HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 6101 11/29/2004
.
ORDINANCE NO. 6101
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A REMAINING FRAGMENT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
IDENTIFIED AS OLD COUNTY ROAD 221, LOCATED ADJACENT TO. 42ND
STREET SOUTH OF INDUSTRIAL AVE.
WHEREAS, the application 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, lawful notice of the proposed vacation was published lIT the
Springfield News and posted at the termination points of the right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the Springfield Planning Commission met on October 19, 2004 and
received a staff report that included findings which conclude the proposed right-of-way
vacation satisfies the decision criteria found in Section 9.030 of the Springfield
Development Code for approving right-of-way vacations; and
WHEREAS, the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing
concerning the proposed plat line vacation on October 19, 2004 and received no
testimony in opposition to the vacation; and
.
WHEREAS, the members of the Planning Commission considering the matter on
October 19th voted unanimously to forward their recommendation that the right-of-way
vacation be approved, to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, such vacation vacates the remaining segment of old County Road
221 previously intended for vacation in and inadvertently omitted from Ordinance 6049
(Special) adopted by this Council on April 7, 2003; 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, the Springfield City Council met in Council Chambers, at 225 Fifth
Street, on Monday the 15th day of November, 2004, at the hour of7:00 p.m., to conduct
a public hearing and first reading of this ordinance concerning the proposed vacation; .
Division of Chief Deputy Clerk
Lane County Deeds and Records
~~O~.~~~l~~
$71. 00
(Bar ~
I
i
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
00650774200400941850120122 12/09/2004 01:44:59 PM
RPR-ORDN Cnt=l Stn=5 CASHIER 05
$60.00 $11.00
.
"----------~--~--- - - ~---------~ --~---
Return to: City of Springfield- City Recorder- 225 Fifth Street- Springfield, OR 97477
ORDINANCE 6101
Page 1 of3
.
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 the public interest will not be impaired by the vacation of this
right-of-way, and that vacation of said right-of-way will be in the best interest of the
public and increase the benefit of the property involved.
Section 2: The right-of-way in the City of Springfield, as described on the site
map and in the property description which are together attached as Exhibit A of this
Ordinance, is declared to be vacated.
Section 3. The City Recorder is directed to file certified copies of this ordinance
with the Lane County Clerk, Lane County Assessor, and Lane County Surveyor.
Section 4. This right-of-way vacation is subject to and explicitly reserves
easement rights for any existing sewer, water main, gas main, conduit of any kind, pole,
structure, or things used for or intended for public utilities or public service. The owner
of any such utility or thing is hereby reserved the right to access, maintain, continue,
repair, reconstruct, renew, replace, rebuild, and enlarge any and all such things under
existing or future easements.
.
Section 5. It is further a condition of this vacation that nothing herein contained
shall cause or require the removal or abandonment of any sewer, water main, gas main,
conduit, pole or thing used or intended for any public service. The right is hereby
reserved for the owner of any such thing to access, maintain, continue repair, reconstruct,
renew, replace, rebuild and enlarge any and all such things under existing or future
easements.
FURTHER, although not part of this Ordinance, the Springfield City Council adopts the
findings set forth in the Staff Report which demonstrate conformance ofthis amendment
to the Metro Plan, applicable State statutes and applicable State-wide Planning Goals and
Administrative Rules, and is attached as Exhibit B.
.
ORDINANCE 6101
Page 2 of3
.
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this29th day of
Nov. ,2004 by a vote of L for and ~ against. (t - absent: Ballew)
Council President
APPROVED by the~tiyer of the City of Springfield this 29tWay of Nov, 2004.
.-
~
Tamalyn Fitch
MrryUt
Council President
State of Oregon )
) ss.
County of Lane )
~is instrument .was acknowledged before ,me on Novefvtber 2..CJ,(){JfJ'/by
J~ r\ Fthh- as tuu-nc..d Pres/Ii e.IL:r of the City
of~Ueld.
