HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 6191 04/02/2007
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
(GENERAL)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE 9
V ACA TIONS ESTABLISHING NEW CRITERIA TO APPLY TO COUNCIL INITIATED
V ACTIONS OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY WHERE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL BE
RETAINED IN PUBLIC OWNERSHIP BUT USED FOR AN AL TERNA TIVE PUBLIC
PURPOSE. (10. No. LRP 2007-00002).
The City Council of the City of Springfield finds that:
A. The Springfield Development Code (SDC) was adopted by the Springfield City Council
on May 5, 1986, and amendments thereto were subsequently adopted by Ordinance.
B. Article 9, Section 9.060 of the Springfield Development Code contains criteria of
approval for vacation of public utility easements, public rights-of-way, other City property, or
Partition or Subdivision Plats, but does not include criteria to consider Council initiated vacation
of public right-of-way where that right-of-way will be retained in public ownership but used for
an alternative public purpose.
C. The SDC implements policies, goals and objectives of the Metro Plan and as such must
comply with these policies, goals and objectives.
E. On March 13,2007, the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on this
SDC amendment request (10. No. LRP 2007-00002). The Springfield Planning Commission
voted 5 in favor, 2 opposed, to recommend approyal of these amendments to the City Council.
F. Findings in support of adoption of this amendment to the SDC are set forth in the Staff
Report and the Recommendation to the Council (10. No. LRP 2007-00002) incorporated herein
by reference.
G. Based on the above record and findings, the City Council concludes that the SDC
amendments are consistent with the criteria of approval as set forth in the Staff Report and
Recommendation to the Council by the Springfield Planning Commission (10. No. LRP 2007-
00002), incorporated herein by reference.
Now therefore, based on the above findings,
THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Article 9 V ACA TIONS; Section 9.060 is hereby amended to read as follows:
(3) Notwithstanding 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 in ORS 271.080, or
public easement will remain in public ownership .and will continue to be used for a public
purpose, the request shall be reviewed under the Type IV procedure. The City Council
may approve the Vacation application ifit is found to be consistent with the following
criteria:
(a) The Vacation was initiated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
(b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.110(1);
(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 660-012-
0045(3);
(d) Whether a greater public benefit would be obtained from the vacation than from
retaining the right of way in its present status; and
(e) Whether provisions have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remain in
public ownership.
Section 2: Although not part of this Ordinance, the Springfield City Council adopts
Findings as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached, in support ofthis action.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be
deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the
validity to the remaining portions hereof.
ADOPTED by the Common Council of t~e City of Springfield by a vote of ~ for
and ~ against this 2nd day of April ,2007.
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this 3rd day of April
2007.
ATTEST:
REVIEWEr' & APPROVED
AS TO FORM
~ \:::) .,,""'~ ~~"""'\.""
DATE:~ '2(.,. l:)
OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY
~~
City Reco~ r
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT OF THE ]
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE ]
REGARDING CRITERIA OF APPROVAL]
FORRIGHT-OW-WAYVACATIONS ]
Jo. No. LRP 2007-00002
RECOMMENDATION
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
The Springfield City Council initiated amendments to Article 9 V ACA TIONS of the Springfield
Development Code to establish new criteria to apply to Council initiated vacations of public right-of-way
where the right-of-way will be retained in public ownership but used for an alternative public purpose.
1. On January 22,2007, the following Development Code amendment was initiated:
City of Springfield - Jo. No. LRP 2007-00002
2. The application was initiated and submitted in accordance with Articles 3 and 8 of the
Springfield Development Code. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to Section
14.030 of the Springfield Development Code, has been provided.
3. On March 13,2007, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to accept
testimony .on the above described proposed amendments to the Springfield Development Code. At the
conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted a recommendation of approval and directed
this recommendation be forwarded to the Springfield City Council. The Development Services Department
staff notes and recommendation together with the testimony and submittals of the persons testifying at this
hearing have been considered and are part of the record of this proceedipg.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the requested amendment application, Jo. No. LRP 2007-00002 is consistent
with the criteria of Section 8.030 of the Springfield Development Code. This general fmding is supported
by the specific findings of fact and conclusions in the attached staff report.
