HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance Packet, Final Miscellaneous 9/17/2007
...
VACATION
ORDINANCE NO. 6207
- AN ORDINANCE VACATING A 66 FOOT WIDE, 264 FOOT LONG PORTION OF B STREET IN
BLOCK 1 OF THE MAP OF SPRINGFIELD, BOOK 1, PAGE 1 OF PLAT RECORDS OF LANE
COUNTY, OREGON, DATED APRIL 5, 1872
WHEREAS, the Springfield Common Council has declared its intention to vacate public
right-of-way in the City of Springfield; and
WHEREAS, the request for vacation was submitted in conformance with the provisions of
ORS 271.080 et. seq., and with the provisions of Article 9 VACATIONS of the Springfield
Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the findings and testimony submitted by the applicant and those in support of
thIS vacatIOn satisfy the criteria of approval for vacations found in SectIOn 9.060(3) of the
Springfield Development Code; and
WHEREAS, such vacation is in the best interest of the City in carrying out its plans and
programs for the general development of the City; and
WHEREAS, lawful notice of the proposed vacation was published and posted; and
WHEREAS, the Springfield Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 5,
2007 and June 19,2007 in the Council Chambers of Springfield City Hall, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield OR and recommended unconditional approval of thIS public right-of-way vacation
(LRP2007-00019); and
WHEREAS, the Springfield Common Council met in Council Chambers, at 225 Fifth Street,
on Monday, the 2nd day of July, 2007, (First Reading) and on Monday, the 16th day of July, 2007,
(Second Reading) at the hour of7:00 p.m., to hear any objectIOns to the proposed vacation and ~
persons appeared to object;
(Bar Code Sticker)
Return to: City of Springfield - City Recorder, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, OR 97477
Ordinance 6207
- I -
Date Received: ~ 74c()7
Planner: AL I
ri
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DOES ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS.
Section 1: The Council finds that the legal notice of the hearing was lawfully published and
posted; that l objections were made at the vacation hearing held; that the public interest will not
be impaired by the vacation of the street right-of-way, and that vacation of said street will be in the
best interest of the public and increase the benefit of the property involved.
Section 2: The public right-of-way in the City of Springfield, as generally depicted on the
site map and more particularly described in the property legal description which are together
attached as ExhibIt A of this Ordinance, is declared to be vacated.
Section 3. Findings 1 through 36 and Conclusions of Law adopted by the Common Council
in support ofthe street right-of-way vacation are hereby made part of this Ordinance by reference.
Section 4: ThIS right-of-way vacation is subject to the special provision that in the event the
vacated right-of-way ceases to be used for Justice Center purposes it shall revert to public right-of-
way.
Section 5: This right-of-way vacatIOn IS subject to the establishment of temporary
easements or licenses for existing utilities located withm the nght-of-way to be maintained,
continued, repaired, reconstructed, renewed, replaced, rebuilt or enlarged subject to the provisions
of said temporary easements or licenses.
SectIOn 6: The City Recorder IS directed to file certified copies of this ordinance with the
Lane County Clerk, Lane County Assessor, and Lane County Surveyor.
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this ~ day of September ,
2007, by a vote of 4 for and 2 against.
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this 17th day of September, 2007.
....
. ~ ~iL
Mayor ( (7 ,
Notar~ on ~tJ DWI r1tJ PaJ)e.
Date Received: 1)7ftfJ/17
, I
Planner: AL
( I ~l- ....()',:- f")
~~~~y... ) L~\~\...,
--- ~ I LLLo-l..
Ordinance lPa. 07
- 2 -
1'.1_ ( l ~ 1_11 '< -'~-J ~:;:-t\ it::\!
ATTEST:
~~
City Recorc{1r
State of Oregon
)
) ss.