M-w~
My commission expires: llr~-~~
d50r Oregon
.
.= <fouR--
City Re rde
OI"F'ICIAL SEAL'.' . .
AMYLSOWA
NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 352109
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV. 22, 2005
\~ v:: -..J \ \":: '-.N ~ \~ \ ~ 'N\ ') \-\ \'>\" ~ ()\J ~ If\
\~ -". \'\) Fo \t 'l-'\
~ o,>c.(\~-\ ~ L fu,:\\*'-(
\ \ \ 7" (J I 0 '-I
O~\(~ O~ C"L:"'\' \ R\\()\(\-J~'i
.
ORDINANCE 6101
Page 3 of3
EXHIBIT-~'1
.
EXHIBIT" A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
RIGHT OF WAY VACATION
42ND STREET, SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
THAT PORTION OF 42ND STREET ABUTIING THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY
OF LOTS 1 AND.2, BLOCK 1 OF MORROW PLAT AS PLATTED AND
RECORDED IN BOOK 19, PAGE 6, LANE COUNTY OREGON PLAT RECORDS,
LANE COUNTY OREGON, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
:;;
"
.
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1 OF SAID
MORROW PLAT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF
COUNTY ROAD No. 221; THENCE NORTH 0014'57" EAST, 63.64 FEET ALONG
THE NORTHERLY PROJECTION OF WEST BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT TO THE
INTERSECTION OF A LINE BEING THE SOUTHEASTERLY PROJECTION OF
THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF 42ND STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID
SOUTHEASTERLY PROJECTION, SOUTH 41"25'41" EAST, 258.23 FEET; THENCE
ALONG A 48.24 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 41005'32", A LENGTH OF 34.60, THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
SOUTH 20052'55" EAST, 33.86 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN
OF SAID COUNTY ROAD 221, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERN
BOUNDARY OF LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF SAID MORROW PLAT; THENCE
FOLLOWING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND ALONG THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARIES OF LOTS 2 AND 1, BLOCK 1 OF SAID MORROW
PLAT, NORTH 46040'00" WEST 178.68 FEET; THENCE ALONG A 266.48 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14013'34",
AND A LENGTH OF 66.15 FEET, THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH
53046'47" WEST, 66.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGININNG, ALL WITHIN
TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, SECTION 32, SPRINGFIELD, LANE
COUNTY, OREGON, CONTAINING 0.15 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
.
.
NUMBER DELTA ANGLE
C1 4 r05'32"
C2 14'13'34"
CHORD DIRECTION
S20'52'55"E
N53'46'47"W
RADIUS
. 48.24
266.48
ARC LENGTH
34.60
66.15
CHORD LENGTH
33.86
66.00 -
EXHIBIT "B"
RIGHT OF WAY VACATION
42ND STREET, SPRINGFIELD
OREGON
NUMBER
L1
L2
L3
DIRECTION
NOO'14'57"E
S4r25'41"E
N46' 40'00"W
DISTANCE
63.64'
258.23'
178.68'
~ ""
J,P. HAMMER
INDUSTRIAL
PARK
LOT 13
.
LOT 1
~
t
.
I I I I I I I i
I I I
SOUTHERN
-
-
Scale 1" = 1 00'
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
,
<)<) .
\ bt<)~\'\\
OREGON
JULY 10. 1964
LAWRENCE B. OLSON
655
ENEWAL DATE: 12-31-2004
LO
,."
I")
~
I")
.<v
" C)CO
t)'-
~
b MORROW PLAT
(/) BOOK 19, PAGE 6
BLOCK 1
~~
co f'..
f'.. LO
I"") "it
1
\
2
N84"24'W
-
:i"
o
0)
l'-
0)
I
N
o
en
,....
......
.q.
LO
.........
......
o
.q.
l'-
0)
~
o
~
Z
~
~
::>
~
..
o
o
N
~
E-t
.....
::>
tI)
..
