Cntenon (b) (c) Approval of the vacation would be consistent with provision ofsafe, convenient and reasonably direct routes for cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles as provided in OAR 660-0012-0045(3); Fmdmg 9 As stated m Oregon Admmlstratlve Rules (OAR) 660-,012-0045(3)(d), "safe and convel1lent" means blcycle and pedestnan routes, facllztzes and Improvements whlch: (A) Are reasonably free from hazards, partlcularly types or l~vels of automobzle traffic whIch would zntelfere WIth or discourage pedestrian or cycle travel for short trips. (B) Provlde a reasonably dlrect route oj travel between destl11atwns such as a transit stop and a store, and (C) Meet travel needs oj cychsts and pedestnans consldenng destl11atwn and length oj tnp, and conslderll1g that the optImum trip length oj pedestrians lS generally % to 'is mzle Fmdmg lO' In accordance WIth OAR 660-0l2-0045(3)(d), vacatIOn of the subJect nght-of-way and closure to pubhc travel would not mterfere WIth or dIscourage pedestnan, cycle or vehIcle travel on the adjacent pubhc street system due to exceSSIve traffic or other unusual hazards East-west traffic circulatlon 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 of the subJect right-of-way would not result m pedestnan, cyclIst or vehicle tnps that are more than ~ mIle from bemg a dIrect route of travel between destmatlon pomts FIgure 1 Illustrates approxJillate 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-drrectIOll dIstance for passage from the eastern end ofthe 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 (<118 mile) for bicycles and t, /; 'i /1CJD7 I / 1-2 Date ~eceived: Planner: AL Figure 1 - Approximate Travel Distances ( .( '\ i' .. . Ql: Ql: .... :;I: .n: ....: 1 . .t !l /~l\i " 1 ... ~ .,' ,. .' ",.. , '.' , . .' ,. -'W01eet '\ (1::~'" .. , -~uu Teel Ij -I \, 'V ~ ) ~ L -300 feet r. ': :.. :Ql ~ :0 :10 .~ ., '--__.T -. C Street :'- ,; -, / / .... :Ql :Ql .- :0 :&r: .,,:1\ ,~" t ~. ( B Street ,/ " .\ r ... Ql Ql - o o M 1 :Q; :Ql :- :0 :0 :M : I , , " , I , ~..; I . .,. I .... I. -300 feet A Street ') r >J lfl co 1.1 >- co ~ :s:. ..... co n.. ..... Q) Q) ..... - ..... Cf) :5 ..q J "= Ma~- Street =:J L I~ r;- ~ r I I"~~ Right-of-way proposed ~. for vacation " Travel directions and approximate distances Out-of-dlrectlon travel ...... directions and distances \ ..... / 1]) Q) , c o ~ 0: (I I I I I I I (! 1-3 Dat(1 t1eceived:. ,j;"I,Joo7 Planner: AL . j / vehicles usmg surface streets VehIcles and bicycles have the optlOn ofusmg eIther A Street or C Street for the east-west segment of the tnp. The out-of-dlrectlOn distance would be even less for pedestnans usmg the publIc 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 Fmdrng 12 ProvlSlon of travel routes for cychsts, pedestnans and vehIcles would be VIa the eXlstmg publIc 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 slIDIlar open areas ls.not conSIdered Fmdmg l3 There are eXlstmg SItuatIOns m downtown Spnngfield and elsewhere throughout the CIty where portlOns of the gndded street system are not connected and out-of-dlrectlOn travel is reqUlred for CycliStS, pedestnans and vehicles Nearby examples mclude portlOns of A Street east of 1 ih Street, A, C, D and F Street east of 14th Street, 8th and 9th Streets north ofG Street, and G Street west of 4th Street Fmdmg 14 A Traffic Impact AnalYSIS (TIA) was prepared by an mdependent traffic engmeenng consultant rn support of the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn (Sprmgfield Justlce Center Revlsed Task 2 Report - Traffic Impact Study, Access Engmeenng, July, 2006). The TIA exammed the eXIstIng and post-vacatlOn street system m the vlclmty of the Justice Center and evaluated the pOSSIble Impacts of the proposed nght~of-way vacatIOn to vehIcle movements and the performance of nearby mtersectIons. The TIA concluded there would be minunallmpact 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 vacatlOn also concluded that no traffic mltigatlOn actlOns would be reqUired to ensure safe and effiCIent flow oftraffic m the vlclmty of the Justice Center. Among the Simplest and most effectlve measures to structure traffic movements m the area will be strategic placement of dlrectlOnal Slgnage 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 mstallmg curb extenSIOns to prevent undeSirable turnmg movements. Findmg 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 vacatlOn. Relocatlon of the bus stop can be done m consultatlOn WIth Lane TranSIt Dlstnct. ConcluslOn Staff have concluded that the proposed nght-of-way vacatIon wIll have no adverse effect on safety, connectlvlty or mamtammg reasonably dIrect travel routes for pedestnans, cyclIsts and vehIcles As proposed, the pubhc nght-of-way vacatlOn comphes With Cntenon (c) (d) Whether a greater public benefit would be obtained from the vacation than from retaining the right-of- way in its present status; and Fmdmg 17 The nght-of-way presently contams a two-lane collector street WIth SIdewalks on both Sides Upon vacatIOn of the nght-of-way, the subJect area would be mcorporated mto the Spnngfield Justlce Center and used for secure police parkmg The nght-of-way would be closed to all public travel The Spnngfield Police Department adVIses that a secure parkmg lot - close to the Justlce 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 veillcles Fmdmg 18. Jerry SmIth, Spnngfield ChIef of PolIce, submItted a memo m support of the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn (Attachment 2) whIch reads as follows. ImDortance orB Street Closln,? to the Justice FacI/ztv Prolect "The purpose of thls memo lS to summan:::e for the Planning CommlsslOn the Importance of clOSing B StreEt as p~rt of the Justice Center project. As deszgned, the area currently occupled by B Street would become part of a h/;1~f)7 I / 1-4 Dat0 Received: Planner: AL fenced and secured parkll1g area . Closll1g B Street lS necessmy for the s,ecunty of portions of the faclhty The planned Justlce faclhty mcludes an anczllary bwldmg that wIll be a reposltory for eVIdence m cnmmal cases, storage for polzce and court records, and storage for speczahzed pohce eqwpment and weapOI1l}' Closmg B Street wIll allow the entIre anclllalY buzldmg and parkzng lot to be fenced m, sIgnificantly lmprovmg the security of these records and eVldentzary ltems. WIthout the secunty fencll1g m place, the anclllmy buzldmg as deslgned does not provIde sufficlent secunty for these llems . Closll1g B Street wlll provzde secure fleet and employee parlGng To date, Department vehIcles and employee parkmg has not been secured by fencmg Whzle .thIs does not cause slgnificant lssues dunng normal working hours, the Department has expenenced damage to fleet vehlcles, and errzployees have suffered damage to theIr personal vehlcles, dunng late evemng and early mor11lng hours Damage has ranged from pamt scratches to slashed tlres and broken wmdows . Closll1g B Street wlllzmprove the safety of pohce officers and Cltlzens The street closure wIll allow officers responding to emergency calls from mSlde the buzldmg to access thelr vehlcles wIthout crossmg a pubhc nght of way, thereby reducing the rzsk of an accldent dunng an emergency response . Closing B Street wlll provIde a secure areafor evacuatwn ofmu11lclpaljazl pnsoners Thefenced area wlll serve as an outdoor holdzng area for mU11lcipal jazl pnsoners m the event that the JazZ must be evacuated Wlthout the street closure and fencmg, there wlll not be an area outside the mU11lcipal jazl adequate and accessIble for holdzng pnsoners Instead, an evacuatwn event would necessItate the uncontrolled release of all mU11lclpal Jail pnsoners " Findmg 19: As descnbed m the statement from the pohce Chief, the vacated right-of-way WIll be used' for secure polIce parkmg and IS also designed to provIde a fenced-in area that IS large enough for evacuatIon of JaIl pnsoners m the event of an emergency. PrOVlSlOn of a secure muster area for evacuated pnsoners provIdes a drrect benefit to the Jail staff, pohce personnel, and the publIc. Findmg 20' As noted m the Pohce ChIefs statement, ensunng respondmg polIce officers do not have to cross a publIc street in order to reach therr verucles enhances safety for both PolIce Department personnel and pubhc users of the street system Fmdmg 21: Passage of the PublIc Safety ballot measure m 2005 that secured pubhc fundmg for the JustIce Center proJect demonstrates Spnngfield residents' commitment to the proJect. ComparatIvely few people wltrun the CIty regularly use the segment of B Street proposed for vacatIOn However, all Spnngfield reSidents (and viSitors) benefit from a strong polIce presence wlthm the commumty. ConcluslOn Staff have concluded that the proposed nght-of-way vacatlOn serves a greater benefit to the pubhc than retammg the one-block segment of nght-of-way m ItS present status The proposed vacatlOn also prOVIdes dIrect benefits to the City's Pohce Department, whIch ultImately benefits Spnngfield reSIdents As proposed, the nght-of-way vacatlOn complIes WIth Cntenon (d) (e) Whether provisions have been made to ensure tbat tbe vacated property will remain in public ownership. FIndIng 22: The vacated nght-of-way IS to be Incorporated mto the JustIce Center