)
County of Lane
Ordinance (p 'J, 0 1
~ _ -,-.;--r"":: -.-.,
__ -I. 'i,"'- - .."..~;::.:~>-!.....~J---~(
~ .r ~~-"~~_' - -. J
'\ .-- ~- (;F;::!CiiILSt_AI I
, " ,~'-,\P"" .
f . If ~~-\~I { ..~ Ii'~"l: h 1\
I _'I , 11 ~ ,iY ;'lJ _\\ 1[;. OlI[G ",I, \
.. t' c~ II 1~~:I:):3I~~ r ~ r~:.' 3~7L '- "I,
I ,/J nY (, - I ,,:;, I' '" ~xrl"J:s t~\ v :<2, 2IJJJ \ '
~ _;-::.: ~~S~3.(-€<;":(.-..~~'7;:~::=~~f:";':::"~_1 ..
This instrument was acknowledged before me on
$eM. 11
I
as
,~oD1
1.-1 tu1 0 Y
J<POSI!lOn)
by :; I dn e~ W. L-e I k t:f\
.J (Name)
. ofthe City of SprIngfield
~A. ~~
NOTARYPUB~CFOROREGON
- 3 -
My commissIOn expires:
1/ - do ).~ (){) 0 q
DClte Received:
Planner' AL
~?~O?
I
i-f>" 7 J, 6f: 8
~~_~~Z~l\'\~'_l~\~\1.~~~~ia'_
'%~%"~\~~~rs' \,,~~~~~,:~'~~,~~>c RI\jBI~O.~~ NA'J:~~~<,'~t~~':..,~;:,~'-.~~~
"'\~~~~>.t"~~,~,,,, " ~~''$-~'~~~~~~'~~~~~'\~~''~~~~''~~~~'~'''~''''''~~':..~~~~~~~,,~..
~"y;' ~~~t ~ \' 'i~~t~~~~~l,~~Tn~1:) 1:"",\1 ^'C' \ ~I:D~~~~~~~~~,'",,'~:R,~'''
,,~ ~''''\~''0.' ~,...~~~ ,-,~...,..~~,.~-.:g~'''~M ~,".~'" -0'"''''&.~~''':\:''' ~~I
~.\\\\_\""\\\,~-
("1 66' 4- 6v' 66' 66" 33'
. 1800
o
\j)
I-
en
<C '0
w ~
>-
<C
~
0::
<C
a..
0::
w 'c
W ~
Z
o
-
a..
13800
4
--~ -~- -----'
'!
13900
5
'1900
o
..0
4
cr. ;j
.::: 17-03-35-3,1
r: "'
_ 2000
o
I'I.l
EXHIBIT A
-I '" I UU
SO) ·
13:
t-
W
w
0::
t-
en
141
3 ~
@O<
17 -03-35-24
14100 1-4200
.
0 3
"
14000
6 14300
Q 0
" .,
. 1 700
o
~
1600
1500 .
<:>
~
J:
J-
~
'-6'
5
3
2
1
33' n--
1
u..
1--
.;;J
~
:r. 1-
or
4
tl.
~
r. -
~
<:,
~
G~?
o 0
o 0
C">J t'I")
C;~ \0)
lJ
34'
2100
2400
A
<;;;>
~
Beginning at the Southwest Corner of Lot 5 of Block 28 of the Map of Springfield, filed and recorded In Book I
Page 1, Plat Records of Lane County, Oregon, said pOint being the Northeast corner of Pioneer Parkway and B
Street In Springfield, Oregon, thence Easterly along the Northerly right of way of B Street, 264 feet, more or less,
to the Southeast corner of Lot 8, Block 28 of the Map of Springfield, which IS the Northwest corner of B street and
Fourth Street, thence leaVing the B Street right of way and along the Southerly projection of the Fourth street right
of way, crossing B Street 66 feet. more or less, to the Northeast corner of Lot 1, Block 1 of the Map of Springfield,
said pOint being the Northeast corner of B Street and Fourth Street, thence along the Southerly right of way of B
Street, 264 feet more or less, to the Northwest corner of Lot 4, Block 1 of the Map of Springfield, said pOint being
the Southeast corner of Pioneer Parkway and B Street, thence leaVing the B Street right of way and along the
Northerly projection of the easterly right of way of Pioneer Parkway, crossing B Street 66 feet, more or less, to the
pOint of beginning, all In the City of Springfield, Lane County, Oregon
Ordinance ~ WI
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
- 4 -
Date ~eceived:
Planner. AL
9/;-'/.Md7
'I
V ACAT][ON OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
City of Springfield Case No. LRP2007-00019
APPLICANT
The City of Springfield and Springfield Police Department
VACATION ACTION
The vacation ofa 66-foot wide by 264-foot long segment ofpubhc street nght-of-way
LOCATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE VACATED
The publIc nght-of-way (ROW) proposed to be vacated IS a segment ofB Street located between 4th
Street and PIOneer Parkway East. The right-of-way lIes on the boundary between Lane County Tax Maps
17-03-35-24 and 17-03-35-31.