~
tI)
~
o
Date16 MAY 2004 Drawn By:
K.Nicolas Job No. 3115 :;
OLSON & MORRIS, \~
EXHIBIT=B 1
. ---,.:
.
Request for Vacation of a Right-of-Way
Staff Report
Date Submitted:
October 7, 2004
Journal Number:
LRP 2004-00029
.
Applicant: Consultant List:
City of Springfield Scott Morris
Olson & Morris
Affected Property Owner: 1410 Oak Street, Suite 200
John Hammer Eugene, OR 97401
P.O. Box 2266
Eugene, OR 97402
Subiect Property Riaht-of-Wav to be Vacated:
880 42nd Street Remaining segment of County Road 221
(Old N Street) adjacent to 42nd Street
Map # 17-02-32-22 Tax lots 100, immediately north of SP Rail Spur
200 crossing.
Plan and Zone Desianation Related Action:
Metro Plan: ' HI Vacation of ROW
Springfield Zone: HI Jo. No. 2002-03-088
Executive Summary
County Rd. 221, an abandoned half-mile long roadway, was vacated iri April 2003. The
vacation followed negotiations between the City and John Hammer for the dedication of
right-of-way for a bike and pedestrian path within the Hammer Industrial Subdivision.
Right-of-way agreements are often negotiated as part of a vacation action. In this case,
the majority of old County Rd. 221 was vacated in exchange for the bike and pedestrian
path. In negotiations for the vacation agreement, a 6636 square-foot ( .15 acres) parcel
was added to the segment of County Rd. 221 right-of-way described in Harrimer's
original vacation application (Journal No. 2002-03-0088). The added segment was
inadvertently left out of the final action on Hammer's vacation request. This action
vacates the segment that was included in the vacation agreement, but omitted in the
original Hammer vacation application.
.
This vacation request fulfills Section 1. A. of the "Agreement Providing for the Vacation
of Certain Segments of Olympic Street Right of Way and Providing for Dedication ofa
Multi-Use Path," signed by John Hammer and the City of Springfield in February 2003.
Based upon the findings made with respect to the criteria for approving vacations of
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19, 2004
Pg. 1 of 7
2
.
rights-of-ways listed in Section 9.030 of the Springfield Development Code, staff
recommends approval of the request.
Di(3gram 1. Vacated County Rd. 221 and the Subject Parcel
.
I. Overview of the Proposal
The applicant, John Hammer filed an application in October 2001 to subdivide Tax lot
101 as part of a larger subdivision plan. The subdivision tentative plan was approved on
'February 12, 2002. The applicant indicated at that time that he intended to file for a
right-of-way vacation (ROW) for an abandoned segment of County Rd. 221 that cut
across his property. Jurisdiction over the subject ROW was surrendered by the Lane
County Board of Commissioners to the City of Springfield in February of 1965. Hammer
requested that a segment of County Rd. 221 be vacated and that the property redeemed
from the vacation was added to the adjacent properties.
.
Parallel to the request for the vacation the City and Hammer negotiated an agreement
wherein, Hammer agreed to dedicate right-of-way for a new multi-use path across his
property. The agreement stipulated that certain driveway access from two small parcels
owned by Hammer be closed. The closure necessitated the vacation of an additional
segment of County Rd. 221 that was not part of Hammer's original vacation application.
When Hammer's vacation request was approved, the added segment stemming from the
negotiations for the multi~use path was not included.
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19, 2004
Pg. 2 of 7
3
.
The City initiated a vacatioflrequest for the additional segment of County Rd. 221 that is
specified in the agreement for the multi-use path~ on September 30, 2004. Required
public notice was posted and mailed to affected property owners and residents.
. II. Procedural Requirements
Type of Procedure
Vacation of a right-of-way isa Type IV procedure as specified in Section 3.1 00(1) (d) of
the Springfield Development Code (SDC). The application, together with a staff report
and public comment shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City
Council. The Commission shall hold a public hearing and issue a decision on the
vacation request based on the criteria for approval found in Section 9.030 of the SDC.