RECOMMENDATION
hereby recommends the City Council amend the Springfield Development
o.LRP 2007-00002, City of Springfield, applicant.
AYES: 6
NAYS: - 2-
ABSTAIN: @
ABSENT: .,
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
MEMORANDUM
City of Springfield
To:
Springfield Planning Commission
Gregory Mort, Planning Manager
March 14,2007
Proposed Springfield Development Code Amendment to allow vacation of public
right-of-way, retention in City ownership and alternative public use of the right-of-
way.
From:
Date:
Subject:
Issue
On January 22,2007, the Springfield City Council initiated amendment of Article 9 VACATIONS
of the Springfield Development Code. The purpose of the amendment is to create specific criteria
for Council-initiated public right-of-way vacation when the City will retain ownership and the
former right-of-way will be used for an alternative public purpose. The existing vacation criteria is
not responsive to these circumstances so new criteria are proposed.
Background
The January 22, 2007 Agenda Item Summary initiating this SDC amendment cited a need to create
these provisions because the existing vacation standards did not contemplate, and therefore could
not recognize "reasons other than policies contained in the Metro Plan, TransPlan, or other planning
documents" as a justification for right-of-way vacation. Most past vacation proceedings were based
on private party initiatives with the objective of property acquisition for private purpose. In all of
these circumstances the Council's review was based on community need to preserve the right-of-
way for public transportation use vs. the property owner/applicant's private interests. The approval
criteria did not allow any public purpose consideration other than those purposes identified in
TransPlan and, with respect to the issues raised by past applicants, "public purpose" was never part
of the equation.
The proposed amendments now allow the Council to weigh whether or not the public interests can
still be served even if the right-of-way is no longer used for transportation activities. The new
criteria are:
(a) The Vacation was initiated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
(b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
( c) Approval of the vacation would be consistent with provision of safe, convenient and
reasonably direct routes for cyclists and pedestrians as provided in OAR 660-012-0045(3);
and,
(d) Whether provisions have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remain in
public ownership.
These criteria still maintain a public stewardship responsibility and do require affirmative findings
regarding the potential effects on cyclists and pedestrians, but they also provide the Council with a
broader field of consideration if the City retains ownership to provide another public purpose for
the right-of-way.
The situation of not having criteria responsive to a given circumstance is not new. The Council has
adopted new criteria in the past specifically to accommodate uses that were not contemplated in
earlier versions of the Development Code, or to provide the City with stronger discretionary
authority when considering use approvals in unique circumstances. In 1991 new discretionary use
criteria were adopted to site public and private elementary and middle schools; in 1997 new
discretionary use criteria were adopted to site wireless telecommunications facilities; and in 2000
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
City ownership and alternative public use of the right-of-way.
3/14/2007Page 2
new discretionary use criteria were adopted to allow approval of innovative design standards in
place of adopted design standards for multi-unit developments. In each of these instances the then
discretionary use criteria of Article 10 was unrespon~ive to the review and consideration of these
particular uses.
Conclusion
The Planning Commission is requested to consider the proposed amendments after conducting a
public hearing and forwarding a recommendation to the City Council for consideration with other
testimony entered into the record of this matter. The Planning Commission action can include
support, qualified support, opposition, or no recommendation.