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF THE VACATION
Finding 1. Oregon ReVised Statutes (ORS) Section 27] 080 prescnbes.
(1) Whenever any person mterested m any real property m an mcorporated Clty m thls state deslres
to vacate all or part of any street, avenue, boulevard, alley, plat, pubhc square or other pubhc place,
such person may file a petltlOn therefor settmgforth a descnption of the ground proposed to be
vacated, the purpose for whlch the ground lS proposed to be used and the reason for such vacatlOn
(2) There shall be appended to such petltlOn, as a part thereof and as a basls for grantmg the same,
the consent of the owners of all abuttmg property and of not less than two-thzrds m area of the real
property affected thereby The real property affected thereby shall be deemed to be the land lymg on
elther slde of the street or portlon thereofproposed to be vacated and extending laterally to the next
street that serves as a parallel street, but m any case not to exceed 200 feet, and the land for a hke
lateral dlstance on elther slde of the street for 400 feet along ltS course beyond each termmus of the
part proposed to be vacated Where a street lS proposed to be vacated to ltS termmi, the land
embraced man extenslOn of the streetfor a dlstance of 400 feet beyond each termmus shall also be
counted In the vacatlOn of any plat or part thereof the consent of the owner or owners of two-thlrds
m area of the property embraced wlthm such plat or part thereof proposed to be vacated shall be
sufficlent, except where such vacatlon embraces street area, when, as to such street area the above
reqUlrements shall also apply The consent of the owners of the required amount of property shall be
m wntmg [Amended by 1999 c 866 82]
Fmdmg 2. ORS SectIOn 271.130(1) prescnbes:
The Clty governmg body may l11ltwte vacatlOn proceedmgs authonzed by ORS 271. 080 and make
such vacatlOn wlthout a petltlOn or consent of property owners Notlce shall be glven as provlded by
ORS 271 110, but such vacatlOn shall not be made before the date set for hearmg, nor if the owners
of a maJonty of the area affected, computed on the basls provlded m ORS 271080, object m wntmg
thereto, nor shall any street area be vacated wlthout the consent of the owners of the abuttmg
property if the vacation wdl substantially affect the market value of such property, unless the Clty
governmg body provldes for paymg damages Provlsion for paymg such damages may be made by a
local assessment, or m such other manner as the Clty charter may provlde."
Fmdmg 3. In accordance with ORS 271.080(1), the area bemg vacated is a one-block segment of publIc
street.
