2006-840-Ordinance No. 2006-018 Recorded 8/23/2006REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
REVIEWED
P,4-
CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE
COUNTY
NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKOS ~d ~006'W10
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL
0814312006 04 ; U M PM
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Amending Title 23, Redmond Area
Comprehensive Land Use Plan, of the Deschutes * ORDINANCE NO. 2006-018
County Code, Declaring an Emergency and Setting
an Effective Date 30 Days From Adoption.
WHEREAS, Deschutes County adopted a coordinated population projection in September 2004
(Ordinance No. 2004-012) that estimates the City of Redmond's population to be 45,724 in 2025; and
WHEREAS, concurring with the City's recommendation, the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners adopted 5,664 acres as the City of Redmond's Urban Reserve Area ("URA") as an
amendment to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan on September 7, 2005; and
WHEREAS, the URA went into effect on December 12, 2005; and
WHEREAS, ECONorthwest, under contract with the City, prepared an Urbanization Study (June,
2005) that documents the need to expand the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary ("UGB") by 2184 acres
of land for residential uses and approximately 100 acres of land for neighborhood commercial uses; and
WHEREAS, proposed text amendments to Chapter 14 (Urbanization Element) of the Redmond
Comprehensive Plan ("RCP") establish the Framework Plan process that will guide land use planning for
the URA and promotes a mix of housing and employment uses consistent with the need established in the
ECONorthwest Urbanization Study; and
WHEREAS, the Urban Growth Management Agreement ("UGMA"), dated July 26, 2005,
defines the unincorporated land inside the Redmond UGB as the Unincorporated Urban Growth Area
("UUGA"), grants the City of Redmond and the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners authority to
initiate legislative actions adopting or amending the County's Comprehensive Plan and land use
regulations for the UUGA and delegates the responsibility of processing these legislative actions to the
City, and
WHEREAS, changes to the Deschutes County Code ("DCC"), Title 23 are necessary to allow for
the expansion of the UGB; now, therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON,
ORDAINS as follows:
Section 1. AMENDMENT. DCC 23.48, Urbanization, is amended to read as described in
Exhibit "A," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, with new language underlined and
language to be deleted in str-ikethFeug
Section 2. AMENDMENT. DCC 23.48.030(2)(d), legal description for the new Redmond
Urban Growth Boundary attached herein as Exhibit "B".
PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
Section 3. AMENDMENT. DCC 23.48.030(2)(e), Redmond Comprehensive Plan map
is amended, designating the new UGB and URA boundaries and adopting a plan designation for
the unincorporated UGB lands as "Urban Holding Area" as shown in Exhibit "C", attached hereto
and by this reference incorporated herein.
Section 4. AMENDMENT. DCC 23.48.030(2)(f), Transportation System Plan (TSP)
map is amended to show future City arterial and collector streets located in the urban
unincorporated areas of Redmond attached herein as Exhibit "D".
Section 5. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings in support of these amendments
the Findings dated August 1, 2006, identified as Exhibit "B," attached hereto and by this
reference incorporated herein.
Section 6. EMERGENCY. This Ordinance being necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this
Ordinance takes effect 30 days from adoption.
DATED this 23 day of 2006.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCFJWES COUNTY, OREGON
R.
BEV
M. DALY,
Date of 1" Reading: Z-13 day of '2006
Date of 2°d Reading: ?-3day of Q , 2006.
Record of Adoption Vote
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Dennis R. Luke ✓
Bev Clarno ✓
Michael M. Daly y
Effective date: day of 2006.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT "A"
Chapter 23.48. URBANIZATION
23.48.010. Urbanization.
23.48.020. Goals.
23.48.030. Urban Growth Boundary Policies.
23.48.040. Urban Reserve Area Policies
23.48.010. Urbanization.
A major emphasis in Oregon's land use planning
is locating the majority of new development in
urban areas. The rural areas are primarily to be
protected for natural resource utilization.
Between the urban areas (incorporated cities) and
the rural areas lies what is referred to as the
urbanizing area. Usually under the jurisdiction of
the County, this is the area where the future
population will be located and where the city's
services must be extended.
In Deschutes County the three incorporated cities
have been given the authority, by the County, to
prepare plans for their respective urban areas.
These plans are coordinated with the County's
planning effort and will eventually be adopted as
part of the County's comprehensive plan. In
addition to a plan each city also prepares an urban
area zoning ordinance and a cooperative
agreement for mutually administering the
urbanizing area.
All three incorporated cities were growing at
rapid rates by the time the Deschutes County
Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in
1979. At that time, the County estimated Bend's
urban area contained a population of 33,000
people, Redmond's was approximately 7,500, and
Sisters' approximately 900. All of the cities were
expected to continue their growth to the year
2000. The 2000 Census results for Bend,
Redmond, and Sisters were 52,029, 13,481, and
959, respectively. In 2000, 58 percent of the
County's population lived in urban areas. By the
year 2025, the County's population is forecasted
to reach 240,811 people. This forecast includes
109,389 people in Bend, 45,724 people in
Redmond, and 3,747 people in Sisters. If
population growth occurs as forecasted, 66
percent of the County's population will reside in
urban areas by 2025.
Such growth will undoubtedly create severe
problems for the provision of public services and
adequate amounts of residential, commercial and
industrial lands. Other problems are the
protection of important aesthetic values, needed
improvements in appearance and function of
existing developments, , safety and aesthetic
problems, as well as energy and service costs,
created by strip development; and problems with
coordination and cooperation between the various
agencies serving the public in urban areas, a
problem which already exists.
Some opportunities also exist. Cities in
Deschutes County are located in one of the most
beautiful and livable environments in the State.
All of the communities have within their
authority the power to guide their community's
growth for the public's benefit. Cooperation and
mutual effort between the cities, special districts
PAGE 1 OF 6 - EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT "A"
and the County could mean urban environments
that not only function efficiently but are attractive
and desirable places to live.
The purposes of DCC 23.48 are to provide the
link between the urban and rural areas, and to
provide some basic parameters within which the
urban areas of Deschutes County shall develop,
although the specific urban area plan for each
community shall be the prevailing document for
guiding growth in its respective area. These
policies will permit the County to review each
urban area plan against common criteria and
assure consistency County-wide.
(Ord. 2004-012 § 4, 2004; Ord. 2002-005 § 1,
2002; Ord. 2000-017 § 1, 2000; Ord. 92-051,
1992; PL-20, 1979)
23.48.020. Goals.
1. To provide for an orderly and efficient
transition from rural to urban lands.
2. To assure that planning and
implementation of plans in the urban
areas are consistent with the best interest
of both urban and urbanizing area
residents.
3. To retain and enhance the character and
quality of the urban areas as growth
occurs. To recognize and respect the
unusual natural beauty and character of
the area.
4. To provide a sound basis for urbanization
by establishing proper relationships
between residential, commercial,
industrial and open land uses; fostering
intergovernmental cooperation; and
providing an efficient transportation
system.
5. To retain and enhance desirable existing
areas and to revitalize, rehabilitate and
redevelop less desirable existing areas; to
encourage and promote innovations in
development techniques in order to
obtain maximum livability and
excellence in planning and design for
development.
6. To recognize the City of Redmond
Comprehensive Plan as the policy
document that provides the basis for
implementing land use plans and
ordinances in Redmond's Urban Growth
Boundary. The general purpose is to
provide for one principal means of
implementing the Redmond
Comprehensive Plan.
(Ord. 2002-005 § 1, 2002; Ord. 2000-017 § 1,
2000; Ord. 92-051, 1992; PL-20, 1979)
23.48.030. Urban Growth Boundary Policies.
1. Urbanization. Urbanization policies refer
to unincorporated urban growth areas
within an urban growth boundary but
outside the boundaries of a city, and are
intended to assist in the decision making
about the conversion of rural to urban
uses, and to help in the development of
consistent urban area plan. More detailed
policies for the urban areas of Bend,
Redmond and Sisters are specified in the
urban area plans and they shall be the
primary documents for coordination and
land use decisions in their respective
areas.
a. Urban growth boundaries identify
and separate urbanizable land from
rural land. Conversion of
urbanizable land to urban uses shall
be based on consideration of:
1. Orderly and economic provision
for public facilities and services;
2. Availability of sufficient land for
the various uses to insure choices
in the marketplace; and
3. Encouragement of development
within urban areas before
conversion of urbanizable areas.
b. Urban growth boundaries shall be
established or expanded based upon
the following:
1. Demonstrated need to
accommodate long-range urban
population growth requirements
consistent with LCDC goals;
2. Need for housing, employment
opportunities and livability;
3. Orderly and economic provision
for public facilities and services;
4. Maximum efficiency of land
uses within and on the fringe of
the existing urban area;
PAGE 2 OF 6 - EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT "A"
2.
5. Environmental, energy,
economic and social
consequences;
6. Retention of agricultural land as
defined, with Class I being the
highest priority for retention and
Class VI the lowest priority; and,
7. Compatibility of the proposed
urban uses with nearby
agricultural activities.
Coordination.
a. Within an urban growth boundary
City and County land use regulations
and standards shall be mutually
supportive, jointly proposed and
adopted, administered and enforced,
and plans to integrate the type,
timing and location of development
of public facilities and services in a
manner to accommodate demand as
urbanizable lands become more
urbanized, and to guide the
community's growth.
b. Urban development shall be
permitted in areas where services are
available or can be provided in a
manner which will minimize costs
related to necessary urban services
such as schools, parks, highways,
police, garbage disposal, fire
protection, libraries and other
facilities and services.
c. Deschutes County adopts by
reference the goals, policies,
programs, elements, and statements
of intent of the Redmond
Comprehensive Plan, the officially
adopted comprehensive plan for the
City of Redmond and its surrounding
Urban Growth Boundary.
Residential development.
a. Residential developments should be
located so that they are convenient to
places of employment and shopping
facilities, and they should be
developed in ways which are
consistent with the character of the
topography and soils on the site.
Residential areas should offer a wide
variety of housing densities in
locations best suited to each.
b. Residential densities indicated on
general plans should be respected
and reflected in City and County
codes, ordinances and development
policies.
c. In residential areas, development
should be encouraged which have
side yards or rear yards along arterial
streets as a means of reducing
congestion through turning
movements in and out of driveways.
d. Higher density residential areas
should be concentrated near
commercial services and public open
space.
4. Commercial.
a. Commercial facilities should be
allocated in a reasonable amount and
in a planned relationship to the
people they will serve. Any future
expansion of commercial uses should
be developed as centers rather than
strips and very carefully considered
so that they do not cause unnecessary
traffic congestion and do not detract
from the appearance of the
community.
b. Neighborhood commercial shopping
areas, parks, school and public uses
may be located within residential
districts and should have
development standards which
recognize the residential area.
Development standards should be
established for those commercial
uses which will provide off-street
parking, landscaping, access control,
sign regulations and design review.
c. Strip commercial developments
along highways should not be
extended. Commercial uses along
major streets and highways shall be
subject to special development
standards relating to landscaping,
setbacks, signs and median strips.
No further commercial development
outside urban growth boundaries,
rural service centers, planned
developments, or destination resorts
shall be permitted.
PAGE 3 OF 6 - EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT "A"
5
6.
d. All commercial shopping centers
shall be subject to special
development standards relating to
setbacks, landscaping, physical
buffers, screening, access, signs,
building heights and design review.
Care shall be taken to control the size
of any new commercial
developments that may be required
as growth occurs. Sites shall not be
oversized to a point where additional
uses which would generate traffic
from outside the intended service
area are necessary to make the
development an economic success.
