[ Council Communication ]  [ Resolution ]  [ Letters ]  [ Maps ]

Council Communication

Title:	Resolution Setting a Public Hearing to hear a Petition for and any Objections to, the Vacation of Three Unopened Alleys between Hersey Street, Helman Street and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad and a Portion of the East West Alley between Laurel and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad
Dept:	Public Works Department
Date:	December 17, 2002
Submitted By:	Paula Brown
Reviewed By: ........................	Brian Almquist, Interim City Administrator

Synopsis:	On November 13, 2002, Meridian Park Medical Foundation, trustee of the Gardiner Charitable Trust, submitted the required petitions and filing fee necessary to vacate two unopened alleys within the former Parson's Pine Products block bounded by Hersey Street, Helman Street and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad. In addition to Meridian Park's request for vacation, Mr. Joe Garfus, owner of tax lot 39 1E 4CC - 1300, has requested that the city also vacate a small portion of the east-west alley which lies west of the railroad. Copies of the original requests and a map identifying the specific locations are attached. On December 10th, the Ashland Planning Commission heard the request and recommended approval.
Recommendation:	It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution establishing a public hearing on January 7, 2003 for the purpose of hearing a petition for and any objections to, the vacation of three unopened alleys between Hersey Street, Helman Street and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad and a Portion of the East West Alley between Laurel and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad.
Fiscal Impact:	There is not fiscal impact to the City. The applicant applies for and pays the required fees.
Background:	Attached.

End of Document - Back to Top

RESOLUTION NO. 2002-___

RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO HEAR A PETITION FOR AND ANY OBJECTIONS TO, THE VACATION OF THREE UNOPENED ALLEYS BETWEEN HERSEY STREET, HELMAN STREET AND THE CENTRAL OREGON AND PACIFIC RAILROAD AND A PORTION OF THE EAST WEST ALLEY BETWEEN LAUREL AND THE CENTRAL OREGON AND PACIFIC RAILROAD

THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 4.16 and ORS 271.080 to 271.150, the City Council of the City of Ashland will conduct a public hearing on January 7, 2003 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland Oregon, to hear the petition for, and any objections to, the vacation of three unopened alleys; two within the Parson's Pine Products block between Hersey Street, Helman Street and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad; and the third being a portion of the east west alley between Laurel and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad as described on the attached Exhibit A.

SECTION 2. The City Recorder is directed to give notice of the petition and hearing by publishing a notice in the Daily Tidings, once each week for two consecutive weeks prior to the hearing and such other notice as may be required by ORS 271.110.

This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ____day of December, 2002.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder

SIGNED and APPROVED this _____day of December, 2002.
Alan DeBoer, Mayor

Reviewed as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney

End of Document - Back to Top

Date: November 22, 2002
To: Bill Molnar
Re: VACATION OF ALLEYS

Meddian Park Medical Foundation, trustee of the Gardiger Charitable Trust, has submitted the required petitions and filing fee necessary to vacate 'two unopened alleys within the former Parson's Pine Products block bounded by Hersey Street, Helman Street and the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad.

The two alleys as shown on the attached map have never been opened and it is unlikely that either alley would be opened in the future. The Parson's Pine Building was constructed over the north-south alley, apparently on a handshake agreement with former City Administrator, Mike 'Beagle. The east-west alley was used as a railroad siding up until 20 years ago when the siding was abandoned. The two alleys do not connect and both terminate at the railroad right of way. There is no approved rail crossing for either alley nor is there any chance that the railroad would approve a new crossing, especially a pedestrian crossing. From a public works viewpoint the alleys have little value and we have no objection to their vacation.

In addition to Meddian Park's request for vacation, Mr. Joe Garfus, owner of tax lot 39 1E 4CC - 1300, has requested that the city also vacate a small portion of the east-west alley which lies.west of the railroad (see attached memo and letter).

Please schedule this vacation request for Planning Commission review at your earliest opportunity. Let me know when you are able to schedule this.