Datfl ~1ecelved: flV.2do7
Planner: AL
FlIldlllg 4 In accordance wIth ORS 271 080, the CIty of Springfield prepared a legal descnptIOn of the
segment of public street to be vacated. The legal descnptIOn was prepared by the City Surveyor and was
available for public review more than 20 days pnor to the opelllng of the City Council Public Heanng on
the proposed vacatIOn action The legal descriptIOn IS attached to the enacting ordinance as ExhibIt A
Finding 5. In accordance with ORS 271 080, the City of Sprmgfield stated the reason for the proposed
public street vacation and the purpose for which the ground would be used. The reason and purpose were
available for public review more than 20 days prior to the opening of the CIty Council Public Hearing on
the proposed vacatIOn actIOn. The reason and purpose for the vacation action are stated on the Public
Heanng Notices for the Planning CommissIOn Public Heanng held June 5, 2007 and the CIty Council
Public Hearing held July 2, 2007. The Public Hearmg Notices were published in the newspaper and
maIled to adjacent landowners and residents as required by ORS 271 UO and provisions of the
Spnngfield Development Code
Finding 6' In accordance With ORS 271.080 and 271 130(1), the Springfield City Council Initiated the
vacation action by passmg a motion on May 7, 2007 The motion IS noted in the minutes of the City
Council meetmg of May 7, 2007.
Finding 7: NotificatIOn of the proposed vacatIOn actIOn was given in accordance WIth ORS 271.110 and
the Springfield Development Code Articles 3.100 and 9.050(2). "NotificatIOn of Street Vacation" signs
were posted m conspicuous locations at both ends of the segment of public streefproposed for vacatIOn, a
legal notice was published in a newspaper of general circulatIOn (The Register-Guard) on June 15 and 22,
2007 pnor to the City Council Public Hearing on the vacatIOn action, and landowners and residents
wlthm a 400 foot radIUs of the street segment were notified in wntmg of the Public Heanng AffidaVits
for the public maIlout notification and newspaper publication are part of the record for the vacatIOn
action.
Finding 8. All properties that directly abut the segment of public nght-of-way proposed for vacation are
owned by the City of Springfield. There are no third-party properties that would be isolated or deprived
oflegal and physical access upon vacatIOn of the nght-of-way.
Finding 9: The Public Hearing was advertised, conducted and concluded before any final action on the
vacation was taken. The City Council Public Hearing on the vacatIOn action was opened on July 2, 2007
and contmued to the meeting on July 16,2007. The Public Hearing was concluded on July 16,2007. At
the conclusIOn of the Public Hearing, Council dIrected staff to return on September 17,2007 for adoption
of findmgs m support of the vacatIOn action.
Fmdmg 10. No landowners or resIdents withm the 400-foot public notIficatIOn area submItted testimony
opposing the street vacation.
Fmding 11: The street vacation will not compromise safe and convenient pedestrian, bIcycle and
vehicular access in the area
Finding 12: Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660-0 12-0045(3)(d) states that "safe and convement'
means bicycle and pedestrian routes, faczlitles and Improvements which.
(A) Are reasonably free from hazards, particularly types or levels of automobzle traffic which
would Interfere With or discourage pedestrzan or cycle travel for short tripS;
(B) Provide a reasonably direct route of travel between destinations such as a transit stop
and a store, and
(C) Meet travel needs of cyclists and pedestrzans considering destmatlOn and length of trzp,
and considering that the optimum trip length of pedestrzans IS generally 'l4 to 10 mzle
DatE) Race,ved:--!J10ctJ7
Planner: Al
Fmdmg 13: In accordance wIth OAR 660-012-0045(3)(d), vacatIOn of the subject nght-of-way and
closure to publIc travel would not mterfere with or dIscourage pedestnan, cycle or vehicle travel on the
adjacent publIc street system due to excessive traffic or other unusual hazards. East-west traffic
circulatIOn can be accommodated on adjacent local and collector streets. The adjacent and parallel public
collector street (A Street) is less than 300 feet to the south
Fmdmg 14 In accordance WIth OAR 660-0 12-0045(3)(d), vacatIOn of the subject right-of-way would not
result m pedestnan, cyclIst or vehicle tnps that are more than V4 mile from bemg a direct route of travel
between destmatlon pomts Vacation of the segment ofB Street would result in out-of-dIrectIOn dIstance
for passage from the eastern end of the subject right-of-way (at 4th Street) to the western end of the nght-