Industrial.
a. Community efforts should be
directed toward preserving prime
industrial lands for industrial
purposes. Industrial areas shall be
protected from incompatible
commercial and residential uses.
b. Industrial areas of the community
shall be located where necessary
services can be provided and with
good access to transportation
facilities.
c. Community efforts should be
directed toward improving the
general appearance of commercial
and industrial areas so that they make
a positive contribution to the
environment of the community.
d. Industrial areas shall provide for new
industry in a park-like setting.
e. All industrial centers shall be subject
to special development standards
relating to setbacks, landscaping
physical buffers, screening, access,
signs, building heights and design
review.
Community appearance.
a. Because of slow natural growth and
their effective use as a visual and
noise buffer, and their relationship to
air quality, trees or stands of trees
shall be protected whenever feasible
in industrial, commercial, residential
and other urban developments.
b. Community appearance shall
continue to be a major concern.
Landscaping, sign regulations and
building design review shall
contribute to an improved
environment. Major natural features
such as rock outcrops, stream banks,
canyons, or stands of trees should be
preserved as a community asset as
the area develops.
c. Attempts by each community to
identify those characteristics which
give the community its individual
identity and to preserve and expand
those characteristics as growth
occurs shall be encouraged by the
County.
d. Sign regulations shall be adopted
which limit the size, location and
number of signs in commercial and
industrial areas and have
amortization provisions to remove
existing signs which do not conform
with the regulations within a
reasonable period of time.
7. Urban transportation.
a. Expressways and arterial streets
should have landscaped median
strips wherever possible together
with left-turn refuge lanes. Public
transportation routes should be
encouraged throughout the area and,
if necessary, special provisions made
in street design to accommodate
ways.
b. Streets and highways should be
located and constructed in a manner
which will accommodate both
current and future traffic needs.
Implementation of arterial and
collector road systems should be
joint County and City effort with
strict time schedules and priorities.
c. Interurban transportation facilities
should be located in or near the
central business district or main
highway. Special consideration will
be needed to evaluate public
transportation needs and possibilities
within the urban area.
d. Except for major arterial and
collector streets, street patterns in
residential areas should be designed
PAGE 4 OF 6 - EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT "A"
8
9
to provide convenient access to each
living unit but not encourage
through-traffic. Major and collector
streets should be secured and
developed under a strict time frame
so that a reasonable circulation
pattern will result.
e. Provisions should be considered
which will permit mass transit
vehicles on arterial and collector
streets within residential areas in the
future.
Facilities and services.
a. Efforts should be made over a
sustained period of time to place
utility lines underground in existing
and new residential areas.
b. Parks should be located within
walking distance of every dwelling
unit in the community. Parks should
be centrally located and easily
accessible to the areas they are
intended to serve (see Recreation).
c. Certain private recreational uses such
as golf courses or riding stables can
be successfully integrated into
residential areas provided the
location, design and operation are
compatible with surrounding
residential developments.
d. Fire protection in the planning area
should be considered as a common
problem by the City, County, water
district and the fire protection
district, and equipment should reflect
the character of land uses in the
community.
e. Efforts should be made to encourage
Federal and State agencies to locate
in urban areas.
f. Efforts should be made to group
public offices in a more or less
common location as a convenience to
the public.
Other.
a. In many cases, home occupations are
a legitimate use within residential
areas and should be permitted
provided that the use displays no
outward manifestations of business
other an a small business sign
attached to the wall of the house.
b. Recreation vehicle storage should be
permitted in planned residential areas
and these facilities shall be
landscaped and otherwise screened
from adjacent residential uses.
c. Consistent with policies in the
Historic and Cultural chapter
rehabilitation and/or redevelopment
of older residential areas shall be
encouraged.
d. All development in Deschutes
County shall comply with all
applicable state and federal rules,
regulations and standards.
(Ord. 2005-023 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2002-005 § 1,
2002; Ord. 2000-017 § 1, 2000; Ord. 92-051,
1992; PL-20,1979)
23.48.040. Urban Reserve Area Policies.
1. Redmond Urban Reserve Area. The
following policies apply to the division
and development of land in the area
designated Redmond Urban Reserve on
the County Comprehensive Plan map.
a. The Redmond Urban Reserve Area
(RURA) shall be designated with an
urban reserve boundary located on
the County's Comprehensive Plan
Map.
b. The County shall implement the
Urban Reserve Area designation
through the application of a RURA
Combining Zone. The text of this
combining zone shall be added and
maintained in Title 18, County
Zoning, of the Deschutes County
Code.
c. Until included in the Redmond
Urban Growth Boundary, lands
zoned Multiple Use Agricultural,
Surface Mining, Rural Residential,
or EFU in the RURA shall continue
to be planned and zoned for rural
uses, but in a manner that ensures a
range of opportunities for the
orderly, economic and efficient
provision of urban services when
these lands are included in the urban
growth boundary.
PAGE 5 OF 6 - EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT "A"
d.
e.
f.
9.
h.
1.
The County, by designating a
RURA, shall adopt and implement
land use regulations that ensure
development and division of land in
the Multiple Use Agricultural,
Surface Mining or Rural Residential
zoning districts, will not hinder the
efficient transition to urban land
uses and the orderly and efficient
provision of urban services.
These land use regulations shall
include:
1. Prohibition on the creation of
new parcels less than ten acres;
2. Regulations that prohibit zone
changes or plan amendments
allowing more intensive uses,
including higher residential
density, than permitted by the
acknowledged zoning in effect
as of the date of establishment
of the urban reserve area. Such
regulations shall remain in
effect until such time as the land
is included in the Redmond
Urban Growth Boundary.
Partitions of land zoned Exclusive
Farm Use shall be allowed
according to state law and the
County Zoning Ordinance.
The City of Redmond and
Deschutes County shall adopt a
RURA Agreement consistent with
their respective comprehensive
plans and the requirements of OAR
660-021-0050.
New arterial and collector right-of-
way established in the RURA shall
meet the right-of-way standards of
Deschutes County or the City of
Redmond, whichever is greater.
The siting of new development shall
be regulated along existing and
future arterial and collector right-of-
way, designated on the County's
Transportation System Plan, for the
purpose of ensuring the opportunity
for future urban development and
public facilities.
The siting of a single family
dwelling on a legal parcel is
permissible if the single family
dwelling would otherwise have been
allowed under law, existing prior to
the designation of the parcel as part
of the Redmond Urban Reserve
Area.
j. City of Redmond shall collaborate
with Deschutes County to assure
that the County owned 1800 acres in
the RURA is master planned before
it is incorporated into Redmond's
urban growth boundary.
(Ord. 2002-005 § 1, 2002; Ord. 2000-017 § 1, 2000;
Ord. 92-051, 1992; PL-20, 1979; Ord. 2005-023 §
1, 2005)
PAGE 6 OF 6 - EXHIBIT "A" TO ORDINANCE 2006-018 (08/23/2006)
EXHIBIT PAGE I
NARRATIVE OF SURVEY
FOR THE CI TII OF REDMOND, LOCATED IN
TOWNSHIPS 14 AND 15 SOUTH, RANGES 12 AND 13 EAST,
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, SITUATED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY,
OREGON, AND BEING THE 2006 CITY OF REDMOND
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
IN MAY OF 2006 WE WERE COMMISSIONED BY THE CITY OF REDMOND
TO ACCURATELY DESCRIBE THE 2005 EXPANSION OF THE CITY OF
REDMOND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY. THIS EXPANSION INCLUDES
AREAS TO THE NORTH, WEST AND SOUTH OF THE CURRENT URBAN
GROWTH BOUNDARY (UGB), THE CURRENT UGB ALSO BEING THE
CURRENT CITY LIMITS.
THE UGB EXPANSION IS GENERALLY BOUNDED AS FOLLOWS: THE NEW
UGB WILL LEAVE THE NORTH CITY LIMIT, AND FOLLOW NORTH ALONG
HIGHWAY 97, WEST ALONG PERSHALL WAY, SOUTH ALONG 19TH
STREET, WEST ON THE SOUTH LINE OF RIMROCK WEST ESTATES,
SOUTH ON -AN ALIQUOT LINE, WEST ALONG UPAS AVENUE, SOUTH AND
WEST ON ALIQUOT LINES AND PARTITION LINES, SOUTH ALONG 35TH
STREET, WEST ALONG MAPLE AVENUE, SOUTH ALONG HELMHOLTZ WAY,
WEST ALONG OBSIDIAN AVENUE, SOUTH AND WEST ON ALIQUOT LINES,
EAST ON A PARTITION LINE, SOUTHEAST ALONG LATERAL B, EAST
ALONG WICKIUP AVENUE, SOUTH ALONG HELMHOLTZ WAY, NORTHEAST
ALONG CANAL BOULEVARD, EAST ALONG ELKHORN AVENUE, AND
NORTHWEST ON A B.P.A. POWER LINE TO THE SOUTH CITY LIMIT.
THE BALANCE OF THE EXPANSION BOUNDARY FOLLOWS ALONG THE
SOUTHERN, WESTERN AND NORTHERN CITY LIMITS. THE EXPANSION
ALSO INCLUDES A FOUR ACRE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN AS THE
"RUSSELL TRACT", WHICH ABUTS THE SOUTHERN CITY LIMIT. REFER
TO EXHIBIT "A" (SHEET 4) FOR A GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF THE
CURRENT UGH AND THE UGB EXPANSION.
MOST OF THE UG8 EXPANSION IS BOUNDED BY EXISTING AND
PROPOSED ROADWAYS. AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY, WE HAVE
INCLUDED AS MUCH RIGHT-OF-WAY AS POSS18LE AND NECESSARY FOR
THESE ROADWAYS WITHIN THE PERIMETER OF THE UGB EXPANSION.
THESE RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTHS VARY DEPENDING ON PARTICULAR
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH LANDS
LYING OUTSIDE THE UGB EXPANSION. WHERE THE CITY OF REDMOND
URBAN RESERVE LIES OUTSIDE OF A SPECIFIC ROADWAY THE UGB .
EXPANSION LINE FOLLOWS ALONG THE ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE OF THE ROADWAY. IN INSTANCES WHERE A PARTICULAR
ROADWAY FORMS THE ABSOLUTE AND FINAL URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
THE UG8 EXPANSION LINE WAS PLACED ALONG THE EXISTING RIGHT-
OF-WAY LINE. WIDTHS FOR THESE ROADWAYS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
_THE THE PRESENT AND EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF HIGHWAY 97,
THE WIDTH OF WHICH VARIES FROM 45 FEET TO 65 FEET FROM
CENTERLINE;
30 FEET FROM CENTERLINE FOR PERSHALL WAY, 19TH STREET,
UPAS AVENUE, 35TH STREET, OBSIDIAN AVENUE, WICKIUP AVENUE
AND ELKHORN AVENUE;
50 FEET FROM CENTERLINE FOR MAPLE AVENUE AND FOR THAT
SEGMENT OF HELMHOLTZ WAY LYING BETWEEN ANTLER AVENUE AND
OBSIDIAN AVENUE;
- 30 FEET FROM CENTERLINE FOR THAT PORTION OF HELMHOLTZ WAY
LYING NORTH OF ANTLER AVENUE AND FOR THAT PORTION OF THE
ROADWAY LYING SOUTH OF WICKIUP AVENUE;
- 40 FEET FROM CENTERLINE FOR CANAL BOULEVARD.