Attachments: Petitions, Letter, Memo

cc: Paula Brown, Paul Nolte

James Olson
City Surveyor/Project.Manager
City of Ashland
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520

Re: Petition for Vacation of Two Alleys Within City of Ashland

Dear Mr. Olson:

The enclosed Petitions for Vacation (Attachment One) are submitted on behalf of Meridian Park Medical Foundation, Trustee of the Gardiner Charitable Trust u/t/a dated September 13, 2000 (Meridian Park or Petitioner) in support of its request that the city vacate the alleys located on its property at 225 Helman Street, pursuant to ORS 271.080 and 271.130. Please consider this letter part of our application and incorporate it into the city's record in this matter.

As trustee, Meridian Park is the fee owner of all the property abutting the alleys that are the subject of these petitions. ORS 271.080 provides that: 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 of the ground proposed to be vacated, the purpose for whlch the ground is proposed to be used and the reason for such vacation. (emphasis added.)

Description of the property to be vacated. The location of the property to be vacated is shownon the drawing submitted as Attachment Two. Alley No. One is located south of Hersey Street, runs parallel to Hersey Street and abuts Helman Street. Alley No. Two is located south of and is perpendicular to Hersey Street.

Purpose for which the ground is proposed to be used. The proposed use of the vacated alleys is in a manner consistent with the industrial use of abutting properties, Tax Lots 200 and 1700.

Reason for the proposed vacation. The purpose of the vacation of the alleys is to remove the encumbrance that results from the encroachment of existing improvements onto the alleys (See outline of building on Attachment No. Three for depiction of the existing encroachments.)

Please schedule the hearing on the requested vacations for the earliest possible hearing date.ORS 217.120 provides in part that at the hearing:

The governing body shall hear the petition and objections and shall determine whether the consent of the owners of the requisite area has been obtained, whether notice has been duly given and whether the public interest will be prejudiced by the vacation of such plat or street or parts thereof. If such matters are determined in favor of the petition, the governing body shall by ordinance make such determination a matter of record and vacate such plat or street; otherwise it shall deny the petition. (emphasisadded.)

The Council will be able to determine that the requisite consent has been obtained. The Petitions (Attachment One) are signed by 100% of the property owners abutting the proposed vacation areas and the owners of not less than two-thirds in area of the real property affected thereby.

The Council will be able to determine that the requisite notice has been given. ORS 271.110 sets forth the notice requirements for a vacation application. Pursuant to ORS 271.110, notice describing the ground covered by the petition, the date the petition was fried, petitioner's name and the date when the petition, and "any objection or remonstrance, which may be made in writing and filed with the recording officer of the city prior to the time of hearing, will be heard and considered" should be published in the city official newspaper once each week for two consecutive weeks prior to the hearing.~ Within five days after the first day of publication, the city shall also post a copy of the notice at or near the end of each of the proposed vacation areas. The notice "shall be posted in at least two conspicuous places in the proposed vacation area." ORS 271.110(2). "The posting and first day of publication of such notice shall be not less than 14 days before the hearing." Id.

ORS 271.110(3) provides that before publishing notice, the city recording officer shall obtain from the petitioners "a sum sufficient to cover the cost of publication, posting and other anticipated expenses.' Enclosed with this letter is a check in the amount of the $500 application fee. Petitioner requests that the required notice be given.

The Council will be able to f'md that the public interest will not be prejudiced by the vacations. Vacation of the alleys will correct the current condition in which improvements constructed in the 1940's upon tax lot 200 encroach onto the alleys. The alleys have never been opened, have not historically served as a shortcut through the area and do not provide access in the area.

Hersey and Helman Streets provide vehicular access in the area. Sidewalks are or will be provided for pedestrian access. The property is part of the Helman Street Sidewalk Assessment District 82 and its owner therefore contributes to the financing of the sidewalk construction along Helman Street. Sidewalks are currently provided along Hersey Street. Bike mobility in the area is provided via existing bike lanes along Hersey Street.

The public interest does not require the retention of bicycle or pedestrian access via the alleys. The Transportation Element (TE) of the Comprehensive Plan defines a bikeway as any road, path or way open to bicycle travel. (TE at 10.) The TE states that city bikeways should be linked to county bikeways and state-wide highway bikeways. TE at 11. The TE also states that "Bikeways must provide direct, continuous, courses accessing commercial areas, activity centers and schools." TE at 10. Pedestrians and bicyclists need walkways and bikeways 'that are clean, free from obstructions and continuous. (TEat 46.) "Connectivity of travel routes is as importam as having, a physical place to travel. Fragmented systems are a serious impediment to convenient travel." /d. A bikeway through this property in the alley locations will not connect to any other bikeways or connect travel routes but will instead dead end at the railroad right of way. Further, the current location of the alleys do not provide a convenient travel route as they are obstructed by the existing buildings.