Attachments: 1. Proposed new text for Article 9 VACATIONS, Subsection 9.060(3) (a-d)
Criteria of Approval
2. Findings in Support of proposed new Vacation criteria of approval (Subsection
9.060(3) (a-d)
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
FINDINGS - JOURNAL NUMBER LRP 2007-00002
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS
Criteria of approval for amendments to the Springfield Development Code (SDC)
Amendments to the Springfield Development Code must comply with the following criteria of
approval:
(1) The Metro Plan;
(2) Applicable State statutes; and
(3) Applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
The proposed amendments establish a new class of right-of-way vacation and the criteria of
approval for such a vacation. The proposed amendments will allow existing public right-of-way
to be vacated and used for a different public purpose if:
(a) The Vacation was initiated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
(b) Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.130(1);
(c) Approval of the vacation would be consistent with provision of safe, convenient and
reasonably direct routes for cyclists and pedestrians as provided in OAR 660-012-0045(3); and,
(d) Whether provisions have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remain in public
ownership.
Criteria (1) Conformance with the Metro Plan
Although the Metro Plan provides the guiding policy for all land use activities in the metro area,
the variety of implementation issues and potential solutions confronted by the City on a daily
basis can easily exceed the level of detail or direction addressed in what is a deliberately "long-
range general plan (public policy document) of metropolitan Lane County and the cities of
Eugene and Springfield." Numerous actions/decisions are "under the radar" of the general
purpose of the plan and so consideration of these lesser measures may result in a fairly short list
of policies that may be reasonably applicable to the proposed action.
The proposed amendments are intended to allow the Council the opportunity to consider
alternative public use of public right-of-way through the vacation process. Neither the Metro
Plan nor TransPlan include any discussion regarding vacation of public right-of-way; the obvious
purpose and intent of both documents is to guide the implementation of a safe, efficient multi-
modal transportation system. While it may have occurred to metro-area officials and responsible
state agencies that the vacation of right-of-way is a legislatively delegated responsibility of cities
throughout the state and therefore should be expected, the effect of these actions on the ability to
implement transportation policies apparently was not considered significant, hence no mention of
vacation actions.
In the absence of policies that specifically address the proposal, the Metro Plan, at page 1-4
suggests the following: "The respective jurisdictions recognize that thatthere are apparent
conflicts and inconsistencies between and among some goals, objectives, and policies. When
making decision based on the Plan, not all of the goals, objectives, and policies can be met to the
same degree in every instance. Use of the Plan requires a 'balancing' of its various components
on a case-by-case basis, as well as a selection of those goals, objectives, and policies most
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
pertinent to the issue at hand." Notwithstanding the dearth of policies addressing vacations per
se, the logical default for this subject must lie with the various transportation policies connected
to use of public right-of-way; what public policies are served by the presence of the right-of-way,
and how those policies might be affected if the right-of-way is converted to an alternate public
purpose. Enumerating each potential benefit which might be reflected in the purpose of
individual policies in the Metro Plan or TransPlan is not necessary to establish the authority to
consider vacation actions, but rather to apply to the assessment of the review standards to be
utilized for such vacation actions. The proposal includes four criteria; two concern compliance
with state statute regarding process; one requires continued public ownership; and one requires
compliance with provisions of the state transportation planning rule. It is this latter criterion that
connects this type of vacation proposal to transportation policies in the Metro Plan and
TransPlan.
The following Metro Plan policies are observed through the proposed criterion (c) depending on
the circumstances that may exist at or nearby the proposed vacation:
The Transportation Element at pages III-F-5, III-F-7, III-F-8, III-F-I0, III-F-ll
FA Require improvements that encourage transit, bicycles and pedestrians
in new commercial, public, mixed use, and multi-unit residential
development. (See also TransPlan Land Use Policy #4, Chapter 2, page
10)
F.13 Protect and manage existing and future transportation infrastructure.