SHEET 7 OF 15
EXHIBIT. PAGE Z-
NARRATIVE - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
IN THE SURVEY OF THE UGB EXPANSION THOSE MONUMENTS
CONTROLLING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED BOUNDS WERE TIED USING GPS
INSTRUMENTATION. MONUMENTS WERE TIED UTILIZING THE
IDENTICAL OBSERVATION BASES EMPLOYED IN OUR PREVIOUS UGS
SURVEY (CS 16511), THE MAJORITY OF THE MONUMENTS ALONG THE
EXPANSION BOUNDARY ARE DEPICTED IN THE FOLLOWING RECORD
COUNTY SURVEYS: CS 10974 (HIGHWAY 97); CS00431, CS00421
(PERSHALL WAY); CS04953, CSI 1708 (RIMROCK WEST ESTATES);
CS00944, CS 12598 (SECTION 5, T15S R 13E); CS04962, CS00972
(SECTION 7, T15S R13E); CS01143, CS14057 (SECTION 18, T15S
R 13E); CS 14700, CS01 168 (SECTION 19, T 15S R 13E); CS03103,
CS00851 (SECTION 24, T7 5S R 12E, AND LATERAL B); CS 13511,
CS01416 (SOUTH HELMHOLTZ WAY); CS01416, CS01424, CS01421,
CS01425 (SOUTH CANAL BOULEVARD); CS01426, CS14794 (ELKHORN
AVENUE); CS16511 (CURRENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY).
IN THE ENSUING DESCRIPTION THE "PERSHALL BOUNDARY" FOLLOWS
ALONG A LINE 30 FEET NORTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF PERSHALL
WAY. RECORD SURVEYS VARY AS TO THE CENTERLINE'S LOCATION
BETWEEN HIGHWAY 97 AND THE ANGLE POINT IN THE ROADWAY NEAR
THE CENTER-EAST 1116 CORNER OF SECTION 33, T14S R 1,3E. IN
OUR SURVEY WE HAVE HELD THIS CENTERLINE SEGMENT AS BEING
ALONG THE SECTION CENTERLINE. THE MONUMENT AT THE
CENTERLINE POINT OF INTERSECTION WAS HELD FOR THE TANGENT
SOUTHWEST OF THE ANGLE POINT. THIS MONUMENT LIES ABOUT 2.1
FEET NORTH OF THE SECTION CENTERLINE: RECORD SURVEYS ALSO
VARY AS TO WHETHER THERE IS OR THERE IS NOT A CURVE IN THE
ROADWAY AT THIS ANGLE POINT. THOSE SURVEYS THAT DEPICT A
CURVE DO SO GRAPHICALLY, AND DD NOT SHOW A SPECIFIC RADIUS.
IN OUR SURVEY WE HAVE HELD AN ANGLE POINT WITH NO CURVE FOR
THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PERSHALL WAY. IN THE SW114
OF SECTION 33 THE ALIGNMENT OF PERSHALL WAY, AS DEFINED IN
C500421, WAS SLIGHTLY ALTERED AND ROTATED TO FIT THOSE
MONUMENTS FOUND ON CENTERLINE POINTS OF INTERSECTION.
IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION THE "NORTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY"
IS CALLED AS BEING "A LINE APPROXIMATELY PARALLEL WITH AND 30
FEET WEST OF THE CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE OF HELMHOLTZ WAY".
THIS BOUNDARY SEGMENT IS INTENDED TO FOLLOW 30 FEET WEST OF
ALIQUOT SECTIONAL LINES WHERE THE CONSTRUCTED ROAD CENTERLINE
IS REASONABLY CLOSE TO THESE. LINES. WHERE THE ROADWAY LEAVES
THESE LINES THE "NORTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY" ENTERS INTO A
SERIES OF REVERSE CURVES CONNECTED WITH SHORT TANGENT SECTIONS.
THE INTENT HERE IS TO FOLLOW THE CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE AS
CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE WITH AN ALIGNMENT THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY.
THIS CONCEPT WAS EMPLOYED IN WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS THE
."CENTRAL HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY" IN THE SUBSEQUENT
DESCRIPTION. THIS BOUNDARY SEGMENT ABUTS THE CITY OF
REDMOND URBAN RESERVE, AND WAS PLACED APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET
WEST. OF THE CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE OF HELMHOLTZ WAY.
THE EAST END OF THE BOUNDARY ALONG OBSIDIAN AVENUE WAS
PLACED 30 FEET NORTH OF THE SECTION LINE, AND CURVED NORTH
FOLLOWING A LINE 30 FEET NORTH OF THE CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE
AT THE WEST END OF THIS BOUNDARY.
SHEET 2 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE 3
NARRATIVE - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
THE RECORD ALIGNMENT OF LATERAL "B", AS DEFINED IN
PARTITION PLAT NO. 1991-23 AND IN MINOR PARTITION NO.
MP-87-08, WAS CALCULATED AND ROTATED TO FIT THOSE MONUMENTS
FOUND ALONG THIS BOUNDARY SEGMENT.
RECORD ALIGNMENTS FOR WHITTED MARKET ROAD AND THE DALLES-
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY WERE CALCULATED AND ROTATED TO BEST FIT
THOSE MONUMENTS FOUND ALONG THESE BOUNDARY SEGMENTS. THESE
SEGMENTS ARE REFERRED TO AS THE "SOUTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY"
AND THE "SOUTH CANAL BOUNDARY" IN THE ENSUING DESCRIPTION.
SECTION LINES WERE HELD FOR THE CENTERLINES OF 19TH STREET,
UPAS AVENUE, 35TH STREET, MAPLE AVENUE, WICKIUP AVENUE AND
ELKHORN AVENUE.
THE CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE WAS HELD FOR THE BOUNDARY SEGMENT
FOLLOWING ALONG THE B.P.A. POWER LINE.
OUR RECORD SURVEY DATA AND RECORD DESCRIPTION WERE HELD FOR
THOSE PORTIONS OF THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
ABUTTING THE CURRENT CITY LIMITS (SEE CS 1651 1). NOTE THAT
THE FIELD SURVEY FOR THESE BOUNDARY SEGMENTS WAS COMPLETED
IN DECEMBER OF 2004. VERY FEW OF THE MONUMENTS CALLED FOR
IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION AND ALONG THE CURRENT CITY
LIMITS WERE REVISITED IN THIS 2006 SURVEY - SOME MONUMENT
DESCRIPTIONS MAY NOT BE CURRENTLY ACCURATE, AND SOME
MONUMENTS CALLED FOR MAY HAVE BEEN OBLITERATED.
THE "RUSSELL TRACT", LOCATED IN THE NE114 NW1 J4 OF SECTION
32, T15S R 13E, ABUTS THE LINE COMMON TO SECTIONS 29 AND 32,
THIS LINE BEING THE SOUTH CITY LIMIT. THE TRACT IS A
PORTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN BOTH SECTIONS, AND THE
STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PARCEL STRADDLES THE CURRENT C17Y
LIMIT. THE AREA LOCATED IN SECTION 32 IS DESCRIBED AS
".-THE NORTH 242 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF THE N112 NE 1 /4
NW114 OF SAID SECTION 32 LYING EAST OF HIGHWAY 97..." IN A
DEED FROM DECARLO TO RUSSELL, RECORDED IN BOOK 2004, PAGE
46396, DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS. RECORD POSITIONS
OF THE N114, C114 AND W1118 CORNERS OF SECTION 32, AS
LOCATED IN OUR SURVEY OF CS16511, WERE HELD FOR THE NORTH,
EAST AND SOUTH BOUNDARIES OF THE "RUSSELL TRACT".
MEASUREMENTS MADE IN CS14794 WERE ROTATED TO THE NORTH LINE
OF THE NE114 NW 1/4 IN ESTABLISHING THE ALIGNMENT OF THE
HIGHWAY, AND THE NORTHWEST BOUNDARY OF THE TRACT WAS PLACED
.90 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF THE HIGHWAY AS PER CSI 1407.
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE 2006 REDMOND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
EXPANSION IS AN EXTENSION OF OUR PREVIOUS URBAN GROWTH
BOUNDARY SURVEY. IN THIS DESCRIPTION THOSE MEASUREMENTS AND
MONUMENTS CITED ALONG THOSE BOUNDARY SEGMENTS FOLLOWING THE
CURRENT UG8 ARE IDENTICAL WITH THOSE MEASUREMENTS MADE AND
MONUMENTS SHOWN IN COUNTY SURVEY NO, 1651 1., UNLESS THEY ARE
NOTED OTHERWISE.
SHEET 3 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE 7 - EXHIBIT "A"
FOR THE C171Y OF RED OND , LOCATED IN
TOWNSHIPS 14 AND 15 SOUTH, RANGES 12 AND 73 EAST,
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, SITUATED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY,
OREGON, AND BEING THE 2006 CITY OF REDMOND
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
0
z
Lzl X
Q¢
~o
z
C)
Z
~o
O ~
O
Nz
I I I
I 32 i 1
I ,
T146 I
NI; 6 1 1
ciz Q~ I 3 I 2 I
~E i ~ I L I I
~ 8 fI g I ~p ~1
Q i
~ ~ I I I I
I ~ I
1 1a 11 ; 16 , ~5 ~..rirr..y ~
i
2°~ 1 ~g i 2p G Gip Qp All
~P INITIAL I 0\ ~ 2 I a I
I 2~ I T6;
2tJ N p 1 29 rrrrr+rrrr~wJ 11
ac I 1
-56
----0
SOUTHERLY TRACT
CONTAINS 461.4 ACRES
I
_ _ T15S r
~ T1 6S
~
RUSSELL TRACT
CONTAINS 4.4 ACRES
SCALE:
1" = 1 MILE
PREPARED JULY 19, 2006
~a
POVEY AND ASSOC. LAND SURVEYORS
SHEET 4. OF 15 P.O. BOX 131, REDMOND, OR 97756
(541 548-6778 .04-246B.DWG
EXHIBIT PAGE f._
DESCRIPTION
FOR THE CITY OF REDMOND, LOCATED IN
TOWNSHIPS 14 AND 15 SOUTH, RANGES 12 AND 13 EAST,
WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, SITUATED IN DESCHUTES COUNTY,
OREGON, AND BEING THE 2006 CITY OF REDMOND
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIPTION SOME ABBREVIATIONS ARE USED:
T14S R13E MEANING TOWNSHIP 14 SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST,
T15S R13E MEANING TOWNSHIP 15 SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST,
T15S R72E MEANING TOWNSHIP 15 SOUTH, RANGE 12 EAST,
C MEANING CENTER, N FOR NORTH, S FOR SOUTH, E FOR EAST,
W FOR WEST, AND R/W MEANING RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THIS DOCUMENT IS A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE 2006 CITY OF
REDMOND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION, SITUATED IN
DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, THE LINES OF WHICH WERE MEASURED
UTILIZING GLOBAL POSITIONING INSTRUMENTATION, THIS SURVEY
BEING MADE IN JUNE OF 2006 BY POVEY AND ASSOCIATES, LAND
SURVEYORS, REDMOND, OREGON, SAID URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
EXPANSION ENCOMPASSING AREAS LOCATED IN SECTIONS 32 AND 33,
TOWNSHIP 14 SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST, AND ENCOMPASSING AREAS IN
SECTIONS 5, 6, 7, 8, 18, 19, 29, 30, 31 AND 32, TOWNSHIP 15
SOUTH, RANGE 13 EAST, AND ENCOMPASSING AREAS IN SECTIONS 24,
25, AND 36, TOWNSHIP 15 SOUTH, RANGE 12 EAST, WILLAMETTE
MERIDIAN, SAID 2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
CONSISTING OF THREE TRACTS OF LAND, BEING SUBSEQUENTLY
DESCRIBED AS THE NORTHERLY TRACT, THE SOUTHERLY TRACT AND
THE RUSSELL TRACT, SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A 3-114" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE SOUTHEAST
(SE) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 15 SOUTH, RANGE 12
EAST (T15S R12E), WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, THE INITIAL POINT;
THENCE N89'57'37"W (PREVIOUSLY CITED AS S89'22'22"E) ALONG
THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 24 - 9.00
FEET TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY (R/W) OF SW HELMHOLTZ WAY,
BEING 30 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ROADWAY, AND TO
THE CURRENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF REDMOND,
AND TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST R/W
AND ALONG SAID CURRENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS;
N00'32'28"E - 254.94 FEET (PREVIOUSLY CITED AS 254.85 FEET)
TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY PARTITION PLAT NO.