"Bikeways must provide safe and convenient bicycle travel and be free of unnecessary delay." TE 10. Safe access through the property is not possible because the property is bounded by the Southern Pacific Raikoad and there is not a legal crossing here.

Safe pedestrian crossings are another city priority. It is the policy of the city that the intersection of multi use paths2 should be designed to provide safe passage for pedestrians and bicyclists over railroad tracks. There is no legal crossing of the railroad property at this location so use of the property as a shortcut is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Due to the location of the railroad, there is no safe through access possible here. The access would also be unsafe in that it would be through a developed industrial site.

One of the Comprehensive Plan policies is to:

Require pedestrian and bicycle easements to provide neighborhood connectors and reduce vehicle trips. Modify street vacation process so pedestrian and bicycle through access is maintained. TE page 50, Policy 1.4.

The street vacation process includes Planning Commission review and provision of a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed vacation. This modification of the procedure has provided a specific venue in which issues of bicycle and pedestrian access are considered in the vacation process and this policy is met.

Furthermore, the TE is intended as a guide to development. TE at 64. The policy's aspiration is to maintain through access. The policy does not require that a multiuse path be open where the access is not "through" because of impediments or obstructions at one end or safety concerns. There is not through access here because there is no legal crossing of the railroad right of way here. As a result, the policy does not prevent full vacation of the alleys. As noted above, the proposed vacations are consistent with the policy because the vacation process was modified by the city and a recommendation on the vacations will be made by the Planning Commission. Further, even if the policy were interpreted to mean that vacations are only allowed were bicycle and pedestrian access is maintained, vacation of the alleys would be appropriate in this case.

"Policies are statements supportive of the goals, as they are to aid in achieving listed goals. They have a strong effect on .a city, because city decisions and programs cannot directly Comradict the policies. Policies do not have to be implemented if they require funds that are not available, since funding is dependent on Council priorities and available money. When decisions are being made, and policies are directly or indirectly applicable to such decisions, the policies must be followed unless it can be shown and recorded that a different decision supports the goal statement better than a decision based on the applicable plan policies." Comprehensive Plan section 2.03.03.

The Goal supported by the policy of'modifying the vacation proCess is "To raise the priority of convenient, safe, accessible and attractive walking and bicycling networks." Transportation Elemem, page 50. Allowing the vacation of these alleys is more supportive of the Goal than a policy of prohibiting the complete vacation because the priority is to provide convenient, safe, accessible and attractive walking and bicycling networks." As previously discussed bike and pedestrian access in these locations would not be safe. Accordingly, the proposed vacations are more consistent with the applicable goal than an interpretation of the policy to require that bicycle and pedestrian access be provided in all cases and the vacations should be approved.

 The Street System Goals and Policies in the Comprehensive Plan includes policies that the street design standards will "[I]ncorporate traditional neighborhood design elements such as,... alleys" Comp Plan 10.03.05 Policy 1.2 and "encourage a connected street network pattern, as topography allows, to promote pedestrian and bicycle travel." Policy I Comp Plan § 10.03.05. The Goal supported by these policies is "To provide all Citizens with Safe and Convenient Transportation While Reinforcing the Recognition of Public Rights of Way or Critical Public Spaces." Comp Plan § 10.03.04. As before, safe circulation is a paramount goal. Given the location of the railroad here, and the lack of connection to a bikeway or multi-purpose path, safe and convenient transportation is not provided by the existing alleys. The goal of safe and convenient transportation is better served by removing the alleys and requiring pedestrians and bicyclists to use the other existing route options than by requiring the provision of vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian access in these alleys.