development, whIch is a pubhcly-funded proJect. OwnershIp ofthe 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 ' FmdIng 23: Upon vacatlOn 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 (whIch could occur lfthere were pnvately-owned parcels frontmg onto the nght-of-way), remammg In publIc ownershIp IS 1-5 Dat() Received: ,If(~1J7n_n_ Planner: AL -T7 assured ConclUSIOn The proposed nght.of-way vacatlOn complIes wIth Cntenon (e) CONCLUSION In summary, the proposed right-of-way vacatlOn. (a) allows constructIOn of a publIcly funded proJect approved by a vote of the publIc, (b) mcreases law enforcement's publIc presence m the downtown core through constructIOn of a Police, Courts and JaIl facIlIty, and (c) prOVIdes constructlOn features that mcrease the secunty and safety to the CIty'S PolIce Department and the general publIc dunng operatlons. The loss of publIc good m terms ofverucle, pedestnan and bIcycle connectivIty has been demonstrated to be mmunal and wlthrn State statutes for connectlvlty under Cntenon 9 060(3)(c) oftrus report and can be reasonably mltlgated. Based upon the above findmgs and testlmony contamed herem, Staff concludes that the proposed nght-of-way vacatIOn for a Justlce Center faCIlIty (mcludmg Jail, courts and polIce statlOn) 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 vacatlOn compbes wIth Critenon 9.060(3)(a-e) RECOMMENDATION RecommendatIOn of approval of the proposed vacatlon to the CIty Counctl. 1-6 Date Received:, Planner: AL ,lfh,tn I / 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 Planning Commission the importance closmg B Street as part ofthe Justice Center project. As desIgned, the area currently occupied by B Street would become part of a fenced and secured parking area. . Closmg B Street is necessary for the security of portions of the facilIty: The planned Justice faCIlIty mcludes an ancIllary bmlding that WIll be a reposItory for eVIdence m crimmal cases; storage for polIce and court records; and storage for specIahzed polIce equipment and weaponry. Closing B Street will allow the entire ancillary bUlldmg and parkmg lot to be fenced in, significantly improvmg the secunty of these records and evidentiary Items. Without the secunty fencing m place, the anCIllary building as designed does not provide sufficient security for these items. . Closing B Street will provide secure fleet and employee parking: To date, Department vehicles and employee parking has not been secured by fencmg. While tlus does not cause significant issues during normal workmg hours, the Department has experienced damage to fleet vehicles, and employees have suffered damage to their personal vehIcles, during late evening and early morning 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 bmldmg to access their vehicles without crossing a publIc nght of way, thereby reducmg the nsk of an accident dunng an emergency response. . Closing B Street will proVIde a secure area for evacuatIOn of municIpal jaIl pnsoners' The fenced area will serve as an outdoor holdmg area for mumcIpal 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 holding pnsoners. Instead, an evacuation event would neceSSItate the uncontrolled release of all mumcipal jail prisoners. 2-1 Oato Receivecl:~a....L- Planner: Al ATTACHMENT , \ \ -k(7L{b'-~ <:j C-rl) :j'l rt~ %!f ~rxSJf-=ff( 1) , (2) A 0 / r ,/ /'11"\-1) ID ' "5Ar711 ~L4 \!JR In c:::P~ . nut,/ L{ t1~4 + y /4Ml1:l'U3tN./({fSJIGif -J req[;7o -t/J- do5.t6& ~ J3 SIte€2/- · a:t Lf--&Ol~ is 11f:e/); -h h~~ ~~ T ~~ !V1Oibr/Sis WGqld~ s~ ~ 4.rrqVt'),p~ ~~ ~_ . oec;de,I. ~ ~I /./ ~ <:. '1-0 ~ y1Ae>~es/llf..., f"7qJ6r~~Ct /,_/ ~ --f)n~ " ~~'~~~ ft--i<~~~~' ~(JflA . ()v)--A~~' ~ ~ . ~- .~ -Q,4~/~ t;;;;::;5;/ff ~GS ' lJ f I VI. ~ B ~1-resZ:i h!ctl/. r?/l tt 0 ~ ~ 7') i ~ (I de:;) e D) JJ3-;-C: ~ : T ~ / tF ~ ~v : ~ ~~ !{Z};;~,~ :r- ~if6z5 ~~ /<5 ~/uft.x.~~ . ~J#J~ pc:sfo--&f':e · B ~ofd}- 3'~ . jC' ~ ~ -Gs7 Ve5'1 ~ L ( h VG-Q eq;,. . ~ cHi. we:s't psi. . , ~,:r -1--- u.nrUl 0-d Q.. vo/~ o.::t- S jHtl'l;G'dJ ~ tihV4 5cZfJ ~ ~/~, So :r~~ ~ ~ ~ SS1~ f/'~ kg t~ ~ +lj~fo'JG~1Sl ;~ '"\. ~ j) 00.. /~. ~~JvY)v~~ CcJ( JJ5f. ~ ~ S~o";f a1- ~q- 3-1 ATTACHMENT 5t:z- ~.{'~. /1; ~ jl:r.r/;:l-( '-'~ C ~ .' e{~V1AA.~ ~ t3~~~)Q:it:: S! f~i' y- . \ /A1. {Cd7~:1f. 7l~ ~~/~.s ~,cm!J~ " Vl~ ~ C(~ t:f:~ ~ f? fJ AA~~ / _ ::; n _ /J ~, , ~ 8J(I'P~ec;~ ~- ~-v-; vc--v ~ ~ . itJz- fllarvf1ltJ ~ r~ vt/Uv-Q ~ ~ . , 7(J;t1.-- dT~~~~: ~ v-.:5!':V} fU) ;f =.0 ~ !8Q. · ~~~::kq~~ · 07~ru:-o'p./:;~ ~ ~"'~ GV( Bp.. - /'- . /' A L A /. (75 *" .L 1_ d (/ . LO 1 c.---~~ (U ~--7 (~_' \: :;PI /.5.~ tt... '^~ a:.. co/{ U€IX;-ePtc:z C~) _/IK:-e ~ ~~ ~ c, (~ ~d O~) ~ V;~~{/::::.- . flU w~/ IJ~J0c:U~'CJ~ ~ (ar&?~(/dJ tt~ y I'T-~ cc ~ I1QQjl c:? 4-JJcYw ;--r/S'~ -to ,'q ~~ T-r ~ $eQMS' (d-: f1A o-;Cn06 ~. ~ h!CJ>~/~~~~.~~ ~ ~o~~._.~ ~/~7?Lto71JV.l fDoLv~S; ~ ./ -J T"2J[d,~' -rht's 'r':5 ~ ~ ' ~rvv1Ql/~ l v( -/t-R- prd<o:L<J ~ ~~)_ ' ~ ~v"'& %~.S'~I/k ~cJ~4-r\ jn~ ()11CS2 ~ ~ ~~~ to ~ l<t~ ~ ~ f3 S;:tZ. f~J /~'~sCCY:.(j! . -jlv"........ J) ~'1V1 ~~ ~~~-+t'.,.., .... '~~J ~ /L/O)~ , 'j; -7r7.l/. 1 ~/f:::-!..; 1 ~ C ~~ _~. '~A.C-/.!~11t. I~~ ~~ ~ 0 nO.A~~::" '-'rJ a oS ~ -I- ~C() -"--0' ~.-r / ~( ~'5'i( [,'[:;.e.S0 i1-?- ~ ~ ~ H~j ~lA.e F .fed!vf)~ <5->.. ~ ~ sf+. ~ /o-Q ~ ~ ~ cuT ~1-~ . 5e~r3 (/k q -f-~(/J~ LV~ ,~~ , - ~--h7~ 0 h ~ --!-YEse < tV ~ ~~ ~~ -10 ~ 'to 6~~ IJ 5 i ~QCe ~!fn i/-o5f/~~' 3-3 Date Received- //1 fl~6L - / , Planner: Al " \ \ \ i ;j)~ /4.a.-; r /p/*el1 ) dt'ld -::/7 ~dl /4'~.6; -l.~ ~,~ ~~ : pqv2:ef (0 JJ/oc!: cJfi !l % ~ ~ 4ft tf~ j)I ef'a(q~ ..~~N;( I {1< . /~./- b~Of:N:J 'f:;;;} i4, . "<f tt!. \ I (/{t;{' I ( . q rt j I ~ ~ i C1. Ml/tJat/&rCf! /0 6-e tb ~ ~ k j7 C yf :Jo. c;er (tJ ~ ff d; [)/;rd0:/j f db ~/.1 ~ ~ A A ~ 0/ ~~ :r ~ f::kr-t l..u ( t / <---T./W/V---r-- /({M;t fo (j~ f3 51 ~ Ju ~/ fLff1 c(8sd _ '. ~tlgn t7 ~ .j.,-fl ~(S . ~ '1 -f0-- ~ t[f ft--e ~ 7/1 ;U~/ ;;;-- ~ _~ ~ -f?L /Jh--cl-lhcCf ~ ~ . /~. ~ ;po 4~~ ~{)IJaz ~;L - ~. ~ ~ V&Yy ~ (b ~!3S7!~~ DJ6~. . , G ;t:" U~ ~ 5)7ft4J'Gef;( _/(L5~ J ~t5/1A d/7/-IJ-f/ ~-p, ..J1~:J' ~ 3-5 Date Received:..ifL71J-"o1 Planner: AL . l.;p~ ~~al ~e/*el1 jdt1A C"7 ~ci/ H~.6, . \, '.:r . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .: \ ~.:d (v JJ/ocL 11 l ~ ~ ~ !-fa t/~ j)I ef'tw?~ ._~~ :{ tJ (/d /1.q4~ ~~ i C1. Ml1tJat/'ttece 10 k . 10 ~ ~ kIJ7 C yf ~)y.r f6 ~ . i1 d / fr'.6r~hH f~' '..-rl ~ (7~~~~ ,wIll ~ --(~ . I (C/.M fo ~ /lJ sf ~ Ju ~/ f1v(Tt c/:6d '. jon ~ ,. J.---f1 ~?S -. ~ ~ -f0-- ~ of ~ ~ 711 ;U~/~~-~~ fld- j;~-i&-?>t(! ~ ~ . /~. (2 ;p- 4-~ (!Jolla? ,-fUJ fL ~ '. ~ - CUM Vet/y ~ 'h~I3SY!~~ 006~' , ~ ;;p- U~ c0 ~7ft1JfJe(;j ~/(..6~ ~ ~/1A"dhIA~ ~~~.?J~ J' ~ . ~ ~ ., .. I ~ \ 3-6 .~- . 0l~ be~ 1/r ~ ~teJ)~/f v~to~~/_~ cb-u0-~ to ~ I{sP a-~SP. ~ ~ ~ ~ S:{}r1M~:,,;Vfll,.~fPi) ,/ - 0( ,0- ~\ /-, ~~'I ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ S7f::w/ ~ ;11 l~ ~ 0; c/os~ :t(3~S3f1- ';:6 ~ i! iv~ ~-- ~~ 00: . / r</6~keo' . ~~ tt-:e- v;U (!Led! ~.~~ tJf' oUf.Lr' . !tFe ~ ~ ~ /1J- ;6 ~ .t; {/O'~ ))J-fto) tAK (J ~ ~'. ry07~~~' ~ k .;--4.9- ~ ~Z ~j~~/~.t::(/:$~ JJ/~ _. J~fJ/ t/td tJi.dJ/nVjJl/EJ'Cf' ~ r~ fG""" . ~uKfr~ - ~ ~ ~A/I---;ta~ ~8Yt51~ ~ ~~6f1i;~kz 7b !iJdtJe'~ ~... .'~" 611 iD ~:J~f ~ HcV:f07 r~ (ow2v( <jq futJ;;/ze $!' ~ M \ ~ .I<ff!!7:Cn 0j' , 1'. 5~~ f(~ - ~~~1. {l ,/_ _n~ J-1~~ A _._ JA J ~-;~J/)1&f ~~ ~~))J::f"'V. ~- !/fJ~ Le~ lfr d:r ~td)/t tr~ (0 ~ ~~.~ ~ to ~ ~Sf ~qzij$? , ' AftJ5 ~ sp~I1~" n P P1iiCd$j ~ ~ . "1 . td--' ~I ~ ~ ~~ ~~uft~'^h111 ~ 11 c ;bsM--C Cjff3 6 SiP- ;;f5 ~ 'Ir~'~-- /1JJ~~ .' / r c/o~,h:eo . ~ jQ v;u(!Lete ~ kA-c tJ;' crU4 It Fe 00 ~ ~ -/1JL ;0 ~ ~ ucr'~ .Lh--/to) ~ fJ~ ~ . ~07~P;,' ~ h ,;-4.9- ~ ~z Vv1j~'r1/ ~ t~~ JJ/~.. /_0/;d!JW J//1f1J 7e'J ~ . r~ ~' ~-/k-e-b{;v~ ~ ~ J/I/0'fJ! ~f1-,,---L9-~ ~ en51~ ~ ~~6(.11il~:fe;b ~e~ ~... ..~ \. ~ i!5 ~:f~f h>> /-fcJijV1 ~U;:; Cowic/ ~ lucY;;rize $!> ~~ \ ~ ~-:r.-n" r/ . 1'. 5{~~ ff7'!r ~ R~~1. <2 , / _ _n~ 1.JWztv'~ A _ . JA. ~ );k1./YJJ ~~ ~~)>~/V. J9 J2cM 5') f)) , fJ /ea~ 0( () lIof (Ja cede B 51' ~ tj 1!r if g ) ,RR(;RTVED 7 I~ _.I /: d J-;' FEB t 200' .f w{)t{h -rif] 1 ~;s ~: ~m/ _ r' ( l1I1/tJr (Il cOil tJefllel1cp -, dr/ul/( l -m ~ clfy IJql/- eLB1' tda(/1~Jtb {At tfbrdr P/e:4:Z recc)t1l~ partifll r Cpfn d stJY1'lf !()~;/1 C/8f~-1 71i5f~rl ~~cJ;cwP g:Yf- ~ .,.M '1 ~ ;( ~2~";-~ S;e:- ,Il_ fir-. /J '-.A?' ~<i ..f M (j't{rf? ~ ~ l.l<: f1J S# ~ (js-e B~- &r i~ w t2 k~ t/tftiK -,- ~~ . fVl fI /. ( 17 ~Jl \) ~~~C(oSlt~'N~. . ~ perM c://7&dh aT _ ~ ~f?l~ - . .,~ :r'r 11 iF die? fl? ;11 ~ c c.; 0 LJ;Y0-d j,.J'A rf \ r -fl td(~ ..:P, &2!i'1 (~YUJ ) 'v-- / I " flMfI' c IJ5/fre _ '. 80 ~~ ~' 3-9 ~ '{' + ]Yfjd:f/ ~ -:J h 1. /Jitl!'J ~/~~I'~/ b~ 97/(77 i --;p~ 51 rrl (J lea:f of () 1101 I/a cede B 5:t ~ 7 t!r q- S ) ,RF.r;v.TVED' .~ {Jo~/d -f/'n~ rd/s iEB~ (V 1)cr ;11 coil (/~I1!ef1(:P . dr/vllIl -frJ fM cl If Aqll--- e/St' wallf~J ~ (At //IJnYy, . '. Pk4-Z recoJJ5/cIfzr partJ'tll r i . C4Y5 d 5~ l()ca~;/1 0'/&tk~ .' ;1\5f~f{ ~<~ gg. ~ .,.0--; " rXft~~~:r~- ~~ . -L~ ~ us-e B~- &J- fU 57 tJ-A.L L . 1, n ,/ A'r"P W fVi tZ k ~ jlCJ<,dX' - - - K,L>p-cr' ~ ~ ~ cuJlc6s)~ # 5fL . ~ perM r:Z/7f'?AIW; cd- _ L-jflHg ~!!. Fla;1:.l!7 - . . -~ .:( r" 11 Of' d 10 II!? III ~Wc:; 0 ~d j, J'A ~ " -f~ 3) dl?l~}M ) -V--/ I, f'/tuJfI c !t75are - Q'g~ ~. ~ " 3-10 ~ '{,o::;>:eS- dF/ 'b .::J b "t l~! ~l!