The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council concerning
the request that includes its findings with respect to the decision criteria.
Section 3.100 (6) provides for a public hearing to be held by the City Council with proper
notice being provided as specified in Section 14.030. The Council shall review the
application, together with the staff report, findings and recommendation of the Planning
Commission, any evidence received prior to and during both the Planning Commission
and the City Council hearings, and shall make a decision on the application.
.
Notice of Public Hearings
Notice of the public hearing before the City Council requires the publication of a notice
concerning the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. Such notices are to be
published at least 10 days prior to the first public hearing, when two hearings are
required. ORS 271.110-N9tice of Hearing, provides additional notice requirements.
The statute requires:
(1) The city recorder or other recording officer of the city shall give notice of the
petition and hearing by publishing a notice in the city official newspaper once each
week for two consecutive weeks prior to the hearing.
(2) Within five days after the first day of publication of the notice the city recording
officer shall cause to be posted at or near each end of the proposed vacation a copy of
the notice which shall be headed, "Notice of Street Vacation," "Notice of Plat
Vacation" or "Notice of Plat and Street Vacation," as the case may be; the notice shall
be posted in at least two conspicuous places in the proposed vacation area. The
posting and first day of publication of such notice shall be not less than 14 days
before the hearing.
.
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19. 2004
Pg. 3 of 7
4
.
Petition by Abutting and Affected Property Owners
ORS 271.080 states that a petition of abutting property owners and of affected property
owners, supporting the right-of-way vacation, must be submitted by an applicant if the .
. applicant is initiating the vacation. The statute states:
(1) Whenever any person interested in any real property in an incorporated city in this
state desires to vacate all or part of any street, avenue, boulevard, alley, plat, public
square or other public place, such person may file a petition therefore setting forth a
description ofthe ground proposed to be vacated, the purpose for which the ground is
proposed to be used and the reason for such vacation.
.
(2) There shall be appended to such petition, as a part thereof and as a basis for granting
the same, the consent of the owners of all abutting property and of not less than two-
thirds in area of the real property affected thereby. Th~ real property affected thereby
shall be deemed to be the land lying on either side of the street or portion thereof
proposed to be vacated and extending laterally to the next street that serves as a parallel
street, but in any case not to exceed 200 feet, ~d the land for a like lateral distance on
either side of the street for 400 feet along its course beyond each terminus of the part
proposed to be vacated. Where a street is proposed to be vacated to its termini, the land
embraced in an extension of the street for a distance of 400 feet beyond each terminus
shall also be counted. In the vacation of any plat or part thereof the consent of the owner
or owners of two-thirds in area of the property embraced within such plat or part thereof
proposed tQ be vacated shall be sufficient, except where such vacation embraces street
area, when, as to such street area the above requirements shall also apply. The consent of
the owners of the required amount of property shall be in writing. [Amended by 1999
c.866 S2]
Findings:
I. A petition of abutting property owners and affected property owners has been
received and presented to the City Recorder.
2. Notice ofthe pending vacation was published in the Springfield News on October
1, 2004, and the following week on October 8, 2004. The first publication date is
more than 10 days prior to the date of the first public hearing before the Planning
Commission and more than 10 days prior to the hearing before the City Council.
3. Posted notice of the proposed vacation was placed in public places at the termini
of the right-of-way segment within 5 days of the published notice.
4. Mailed notice to property owners within 100 feet on October 8, 2004.
.
5. A public hearing concerning the vacation was held before the Springfield
Planning Commission on October 19,2004.
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19, 2004
Pg. 4 of 7
5
.
6. A staff report and the application together with all supporting materials relied
upon by the applicant were available for public review before the Planning
Commission hearing.
. ConClusion:
Procedural requirements for processing the requested vacation of a right-of-way have
been met.