1991-23; THENCE S83'22'02"W ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY AND
..SAID WEST R/W - 10.08 FEET, FROM WHICH A 112" PIPE BEARS
:N83'22'02"E - 0.26 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST R/W, BEING
40 FEET FROM SAID CENTERLINE, AS FOLLOWS: N00'32'28"E -
57.75 FEET TO A 314" PIPE; THENCE 220.22 FEET ALONG THE ARC
OF A 517.47 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD
OF WHICH BEARS N 12'43'58"E - 218.56 FEET, FROM WHICH A 3/4"
PIPE BEARS N47W - 0.15 FEET, THENCE N24'5528"E - 812.35
FEET TO A 314" PIPE; THENCE 340.29 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF AN
840.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD
.OF WHICH BEARS N36'31'48"E - 337,97 FEET TO A 314" PIPE;
THENCE N48'08'08"E - 989.71 FEET TO A 712" PIPE ON THE WEST
LINE OF THE NE114 SW 1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 19, T 15S R 13E,
THENCE S00'03' 13"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE AND ALONG SAID WEST
R/W - 13.44 FEET;, THENCE ALONG SAID WEST R/W, BEING 30 FEET
FROM SAID CENTERLINE, AS FOLLOWS: •N48'08'08"E - 377.37
SHEET 5 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
FEET, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS N47-18'E - 5.39 FEET, AND
FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS 552'03E - 30.45 FEET; THENCE
456.55 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 2235.51 FOOT RADIUS CURVE,
CONCAVE SOUTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N53'59' 10"E -
455.76 FEET TO A 314" PIPE, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS
S30-00'E - 29.96 FEET; THENCE N59'50' 13"E - 135.09 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS N78-W - 0.14 FEET, AND FROM
WHICH A 3/4" PIPE BEARS S29'59'E - 30.08 FEET., THENCE 386.73
FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 635.65 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHWEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N42°24'26"E -
380.80 FEET, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS N83'W - 0.13 FEET,
AND FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS S64'39'E - 29.90 FEET;
THENCE N24'58'40"E - 75.13 FEET; THENCE 245.29 FEET ALONG
THE ARC OF A 484.30 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE
LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N i 0'28'04"E - 242.68 FEET; THENCE
N04'02'31 "W - 189.87 FEET TO A 112" PIPE; THENCE N04'02'31 "W -
377.35 FEET TO A 112" PIPE; THENCE N04'02'31"W - 30.05 FEET
TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NE114 NW114 OF SAID SECTION 19;
THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST R/W AND ALONG SAID CURRENT URBAN
GROWTH BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS; S89'37' 14"E ALONG SAID SOUTH
LINE - 65.29 FEET TO A 3/4". PIPE, THENCE S89'37' 14"E ALONG
SAID SOUTH LINE - 183.27 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE
C-N1116 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE S89'23'37"E ALONG
THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NW114 NE114 OF SAID SECTION 19 -
1308.68 FEET TO A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE NE1116 CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE S89'21 '46"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE
OF THE NE114 NE114 OF SAID SECTION 19 - 1285.46 FEET TO THE
WEST LINE OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF SAID NE114 NE114, FROM
WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTINC THE N1116 CORNER ON THE EAST
LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 BEARS SB9'21 '46"E - 30.00 FEET,
THENCE N00' 12'37"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE AND ITS PROLONGATION -
1361.67 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 35 FEET OF
THE SE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 18, T15S R13E; THENCE
S89'35'06"E ALONG SAID NORTH LINE - 30.32 FEET TO THE EAST
LINE OF SAID SE114 SE114, FROM WHICH A 3-114" ALUMINUM CAP
MONUMENTING THE SE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS
S00' 18'31 "W - 35.00 FEET; THENCE NOO' 18'31"E ALONG SAID EAST
LINE - 1285.50 FEET TO A 2-112" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE
S1116 CORNER ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE
N00' 18'45"E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NE114 SE114 OF SAID
SECTION 17 - 1284.44 FEEL' TO A 3-112" BRASS CAP; THENCE
N00' 18'45"E ALONG SAID EAST LINE - 36.07 FEET TO THE E114
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 (NO MONUMENT FOUND); THENCE
N00'16'38"E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SE114 NE114 OF SAID
SECTION 18 - 1318.03 FEET TO A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE
N1116 CORNER ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE
N00'21 '22"E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NE114 NE114 OF SAID
SECTION 18 - 1290.02 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 30
FEET OF SAID NE114 NE114, FROM WHICH A 3-114" BRASS CAP
MONUMENTING THE NE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 BEARS
N00'21 '22"E - 30.00 FEET; THENCE N89'43' 1 1 "W ALONG SAID
SOUTH LINE - 30.21 FEET TO THE PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE
OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 7,
T15S R 13E; THENCE NOO'45'22"E ALONG SAID PROLONGATION AND
ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 1369.77 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE
EAST 30 FEET OF THE NE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 7, FROM
WH1Cl4 A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE 51116 CORNER ON THE EAST
SHEET 6 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
LINE OF SAID SECTION 7 BEARS S89' 14'50"E - 30.00 FEET,
THENCE N00'44'58"E ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 1339.46 FEET TO
THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SE114 NE114 OF SAID
SECTION 7, FROM WHICH A RAILROAD SPIKE MONUMENTINC THE E114
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 BEARS S89'36'08"E - 30.00 FEET;
THENCE N00'02'46"E ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 29.92 FEET TO THE
PROLONGATION OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF THE
SWI14 NW114 OF SAID SECTION 8, T15S R13E, THENCE S89'4452"E
ALONG SAID PROLONGATION AND ALONG SAID NORTH LINE - 1340.61
FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF THE SE114
NW114 OF SAID SECTION 8, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING
THE C-W 1/16 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8 BEARS S00' 15'00"W -
30.00 FEET; THENCE S89'45'08"E ALONG SAID NORTH LINE -
1310.50 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF THE
SW114 NE114 OF SAID SECTION 8, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE
MONUMENTING THE C114 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8 BEARS
S00'15'09"W - 30.00 FEET, THENCE 589'4434"E ALONG SAID
NORTH LINE - 1317.86 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SW1/4
NE114, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE C-E1/16 CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 8 BEARS SOO-21.02"W - 30.00 FEET; THENCE
NOO'21 '02"E ALONG SAID EAST LINE - 1288.62 FEET TO A 3/4"
PIPE MONUMENTING THE NE1118 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 8; THENCE
N00'21'20"E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NW114 NE114 OF SAID
SECTION 8 - 1318.91 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE
E1116 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 8, T15S R 13E, AND SAID
SECTION 5, T15S R13E; THENCE N00'42'47"E ALONG THE EAST LINE
OF THE SW114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 5 - 1321.63 FEET TO A
518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE SE1116 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5;
THENCE N00'41 '42"E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NW 1 /4 SE 1 /4 OF
SAID SECTION 5 1321.45 FEET TO A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING
THE C-E1116 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE N00'37'50"E
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SW114 NE114 OF SAID SECTION 5 -
1317.84 FEET TO A 1-112" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE NE1115
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5; THENCE N00'38'23"E ALONG THE EAST
LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 2 OF SAID SECTION 5 - 1016.51 FEET TO
A 518" REBAR ON THE TOP OF THE SOUTHWEST RIM OF THE DRY
CANYON; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHWEST RIM AS FOLLOWS:
N58'09'01 "W - 33.33 FEET TO A 1 12" PIPE; THENCE N24'20'35" W -
109. 11 FEET TO A 112" PIPE; THENCE N38'39'01 "W - 261.22 FEET
TO A 112" PIPE ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 2;
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHWEST RIM - S89'50'06"E ALONG SAID
NORTH LINE - 240.04 FEET TO A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE
E1116 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 5, T15S R13E AND SAID
SECTION 32, T14S R 13E; THENCE 589'4639"E ALONG THE SOUTH
LINE OF THE SE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 32 - 1318.29 FEET TO
A 3-114" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE SW CORNER OF SAID
.'SECTION 33, T14S R13E; . THENCE S89'56'31"E ALONG THE SOUTH
LINE OF THE SW 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 33 - 2637.01 FEET TO A
.518 " REBAR MONUMENTING THE S114 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33;
THENCE N89'33'31"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SWI14 SE114
OF SAID SECTION 33 - 1319.40 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING
THE E1116 CORNER ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 33•
THENCE N89'33'28"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SE114 SE114
OF SAID SECTION 33 - 260.19 FEET TO THE EAST R/W OF STATE
HIGHWAY U.S. NO. 97, BEING 45 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF
SAID HIGHWAY, FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE SE
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33 BEARS N89'3328"E - 1059.23 FEET;
SHEET 7 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE
i DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
AND FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR ON SAID EAST R/W BEARS
S08'02'38"W - 0.43 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID CURRENT URBAN
GROWTH BOUNDARY AND ALONG SAID EAST R/W AS FOLLOWS.