~,f' ~ '17/f77 /5. :;f wl 1/ 6e' cM-c(- elf L, " . <' /L1 M<::A ! 3 14 . _ u rcr-u'tA cr2--f 10~ __ 'J/ I t. i/I ~ ar- , . ,J::.<l ~ CA/vCf r ~J 1MA4;2 u /11 V ev'.6C{(~, . / c.e.u::6 .J re<<(~ f/crt oro6d!,hl~ w;!f crt d~tif F ,7 t22'Q : IlSi.~~~~~~ i :r: ~ wcJrK c:z f ./1-e 5'Tr;~+1d'if : ?/JrcUj CCJ C{ 5'Aefo-f21 s.~/~eu . ~ (j,;;/uvdeerl ~ 'J6 -/0 --fh2 L'I:J rcvVj o~r-01. - - :r t'f!cdiU -1tzt ~ ~ llt-c.,);:t. QI1 ~ wi(( ~ slHI IP ~ --Sd fl/ wc1l'k .f(u1 W6o/ tv~..MA E 75 ~ cd- ~- W~~~tJ1A 467C :}:f Culll i-e ~ 0i1~. (+~J~' to/fl ~ -jz;~ "I~.-<f:J) ~ un 5%:: c2f ,7 t?7 ^,J-e c ~ ljj a.1A '. . ;to r/la4~' r/~ ~~~ ~ '\ \ \ , Date R~ceived: '//i~D7 Planner. AL --------- \ \ \ 3-11 fS ;Th.-?7!/ ~ ~ . - fv{~ /314 .. _1) ~'-7A a2J ' ~~ ~ :;; . ~ 1t1/~ 7CV /11 V ev'.6ccr~ " /' ~ .J re<<(~ fI6-vt oro6~hk wi!! ~L' , de::J'/Ji-kf F /' L.(a.2?Q i 1151~~~~~- I :r:-,Ie UlCJrk<< -I f& .5/w-("J-Hefcf : /-/.brcUj C{J ~ 5'he!o-01 S-~/~~ . t1. wi uvJ-eert ~ (j6 -/0 -!1U2 1../6 rcuVj o~'I-eY'I. - " ; :r r of! Cf (/u ~ d.fy /;.d4>dlvv 11r;- C Sf - ovr ~ i wi(( ~ $(1 ~ ~ -:s;LJ :t?/i u.}ellk' i --ftu-T wq ~-tA E 75 ~ cd- L(ffi- I 1Ja;t~'j,5TA 467C Y tulll /vz ft~ 0i1~_ . (+~J- Ct:O;(! ~ -/ZJ~J. Lf~ ~ ! ~ o-n 5 -7 ~ c.:Ef /dl ;V~ C It-~ ~ ! CUI(' - ;to tvlO/<? ~~ 7/ A In - {} i cr1t jjsf: { -?/U' YV~ '1J I I I I ~( l"t' t ~'-): lL r 1 ,f 1 , \ \ \ 3-12 ~ - - -- --- ---~-- --....-.. - -~_.... .'... '. . ftfl"J'II.:::r. ,CWU ",,-Is~ I/~ '..:.... ''{7 /.(~ .,VI fl~ ~';"'/ ~ ~7'4. A. .".-I>.6e- {/<lC~J kss -::z;: ~ /'~ iL4-'< diJ ~.~,~ {3' .Lc( .?1: .. c;ry-lN.t/ J S' arCk/ <iko'-(-o drlvec' ~ +v~ ~'3~"/);:JI. "" __,' L/' - t1 -r- <2cJMf1,Ac;>'\ S@\..Je '/pfJe. -thIS CCfl1 ~ C?oer-ro.,.A' I 'Sdq/-/d/l' preVCl/!It/lOt.>-<- 'io c(/~ w I -"- w "'00 -0) 0)..... ::JG) ffiA3 ::<D 2 ~<' ' (l) 0. ~ ~ ~ _ ~_ __ ________ ._~_ r_ ___ ~ --- - - ~- ~ -- - UNIV.RRSIT~-OF OJ\_E~G_ON - ~hemic~rPhYSICS Inshtute ~ '" - 240 Wlll~tte Hall : ,~'"' c~ J.ugene=GR:97403 "'~.~~I' g, h Fbsfe/ . 3'6 9 0e5!~ 5Ir)wJ6~~1 i.::".1. FEe 2-!.::~n::" Pf"4 '::! .L '......_....~ ...................,..,.. ;f-~; ~cry ~/S~6I?d f7aflf/I"; Cc;tv/MI55ft711 ,:2;2-5 F/-fY4 SI --1 _5fr)i~;<1ctcjR 7'7'17/ "2",' _~ -~: +_.1. 7__';' 11,1,,1," I, " 111",11 " ,1,1..1,11" 1,,,1,,,111,1,,1,1,,11. II I \ \ \ , (fJt2 ccr 510' -r-f;:erc/ (';4. Ilk< 'iL{vle~' Orb ' .'. l / . (11 Pr) 7 _______________ : r -fAil1/< rAce?? Q pfd6/F~ - i hlz; C/!./~/17o. o-f-f- 13 s+ a-s'~ Q~ c<rf--€ ~ ,./ . , va:f'Y<n'J,uiU&j/ rt'C('/ '-fo /:;t~/fd ~ /Jr;50"v1~jJc:')ll~ ~~S')~ " . V / /t5 n of C1' qC?CJ. J \.//""-7 - f // / q (~~ q/{- t-or S~r ~ aWM~< e -t. ~ .s~ I\(/r~ '-p o:ry iJc:(1I c/oWI1 ;f' Sf: I &? /Vtik C Sf.. (" q res/ /t//J ~u A'> L_ __"-67) /' ~' /' r ~ St~/ C( d<S-/f."'r vtr~ ~ d~~ V//1~r$lc~ //~~ C/'-'d~t1)# L <//J " ;;.;7 ~ ~~ ~/</(,;::( V{ jJjrI,)'e7Ztf ~. 111 <?11~ p::crt err SprJt1 /(~G(,-~ /7D-r -6/ack q tV/q;,.pt sf~ef' to do -ftz?5' Akd ~ ~ ~ '/CJ /.PC2 ~ -<*11d'J~ fi/S ~~y~ ~~/j.fr- h-U- l5' (It/:' ~/hilr~ ;I- ~ ~ 6tL/!f;~ ~ Ilk l:u-e will u~ ~ IT ~ r vJI// h~ cyzr :8 -f~ ' . flO7<f22J ~(/'r~ fc; {;/J j/ . J c:(~<< v't I'(<J~ ' I ~~ upl)>tj i1~ -Cl-/- -j7{/S It hU? j A.& '.;f gr41;fJ 5~ ?nS~/<d-Mdre: ~~-'- ;r~ ~ //1 -{quo/" ()-P -f/t--f Cb(rr-€rr.-r- . cot1s-fl/ud;cTr1 ?c&a. .h~/~ CCC'G.<'$5' to (' /~ (f~1 fed o-P0?, --f1.< 1:9f/~q/ ~~ :;fy6' :r wt>1clrvr ur-tv;, 'J;j.,pte ~ ~ o.h()<.d" 'IJi) 5~ I 6c-<;.,.-(/ ~ M €eI1l'0~ ~ ;;;r~ (/~ ~-7d-d~ 3 15 , Date Received: 7,,7I1/2-D07 Planner: AL ( ;<:A~ ~J - ~-(. \, ~ -t1~ -ttd? c71!(~ ce4/1 (OJ15i:/.s4 ~ ~ II ~ tM-R ()~psR f1v0 (~. . ..j -f' -t~ ~ ex. ~ ;j lj) cv-d {):Jfe &3 . . __ ~ (1;g !!: l:-es~/JCn)(/ ~~ t~ . ~~ ~&rt~-50()f/ // ~C?~ ,5 < .1: rd ~4 cJ--u< ::/ / P 7P 1~ --E<< ~ t- p+, A ~ -f~ I~ V r&vJcVf !),f/ljl)z -f") cif(2--f3tj ~~ . I~~ CF I &6' r;i~ b~/~~ fJA 369 (cuesf'-LY51.#/ l'3~J? 1:, "- ~ ofi ,5jorA r;f; eM/ OR. #flJ.~ ~~ . .. 97Y77 '_L-kl A.f~ fJ. . t~'(l~ 1 _/.~~ ~ /,1 VI f\ .' Dat€'I Received: (, ~-9 //,fl/J7 Planner: Al -T/._~ I RECEIVED I JUN 0 5 2006 BY: ac;Z 3-17 Submittal to the record of the city of Springfield Planning Commission Discretionary Use and Zone Change Request (Justice Center) Case N urn bers DRC2006-000l3 (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 criteria for approval With summary concluslonary findings With little or no diSCUSSion of how the application supports the findings No indication that the applicant has addressed any of the approval criteria In .the application IS presented In the staff report The staff report includes; Proposed Findings In Support of Discretionary Use Approval Criterion (1): The proposed use conforms WIth the apphcable: (a) PrOVIsIOns of the Metro Plan; Finding: The Metro Plan speaks in broad terms about development In the greater Eugene/Springfield urban area, and there are no policies specifically related to Justice Center or correction facihty projects. However, the proposal is consistent with the Metro Plan objectives for siting public/government buildings and services in nodal development areas such that population and employment are concentrated in well-defined areas with good transit service and a mixture of compatible land uses (Metro Plan Chapter II-E(4)). Finding: The Metro Plan's Public and Semi Public plan designation provides for the accommodation of major government facilities and office complexes. Springfield's Public Land and Open Space zoning district implements thiS plan designation in the City. The Justice Center, a large public facility, is proposed to be located within thiS plan designation and, therefore, is consistent With the Metro Plan Chapter II. Comments The staff report fads 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 policy document) for the region comprised of the 1 Of 16 ATTACHMENT 4-1 (/;'1/UtJ7 Date Received: 7 -/ - Planner: AL cities of Eugene and Springfield and metropolitan Lane County The Metro Plan establishes the broad framework upon which Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County make coordinated land use decisions. As a functional plan, TransPlan must be consistent with the Metro Plan. Metro Plan amendments reqUired for consistency will be adopted by the elected officials concurrent with the adoptIOn of TransPlan TransPlan strategies include nodal development and transit-supportive land use patterns, new and expanded TDM programs, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), in addition to roadway projects that benefit pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists All of these strategies can increase the attractiveness of transportation modes other than the single-occupant vehicle (SOV). The mtegration of transportation and land use planning is especially important to support compact urban growth, which proVides for more pedestrian-, blcycle-, 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 planmng 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 tnp 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 opportunity, and the quality of life Definition/Intent: This goal recogmzes the need to mtegrate transportation and land use plannmg to enhance livability, economic opportunity, and quality of life Integration supports transportation-efficient development patterns and choices in transportatIOn modes that reduce reliance on the auto. Closmg off a collector street at It's intersectIOn with an artenal street, dlVertmg collector street traffic to adjacent local street, shuttmg off pedestnan and b/cylce publiC ways, seeking vanances to street connectIVIty and block length standards In a nodal development overlay zone IS not consistent With thiS goal 2 Of 16 4-2 " ~ 'l /Zj)f) 7 Date Received: '" f.7' - Planner: AL Goal #2: Transportation System Characteristics Enhance the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area's quality of life and economic opportunity by providmg a transportation system that IS: a) Balanced, b) Accessible, c) Efficient, d) Safe, e) Interconnected, f) Environmentally responsible, , g) Supportive of responsible and sustamable 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 charactenstics 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 mtegrates 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, ongomg financial support to ensure transportation system investments can be operated and maintained as desired. Closmg off a collector street at It's mtersectlon With an artenal street, dIVertmg collector street traffic to adjacent local street, shuttmg off pedestrian and blcylce publiC ways, seekmg vanances to street connectivity and block length standards m a nodal development overlay zone IS not consistent With thiS goal 3 Of 16 Date Received: P!ann~r: Al 6//? /)Po/ I 4-3 TransPlan Objectives Consistent with the Metro Plan, the following defimtion 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 }hat 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. DefinitionlIntent: AccessibilIty refers to physical proximity and ease of reaching destinations throughout the urban metropolitan area This objective supports the need for multimodal accessibility to employment, shopping, other commerce, medical care, housing, and leisure, including adequate public transit access for people who are