(See also TransPlan TSI System-Wide Policy #1, Chapter 2, page 10)
F .14 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. (See also
TransPlan TSI Roadway Policy #1, Chapter 2, page 10)
F.17 Manage the roadway system to preserve safety and operational
efficiency by adopting regulations to manage access to roadways and
applying these regulations to decisions related to approving new or
modified access to the roadway system. (See also TransPlan TSI
Roadway Policy #4, Chapter 2, page 11)
F.22 Construct and improve the region's bikeway system and provide bicycle
system support facilities for both new development and
redevelopment/expansion. (See also TransPlan TSI Bicycle Policy #1,
Chapter 2, page 11)
F.24 Require bikeways to connect new development with nearby
neighborhood activity centers and major destinations. (See also
TransPlan TSI Bicycle Policy #2, Chapter 2, page II)
F.26 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. (See also TransPlan TSI Pedestrian Policy #1,
Chapter 2, page 12)
2
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
F.27 Provide for a continuous pedestrian network with reasonably direct
travel routes between destination points. (See TransPlan TSI Pedestrian
Policy #2, Chapter 2, page 12)
Criteria (2) Conformance with Applicable State Statutes
ORS 271 establishes the jurisdiction of cities to vacate public right-of-way, including setting
forth the process and procedures for such action. The proposed criteria of approval implement
specific provisions of ORS 271.
ORS 227 establishes the jurisdiction of cities to adopt and enforce planning, zoning and
development regulations. Section 227.215 states: "A city may plan and otherwise encourage and
regulate the development of land. A city may adopt an ordinance requiring that whatever land
development is undertaken in the city comply with the requirements of the ordinance and be
undertaken only in compliance with the terms of a development permit."
These amendments apply to Article 9 VACATIONS of the Springfield Development Code. The
Development Code is the principal document used by the City of Springfield to implement
comprehensive planning policies.
Criteria (3) Conformance with applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative
Rules
The City's comprehensive plan and development code are acknowledged by the State of Oregon
to be in compliance with all applicable statewide planning goals and administrative rules.
This proposed amendment is consistent with a number of plan policies cited in previous pages
and with ORS, and so, by extension, conforms to applicable statewide planning goals and
administrative rules. However, the following findings are included in this record.
Goal]: Citizen Involvement
The proposed amendments are the subject of legislative public hearings advertised in the
Register-Guard on March 2,2007. The City Council initiated these amendments on January 22,
2007 during a regular meeting. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March
13,2007. The City Council held a publicized work session and public hearing on March 19,
2007. Interested parties were invited to participate at these hearings.
Goal2: Land Use Planning
This goal states: "All land-use plans and implementation ordinances shall be adopted by the
governing body after public hearing and shall be reviewed and, as needed, revised on a periodic
cycle to take into account changing public policies and circumstances, in accord with a schedule
set fort in the plan.
"Implementation Measures -- are the means used to carry out the plan. These are of two general
types: (1) management implementation measures such as ordinances, regulations or project
3
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
plans, and (2) site or area specific implementation measures such as permits and grants for
construction, construction of public facilities or provision of services."
These amendments provide the Council an opportunity to consider whether or not public right-
of-way should be vacated but retained by the City for alternative public use. The vacation
criteria invoke an analysis and findings of consistency with existing policies in the Metro Plan
and provisions of OAR 660-12-0045(3).
Goal3: Agricultural Lands
This goal does not apply within adopted, acknowledged urban growth boundaries. The City of
Springfield does not have any agricultural zoning districts. These amendments do not apply
outside the urban growth boundary.
Goal4: ForestLands
This goal does not apply within adopted, acknowledged urban growth boundaries. The City of
Springfield does not have any forest zoning districts. These amendments do not apply outside
the urban growth boundary.
Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
These amendments do not repeal, replace or void existing Metro Plan policy or Development
Code regulations with respect to any identified natural resources. No changes to supporting
ordinances or policy documents adopted to comply with Goal 5 are affected by these
amendments. In the unlikely event that a Goal 5 resource was discovered to exist within the
p~blic right-of-way, preventing loss of the resource through the vacation process could occur.
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
This goal requires compliance with applicable state or federal environmental quality statutes,
rules and standards, and that "discharges not exceed the carrying capacity of such resources,
considering long range needs; degrade such resources; or threaten the availability of such
resources." These amendments have no affect on the City's ability to maintain conformance with
state or federal air or water quality standards. These amendments will extinguish the use of
right-of-way for transportation activities but preserve public ownership for alternatives activities.