N08'02'38"E PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTERLINE - 1327.50 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR BEARS N82-W - 0.05 FEET; THENCE
N08'02'38"E PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTERLINE - 902.70 FEET TO
ENGINEER'S STATION 130+00, FROM WHICH A BENT 518" REBAR
BEARS N85-E - 0.12 FEET; THENCE N 1 1-33'55"E - 325.61 FEET TO
A 518" REBAR AT ENGINEER'S STATION 133+25, BEING 65 FEET
FROM SAID CENTERLINE; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST R/W -
N08°02'38"E PARALLEL WITH SAID CENTERLINE - 101.65 FEET TO
THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NE114 OF SAID SECTION 33, FROM WHICH A
3-114" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE E114 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 33 BEARS N89'57'27"E - 677.49 FEET, AND FROM WHICH A
112" PIPE MONUMENTING THE C114 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 33
BEARS S89'5727"W - 1948,41 FEET; THENCE NOO'02'33"W - 30.00
FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF SAID NE1/4,
AND TO THE PERSHALL BOUNDARY, BEING A LINE THAT IS PARALLEL
f WITH AND 30 FEET NORTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF NW PERSHALL WAY;
THENCE ALONG SAID PERSHALL BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS: S89'5727"W
ALONG SAID NORTH LINE - 843.83 FEET, FROM WHICH A BENT 1/2"
PIPE ON A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE BEARS
S22'4259"E - 30.26 FEET; THENCE S59-49'1 1-W - 1498.86 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 1/2" PIPE ON A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID
CENTERLINE BEARS S30'07'56"E - 30.00 FEET; THENCE
S59'5457"W - 559.60 FEET, THENCE 187.33 FEET ALONG THE ARC
OF A 256.48 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTH, THE LONG CHORD
OF WHICH BEARS S80'50'23"W - 183.19 FEET; THENCE N78-14'1 1"W -
148.00 FEET; THENCE 293.30 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 542.96
FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTH, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH
BEARS N62'45'41 "W - 289.74 FEET, FROM WHICH A 112" PIPE ON A
POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE BEARS S3634'37"E -
161.44 FEET, THENCE N47-17'11"W - 125.22 FEET, FROM WHICH A
112" PIPE ON A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE
BEARS S42'50'08"W - 30.00 FEET,• THENCE N47'02'32"W - 266.62
FEET; THENCE 92.25 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 242.84 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH
BEARS N36'09'36" W - 91.69 FEET, THENCE N25' 16'40" W - 1.55
FEET; THENCE 221.87 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 388. 10 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH
BEARS N41'39'20"W - 218.86 FEET; THENCE N58'01 '59"W - 97.81
FEET; THENCE 171.06 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 606.62 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH
BEARS N49'57' l rW - 170.49 FEET; THENCE N41'52'35" W - 201.07
FEET; THENCE 138.61 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 173.24 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTH, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
N54'47'50"W - 134.94 FEET, FROM WHICH A 112" PIPE ON A POINT
OF INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE BEARS S61'22'07"E - 67.59
FEET; THENCE N87'43'05"W - 345.90 FEET, THENCE 61.30 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF A 72.31 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTH,
THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N63'25'58"W - 59.48 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID PERSHALL BOUNDARY - S50'51'09"W ALONG A
LINE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE - 88.47 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF
THE NE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 32, T14S R13E, FROM WHICH A
3-114" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE E114 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 32 BEARS S89'30'23"E - 30.00 FEET; THENCE
SO0°08'09"W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF SAID
SHEET 5 OF 15
EXHIBIT -d- PAGE
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
NE 1 /4 SE1 f4 - 1312.51 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NE 1/4
SE114, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE S1116 CORNER
ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 32 BEARS S89'37'17"E -
30.00 FEET; THENCE N89'37' 17"W ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE -
j 1286.91 FEET TO A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE SE 1116 CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE N89°40'26"W ALONG THE NORTH LINE
j OF THE SW114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 32 - 1315.46 FEET TO THE
C-S1116 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32 (NO MONUMENT FOUND), FROM
WHICH A 112" PIPE MONUMENTING THE C114 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 32 BEARS N00' 19' 15"E - 1318.92 FEET, THENCE
SOO' 19' 15"W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SW 1%4 OF SAID SECTION
32 - 1288.92 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF
SAID SW114, FROM WHICH A 2-112" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE
1 /4 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 32, T 14S R 7 3E, AND SAID
SECTION 5, T15S R 13E. BEARS SOO' 19' 15"W - 30.00 FEET; THENCE
N89'32'15"W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 1320.16 FEET; THENCE
S00'27'45"W - 30.00 FEET TO THE W1116 CORNER ON THE NORTH
LINE OF SAID SECTION 5 (NO MONUMENT FOUND), FROM WHICH SAID
I COMMON 114 CORNER BEARS S89'32'15"E - 1320.23 FEET, AND FROM
WHICH A 2-112" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE NW CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 5 BEARS N89'32' 15"W 1320.23 FEET; THENCE S00'33'41"W
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 4 OF SAID SECTION 5 -
1341.04 FEET TO THE NW 1116 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5 (NO
MONUMENT FOUND), FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE
C-WI116 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5 BEARS S00'33'41"W - 1323.77
FEET, AND FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE N1116
CORNER ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 5 BEARS N69'41 '52"W -
1317.45 FEET; AND FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE
C-NI118 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5 BEARS S89'41'52"E - 1317.59
FEET, THENCE N89'41 '52"W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
GOVERNMENT LOT 4 - 81.50 FEET TO THE PROLONGATION OF THE
WEST LINE OF PARCEL I OF DESCHUTES COUNTY MINOR PARTITION
NO. 85-12; THENCE 500'00'13"E ALONG SAID PROLONGATION -
60.11 FEET TO A 112" REBAR MONUMENTING THE NW CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL 1; THENCE SOO'00'13"E ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 1263.84
FEET TO A 112" REBAR MONUMENTING THE SW CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL I; THENCE S89'53'25"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
PARCEL I - 68.45 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING SAID
C-W 1116 CORNER; THENCE S00'43'41 "W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
THE NW1/4 SW714 OF SAID SECTION 5 - 1320.07 FEET TO A 518"
REBAR MONUMENTING THE SW 1 / 16 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 5
THENCE N89'48'18"W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NW114 SW114 -
.....1315.94 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE S1116 -CORNER
COMMON TO SAID SECTION 5, T15S R 13E, AND SAID SECTION 6,
T15S R 13E; THENCE N89' 14'31 "W - 30.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE
OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 6,
THENCE SOO'45'29"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 1268.67 FEET TOE
THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF SAID SE114 SE1 f4,
FROM WHICH A 3-114" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE SE CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 6 BEARS S30'18'36"E - 58.13 FEET; THENCE
1\189'38'13"W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE - 1283.15 FEET TO THE
NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF THE SW114 SE114 OF SAID
SECTION 6, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE E1/16
CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 6, T15S R13E, AND SAID SECTION
7, T15S R13E, BEARS S00'27'27"W - 50,00 FEET; THENCE
N89'38'52"W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE AND ITS PROLONGATION -
1342.62 FEET TO THE PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF THE
SHEET 9 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE % Q
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
EAST 30 FEET OF THE NE114 NW 114 OF SAID SECTION 7, AND TO
THE NORTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY, BEING A LINE THAT IS
APPROXIMATELY PARALLEL WITH AND 30 FEET WEST OF THE
CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE OF HELMHOLTZ WAY, FROM WHICH A 3/4"
PIPE MONUMENTING THE 114 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 6 AND
SAID SECTION 7 BEARS S30'24'05"E - 56.18 FEET, THENCE ALONG
SAID NORTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS: S00'38' 16"W ALONG
SAID PROLONGATION AND ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 1371.46 FEET TO
THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SE114 NW114 OF SAID
SECTION 7, FROM WHICH A 2" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE
C-N 1/16 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 BEARS S89'21'50"E - 30.00
FEET; THENCE 500"38'04"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 1321.80 FEET
TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SW 1/4 OF SAID
SECTION 7, FROM WHICH A 2" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE C114
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7 BEARS S89'21 '52"E - 30.00 FEET;
THENCE S00'38'01"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 505.28 FEET;
THENCE 139.40 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 670.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S06'35'39"W - 139.15 FEET, THENCE 512'33'16"W - 150.00 FEET,
THENCE 260.26 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 730.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD -OF WHICH BEARS
S02'20'28"W - 258.88 FEE(; THENCE S07'52'20"E - 250.00 FEET;
THENCE 218.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 1470.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S0337'10"E - 218.03 FEET TO SAID WEST LINE; THENCE
500'35'01"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE - 466.43 FEET; THENCE
232.24 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF AN 870.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE,
CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS SOB-16'52"W -
231.55 FEET,• THENCE S15'55'42"W 150.00 FEET; THENCE 376.91
FEET ALONG THE ARC OF AN 830.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE
EAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S0255'09"W - 373.68
FEET, FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE 114 CORNER
COMMON TO SAID SECTION 7, T155 R13E, AND SAID SECTION 15,
T15S R13E, BEARS N65 14'39-E = 127.61 FEET; THENCE LEAVING
SAID NORTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY - S79'54'35"W ALONG A LINE
RADIAL TO SAID CURVE - 20.00 FEET TO THE CENTRAL HELMHOLTZ
BOUNDARY, BEING A LINE THAT IS APPROXIMATELY PARALLEL WITH
AND 50 FEET WEST OF THE CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE OF.HELMHOLTZ
WAY; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTRAL HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY AS
FOLLOWS: S10'05'25"E - 400.00 FEET; THENCE 153.01 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF AN 850.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE WEST,
THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S04°56'00"E - 152.80 FEET TO
THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 50 FEET- OF THE NW114 OF SAID
SECTION 16; THENCE 500'1325"W ALONG SAID WEST LINE
1463.28 FEET; THENCE 91.18 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF AN 850.00
FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH
.BEARS S03" 17'48" W - 91.74 FEET; THENCE S06°22' 11 "W - 150.00
FEET; THENCE 177.65 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 750.00 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S00°24'58"E - 177.24 FEET; THENCE S07' 12'07"E - 150.00 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 2" ALUMINUM CAP MONUMENTING THE C114 CORNER OF
SAID - SECTION 18 BEARS N82'47'55"E - 50.00 FEET,• THENCE
108.70 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF AN 850.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE,
CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS 503'32' 19"E -
108.62 FEET, THENCE S00'07'29"W - 2085.94 FEET; THENCE
448.20 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 666.20 FOOT RADIUS CURVE,
'CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S19'23'54"W
SHEET 10 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
439.79 FEET, TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 30 FEET OF THE
SE114 SW114 OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE LEAVING SAID CENTRAL
HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY - N89'30'20"W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, AND
ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 30 FEET NORTH OF THE
CONSTRUCTED CENTERLINE OF SW OBSIDIAN AVENUE - 713.48 FEET,•
THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE AND 99.37 FEET ALONG THE ARC
OF A 1470.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTH, THE LONG
CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N87'34'09"W - 99.35 FEET; THENCE
N85'37'57"W ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE - 317.14 FEET; THENCE
S04'22'03"W - 54.90 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE
W1116 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 18, T15S R13E, AND SAID
SECTION 19, T15S R13E, FROM WHICH A 112" ROD MONUMENTING THE
114 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 18 AND SAID SECTION 19
BEARS S8930'20"E - 1316.16 FEET; THENCE S00'40'20"E ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 OF SAID SECTION 19 -
1320.67 FEET TO A RAILROAD SPIKE IN A JUNIPER TREE
MONUMENTING THE NW 1 /16 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE
N89'39'20"W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1 -
1276.95 FEET TO THE N1116 CORNER COMMON TO SAID SECTION 19,
T15S R13E, AND SAID SECTION 24, T15S R12E (NO MONUMENT
FOUND), FROM WHICH A 2-1/2" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE NE
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24 BEARS N00'02' 19" W - 1323.58 FEET;
THENCE S00'02'19"E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SE114 NE114 OF
SAID SECTION 24 - 1323.58 FEET TO A 1" DRILL BIT MONUMENTING
THE EAST 1 /4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24, THENCE N89'51 '58" W
ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NE114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 24 -
1403.44 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE C-rEII16 CORNER
.OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE S00' 11 '44"W ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID NE114 SE114 - 335.22 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF
PARCEL 1 OF DESCHUTES COUNTY PARTITION PLAT NO. 1991-23 (NO
MONUMENT FOUND); THENCE S89'47' 13"E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE -
126.97 FEET TO A 112" PIPE; THENCE S89'47'13"E ALONG SAID
SOUTH LINE - 25.00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF CENTRAL OREGON
IRRIGATION DISTRICT'S LATERAL "B"; THENCE ALONG SAID
LATERAL CENTERLINE AS FOLLOWS: 36.85 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF
A NON-TANGENT 60.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE
LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S1722'48"E - 36.27 FEET; THENCE
S34'58'22"E - 611.84 FEET; THENCE S28'49'09"E - 333.25 FEET;
THENCE 92.05 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 210.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S 16' 15'44"E - 91.31 FEET, FROM WHICH A 112" PIPE ON THE
SOUTH LINE OF PARCEL 2 OF SAID PARTITION PLAT BEARS
N89'48'04"E - 45.09 FEET,' THENCE S03'42'18"E - 375.98 FEEL;
THENCE 135.77 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 390.00 FOOT RADIUS
.CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S 13'40'42"E - 135.09 FEET; THENCE S23'39'05"E• - 286.56 FEET;
THENCE 134.41 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 450.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S32'12'29"E - 133.91 FEET; THENCE 540'45'52"E - 149.37 FEET,
THENCE 121.31 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 240.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S26' 17'03"E - 120.02 FEET,• THENCE S 11'48'1 4"E - 77.58 FEET;
THENCE 167.59 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 300.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S2748'28"E - 165.42 FEET; THENCE S43'48'42"E - 95.05 FEET
TO A 112" PIPE ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE NE114 NE114 OF SAID
SECTION 25, T15S R12E, FROM WHICH A 3-.114" BRASS CAP
SHEET 19 OF 15
EXHIBIT 13 PAGE / Z
DESCRIPTION - CITY -OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
MONUMENTING
THE NF CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, ALSO BEING THE
INITIAL POINT
OF THIS DESCRIPTION, BEARS S89'57'37"E -
130.86 FEET;
THENCE S43'48'42"E - 41.60 FEET TO THE SOUTH
LINE OF THE
NORTH 30 FEET OF SAID NE114 NE114; THENCE
LEAVING SAID
LATERAL CENTERLINE - 589'57'37"E ALONG SAID
SOUTH LINE -
92.69 FEET TO THE WEST R1W OF SW HELMHOLTZ WAY,
BEING 30 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ROADWAY, AND TO
THE CURRENT
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF REDMOND;
THENCE N00'4
3' 19
E ALONG SAID WEST R1W AND ALONG SAID
CURRENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY (PREVIOUSLY CITED AS
NOO'42'49"E)
- 30.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID NORTHERLY TRACT CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1833.2 ACRES,
AND SAID SOUTHERLY TRACT BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A 3-114" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE NE CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 25, T 15S R 12E, THE INITIAL POINT, THENCE
N69'57'37" W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NE1 /4 NE 114 OF SAID
SECTION 25 - 9.00 FEET TO THE WEST R1W OF SW HELMHOLTZ WAY,
THIS LINE BEING THE SOUTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY, AS ESTABLISHED
BY DESCHUTES COUNTY ENGINEER ROBERT COULD, IN HIS MAP OF
WHITTED MARKET ROAD, 1927, ALSO BEING 30 FEET FROM THE
CENTERLINE OF SAID ROADWAY, AND TO THE CURRENT URBAN GROWTH
BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF REDMOND; THENCE S00'43' 19" W ALONG
SAID SOUTH HELMHOLTZ -BOUNDARY AND ALONG SAID CURRENT URBAN
GROWTH BOUNDARY - 158.60 FEET (PREVIOUSLY CITED AS
N00'42'49"E - 158.75 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE
ALONG SAID SOUTH HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS: S00'43' 19"W
2267.59 FEET; THENCE 100.13 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
22,948.32 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD OF
WHICH BEARS S00'3549"W - 100.13 FEET, FROM WHICH A PK NAIL
IN A 3/4" PIPE MONUMENTING THE 114 CORNER COMMON TO SAID
SECTION 25, T15S R12E, AND SAID SECTION 30, T15S R13E, BEARS
S12'21'27"E - 111.35 FELT; THENCE SOO°28'19"W - 1440.24
FEET, FROM WHICH A 112" PIPE MONUMENTING THE SW CORNER OF
PARCEL 1 OF DESCHUTES COUNTY PARTITION PLAT NO, 1999-03
BEARS S89'31'41"E - 60.02 FEET; THENCE S00'28'19"W - 1330.78
FEET, FROM WHICH A 3-114" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE CORNER
COMMON TO SAID SECTIONS 25 AND 35, T15S R12E, AND SAID
SECTIONS 30 AND 31, T15S R13E, BEARS S85'49'04"E - 22.03
FEET, AND FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE CENTERLINE
INTERSECTION OF HELMHOLTZ WAY AND SW ELKHORN AVENUE BEARS
S89'31'30"E - 30.00 FEET; THENCE S00'2$'41"W - 2993.75 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE BEARS S89'31 ' 19"E - 60.00 FEET;
THENCE 356.83 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 985.30 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S09'53'49"E - 354.89 FEET, FROM WHICH A PIPE BEARS
N69°3236"E - 60.11 FEET, THENCE S20'16'19'E - 662.80 FEET;
THENCE 349.17 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 379.26 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
S06'06' 1 D"W - 336.97 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH
HELMHOLTZ BOUNDARY - S57'31'21"E ALONG A LINE RADIAL TO SAID
CURVE - 70.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH CANAL BOUNDARY, BEING A LINE
440 FEET SOUTHEAST OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE OLD DALLES-
CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY (SOUTH CANAL BOULEVARD) AS ESTABLISHED BY
OREGON STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT RESIDENT ENGINEER G. 1.
SHEET 12 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
STEBBINS, IN HIS MAP OF THE DALLES-CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY
(DESCHUTES COUNTY - BEND - JEFFERSON COUNTY LINE SECTION),
1919; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH CANAL BOUNDARY AS FOLLOWS:
N32'28'39"E - 867.07 FEET TO A 518" REBAR, FROM WHICH A BENT
3/4" PIPE BEARS N57"42'52"W - 69.59 FEET; THENCE 253.49 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF A 2904.79 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHWEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N29'58'39"E -
253.41 FEET, FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR BEARS S43-E - 0.09
FEET; THENCE N27-28'39"E - 704.10 FEET, FROM WHICH A BENT
518" REBAR BEARS N21'W - 0.26, AND FROM WHICH A 3/4" PIPE
BEARS N62'3622"W - 70.27 FEET; THENCE 145.02 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A 1392.19 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEAST, THE
LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N30'27'42"E - 144.96 FEET TO A
BENT 518" REBAR ON THE NORTH LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3 OF
SAID SECTION 31; THENCE 97.96 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
1392.19 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD
OF WHICH BEARS N3527'42"E - 97.94 FEET, THENCE N37'28'39"E -
46.05 FEET, FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR BEARS N52'31 '21 "W - 9.44
FEET; THENCE N3726'39"E - 731.25 FEET, FROM WHICH A 5/8"
REBAR BEARS N52'31 '21"W - 9.85 FEET, THENCE N3728'39"E -
1450.55 FEET, FROM WHICH A 60d SPIKE BEARS N5231'21"W -
10.25 FEET, THENCE N3728'39"E - 557.98 FEET, FROM WHICH A
314" PIPE BEARS N5231'21"W - 10.00 FEET; THENCE N37'28'39"E -
390.88 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 30 FEET OF THE
NW114 NE114 OF SAID SECTION 31, FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE
MONUMENTING THE N114 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 31 BEARS
N86'50' 16"W - 583.16 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH CANAL
BOUNDARY - S89'47'12"E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE - 746.70 FEET
TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 30 FEET OF THE NE114 NE114 OF
SAID SECTION 31, FROM WHICH A 112" REBAR MONOMENTING THE
E1116 CORNER ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 31 BEARS
N00' 15'26" E - 30.00 FEET; THENCE S89'41 '57" E ALONG SAID
SOUTH LINE - 1328.48 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 30
FEET OF THE NW 1 /4 NW 1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 32, T 15S R 13E, FROM
WHICH A 3-114" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE NW CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 32 BEARS N00' 18'03"E - 30.00 FEET; THENCE
N69'26'00"E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE - 796.35 FEET TO THE
CENTERLINE OF THE BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION (B.P.A.)
REDMOND - PILOT BUTTE POWER TRANSMISSION LINE, THENCE
N27' 10'49" W ALONG SAID B.P.A. CENTERLINE - 33.56 FEET TO THE
SOUTH LINE. OF THE SW 1/4 SW 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 29, T15S R 13E,
AND TO THE CURRENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF
REDMOND, FROM WH1CH A 518" REBAR MONUMENTING THE W1116
CORNER ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29 BEARS
N89'28'00"E - 550.11 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID CURRENT URBAN
GROWTH BOUNDARY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS DESCRIPTION, AND
AS FOLLOWS. N27' 10'49"W ALONG SAID B.P.A. CENTERLINE -
1460.89 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SWl14 SW114, FROM
WHICH A 112" PIPE ON SAID NORTH LINE BEARS N89'50'55"E -
31.13 FEET; THENCE S89-50'55- W ALONG SAID NORTH LINE -
110.73 FEET TO A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE S1115 CORNER
COMMON TO SAID SECTION 29 AND SAID SECTION 30; THENCE
N89°40'42"W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SE114 SE114 OF SAID
SECTION 30 - 1324.00 FEET TO AN 8d NAIL AND WASHER IN THE NW
CORNER OF A ROCK CRIB MONUMENTING THE SE1116 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 30; THENCE N89'43'1 1"W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE
SW114 SE114 OF SAID SECTION 30 - 1324.61 FEET TO THE C-51116
SHEET 13 OF 15
EXHIBIT PAGE Ll _
DESCRIPTION - CITY OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 30 (NO MONUMENT FOUND), FROM WHICH A
314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE S114 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 30
BEARS S090652"W 1326.32 FEET, AND FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE
MONUMENTING THE C114 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 30 BEARS
N00'06'52"E - 1326.32 FEET; THENCE N89'49' 19"W ALONG THE
NORTH LINE OF THE SE114 SW114 OF SAID SECTION 30 - 629.33
FEET TO A 112" PIPE, THENCE N89'49' 19"W ALONG SAID NORTH
LINE - 45.43 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID LATERAL "8",
FROM WHICH A 314" PIPE MONUMENTING THE SW1116 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 30 BEARS N89'49' 19" W - 642.15 FEET; THENCE ALONG
SAID LATERAL CENTERLINE AS FOLLOWS: N08'05'36"E - 273.34
FEET, THENCE 263.49 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 450.00 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE WEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
N084051 "W - 259.74 FEET; THENCE N25-27'19"W - 888.59 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 112" PIPE ON THE NORTH LINE OF DESCHUTES COUNTY
MAJOR PARTITION NO. MJP-78-20 BEARS .589'42'43"E - 50.01
FEET, AND FROM WHICH A 112- PIPE ON SAID NORTH LINE BEARS
N89'42'43"W - 27.75 FEET; THENCE N2527' 19"W - 301.73 FEET;
THENCE 145.06 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 900.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE EAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
N20'50' 16" W - 144.90 FEET; THENCE N16-13'13"W - 927.39 FEET,
FROM WHICH A 5/8" REBAR ON THE SOUTH LINE OF DESCHUTES
COUNTY PARTITION PLAT NO. 2000-52 BEARS N73'46'47"E - 52.03
FEET,• THENCE N16'13'13"W - 197.97 FEET; THENCE 190.13 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF A 400.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHWEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N30'08'47"W -
186.35 FEET; THENCE N43'45'50"W - 447.86 FEET; THENCE 93.18
FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 500.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHWEST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N49°06'10"W - 93.04
FEET; THENCE N54'2629"W - 378.21 FEET, FROM WHICH A 518"
REBAR ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARTITION PLAT BEARS
N35'33'31 "E - 64.96 FEET,• THENCE N54°26'29"W - 171.30 FEET;
THENCE 141.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 600.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEAST, THE LONG CHORD OF WHICH BEARS
N47'41'54"W - 140.90 FEET, THENCE N69'56'28"W ALONG A NON-
TANGENT LINE - 54.32 FEET; THENCE N24'20'57"W ALONG SAID
LATERAL CENTERLINE, AND ALONG SAID CURRENT URBAN GROWTH
BOUNDARY - 17.26 FEET (PREVIOUSLY CITED AS 17.20 FEET) TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID SOUTHERLY TRACT CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 461.4 ACRES,
AND SAID RUSSELL TRACT BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A 3-114" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING THE NW CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 30, T15S R13E, THE INITIAL POINT; THENCE
S56'21'04"E - 9541.45 FEET TO A 3-114" BRASS CAP MONUMENTING
THE N714 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32, T 15S R 13E, AND TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89'24'30"W ALONG THE NORTH LINE
OF THE NE 1 /4 NW 1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 32, AND ALONG SAID
CURRENT URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY - 709.82 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST
R/W OF STATE HIGHWAY U.S. N0. 97, BEING 90 FEET FROM THE
CENTERLINE OF SAID HIGHWAY, FROM WHICH A 518" REBAR
MONUMENTING THE W1116 CORNER ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
SECTION 32 BEARS S89'24'30"W - 621.10 FEET; THENCE
S35'37'49"W ALONG SAID SOUTHEAST R/W - 299.97 FEET TO THE
SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 242 FEET OF SAID NE114 NW114; THENCE
SHEET 14 OF 15
EXHIBIT -0 PAGE J
DESCRIPTION - C17Y OF REDMOND
2006 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION
N89°24'30"E ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE - 881.61 FEET TO THE EAST
LINE OF SAID NE114 NW114, FROM WHICH A 60d SPIKE IN THE
CENTER OF A STONE MOUND MONUMENTING THE C114 CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 32 BEARS S00'42' 13"W - 2399.56 FEET; THENCE
N00'42'13"E ALONG SAID EAST LINE - 242.06 FEET TO'THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
SAID RUSSELL TRACT CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 4.4 ACRES.