transportation disadvantaged. This objective also supports the need for improved access for tourists to destinations. Mobilityis the ease with which a person is able to travel from place to place. It can be measured in terms of travel time Access and mobility are provided at different levels on different classes of transportation facilities. For example, a local street has a high level of accessibilIty for adjacent residences and businesses, with a low level of mobIlity for non-local traffic. An arterIal street has a lower level of accessibility, with a higher level of mobility for through movement of travelers. Local jurisdictions will determine what constitutes adequate levels of accessibility and mobility and what is efficient movement of people, goods, and services Within the region. Provide adequate levels of accessibilIty and mobility for the efficient movement of people, goods, and services within the region. ClOSing off streets, rerouting a collector street at It'S intersectIon WIth an artenal street, dIverting collector street traffiC 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 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 ofthe 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 Intend to result In street closure because It IS unsafe for the police to need to cross a puMc street to get to the secured vehIcle parking area The objectIVe IS aImed at making the street a safe place for all of us Objective #3: Environment 4 Of 16 4-4 Da~~ ~eceived: ~b/j.t707 Plan~er: AL / ,.... .- ~"" I 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 /tmlts access to the transIt statIon, mhlblts walkmg, blcyclmg, and created out of dIrectIon auto travel Objective #5: Public Involvement Provide citizens with information to increase their awareness of transportation issues, encourage their involvement in resolving the issues, and assist them in making informed transportation choices. The applIcant created a cItIzen adVISOry commIttee to assist WIth sltmg Issues but has refused to conSIder project alternatIves that are wlthm the fmanclalllmltations 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 Counctl 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 dIrectIOn to staff ThIS applIcatIon also mappropnately tIes the street vacatIOn to the dIscretIOnary use approval through the proposed condItions of approval yet has not addressed the vacatIOn approval cntena or done the necessary publIC notIce' for a street vacatIOn Objective #7: Policy Implementation Implement a range of actions as determined by local governments, including land use, demand management, and system improvement strategies, to carry out transportation policies. The land use polICIes m thIS area were denved from thIS objectIve of TransPlan and It'S dependance upon Nodal Development and creatIon of attractIve modal chOIces The proposed use IS 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 '/tptJ07 I I The nodes will be pedestrian-fnendly environments with a mix of, land uses, including public open spaces that are pedestrIan-, transit-, and bicycle-oriented. Land Use Policy #2: Supportfor 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 corndors and near transit stations, medium- and high-density residential development within 1;4 mile of transit stations, major transit corndors, employment centers, and downto\Vn areas; and development and redevelopment 10 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 ar~ or could be served by high levels of transit service. By doing so, transit will be more convenient for a greater number of bus messes 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 a'pply measures to protect designated nodes from incompatible development and adopt a schedule for completion of nodal plans and implementing ordinances. Policy Definition/Intent: This policy was added at the request of the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The nodal development strategy anticipates a significant change in development patterns within proposed nodes. Development of theseareas under existmg plan designations and zomng 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 4-6 Date Received:-#ool Planner: Al TDM Policy #2: Parking Management Increase the use of 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 balancing 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 sprface parkmg thoughout a slgnrficant '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 DefinitionlIntent: 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 facilities is crucial. Strategies related to access management, TDM, and land use can be implemented to reduce trips and impacts to major transportation faCilities, such as freeway interchanges, thereby postponing the need for investments in capacity-increasing projects. Closmg B Street, a collector street of recent reconstructIOn with federal fundmg assIstance, and dlrverting traffic to local streets not constructed to the same standard IS inconsltent wIth thIS polley. TSI System- Wide Policy #2: Intermodal Connectivity Develop or promote intermodallinkages for connectivity and ease of transfer among all transportation modes. Policy DefinitionlIntent: 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. Intermodallmk3ges 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 - 4-7 Date Received: ~/~]____ Planner: Al Ellmmatlon of eXlstmg Improved public comdors to avoid walkmg across the street IS not consistent with this policy TSI System- Wide Policy #4: Neighborhood Livability Support transportation strategies that enhance neighborhood livability. DefinitionlIntent: Transportation-related impacts on neighborhood livability include excessive Intrusion of regional vehicle movement on local residential streets, excessive vehicle speeds, and excessive traffic noise. Strategies aimed at improving flow on artenals, such as access management measures, may draw traffic fro!TI neighborhood streets that, based on travel charactenstics, should be properly using the arterial The proposed use IS not constent with this policy TSI Roadway Policy #1: Mobility and Safety for all Modes Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing roadway system improvements. Policy DefinitionlIntent: This policy supports the design and construction of systems and facilities that accommodate multiple modes. It also supports consideration of the needs of emergency vehicles in the design and construction of system improvements. The proposed use IS not constent With this 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 DefinitlOnlIntent: 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 coord mated with the Lane County Transportation System Plan (TSP) roadways and 00 aT corridor studies All roadway system Improvements will also be consistent with other adopted poliCies in TransPlan. The proposed use IS not constent With this policy TSI Transit Policy #1: Transit Improvements . Improve transit service and facilities to increase the system's accessibility, attractiveness, and convenience for all users, including the transportation disadvantaged population. . Policy DefinitionlIntent: Continued improvements to the transit system, including enhancements to the existing transit service, exploration of transit fare alternatives that increase ridership and new and improved transit facilIties for passengers, will make transit a more attractive transportation alternative and encourage increased use of transIt. 8 Of 16 4-8 Date Received: , Planner: Al ~/;?/utq I / This policy also supports maintaining eXisting facilities in good condition. By restnctmg pedestnan accesslbt/lfy the proposed use IS not constent with this poltcy TSI Transit Policy #2: Bus Rapid Transit Establish a BRT system composed of frequent, fast transit ~ervice 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. BR T is also expected to help the region mamtain conformity with federal air quality standards. BRT, combined with nodal development, is a key strategy m the region's compliance with alternative performance measures for the TPR. Closure of streets wlthm the neighborhood of the transit station IS not constent With thiS policy or the very slgmfcant mvestment the publiC IS makmg the BRT system TSI Bicycle !,olicy #2: Bikeways on Arterials and Collectors Require bikeways along new and reconstr'fcted arterial and major collector streets. Closmg 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 Definition/Intent: 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 mclude, but are not limited to, nodal development centers, schools. shopping centers, employment centers, transit stations, and parks. This policy does not imply that a developer would be required to provide bikeways through undeveloped adjoining properties. 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 4-9 Date ~eceived: Planner: Al ~//1/J-p(/7 , I Policy Definition/Intent: This policy supports the provisIon of pedestnan connectIOns between adjacent land uses, improved pedestrian access to transit stops and stations, safe and convenIent pedestnan street crossings, and pedestnan amenities, including lighting. In more developed areas, such as dqwntowns, pedestrian design features improve the accessibIlIty of destmations. 