Regardless of the depth or breadth of these alternative activities, the City's responsibility to
comply with all local, state and federal laws that might apply to or be impacted by the proposed
alternative activities is not diminished by this proposal.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
All sites within Springfield subject to these hazards (floodplain, erosion, landslides, earthquakes,
weak foundation soils) are inventoried through a variety of sources. These amendments do not
remove or exempt compliance with applicable Code standards that may apply to the area
proposed for possible right-of-way vacation.
Goal 8: Recreatiolwl Needs
4
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
Willamalane Park and Recreation district provides for the recreational needs of Springfield
through its own park planning. Park needs and facilities are based on existing and projected
populations. These amendments have no influence on population projections because they do
not change permitted density within residential plan designations. These amendments do not
influence the ability of the park district to acquire land for parks.
Goal 9: Economic Development
This goal is intended to preserve and enhance economic development activities, including ,
preservation of sites for industrial and commercial use. These amendments have no affect on
these objectives.
Goal] 0: Housing
This goal states: "to provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state." These amendments
are not associated with this goal and have no affect on the provision of housing.
Goal 11 : Public Facilities and Services
This goal states: "To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public
facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development." Urban facilities
and services include the appropriate types and levels of police protection; sanitary facilities;
storm drainage facilities; planning, zoning and subdivision control; health services; recreation
facilities and services; energy and communication services; and community governmental
services. These amendments have no affect on the provision of these services.
Goal]2: Transportation
This goal states: "To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation
system." These amendments allow the City Council to vacate right-of-way, retain it, and use it
for an alternative purpose. One of the tests this action must satisfy is compliance with the
following criterion: "Approval of the vacation would be consistent with provision of safe,
convenient and reasonably direct routes for cyclists and pedestrians as provided in OAR 660-12-
0045(3)." Compliance with this administrative rule provision will result in consistency with the
applicable provisions of this Goal.
Goal]3: Energy Conservation
This goal states: "To conserve energy." To the extent that one form of energy conservation is a
function ofthe City's standards for "reasonably direct routes for cyclists and pedestrians" this
proposal includes a requirement that the action of vacation will not result in the loss of
reasonably direct routes for cyclists and pedestrians. These amendments are consistent with this
Goal
Goal]4: Urbanization.
This goal states: "To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban use."
These amendments have no affect on the timing or ability of the City to convert rural uses to
urban uses; this conversion occurs through annexation.
5
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191
Goa1I5: Willamette River Greenway
This goal states: "To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical,
agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the WiIlamette River as the
Willamette River Greenway." These amendments do not pre-empt the City's obligation to
comply with the existing requirements for development approval within the WiIlamette River.
Greenway. The Greenway provisions allow development of permitted uses in the underlying
zone, provided that all other Greenway requirements are satisfied. The City's adopted,
acknowledged Greenway ordinance will not be changed by these amendments.
Goa1I6: Estuarine Resources; Goal I?: Coastal Shorelands; Goa1I8: Beaches and Dunes;
and Goa1I9: Ocean Resources
These goals do not apply within the adopted, acknowledged Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan
Area General Plan.
Chapter 660 of Oregon Administrative Rules establishes interpretation of a number of statewide
planning goals. These rules are generally designed to provide clarity or specific instruction
regarding the implementation of the goals. OAR 660-012 provides guidance and standards for a
City's transportation planning and infrastructure efforts. Because the vacation of public right-of-
way could potentially influence these efforts, the proposal contains a criterion of approval that is
taken directly from the Rule and applies to this process each time it is undertaken. Specifically,
OAR 660-012-0045(3) requires consistency with a number of transportation standards designed
to implement Goal 12 and OAR 660-012. If affirmative findings cannot be made, the vacation
cannot be approved.
6
Attachment A
ORDINANCE NO. 6191