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
OREGON
JULY 15, 1983
WILLIAM G. BAHRKE
2039
Renewal Date: 12/31/05
PREPARED JULY Y9, 2006
POVEY AND ' ASSOC. LAND SURVEYORS
P.O. BOX 131, REDMOND,. OR 97756
(541) 548-6778 06-181 B.DWG
SHEET 15 OF 15
Legend
city Umit
Urban Growth Boundary
Urban Reserve Area
Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan
Exhibit "C" to Ordinance 2006-018
BOARD
OF D66
COMMISSIONERS
40.
bnw MwiaN~we~.wh Tlr.~rov~ruilw..mraw apfq, icWryq.
.mew a ii. w+oa, ww...ao~rb rr weaa
ra~c~..r~w~a~px.e~u~ssmoe.;meaw~n me~.e
Bev
(?D
1 0.s 0
Miles
August 01, 2006
Dated this Z-'5,day of y~Ayu~~ ust, 2006
EffeGive Date: BugdSt T' 06
74;~
MIA
r II w tMi~r-*;~ r r r r ~r r r it
t~ 1
~•I,~~ m c r r IT p~-'~'It~[~ p l ■ 1
Map ^Ss ~L ,,y-~r' G~[lgl~fW, I4.IE AVE
-gr tl L
R -3-
Rag ~Fi?t~f(~ Z• -w
9~^ ~~~®r- ' it
L r~C ~f1R Adr en ~R (1 _ Fs~~
t xti b t t
yy dr try k~iiry}
_ yP uz j H3LY
--t7': .1 r~ ~fPy 7+ltfrrff ri' or
I TI
T710
i2N JL~
TE]G v.~ 1rliLRIDPNAVR~~ YE AWAY
Y W
g
1 ~~fBW'~gYHt~`~! f iT7
MEN@
L
Legend
Crcy L ft 4ft
Uhn R.- NN
'i. UrMn GrowN Boundary
I' ~PdrciplAMrbl
Rural ArMrhl
Rural Colb<Wr
\E IN F-,Redmond Mlnor Ad.d.l(Raa-dTSP)
■ r F.Wra R-ad Major Call-(R.dmond TSP)
FVWrl County RUr.l-1111*11, TIP)
■ r F- County Rural C.Ibotm (County TSP)
Deschutes County
Transportation Plan
Exhibit "D" to Ordinance 2006-018
V V
1 0.5 0
Miles
August01, 2006
BOARD UNTY COMMISSIONERS
OFD TES COUNTY, OREGON
9"is R. Luke~air_
Dated thisZ'3 day of August, 2006
Effective Date: AM@aVf 21006
EXHIBIT 1EPAGE 1
City of Redmond & Deschutes County
Findings Document for Amendments to the
Redmond Urban Growth Boundary
A Proposal Submitted to
Department of Land Conservation
and Development
Prepared for. V i
City of Redmond
~y
716 SW Evergreen'.
P.O. Box 726
Redmond, OR 97756
Prepared by:
Angelo Planning Group
620 SW Main, Suite 201
Portland, Oregon 97205
July 2006
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Resolution No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PAGE Z_
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PROPOSAL SUMMARY INFORMATION ..............................................................1
II. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................2
Background .......................................................................................................................2
III. PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT ..........................................................................8
IV. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS ......................................................................9
Chapter 11 Public Facilities .........................................................................................9
Chapter 12 Transportation .........................................................................................17
V. CONFORMANCE WITH STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS ..........................20
A. FOR PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT ....................................................20
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement
Goal 2 Land Use Planning ........................................................................................................22
Goal 5 Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources .........................24
Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality 26
Goal 7 Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards 27
Goal 8 Recreational Needs ........................................................................................................28
Goal 9 Economic Development 29
Goal 10 Housing ..................................................................................32
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services
Goal 12 Transportation 337
9
Goal 13 Energy Conservation 40
Goal 14 Urbanization ...................................................................................................................41
B. FOR NORTHWEST AREA OF PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT .......50
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services ........................................................................................50
Goal 12 Transportation 59
C. FOR RUSSELL PROPERTY OF PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT .....62
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement 62
Goal 2 Land Use Planning ........................................................................................................63
Goal 9 Economic Development ...................................................................................64
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services ..........................................................................64
Goal 12 Transportation ..................................................................................................64
Goal 14 Urbanization .....................................................................................................64
D. FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS-66
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement 66
Goal 2 Land Use Planning 66
Goal 3 Agricultural Lands
Goal 5 Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources 68
Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality 69
July 2006 i
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PAGE
Goal 7 Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards 69
Goal 8 Recreational Needs
Goal 9 Economic Development 70
Goal 10 Housing ...........................................................................................................................71
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services 72
Goal 14 Urbanization ...................................................................................................................73
VI. CONFORMANCE WITH STATE STATUTES .....................................................76
ORS 197.296 ...................................................................................................................................76
ORS 197.298 ...................................................................................................................................78
VII. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ......................79
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23.48. Urbanization 79
VIII. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ..............................85
City of Redmond Chapter 14 - Urbanization Element 85
IX. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY DEVELOPMENT CODE 87
Section 8.0760 - Caiteria for Amendments 87
TABLES
Table 1.1
Buildable commercial and industrial land, employment capacity, and
em
lo
f
Table 1.2
p
yment
orecast
Buildable residential land, residential capacity
and needed dwellin
,
g
units b
l
d
i
i
Table 1
3
y p
an
es
gnat
on
Alternative fore
t
f
d
d h
i
.
Table 1.4
cas
o
nee
e
ous
ng units 34
Estimated size of UGB expansion to accommodate growth between
2003 and 2025
Table 1.5
Historical and forecast population and employment
35
42
Table 1.6
Projected employment growth by land use type in the Redmond UGB,
medi
i
Table 1.7
um range assumpt
on
Framework Plan Ca
a
it
A
l
i
42
Table 1.8
p
c
y
na
ys
s
Net acres of vacant and partially vacant land by plan desi
nation
48
76
Table 1.9
g
Estimated develo
ment
i
Table 1.10
p
capac
ty
Allocation of needed housin
units b
77
g
y zone
77
FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Proposed UGB Expansion Area .........................................................................................4
Figure 1.2 Northwest Area of the Proposed UGB Expansion Area 5
Figure 1.3 Current County Zoning in the Proposed UGB Expansion Area 6
Figure 1.4 Adopted Redmond Urban Reserve Area (URA) 7
Figure 1.5 Northwest Area Conceptual Facility Plan .........................................................................15
Figure 1.6 Draft Transportation System Plan (TSP) Map .................................................................19
Figure 1.7 Draft UGB Expansion Framework Plan ...........................................................................33
July 2006 11
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PAGE
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A Properties Included in the Redmond Proposed UGB Expansion Area
Exhibit B Properties Included in the Northwest Area
Exhibit C 2005 Rabrcnd Urbanization Study, ECONorthwest and Angelo Eaton & Associates
(AEA)
Exhibit D Technical Memorandum: NW Area Water Facilities, City of Redmond
Exhibit E Technical Memorandum: NW Area Wastewater Facilities, City of Redmond
Exhibit F Conceptual Facility Plan, City of Redmond
Exhibit G Draft Transportation System Plan (TSP) Map, City of Redmond
Exhibit H Northwest Area Public Facilities Plan (PFP) Summary, City of Redmond
Exhibit I Conxpwd URA and Northzeest Neighborhood Setter/Water 2005 Study, David Evans &
Associates PEA)
Exhibit J Urban Reserve Findings, August 23, 2005, Deschutes County
Exhibit K VisioningRffi~?~ AEA
Exhibit L Draft UGB Expansion Framework Plan, SERA Architects & Angelo Planning Group
(APG)
Exhibit M Legal Metes and Bounds Description of the Proposed UGB Expansion Area
Exhibit N Urban Holding Area Master Planning Requirements, SERA and APG, June 21, 2006
July 2006
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT 6: PAGE S-
1. PROPOSAL SUMMARY INFORMATION
File No:
082-004
Applicant: City of Redmond
Community Development Department
716 SW Evergreen
P.O. Box 726
Redmond, OR 97756
Phone: (541) 923-7710
Fax: (541) 548-0706
Applicant's Representative:
DJ Heffernan
Angelo Planning Group
620 SW Main, Suite 201
Portland, Oregon 97205
(503) 227-3664
Fax: (503) 227-3679
dheffeman@angeloplanning.com
Request: To amend the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to
include 2,299 acres for primarily residential development and
to update the Comprehensive Plan designations and zoning
of these lots. To amend the City's Public Facility Plan (PFP),
Transportation System Plan (TSP), and Public Facilities and
Transportation Elements of the Redmond Comprehensive
Plan to reflect planning updates for the Northwest Area of
the proposed UGB amendment area. (A map and list of the
properties within the Northwest Area are included as Figure
1.2 and Exhibit B respectively.)
Location: North, west, and southwest of the existing Redmond UGB,
roughly Per-shall Road and Upas Avenue on the north, 35th
Street and Helmholtz on the west, and SW Canal Boulevard
on the southwest, and one property directly south of the
existing city limits east of Highway 97 (Figure 1.1).
Legal Description: The land proposed for the entire UGB expansion is
comprised of the lots listed in Exhibit A. The lots belonging
to the Northwest Area are included in the list in Exhibit A,
and are also listed separately in Exhibit B. The Russell
property proposed for consolidation within the UGB is
identified as taxlot 1513290001200. A metes and bounds
legal description of the entire proposed UGB expansion area
is included as Exhibit M
July 2006 1
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PAGE
II. INTRODUCTION
Background
The City of Redmond is submitting this Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposal to do the
following:
• Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map by expanding the existing Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB) by 2,299 gross acres to address housing and associated land needs,
including parks, public facilities, and neighborhood commercial services, and to correct
mapping errors by consolidating taxlots fragmented by earlier designations of city limits
and the UGB. The proposed acreage accounts for roughly 380 acres of constrained land
(BPA easements, canals, and road rights-of-way).
• Amend text in the Public Facility Plan (PFP) and Transportation System Plan (TSP) to
reflect updates in public facility and transportation planning to support anticipated
urbanization in the Northwest Area of the proposed UGB expansion area.
• Amend text in the Public Facilities and Transportation Elements of the Redmond
Comprehensive Plan, which reference the PFP and TSP, to also reflect planning updates
meant to support anticipated urbanization in the Northwest Area of the proposed UGB
expansion area.
• Amend the Redmond Development Code to provide for a Master Planning Process and
Criteria applicable to properties within the expanded UGB.
This single UGB amendment is designed to provide housing and associated needs for the next 20
years. The entire area proposed for UGB expansion is illustrated in Figure 1.1, and the properties
included in this area are listed in Exhibit A. However, it is the "Northwest Area" that is expected to
be the first portion of the proposed UGB expansion area to be provided with services and urbanize.