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 t() major activity centers A continuous pedestrian network IS free of gaps and deadends and overcomes physical barriers that mhibit walkmg. 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 maintam transportatIOn facilIties in a way that reduces the need for more expensive future repair. Removal of a street m 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 support mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly nodal development and increased use of alternative modes. Policy Definition/Intent: This policy supports consideration and programming of facilitIes and Improvements that support nodal development and the increased use of alternative modes. Examples of such investments mclude funding mcentlves 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 contmue below (b) Refinement plans; Finding: The proposal is consistent wIth provisions of the Downtown Refinement Plan, mcludmg recent amendments made to allow consideration of Justice Center proposals within the Plan area The Downtown Refinement Plan - Land Use Element, General Policy #2 contams the following enabling policy in support of the proposed Justice Center development: "Civic and governmental uses serving the 1 0 Of 16 4-10 Date Received:~/jbt?/ Planner: AL 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 ex.pand along A Street." Along the street not m It (c) Plan DIStrlct 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 determmed If It IS consltent without discussion about what they are? What does the NOO designation mean? ThiS cntena has not been addressed by the applicant or staff (d) Conceptual Development Plans; or Finding: There are no conceptual development plans for the subject development area. ( e) Specwl use standards in thIS Code; Finding: In accordance with SDC 23.1 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 cntena applies to this applicatIOn of discretIOnary use approval There need to be findmgs that thiS application is consistent With the Specwl use standards m thIS Code The staff report contmues, ' Criterion (2): The sIte under consIderatIOn IS sUltable for the proposed use, consldermg' (a) The locatIOn, size, desIgn and operatmg charactenstlcs/ofthe use (operatmg charactenstlcs mclude but are not hmlted to parkmg, traffic, nOIse, VIbratIOn, emlsszons, hght, glare, odor, dust, VISlblhty, safety, and aesthetIc consIderatIOns, where applicable), 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 ex.isting office, commercial and institutional uses 10 the Immediate viciOlty. The publiC street IS not suitable for the proposed use as a secured police compound and IS not compatable With the neighborhood or the eXlstmg public use of the street The applicant nor staff have addressed the locatIOn size or operating charactenstlcs of a Jail m addressmg thiS cntena. The relationship of the jail and the church entrances should be addressed A jail IS not an office 11 Of 16 4-11 Date Received:_ t/;1/totJ7 Planner: AL ./ / - (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 Spnngfield, including PIOneer Parkway East which is classified as a mmor 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 pomts 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 trasJt clfcualtlon 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 parking area IS not reqUired for emergency evacuation and IS not /ikey the pnmary evacuation route (c) The natural and phYSical features of the Site, Includmg but not lzmlted to, rzparzan areas, regulated wetlands, natural stormwater management/drainage areas and wooded areas shall be adequately considered m the project design, Finding: There are no existing natural and/or physical features that will be affected by the proposed Justice Center. (d) Adequate publzc facIlztles and services are avmlable, mcludlng but not lzmlted to, utz/ltles, streets, storm dramage facz/ltles, sanztary sewer and other publzc mfras tructure Finding: The Development Review Committee I held a meeting to review the proposed conceptual site plan, Discretionary Use, and Zone Change requests. Staff and Sprmgfield Utility Board representatives have determined that sufficient capacity eXists in the adjacent street and utility system to allow consideration of DiscretIOnary Use and Zone Change requests. Specific details on utility servicing and other potential effects on public faCIlities would be finalized with a Site Plan Review application. The trafflc analYSIS had not yet been reViewed by city staff at the time thiS flndmg was prepared The testimony at the heanng which mdlcated that the reported Increased traffic volumes on C Street would not reqUire mitigation IS not consistent With city Imposed reqUirements on other recent developments In the city With over 1,000 vehicles per day on a local street Cnterion (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 4-12 Date Received:. '/If/~ Planner: Al / / 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 avoldmg any Improved use at all of the property abuttmg the resIdentIal neIghbors, the applicatIOn does not address how entrances, (whIch the archItect dlscnbed as akward) landscapmg, (whIch there may not be any room for) screenmg or other mechamsms are bemg proposed to address thIs cntena (b) Site Plan Review condltzons oj 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 appltcable mean? If It means dunng site plan revIew then that IS where thIs criteria would be located not under dIscretIOnary use approval cnterla There should be eVIdence and fmdmgs that IS seems likely or at least possIble that thIS proposal can comply With the code reqUIrements (c) Other condltzons oj approval that may be requzred by the Approval Authorzty, Finding: The use of public nght-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 condItIons oj approval Finding' The Justice Center proposal will meet or exceed all relevant Code standards required for approval of the Discretionary Use and Zone Change. How can the adverse affects be mItIgated through future condItions or code standards? The staff fmdmg falls to address how the proposed street vactlon can meet the standards for a street vacatIon or any of the PLO/NDO zone standards Conclusion. The staff has reviewed the application and supporting evidence submitted for the Justice Center Discretionary Use approval. The staff recommends support for the request as the proposal meets the stated criteria for Discretionary Use approval as listed above. In the event that new or contradictory representation that could lead to a different conclusion is introduced at the public hearing for the Discretionary Use request, staff will undertake additional analysis and prepare findings to address thiS testimony. As proposed, the Discretionary Use application will require the vacation 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 4-13 Date Received:~/,lOlJ7 Planner: AL 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 lh Street between A Street and B Street also will require vacation as it is part of the dedicated parkmg 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 lh Street and Pioneer Parkway East shall be vacated. 2 Pqor to Final Site Plan Review approval for development of the Justice Center, the 4 lh Street right-of-way between A Street and B Street shall be vacated The Planning Commission may choose to apply additional conditions of approval as necessary to comply with the Discretionary Use and/or Zone Change criteria. Additional Approvals The subject applications are the first steps in a series of development applications for Planning Commission and Council consideratIOn in order to allow development of a Justice Center at the proposed location. If the Planning Commission approves the Discretionary Use and Zonmg Change requests, an application would be taken to Council for a Type II TransPlan amendment to remove the affected portion of B Street from the collector street network. Application also would be required to have the affected portions of B Street, 4 lh 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 between Pioneer Parkway East and 4 lh Street, as the perimeter travel distance would exceed the parameters established by the SOC. The followmg is taken from the city's Site Plan ReView Package Submittal ReqUirements and the Spnngfleld Development Code 4 Copy of the deed and a prelimInary title report Issued WithIn the past 60 days documentIng ownership and lIstIng all encumbrances If the applIcant IS not the property owner, wntten penmsslOn from the property owner IS requIred 5. Right-of-Way Approach PermIt applicatIOn must be proVIded where the property has frontage on an Oregon Department of TransportatIOn (ODOT) facthty 6 Traffic Impact Study must provIde four (4) copIes of the study prepared by a Traffic EngIneer where the proposed development will produce more than 250 vehicle tnps per day in accordance with the current versIOn of the Transportation EngIneers Trip GeneratIOn InformatIon Report Before the Planning Commission or Heanngs Official can approve a Discretlonary Use request, there must be information submitted by the appltcant which adequately supports the request In reViewing a request, the City must consider both the positive and negative elements of a Discretionary Use request All of the Discretionary Use Criteria must be addressed by the applicant. If insufficient or unclear data IS submitted by the applicant, there is a good chance the 14 Of 16 4-14 Date Received:. {, /If ~~7 'Planner: AL I I request will be denl~d or delayed It IS recommended you hire a professional planner or land use attorney to prepare your findings Discretionary Use Criteria Checklist (SDC 10.030) 1 Except for pnvate/public elementary and middle schools and certam wireless telecommunicatIOns systems facihties, a DiscretIOnary Use may only be allowed if the Plannmg CommiSSIOn finds that the proposal conforms with the followmg cntena' a. The proposed use shall conform with existing uses in terms of scale, lot coverage, design, mtensity of use and ope rat 109 charactenstlcs , b. The proposed use shall not generate more traffic on local streets or more demand for public facilities than would permitted uses in the same zomng 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 existing Discretionary Use shall be exempt from conformance-with Metro Plan land use deSignations. 