Furthermore, the alleys are not necessary to ensure future access in the area. If the property is redeveloped in the future, the code allows for conditions of approval concerning access. The standards in "A Handbook for Planning and Designing Streets" are not applicable to a vacation of a street. Rather, "the standards are to be used in the development of new streets, and reconstruction of existing streets in portions thereof  (i.e. improving a paved local street by adding sidewalks.' Handbook at pg. 1. If a development is proposed in the future that requires new streets, the City has ample means by which to require those be provided.

There is no project design associated with the vacation petition. If, at some point a development proposal is submitted for the property the street standards may apply and any through access the City deems necessary can then be considered in conjunction with a specific developmem plan and located in a manner that best serves that specific project and the City.

Further, keeping the alleys in their current location does not provide design flexibility to adjacent properties. The site is bordered by Hersey and Hi~lman Streets and the Southern Pacific Railroad. While there are alleys across the railroad right of way from the alleys at issue, there is not, as noted above, a legal railroad crossing here so the alley doesn't provide through access. For the foregoing reasons, the city shoUld determine that the vacation petition will not prejudice the public interest and approve the proposed vacations.

If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact me at 503 294 9390. Thank you for your assistance in processing these Petitions and this request for approval of the vacations under both ORS 271.080 and 271.130.

Very truly yours,
Michelle Rudd

Enclosure
cc (w/encl.): Mr. Larry Hill
Ms. Jamie Baker
Mr. Bill Leever
Mr. Tom Page
Ms. Nancy Leever

CITY OF ASHLAND

MEMO
Date: August 19, 2002
From: James H. Olson
To: Paula Brown

Re: REQUEST FROM JOSEPH GARFAS

There is currently an effort underway to vacate two sections of unopened alleys which are located beneath the former Parson's Pine Products building located at Hersey and Helman Streets. Jackson County Title Company is currently working with a potential owner to collect the required number of petition signers.

We have recently, received a two part request from Joseph Garfas which impacts this proposed vacation:

1. Mr. Garfas has requested that a portion of the east-west alley between Laurel Street and   Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad be included in the vacation process. (see attached map)   The current petition which is being circulated by Jackson County Title Co. deals with the two   sections of unopened alley located under the Parson's Pine Products building. The addition of the small section of unopened alley would not affect the area of notification, but since this alley is not listed on the petition being circulated the Garfas request would need to be done on the Council's initiative. All public notices, etc. would be covered under Jackson County Title's request.

2. Lot 391E4CC-300 is owned by the City of Ashland. It is a renmant of Lot 9, Block 10 of the Original Town which was created when the Railroad Right of Way was acquired in 1888. The lot is triangular with approximate dimensions of 22 feet by 40 feet and containing approximately 440 square feet. Mr. Garfa~ has requested that the City sell this small lot to him. Even though this lot is a tax lot, it is not considered a building lot since it is too small. Since Mr. Garfas owns the property to the south (tax lot 1300) it could be added to his lot if the alley were vacated.

Can the vacation of the 50 foot long alley be included in the proposed vacation action currently scheduled? Will the City consider selling tax lot 300 to Mr. Garfas and if so at what price?

August 13, 2002
Joseph Garfus

CITY OF ASHLAND
Jim Olson, Public Works Director

RE: Your consent to vacate an unused alley.

Dear Sir:

I'm enclosing a copy of a letter from Stoel Rives Attorney at Law, for my consent to vacation of two unused alleys at the old Parson Pine property, with a Map, showing the said alleys, and the property owners to be notified.

Our property is 1300. There is a short alley adjoining our land on the North side +/- 75' contiguous with the other alley requesting vacation.

We have two questions:

1. Is there a possibility to incorporate this short alley with this vacation? If in deed we can, what are the procedures?

2. Lot #500 (a small triangle of land) is city property, of blackberries. Is there a possibility of us purchasing this land from the city? If the city is willing to sell, how much are you asking?

Thank you for your consideration on this matter.

Sincerely,
Joseph Garfas

End of Document - Back to Top

Maps in PDF format:

Alley_Vacation_Maps.pdf (230.7KB)

The above document(s) are Adobe® Acrobat® PDF files and may be viewed using the free Adobe® Acrobat® Reader™. Most newer web browsers already contain the Adobe® Acrobat® Reader™ plug-in. However, if you need it, click on the "Get Acrobat® Reader™" icon to download it now.