of-way (at PIoneer Parkway East) of about 600 feet (<1/8 mile) for bicycles and vehIcles usmg surface
streets. Vehicles and bIcycles have the option of usmg either A Street or C Street for the east-west
segment of the trip. The out-of-dIrection distance would be even less for pedestrians usmg the publIc
sidewalk system, or bicycles and vehicles passing through the mid-block alley north of B Street
Finding 15. A travel dIstance dIagram for the publIc streets surrounding the proposed vacatIOn area is
prOVided as Figure I m the staff report for the vacatIOn actIOn For purposes of prepanng the travel
distance diagram, staff used GIS mappmg informatIOn and a calIbrated measuring wheel to venfy
potentIal vehicle travel distances Measurements were taken m the field from points within the travel
lanes of the publIc streets adjacent to the proposed vacation area to determine lIkely travel distances for
vehicles Travel distances for pedestnans usmg the publIc Sidewalk system and publIc alley are less than
the distances descnbed for vehicles, but are not descnbed on the diagram as there are more short-cuttmg
opportunities for pedestrians than vehicles. The diagram also is mtended to Illustrate maXImum out-of-
dIrection travel distances
Fmdmg 16: The ~600-foot out-of-direction distance is limited to tnps that have an origm and destination
on B Street and that would otherwise pass across the vacatIOn area Tnps that have an east-west
component and that are not confined to B Street can be accommodated on adjacent public streets without
any out-of-dIrection travel. Tnps that have origins and/or destinatIOns outSIde the B Street alignment and
require a north-south travel component can be made on adjacent publIc streets with minimal or no out-of-
direction travel dIstance.
FmdIng 17 In accordance WIth Spnngfield Development Code Section 32.020(l)(a)1 b, block length for
local streets shall not exceed 600 feet The proposed vacatIOn action wIll not create a north-south block
length exceeding 600 feet. As measured from the north edge of street nght-of-way on A Street to the
south edge of street right-of-way on C Street, the dIstance IS approXImately 575 feet. The existing mId-
block alley between the proposed vacation area and C Street reduces this maximum block length distance
because It will continue to accommodate east-west vehicle, bicycle and pedestnan passage.
Findmg 18: Pedestrian, bicyclist and vehicle passage will not be obstructed on the adjacent public streets
outside the vacation area Pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle passage through the east-west mid-block alley
north ofB Street can be accommodated WIthin the existing 14-foot wide paved surface.
Findmg 19 The publIc streets adjacent to the proposed vacation area are developed to City standards
WIth SIdewalks, paved travel lanes and street IIghtmg The adjacent publIc streets are designed to
accommodate one lane of vehicle travel m each direction and parking on both SIdes. The pavement
Widths are suffiCient to allow for continuous traffic flow m each direction With full utilizatIOn of the
curbline for parking. Therefore, negotiating the public street system adjacent to the proposed vacation
area WIll not create any unusual hazards for pedestrians, bicyclists or vehicles.
Finding 20' Safe pedestnan, bicycle and vehicle travel will be maintained WIth the proposed nght-of-way
vacation. The surrounding public Sidewalk and street system adjacent to the vacation area wIll not be
altered by the proposed vacation action. Speed limits are 20 mph and traffic control slgnage is in place on
Date Received:-!;j?~o"'7
Planner: AL
- I
the local streets adjacent to the right-of-way proposed for vacation in order to maintain safe vehicle and
bicycle passage through the area Additionally, the width of pavement on the adjacent publIc streets IS
comparable to the proposed vacatIOn area Therefore, vehIcles and bIcycles WIll have the same
opportUnIty for safe passage, parkIng and maneuvermg
FIndIng 21 A Traffic Impact AnalYSIS (TIA) was prepared by an independent traffic engineering
consultant to evaluate the Impacts of the proposed right-of-way vacation (Springfield Justice Center
Revised Task 2 Report - Traffic Impact Study, Access Engineering, July, 2006). The TIA was placed in
the record of the vacatIOn proceedings. The TIA examined the existing and post-vacation street system In
the vicinity of the JustIce Center and evaluated the possible impacts of the proposed right-of-way vacatIon
to vehicle movements and the performance of nearby mtersectlOns. The TIA concluded there would be
minimal impact on the downtown transportation system with the proposed vacation of public right-of-
way.