3.050 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL. (3) An application shall consist of Items required by this Code and the following: (a) An explanation stating the nature of the proposal and information that may have a bearing in determinmg the action to be taken, including findings demonstrating compliance with applicable approval cnteria (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 parking facilities north of Fourth Street which are not city owned The city also need to complete street vacations pflor to haVing a bUlldmg fight to the street ThiS proposal can not comply with the street vacation cr/tena which Include no loss of any beneflcal use. UntJI 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. (d) Additional information including 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. (f) 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 4-15 Date Received:. Planner: AL 6),,/;cry I 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 cntena refer speCifically to the street conectlvlty and block length standards Respectfully submitted to the city, Scott EDison, P E 1127 B Street 16 Of 16 4-16 Date Received:-0.;/)4lO7 PI~nner: AL \ . R T":' ,r'\\ Ti'1""\ r"H"' D:' '-- tr",r' ,':' .of Submittal to the Record City of Springfield Street Vacation Request Case No. LRP 2007-00019 Testimony in opposition June 12, 2007 jUN 1 2 Z007 ~GK --::=:=J BY: Submitted by: Scott E. Olson, P.E. 1127 B Street Springfield Oregon I have been Involved wrth the planning and development of the urban form for more than 30 years I feel pnvlleged to live and work within SIX blocks of Springfield'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 grid and open public ways are the underlYing fabnc from which we create the sense of place and vitality we seek AchieVing the kind of place we desire reqUIres that we carefully conSider both what activities we place there and how those acbvities are located and Interrelated with each other. Success demands both the nght mix of functions and the nght facilities In fact It is our Insistence upon developing a compatible mix of actlvrbes and their Interrelationships that must guide the dectslon making process We must not compromise the larger area for the funcbonality 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 planning process requires that we work our way down from macro broad state Wide goals, down to comprehensIVe plan policies, to development codes, refinement plans, and finally site Specific developments. This is the context in which we must proceed with all new development proposals I believe this is particularly true when we are working on the development of a public faCility It seems to me that the Justice Center planning has somehow become reversed and is asking us how we need to modrfy our planning framework to accommodate the project instead of how can the project be developed to fit the area's plans I am disappointed that the city has steadfastly refused to consider any altematives dunng the project development process which conSidered tradeoffs In the funcbonal and space program with the associated site constraints Placement of a lower cost ancillary bUilding 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 5-1 Date Raceived:_~? /)ar1 Planner: Al 1 \Nhen considering the srtJng of a Justice center In downtown Spnngfield we should ask two questions; 1) How does including thiS activity co,ntnbute to the desired vrtahty of the area? And 2) How does the facilrty 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 srtuatlon then we are to proceed with the wrong project. If the functional demands of a justice center can not fit harmoniously within the requirements for a healthy town center and preserve the integnty of our public ways and spaces, then rt simply needs to be located elsewhere If concessions need to be made they should to be In the functIOnal requirements of the new facllrty, not the function of the neighbortlood and greater community This area IS evolVing and the nght things will happen if we are patient and reSponswe when opportunrty presents rts self We may have an opportunity before us now We must not be short srted and sacnfice the Integnty of the greater communrty to accommodate the InfleXible requirements of crty staff. The public has very narrowly supported the project In both bond and jail operations elecbons. The projects approval can hardly be conSidered a mandate to Ignore our land use polICY and gwe 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 cnmlnal jUsbce system may be confounding the problems and aggravating a more holistic regional solution. I wonder how many others of the 53% of voters that supported the bond measure were unaware as I was that the new jail would not do anything wrth the felony offenders accounting for 85% of Spnngfield's 2004 charges The felony cnmlnals will continue through the Lane County revolving door while Spnngfield locks up the misdemeanor offenders How many of my neighbors understood that the closed 3Jd 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 facllrtles I also believe that those actMbes could contribute to the vitality of the downtown If srted with sensrtJvity to the requirements of the larger community and nerghbortlood. If the JUStice Center IS to be bUilt in the downtown area, we need to find a way to have it fit In anq to contnbute to the greater function of the area while respecbng the historical framework of rts public . ways. If that can not be achieved, then we must locate a srte better surted to the secunty and space requirements whICh were Imposed upon all of the altematlVes conSidered in the project development process. The City inappropriately presumed In the development of the preliminary planning and cost estimating that the street fight of ways were available for incorporating into the new Justice Center FaCIlity The fact that the pOSSibility of street closures was mentioned In the ballot measure does not have any meaning In the context of the land use approval for thiS project, or exempt the City from adhenng to their own land use poliCies and code requirements The police chief has testified that plan to bUild across B Street was based upon the lower cost to bUild into the street Twelve years ago the City Improved B Street at a cost of $875,000 The improvements to the collector street were paid. for With federal funds If B Street IS severed from the artenal at B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing Scott E Olson, P E 2 5-2 Date f~eceived: b)/~67 Planner: AL Pioneer Parkway, Immediately adjacent to the proposed street closure, B Street will no longer function as a collector. As a local street, the Improvements would not have been eligible for the federal Investment In the street Improvements. The value of B Street both In terms of Improvements and function has not been considered In City decIsions to pursue the street closure. The value of the investment the public made in Improving B Street in 2007 construction costs IS over $1.2 million, It has been suggested that the city could be obligated to repay the federal government if the street is Indeed closed. The City contracted for a traffic study of the Impacts of the proposed closure of B Street. The study IS appropnately focused on the capacity of the adjacent streets to absorb the diverted traffic, Street capacity has never been the Issue related to the closure of 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 abutting property as local streets do. Further, the street gnd IS almost entirely intact In thiS area of Springfield. No other neighborhood has developed the degree of street connectivity as exists In this hlstoncal core of the Spnngfield community The traditional street system has become 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 pedestnan and bicycle mobility is clearly movmg in the wrong direction and is inconsistent with all of the adopted land use policy in the City of Spnngfield The City approved a zone change from Mixed Use Commercial/Nodal Development to Public Land and Open Space/Nodal Development because a Justice Center IS not listed 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 appropnately 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 Spnngfield", I volunteered for the CAC and dunng my interview for the pOSition I Informed the City counCil of my opinion With respect to the street closure and indicated a deSire to work on appropriate alternatives, City staff and their consultant developed a Functional and Space Program pnor to formation of the CAC The draft document was presented to the CAC. However the committee was told It was for their mformatlon only and they would have no Input on the contents of the space program The Functional and Space Program was adopted by the City council Without public heanng or any changes to the consultant's recommendations The public was not prOVided any opportUnity to partiCipate in what was bemg 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 Vacation, Testimony Opposing Scott E Olson, P E 3 5-3 Date Received:.