III. Criteria for Decision Making
Article 9.030 ofthe SDC details the criteria to be applied by the Council when
considering a vacation request:
"The applicant shall demonstrate that the following criteria have been met in order to
approve a Vacation request:
(1) The Vacation is in conformance with the Metro Plan including any adopted Street
Plans, and/or Conceptual Plans.
.
(2) There are no negative effects on access, traffic circulation, and emergency service
protection; or any other public benefit derived from the easement, right-of way or
plat.
IV. Findings and Conclusions
(1) The Vacation is in conformance with the Metro Plan including any adopted
Street Plans, and/or Conceptual Plans.
Findings:
7. The Metro Plan designation for properties adjacent to the subject right-of-way and the
surrounding area is Heavy Industrial. The Springfield Zoning Map shows the
properties are also zoned Heavy Industrial.
8. The subject right-of-way is a small remaining fragment County Rd. 221 that once
connected with Kathryn and Olympic Streets to the north and 42nd Street on the east.
9. Jurisdiction over the subject right-of-way was surrendered by Lane County to the City
of Springfield in February, 1965.
10. Springfield Ordinance No. 6049 approved the request by John Hammer to vacate a
large segment of County Rd. 221 on April 1, 2003.
.
11. The subject right of way segment is crossed by driveways which allow access to 42nd
Street from two small parcels owned by Mr. Hammer. Closure of these driveways
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19, 2004
Pg. 5 of 7
.
.-
.
..
6
necessitates the vacation of the subject right-of-way to provide a new access for these
properties to 42nd Street via the newly constructed Industrial Way which is lo?ated to
the north.
. 12. A review of the Springfield Conceptual Local Street Plan (6/97) shows no conflict
with the proposed vacation. No street currently connects to the subject right-of-way
and no future use of the segment is ~hown on the Plan as part of a future facility.
13. The Springfield Bike Plan shows a bike path on 42nd Street, east of the industrial
. subdivision, but no use of the right-of-way is shown. By agreement with John
Hammer, property owner, this vacation will result in the fulfillment of an important
element of an agreement to dedicate a new right-of-way for a multi-use path on the
west side'of 42nd Street, through the Hammer Industrial Subdivision.
14. The vicinity of the right-of-way is within the plan boundaries ofthe Mid-Main
Refinement Plan that was adopted in 1986. The Plan makes no mention of the right-
of-way (or affected properties) in its maps or policies.
15. A review of Trans Plan's Capital Investment Action List shows no roadway or
bikeway project in the foreseeable timeline that depends on the subject right-of-way.
Further, vacating the right-of-way does not conflict with the Plan's goals or policies.
Conclusion:
The proposed vacation conforms to the Metro Plan, and reverses a subdivision
configuration that is not consistent with the intended use of the land as designated by the
Plan and current zoning. The vacation is not in conflict with adopted Street Plans, and/or
Conceptual Plans in the area.
(2) There are no negative effects on access, traffic circulation, and emergency
service protection; or any other public benefit derived from the easement, right-
of-way or plat.
Findings:
16. Original comments regarding the vacation were received from through a
C Development Review Committee meeting that was held on April 15, 2002.
17..The Public Works Transportation Planning staff later negotiated the inclusion of the
subject property as part of the overall vacation of County Rd 221. Staff determined
that there would be no negative effects on traffic circulation from the added segment.
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19, 2004
Pg. 6 of 7
c' .
.
.
.
\ .
7
Conclusion:
A review of the proposed vacation by affected public and private utilities and the City of
Springfield indicates that no negative effects on access or facilities will occur from the
. vacatIon of the subject property. .
v. Recommendation and Conditions of Approval
Based on an analysis of the application and the approval criteria found in Section 9.030
ofthe SDC, staff recommends approval of the requested right-of-way vacation.
Attachments:
A. Vacation Application
B. Consent to Vacation
C. Legal Description of Right-of-Way
D. Map showing area to be vacated
E. Vacation agreement providing for dedication of a multi-use path (February 2003)
Hammer ROW Vacation
Jo. No. LRP 2004-00029
October 19, 2004
Pg. 7 of 7