Finding 22' The TIA prepared for the proposed right-of-way vacation concluded that the proposed
vacatIOn action would have mmllnallmpact on the transportatIOn system The report determined that
levels of servIce would be mamtamed on nearby intersectIOns and that no traffic mitigation actIOns would
be reqUIred to ensure safe and effiCIent flow of traffic m the vicinity of the Justice Center.
FIndmg 23 The Springfield Development Code (SDq ArtIcle 9 - Vacations contams CriterIa of
Approval for vacatIOn of easements, nghts-of-way, plats and other CIty property. The sectIon descrIbmg
the CrIterIa of approval reads.
9 060 Criteria of Approval
(1) For the Vacation ofpubhc utlhty easements, the Director shall approve, approve With conditIOns
or deny the apphcatlOn The apphcatlOn shall be approved if the Vacation Isfound to be
consistent With the following criteria'
(a) There are no present or future serVices, faCIlities or utilities deemed to be necessary by a
utlhty prOVider and the easement IS not necessary, or
(b) If the utility prOVider deems the easement to be necessary, public servlces,faclhtles or
utilities can be extended In an orderly and effiCient manner In an alternate locatIOn
(2) Where the proposed Vacation ofpubhc rights-ai-way, other City property, or PartitIOn or
SubdiVISIOn Plats IS reViewed under Type IV procedure, the City Councll shall approve, approve
with conditIOns, or deny the VacatIOn applicatIOn The applicatIOn shall be approved if the
VacatIOn Isfound 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 dlGgram, Plan
District map, or Conceptual Development Plan,
(b) The VacatIOn shall not conflict With the proviSIOns ofSprmgfield MuniCipal Code 1997, and
thiS Code, mcludmg but not lmuted 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 derlvedfrom the public right-ai-way, publicly owned land or PartitIOn or
SubdiviSIOn Plat.
(3) NotwlthMandlng the prOVISIOns of SectIOn 9 060(2) where the land affected by the proposed
VacatIOn of public right-of-way, other publiC land as specified m ORS 271 080, or pubhc
Date r~eceived:
Planner: AL
i/;7k7
I I '
easement will remam m public ownership and will contmue to be used for a publlc purpose, the
request shall be reviewed under the Type IV procedure The City Council may approve the
VacatlOn appllcatlOn ifit lsfound to be consistent with thefollowmg crzterza'
(a) The Vacatzon was lmtzated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271 130(1),
(b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271110(1),
(c) Approval of the vacatzon would be consistent with prOVlSlOn of safe, convement and
reasonably direct routes for cycllsts, pedestrians and vehicles as provided m OAR 660-
012-0045(3),
(d) Whether a greater publlc benefit would be obtamedfrom the vacation than from
retammg the right-oi-way m lts present status, and
(e) Whether provlslOns have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remam m
publlc ownership
Fmdmg 24: The vacation is not a public utility easement, therefore Cnterion 9.060(1) is not applicable.
Fmding 25. The vacation is a segment of public street right-of-way that will remam in public ownership
and will continue to be used for a public purpose (Justice Center facility). Therefore, Cntenon 9.060(2) IS
not applicable, the applicable Cnterion of approval is 9.060(3).
Fll1dmg 26 In accordance with SDC 9 060(3)(a), the vacation action was Initiated by City Council on
May 7, 2007 and pursuant to ORS 271 130(1).
Findmg 27' In accordance with SDC 9 060(3)(b), notice ofthe vacation action has been given pursuant to
ORS 271 110(1). Notice of the vacatIOn action also has been given m accordance with the City'S
Development Code (SDC 3 100 and 9.050) and Municipal Code (Section 3.205).