$/~~?_ Planner: At No attempt was ever made to develop an alternative that was within the available funds and respected the land use requirement for new development in this zone Including the closure of streets City staff has orchestrated a planning process from the very beginnings of thiS project In which no meaningful consideration has been given to 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 closing B Street and steadfastly argues, often In absurd ways why the street should be closed. In last weeks heanng the police chief stated more than once that If officers responding to an emergency must cross the street to reach their vehicles, ultimately one IS gOing to be so distracted with responding that they Will run in front of a car and be hit. One must question the wisdom of such statements when we are trusting that same Individual to get in a police cruiser and drive 50 miles per hour down my residential street and appropnately handle deadly weapons. Such arguments demonstrate the desperation with which supporting arguments for the street closure have been constructed Other absurd arguments have been constructed throughout the planning process On at least two separate occasions suggestions to construct a pedestnan over-crossing of B Street have beem 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 sacnficlng the functionality of a million dollar collector street Arguments about police response times seem equally absurd from my perspective. Statements about the need to evacuate Inmates to the secure parking area in B Street are InconSistent with what the CAC was told about jail evacuations. The secure parking area is adjacent to the Police Courts bUilding not the Jail on the opposite Side of the block from B Street. The need for thiS function In B Street IS not part of the Functional and Space Program and IS not the pnmary evacuation plan The City has modified the code Crltena for a street vacation In an attempt to avoid the inconSistency with thiS project and the adopted land use policy The cntena tailored speCifically to get thiS project around the land use policy Impediments to desired street closure are not grounded In any adopted land use policy and are vague and misleading In the Intent EnSUring that the vacated property Will remain In public ownership Inappropriately 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 nght of way, but has an Interest In the use for street purposes The City can not ensure continues public ownership because It does not own the property until It IS vacated Once vacated there IS no way of preventing future City counCils from selling the property to a pnvate party Substituting pedestnan and bicycle connection crrtena from the states OAR, the minimum required anywhere in the entire state for the speCifics of the local Comprehensive Plan, Transportation System Plan, Refinement Plans, ZOning Requirements and other local code requirements IS an obVIOUS attempt to aVOid compiling with the local adopted policy and code requirements Additionally staffs findmgs that adding 46% to the length of the deSirable Y. mile pedestnan tnp length IS not consistent with accepted pedestnan planning pnnciples B Street Vacation, Testimony OpPosing Scott E Olson, P E 4 5-4 Date Received: (,;/1 /JHJ1 I I Planner:, AL Further "Whether a greater public benefit would be obtained from the vacation than from retaining tne right-of-way In Its present status" lacks any criteria 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 Criteria previously established In the code. The city's process has attempted to skirt or bypass addreSSing the street clos~re inconSistency with the ComprehenSive Plan, the Transportation System Plan, the Zoning District, the Nodal Development Overlay, and the Code Critena The criteria 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 vanance that makes these poliCies go away The City staff has the hierarchy of the project planning Criteria reversed. The community has planned for the development deSired in the downtown area Those plans are embodied in the adopted public policy documents The approach to thIs project has been how we can change the code to accommodate everything the police are asking for Instead of how we can build consistent With our community plan and viSion We can have both a JaIl and a livable communtty. ThiS project must conform to block and connectIVIty standards. PartIcularly since thiS IS a Nodal Dev~lopment Overlay zone which relies on enhanced connectivity and pedestnan and bicycle mobility. B Street Vacation, Testimony Opposing Scott EDison, P E 5 5-5 Date Received: ~/;~1J7 Planner: AL MEMORANDUM City of Springfield To: Andy Limbird, Planner IT Jim Polston, Assistant Project Manager ./ ~. y. . From: Date: June 11, 2007 Subject: SIdewalk in the alley north ofB Street As a result of the request from the Planning Commission meetmg of June 5th, I have looked into the effects of installing a SIdewalk in the alley north ofthe secure parkmg area ofthe Justice Center The request was to mstall a three foot wide walkway along the alley to make pedestnan travel qUIcker and safer at this mId-block locatIOn. A three foot walk IS acceptable under the Am en cans WIth DIsabIlItIes Act as long as a five foot wide passing lane is mcorporated at least every two hundred feet. ThIS could be accommodated in thIS area; however there are other factors to conSIder pnor to reqUIrmK.a walk m tills-area. 1 If the SIdewalk is mstalled withm the alley right-of-way it will gIve vehicles less space to maneuver makmg the alley less safe for them, whIle offenng only limIted protectIOn to the pedestnan, unless the SIdewalk is raIsed behmd 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 ofSpnngfield Engmeering DeSIgn Standards calls for the mmimum 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 minlIDum. 4. The Springfield Development Code requITes 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 lfthe SIdewalk is to be mcluded m the landscape buffer then It reduces SIze of the plantmg area which creates conflIcts between code sections, impacts the survival of the landscape plantings by reducing plantmg area and creates opportunities for tree roots to damage pavement. B. lfthe sidewalk is mstalled between the alley and the landscape buffer then the secure parking lot would have to be redeSIgned. It appears that to accommodate tlus 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 engineering 4 - The SIdewalk would have to be bUIlt behmd a curb or to road specifications or velllcle traffic would damage the sidewalk not designed for vehIcle traffic. In dISCUSSing thIS WIth the Engmeenng and Traffic DiVIsions of PublIc Works it was suggested that allowing pedestrIans and bicycles to use the alley without a sid~walk is an acceptable solutIOn, because most, If not all, alleys currently have this type of shared use Also the pavement width m the alley IS sufficient for shared use The alley IS a low speed area, by ordinance, and that mixing uses in thIS s~tuation 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 ellIDmates several ingress/egress points to the alley greatly reducmg the amount of traffic that access the alley Fmally the street-side SIdewalk system in the area will be unmterrupted throughout the area giving 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 6-1 ,~. Date Received:~~t7J Planner: Al ATTACHMENT \ .~cc~c~:=~~-=t~~~2~~ tn: .PAAllNC: ,.TA!.Ul :::.:]. {1(,) -PAl lONG STAll; ." I f j \ - ,: i ~ ~ . ~ ~ CONe:. (2\. - CURB (T'fP ,}\e;Y WHTTE. S1RIPll'iC: CONC flEl;DER" ("H\ {'Nl'.) 1'--... ~WI WHEE!. ST_OPS~ I _____ .. m P.ARIONC: STAUS o Gt A a : b.\ . ~-) \1 :v \' -, t l - ~ >~Y1[)~ ,=::-.-~\~~-~:~4 ~: II II ~~ ,K i An~~~a;;" IIi ~~ 1 : ~~ tn I <> ~ ", 0 ~ g: BUilding : i ~ :l~ ~ ~ ~! Expansion ! 1'IHI'lE S'lRIPlblC;.-/ ~~ it .:.~ ~ I ~ I (7'IP)- e-:: I; e. R ~ I l! ~ ~ \-Jf E C~-li ~\ \ ~ , II - - . ~ - - - - - ---1 - - I I :-1. ;; , I ' "STD CONe:. (2\ I i1 " '..." " 'I i '" . CURB (T1P)'eY ;-t" l1:. /,' .~I._.---'/~~(;;~}@ ~~;:Pw"T~ ~ i ~ I ~ CROSSHATCHtTI). T'l " 11 I /1'-' -eJ ..). l~l"\~9~t;r ('i1~:'J r-' c c.J~ - ",...."..' > rt J .... I I I 'I I , "' I I ~ I ... I "' , t:l !~. . ."-..f. I r '" 1D::m__ -, lXJ : I X ~ I I I I I I t..:::::: u '" .... " " STD CONe:. (2\ / CURB (T1P .llE::J! / -, ~ ,i , -, ~...... ~ 'un ~ ]14"= ~/ \!-/.~ I ...~ I I I I 'r-- : L .'i F"I_ · ,i~,," ,!;fi F /33+62. ~ },~ ;; S. .1, " . i lr .{o;sr, " ~i! :1 /V' ~~ -----<>---.,1 il', I ' iil "1- c=~ __ .... ~,~ 71 STD CbNC (2 =~~ rtf/l- '" (21 PAIiKlNG STAUS"' ai.. .~ ~ ~ . (1' H Co STAll. \l2Y '\i~ ~ , r ~n__ -;1" "I~ I ~~ -- "10 __ ''".. J " +- tl: -, n-I..__ / I ~- ",<'> -.--' 0-' <~ C') ~rn 00 ..,.z~ .....;;: .r-'" ....~ 0 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 cntical 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. 6-2 Date ~eceived: Planner: Al t.//'1/frJd7 I I ~~-- PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-Of-WAY VACATION PORTION Of B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST CASE LRP2007-00019 Sptillgfjeld. OR -.J I --" )> -i -i )> () I s: m Z -i I'r-. -00 Di'~ ;'ro :3 (I);B ~m f!~. .m ~ ;~ I) '1 <', . '...~ ..- . . ' -';;:~~' .::" - .. o 0.5 1 Mile ~~ n..r~ ." _ WIIIl"'I'.",1a r/.., ___...,....J. ,Jt;;proJwct (a." ..uw.....u '~I,"i"1JI;,' .,.,. ,",u Of' J...it.,_ .,&Ii '" ". """-J- rror. .,,'",Oft. ID_'!tio..,.,-..:p.,,,,,,,,,o/douI'"'J.d : PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION. PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST. CASE LRP2007-00019 r-----f r--j---r- I \ I. I j-; Ift-i-j '~__ J illr!lild I fiT i i !iTTT"f II \ ,[-1 J! 1 I.' I,' 11'1,' I'.' IJ' -t \ L-1...--1__L.--: . _ \ \ ,..-~__--, _ EST ---.1 I ! I' 1 ! r-l-'!I I' ' , i'--j': \ ,I~. ' t; I; 1;-1 !~~i h-! CJ ~_________ UJ~J II I ! tJ I ! i I I TIl'\\;r I I -rrr I I \ jr-! II r- D,ST,! ! ! I \ \;;:\ I I I,' ,. , I :.J i Iii I II I.~-i < . '- .. ~-,. l--L. r i ; 1 i ; I _I ill" \'- \ ~\_J---II ,;--,~ I I I ""1 T . . , 1 "I ' I; i :,1 . . 1 .-,--.L-1..___1_~'~ ! t I ~L~ i.,' J.i ...:.-1,. .,,1 i l_l._.LL~ I i I i ___-'- I i I -;-r -----,..-r-~ . J i ~- CST ---1-\---1- ; \ I' I " i! ;,i II ,.',I-,i ,i Ir-rmn-1if l-lTJT.....Lj,-1 i ',J Ii 1 ! I ., ' I" " I' --~ :----:J'-{, ,~.'Ii rf . ~ !I-~r\ ~L--", ~_L_+_~ 'j-i~jJlj . , r- i I I, II I ; I I I ; I r--r-' I! \ \....._ I I 1 fool I,' !, I; I; , I; BST lfiL -i Ii , . , : L_' ; L -~ \"----! I !!_;~I____..J 1_ - r--F,--l I I I < I' !i I I ! ! i L --I r--r-T"rFil \ II: I---' :;:'1 ' II-l ' I I fool ,--'foo1 1 ~\; "-_......I; ....J___-' l.: _-- ifoolL I I I '<Il: ,_.. <Ill i ;r t ',IIr' l~ I, ,--r-r-r---i J:;...-=----" J:'---" , , I ! <' 'w 'I I I I I 1 foo' I!' ~ '. . \ i: I a.! ! 1>-1, I III, : "'I i I "': : I . __~___.,;cr;. . ,<di!,I' , ,I, __AST it!-l~! . , , ',! \ I ! ! ---I~r---ll~ll i i! i fTil I \ j .1_--1! j jlril (1lrd ! Iii! J \- ! 1"~ IT --itti I! \ I'r,. . - \ i j Iii! 10 Ii II! i I i irlp Ii Ill! l__L i Ll.J Ii i~i Ii i !lJ LL!i!, Ij MAIN ST i,' : 1\1'1'1'1' 11'1 ,~" ,.~--.,.. II! 'JIII'I,i 1:1 ' Fir;: i' ")-;,1---: r. II' ~':st- ~ll : i! : : L...: i i: .! I:; I:, ! /-nC[l n N~~ ~~=--=~_~__. . , Ii'"" I!_ '- j H "''',-4:==~_-'-'.-4li --------,-,-------- --- '-.. ) f ~. L..-i- i .......,-~-J ! -'l I .~-......,_~_,__ 1.___....__. i----....--,------------'----.: --.'- -- ~-_.,~._---- - ~--.----.- ~/ ----~::::::--'------ SUBJECT SITE ,~-- p. . ',: ", \=----== I i I I r 1---'-; i I! II! ,--_J_ i i F--" H ; ~ \ \ -\\ ~ t. _\'r'-~l \ H '1\ =:.r:=----\ , , i r-----~ , .r---...._..L.;.-J i-ill H Lt,! I__J Ii I , 1 1 LLLUJ \ " , -"'n-'-~ \\ \ II ~ \\ > -----' ' \ r-: GJJ-!'i i .Tl~~.==J, 1 !! ~ jJ i-~ ,-- ! i L-.l \ \ , \ , j~ I __--L-- ~ i i I \ . \ ....L~-- -- ...."".~ ~/ ,..../' /" ,/'//' /.... r--l1 h q I ~J L...-1 ....-----1 j r_--=== -,,~-~ //...........---r i I.r--',r---:,; . ,.,.'" ../~ j i : ~'1zP~~ ! ! , \ ~-----!--~-; . Ll~"~'" ~.:, -i \ \ \ \ \ ---'""\ "\ \ \" \ I " \ \ \ \ . \," \. L-L \ \ t . i__\ \_ \ : J.___J l ; ; l ,-, i f ---I r--r 1..~IU L ' ,1 1 \ 1-;-- . ,I ! ! 1 ! ....'........ '-f~ Lt.-I! , , 1Mn on. lit) wammlits dta1 a<<0"fJCl~" Ihis produet tun GJ.nUlIeQU rt:Jpomibi};I)'.pr d~'1ou ordcunogeari!;/tg froman:l' tfl"Or', D,"iui~fT fDI;~inacOU'gc."ofJh~~UC' o 100 200 Feet 7-2 W I I I , i I ' i _J Ii l--.J I. , p::.,r ' , !: I I I I ~ ! "-Tl L_LLLj I ,Tll ~-i 1 i I L ,L n-r1-J ! i ! I I i- ' ...L..-L--J 1""'-' -.,...-- L-..J 'I ' I ; i i . I I , !...--_-" ; f--'-"""-~ , Ii! I l I i.J I r--j- , i l_L.-J Springfield. OR r-nrf: I '! LJli! j! tiT" If i ; I I ; !! l---L.l I I) : : i il)!! H I'LL;!!! . _ I...L.J r iT1-Tl rill I i r-!"'---::;"'..,---' I I ! I ' i ! I I I ! ' l_jIILJ r;-!'i--1 tl i i I -__')LL_ ' r-T. l-==j I ' , l..-..J ! i' I I ' , . , ~ , r-;--r- I ' ;. I ! ~.~ i 1 , J--1 I! t ) --; ;' i ! r~ i 1 , r-! L_' I ! r {, ~ I .:, \-ii; I! _.LJ--L..J jTT-ii j ! Ii! I .' ; ,- rT--i foo r---Tl~-] ;-,__ I<llL I II , U_JJJJ~ [D_II---i r-r ! ~;- ! I , I L'_ r-T 1--1 I ! ,..--- I I ! I , , , ! , ! L.L I ! H L-..i.- r-r- iT' 1-_1 I i I ! I ! i ! : L-l.....L.. r-l i i ' LL_ i i=-~ i i i L-l---1 Mly,2(1)7 Date Recelved:-1/.4/2ofJ7 Planner: AL I --- ---- ----- - ; ~ . PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST CASE LRP2007 -00019 SUBJ EeT SITE i i i i I I ' _____-----L. I I --j ! i i - ! r- ! i ! r------ ..----.- I 17-03[35-24 -----, , i , I 14300 I ; I , I i i I 14100 .1 I j i i i I i 264.00' 14000 13900 ----1 iN lco 110 lco i. I l- I C/) 264100' i < I w I j i >- 1800 I 1 < I I ' J I i s: / - ' 1 1500 I [------i 1600 I I -~ 1700 I I I I ' I n:: ' I I < I I 1 i 0- i , 1900 17 -O3~35-31 I I n:: ! I j I I w I W 1 i ~ z i I ~J__ 0 i ! ! I I I i 1 0- I i I I I ! I I ! j I i I i I 1 j i , I i I i i i i I ! I , I i I ! I ! I I i I I I i i i I I j I i ~-L____ A STRE ET r j I i ! 1 i .------r---- J I ; T--- ~------_. ------ I I ! . ,::: :0, -- CO :cO ,CO Springfield. OR B STREET I- C/)_ :r: I- "'<t ! I I i i i I ,I l 1--- I 1 I I I i j i ! i i --- -.------- - , - i ~ ! i I - - - . ,",err tllY no "'.n'IlllneJ' ,Iwl ClCt'Olrpl"." litis p~L UtI'1' GSsum, GU rr::spottSibiJil)'jorGIIY hu Of dG1fIflgt llrisinf . ftutrlQ".l' tmJf. omUsioll cr fDSiuonQ/ ;nQC~rG,yollhlJ producl ~:=~.~ ..., 0' - 50 7-3 100 I -_ !.fay. 2007 Date Received: Planner. AL t/I?/:JP'17 ,---' PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION PORTION OF B STREET BETWEEN 4TH STREET AND PIONEER PARKWAY EAST CASE LRP2007 -00019 SUBJ EeT SITE i -j 1--4 , I i i ! i i ---~ -.--.;. [)~~ ~ ....., ~ I- m <( UJ >- <( ~ ~ rr <( a. rr UJ UJ Z o a. : ' ----..2.______--1._______l____--1 i \ 17 -03~35-24 i 13900 14000 14100 14300 i I 264:,00' N . ___.....0000..0_.0.0...00. r--p.;;.;;gn. 0-"'" 00-- '-.--. '-'. n_O.. __. 00___.... _ m. m ~ ..__O'_.n. ...._...._._..J.~~?._.._....~:~~.~~~~__..__.._.._._____ g 264100' 1000 1700 1600 1500 1000 17 -O3~35-31 ! \ ~ r---I-'--' i _._~ i ! i I I i ..__._l_.____.,--.J A STREET _..__.._..~.._..._--_..._--""" " 'Thtrt QrTlIO wQmlnM lllalCif(t"flfPJJCIA'." rlrisprodu~', . : Ucn as.rumt' gl/ r~lUlbilil)'jo' all)' IoSJ or do"'Ufe (Ins; rtg . from allY l"""Dr. ~mWio.. IT s>>SiUoltol ;,,"'alnJ(1'nJ/~is ~rod1lCl . o 50 7-4 , i I i I" Springfield. OR l_ I L__, 8 STREET ,----- j i ! I- m J: l- v i L.___ i i l_____., '.'*. --..'.'- . . . . , . i i ~ ~: J 100 ......, .... .. . ': ';.,ay, 2007 Date Received:L Planner: AL " '/11/2PP7 / I S: STREET OVERVIEW .-1 I v; ~ I '~UI ,"IA~A~~ ~1 J ~ r--l. _ I J~-'L'I ~IU ~ lii I- II-I ~ ~ IT ~~ l .~, ~~I L~ l~ J)f- !: ~ U) ".".-.-T II I II - r-:!==. .~ \ \ \]\ ~ J ~ ' ~r'\tiLJ- \ \I~ - I- J '-Ir--1I1 ') I\F ST\ : ~ ~I J. J, II ", IL.- - 1[0,,\ ~.I .:1 Il I~I r '-iii II J,- J '( Il\WES*\ s IL@ -<~)Il II ~ tll- [- Jl JI _IL_ _~ j I J-J\~ cr - '>- ~I .11 I J ~ III ~- 10 ~ ~ UUlj,--tiJlI :II '1.. :ii"m tn I j -- \\- . ~ -j ~TJ yl =-:J '-"-Jl' II If -; tr. -" ~. ~lr cr --...J\ ,-llil ~ lol-, ::I.' t;11 c;, l ~ r;J J ~ \\ ~ 21 IIlI I (~I. ~ '--~I \\ ~ ~1l1 I JI ,-I -- I -- ==S-:..sTREe:J::::=! . "..- -. -l,. ~~-I=l =iH ~n --- Ir :1 '-~". -- <.-~. --. --... I. I 'I L I~J Ir-, j.JL-" n ~:~J! t~-lJjll~ I~. l; ~' ~ ~'L~ I~-..~ l-~~ I-~ I "J~ l- (/) ::> l- t; I l- I- (/) l- I- l- (/) (/) ~ (/) (/) r 0 I: r r I- :z l- I- en No r ~ 0 ;;; C'. l- N <0 J ~ \ II ~Ll I r-- I ~ L~ -, U 1-' en i!: <0 ;;;L "" ~b0 ~, Total Length of B Street From Mill Street to 16th Street. 611783 Feet (1.16 miles) ./ ~ 1 r=--= o 250 500 Feet '- Date Received: t/~o/" , / Planner: Al BEFORE THE PLANNING'COMMISSh.", - OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL CASE NO. LRP2007-00019 NATURE OF THE APPLICATION. VacatlOn of a one-block segment of B Street located between 4th Street and PlOneer Parkway East 1. On May 7, 2007, the Spnngfield CIty CounCIl IrutIated the vacation actIon m accordance WIth Spnngfield Development Code 9 060(3)(a), Planrung Case No LRP2007-00019 - CIty of Spnngfield PolIce Department, applIcant 2. The application was 1ll1tIated m accordance WIth SectIOn 3 050 of the Spnngfield Development Code Tunely and suffiCIent notice of pubhc heanng, pursuant to Sections 14030 and 9050 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 heanng 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 Tlus general finding IS supported by the specIfic findmgs of fact and conclUSIon m Attachment A, VacatIOn Staff Report RECOMMENDATION The Planmng CommlsSlOn hereby recommends the CIty CouncIl approve the vacation request at a publIc heanng ATTEST P1anrung CommIsslOn ChaIrperson AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTACHMENT 8-1 Date Received: 1,/1 ?/tfJtJ7 ., / Planner: AL