Finding 28 In accordance with SDC 9.060(3)(c), approval of the vacatIOn would not compromise safe,
convenient and reasonably direct routes for cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles as provided In OAR 660-
012-0045(3). As described in the above findings, the out-of-directlOn travel distance for vehicles, cyclists
and pedestrians is not expected to be more than 600 feet The out-of-directlOn travel distance is minimal
or non-existent for trips with ongins and destInations outside the linear alignment of the street contaIning
the vacated area
Findmg 29. In accordance with SDC 9.060(3)(d), the public benefit attnbuted to a public Justice Center
facIlity with secure parking area and ancillary building that serves the entire municipal area is deemed to
be a greater benefit than retaming the one-block segment of street nght-of-way for public travel.
Fmdmg 30: It is of cntlcal importance and public benefit to mall1tain a safe Justice Center facility with a
contiguous, secure parking area. The preferred deSIgn of the Justice Center facility includes the
contiguous secure parking area, and therefore reqUires the one-block segment of public nght-of-way
proposed for vacation.
Fll1dmg 31 Damage and vandalism to police vehicles is an ongomg problem that reqUires repaIrs at the
expense of taxpayers IncorporatIng the proposed vacatIOn area into the Justice Center will Improve the
secunty of publicly-funded police and special operatIOns vehicles and eqUipment stored at the facIlity
(testImony from Police Chief Jerry Smith dated May 16,2007) It is of public benefit to deter damage
and vandalism through administratIOn of a secure parkmg area that is contiguous to the Justice Center
faCIlity.
Date Received: r176<<77
Planner: AL /'""".
. \
Finding 32: Safety and security of police officers and the public are paramount to the PolIce Chief and
other Interested parties that submitted testimony in support ofthe vacation action. Maintaining a secure
parkIng area Immediately adjacent to the police station will prevent responding officers from having to
cross a public street to reach their vehicles. The secure parking area will result In quicker response times
for polIce officers because they don't have to travel as far to their vehicles and don't have to cross a
public street Therefore, the proposed vacatIOn will benefit the greater community, particularly those
requIrIng timely police assistance.
FIndIng 33 The preferred site design for the Justice Center includes an anCillary building for retainIng
polIce and court records, eVidence, recovered items, and police equipment. ProXimity to the Justice
Center and security of the ancillary bUildIng is necessary to protect the integrity of ItS contents. The
preferred placement of the ancillary building IS withIn a portion of the street nght-of-way area proposed
for vacation.
Finding 34: The secure parking area adjacent to the Justice Center can be used for emergency evacuatIOn
of jail pnsoners. The secure parking area provides a contained muster area for pnsoners that otherwise
could be subject to an uncontrolled release In the event of an emergency evacuation. Provldmg a
contained evacuatIOn area increases the safety and secunty of the community and the pnsoners
themselves The secure parkIng area that can be used for emergency evacuation IS within the street right-
of-way area proposed for vacatIOn.
FIndIng 35. Based on FIndIngs 29 to 34, the benefit obtaIned from the proposed vacatIOn area (through
its use as an Integral part of the Justice Center facilIty) is of greater public benefit than retaInIng the nght-
of-way in its present status.
Finding 36: In accordance with SDC 9.060(3)(e), a special condition has been inserted In the enactIng
ordInance requiring that the right-of-way revert back to publIc right-of-way If the vacated area ceases to
be used for the purpose of a municipal Justice Center. The special conditIOn IS mtended to ensure the land
is retained in publIc ownership.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregOIng findings and the record of the vacation actIOn (City ofSprmgfield Case No.
LRP2007-00019), the nght-of-way vacatIOn IS consistent With and meets the applicable requirements of
ORS 271.080 & 271.130(1), OAR 660-0 12-0045(3)(d), and Springfield Development Code Sections
9060 and 32 020(1)(a).
~D"'~\-'\ j L~('\~J
"'\ III (al ____._
Date Received: 'f/7ih() 7
Planner: AL ;--