This area is illustrated in Figure 1.2 and properties inside this area are listed in Exhibit B.
Consequently, more detailed transportation and public facility planning has been performed for this
area.
These proposed Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments are being submitted in
conjunction with Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments that establish a policy framework for
management of future urban development in the proposed UGB expansion area using strategies
such as an Urban Holding zone, a Framework Plan, and a Master Planning process.
The proposed UGB expansion area includes approximately 2,299 acres, and is currently zoned for
Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Mixed Use Agriculture (MUA 10) by Deschutes County (Figure
1.3). The area is being designated as an Urban Holding Area (UHA) in the Redmond
Comprehensive Plan until master plans are completed for the area, but the area is intended for
residential uses to meet critical housing needs identified in a Redmond urbanization study prepared
by ECONorthwest (Exhibit q. The proposed UGB expansion is entirely within the Redmond
Urban Reserve Area (URA) adopted in 2005.
The Redmond URA was established through the collaboration of the City of Redmond and
Deschutes County. The adopted URA includes 5,664 acres and, combined with undeveloped land
inside the existing Redmond UGB, is expected to meet future residential, commercial, and industrial
land needs for the City of Redmond for the next 50 years. The URA designations were established
through amendments to the City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan policies and maps and to
July 2006 2
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT- PAGE 7
Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan policies, maps, TSP, and zoning codes. The URA
adoption process met state land use and transportation regulations.
The Redmond City Council unanimously recommended 5,664 acres for designation as urban reserve
to the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners on May 10, 2005. A second public hearing was
held by the Redmond City Council on June 14, 2005 to take testimony on the URA
recommendation, especially from affected property owners. The Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners held a public hearing and reviewed the Council's recommendation on August 23,
2005. The Board of Commissioners adopted the URA as an amendment to the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan on September 7, 2005, and the URA went into effect on December 12, 2005.
The designated Redmond URA boundary is shown in Figure 1.4.
July 2006 3
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT E_ PAGE_
Figure 1.1 - Proposed UGB Expansion Area
f ~ wa'aww. ~ Cw
w
A
t
pwch 2M)
"K4 F,,M
4 ~ ~ ~ x5
~r .
f ~
F- . ftpo"d,t Expeneion Ares
f;WdnWd Utbo Raw" Am
® qty kats and U
Source: City of Redmond and Deschutes County
July 2006 4
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT C PAGE -i--
Figure 1.2 - Northwest Area of the Proposed UGB Expansion Area
YA,yIER
WAL
UPAi
TEAXWOOD
TEEM
SPRUCE
SPRUCE
PFIJCE
SPRW,
td1JUVCE
F
/
~
~
4tC
POPLAR
~
1 ~
ry
WiLt3FLMvER i
£
MAPLE
MAKE
Z
~K9NCdWC?f3L1
K;NCW000
JOSHUATREE
-
dAcw1pe
%IVY
~ yr
w-
HICKCY?V
IVY
GR EPj4V `
PMPOOd NW h v%1I ELM ELM
W-3 EXpenaian' AM
~
Ro6yan6 Otan Raw yo tvea D N
Oty7ur m am UG13
{hCarch 2tN.5f
rya a aoc ,ca~Zsc~ ~
ANTLER Sr
Source: Citv of Redmnnd and f)asrhntes Cnunty
July 2006 $
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24,
EXHIBIT _ PAGE I'D_
Figure 1.3 - Current County Zoning in the Proposed UGB Expansion Area
w
;
i t t B ,C~_
77
~d s
~ b x
x
i
+vaoa K
' LEY }±p ;~N
OA F
6w 4000 Faet
Redmond and Deschutes County
F
t
L.cda vF tiw PtopomeC
r'
Wftlside and hdp ftfn
UGS Exps miwArea t
i
Dmwtes County
0PMPMhCnS!we Pw
DwIgnatlan $ ZDnbV
S=
EFUN.
F.sctualve~armU~e
D
Affalf8
EFUTRS
Excdu5ivs Fwm o
T8Yf9
l1 MUA1o
Nixed UwAWW& turb
RRID
L
ReakW 81
F#Ad
July 2006
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT- PAGE
Figure 1.4 - Adopted Redmond Urban Reserve Area
r
1
1
Y
~r
J
L Serx1 .rt"~PS ~.i i; r~ ~ rt r ~ ,
Deschutes County ,
Comprehensive Plan l.:".r
~a Exhib# 8lo Ordnance 20[35-023
.,o..Q. ~-3xy..,.y....m.+..a~. w.t.! aid
ouurcC. ~ascnuies i.uurny wmmumry uemopmenr ueparrmenr
July 2006
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT_ PAGE ' Z-
III. PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT
The City of Redmond proposes to amend its Comprehensive Plan Map to include land shown in
Figure 1.1 in its UGB. A list of each lot included in this proposed map amendment is found in
Exhibit A and a legal metes and bounds description in Exhibit M. This land will be designated
Urban Holding Area (UHA) according to proposed amendments in Title 23 of the Deschutes
County Comprehensive Plan and proposed language for Policy 10 of Chapter 2 (Land Use Planning)
in the City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan. This land will be zoned Urban Holding Zone (UH
10) according to proposed amendments in Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 20, the Redmond
Urban Area Zoning Code, and proposed language in the Redmond Development Code, Chapter 8,
Article 1- Zoning Standards.
July 2006 8
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT ~ PAGE ~3
IV. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Chapter 11 Public Facilities
The City of Redmond has prepared a technical analysis of the water and sewer system improvements
that are needed to serve the Northwest Area, a roughly 400-acre portion of the proposed UGB
expansion area that is anticipated to urbanize before other parts of the proposed UGB expansion
area. (See Exhibit B for the properties included in the Northwest Area) The following exhibits are
adopted as amendments to the 2005 Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs),
Section 6 and Section 7 of the City's Public Facility Plan (PFP). These provide the factual basis for
public facility improvements that will serve the Northwest Area.
■ Exhibit D - Technical Memorandum: NW Area Water Facilities
■ Exhibit E -Technical Memorandum: NW Area Wastewater Facilities
The Parks and Transportation CIPs, Section 8 and Section 5 of the City's PFP will also be updated
to account for projects needed in the next five years in the Northwest Area. A conceptual utility
plan for the Northwest Area - including water, wastewater, streets, and park service areas - is
provided in Figure 1.5 (Exhibit F), and a draft TSP Map in Figure 1.6 (Exhibit G).
The City of Redmond proposes to adopt the following tables (Exhibit" and Figures 1.5 and 1.6
(Exhibits F and G) as amendments to its PFP.
July 2006 9
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT _C PAGE ry
b
0
fi
O
N
C~ o
h
. (1 V
V
N~
/LL^
V
Z ~
Q Q
Z_
tL 0
Z
O
F-
0 ~
(L Z
N
Z
Q
z
U D
J
F- ~
F-
w i=
w D
a o
J
H
3Q.
a
U
N
w
J
U }
LL J Z
U U O
J LLQ
m
F-
a
[L' N
z
0000
000
0
0
I
l
V* 00l T 00l
I
I
I
l
I W
l`
N
N
N
e
-
:
0 0 0 O
000
O
O
to
O O O O
O O O
O
O
CO f~
00 0 0 0
000
O
00
00
N V w O
V) 0 0
O
t,-
It r
i- 00 I~- M
M~rl
O
M
M
O O M ti
P- LO In
O
f-
M co
N
V O O
V f-
co
CN
ea 60 Q%
~
u
O tO
N
In
to
0 0 0 0
I
0 0 0
0
I
LO
l
l
I
O
LO
ti
ti
~
O
O
o
O
(V 0 0 0
0 0 0
0
O
N
0
a
r) 0 0
L
O
N
LQ r r
V
C)
0)
oo 0)
co
N
f~ L
'
N
1
O
6
)
U) 69 6
)
M
0000
0 0 0
O
O
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0
O
O
0 0
0 0 0 0
C7 0 0
O
O
N V
O V O O
O O O
O
IT
0) co
N 00 O M
V 00 00
O
0
~ V:
(O V f-
00
L
- N N
O
(O
V M
N
O M
r- N O 1-
O 00 00
M M
O
L
(O
LID N
N V
M
N
00
O (o
J
Q
1
M
0
o
1
1
6
0
V V 0)
N
o
o
r
O
L
Y
I
I
l
l
I
I
I
~I
cn
cn
J
J
J
J
J
w
a
U) O
co
0
O
O
O
-I
~
l
LO N M O
I
I
I
N V N
V
1
O- O V
f- 00 N O
M w M
N
m
co r
w
a
j
~
a
L o
Z
0
N
Z
I~
o IC-
4-M
Q
(
rj
0 U)
C0
U)
°
p
LO Cl)
O >
_
Z
W
~
O O
N
O
2
W
NNa
O
N j
o
s
w
>
N N
c c
(u
N
-a
v
O
j
00
~
o0
o
' O
0 0
> c
N
a
0
i
a
`
o
N
0
d
Y Q
a Q o
O
3
°0y
a
N O
Pa
O
(p (n (n N N
U) O V
O P
C
U
z
L L
N -Z E `
` cm N
C
J
, ami
w ca
N
~
-t
_
O M
C
_
T
p
N
2 (
n
U Z
H
*k
o
i
>
>
>
>
>
> U> >
U U
U U U
D
o b W
Z Z Z Z .
~ Z Z Z
m l
L
;t4
C7
~ ~
co E2 0
HH~
u
O
O O O
an`.a
a~
w
EXHIBIT PAGE ~.S._
o
o
a
o
0
z
o
f of
o
f
of
o
f
p
0
0
0
0
0
F=
O
o
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
I'
N
N
N
O
O
H
-
O
O
In
O
O
O
O
ti
-q'
co
w
N
N
LO
O
co
Cl)
M
O
r
O
0 0 0 0
f
I
I
f
0
f
z
O
O
o
lo
o
v
4.
Q
H
a
'Q
U
0 0 0 0
O
o
0
0
0
0
O
Q
O
O
'It
N
N
U
O
o
O
o
c-
Un
~
0
~
M
0
co
ti
q-
0
a
N
N
LO
O
co
M
te
M
6')
O
r
9
Q
L6
6
i
Z
0
0
I
F3
U~
L Q
U LL
Id,
00
oof f
0
0
C)
0
O
O
O
I
N
~
O
(6
C~
(6
10
-
LO
N
O
N
LO
N
co
00
C
O
co
N
m
ti
~
M
O
In
09~
6q
of of
00 O
O O O
O N
Oo Oo co
ao N w
M O O
O
b9
r
= w z N L
y o 0 ~0 0
r m f0 O _N
Y m
~ N ~ ~ N c~ii co
J j m J (6
nZwzzo~
c c
11 -
O ~ N M ~
b rn r
* 4t
t5 t t5 t
N N N N N N N
o 'o 'o 'o 'o 'o 'o
LQ- (LCLII
Z
O
C
H =
~ Y
J W
O a
U
0
Z
U)
X
w
0
0
N
00
C~
N
•V O
N
c 0
Uz
U ~
~ o
o v ~
o p3
~dw
EXHIBIT- PAGE I L
Z
oa
o
00
OI MI
CD
I C)
Ln co
O
O
0 0
0.
O
R)
C04
O
0
O O
CD CD
CD
N
r-
ol
o
N
J
O
O O
m
d
(17
N
M
O
ti Ln
LQ
w
r
LO
'IT r
N
>
V)
69
6s to
r
61)
OI
t {
I
o 0
0 l
o f ~I
O
rI
O
O O
F-
11
0
°
LO
o
Q 4
O O
N Lp
O
I-
h-
M r
w
r
c
r
Q
6
)
69
'U
i
0 0
Cl 0
O
0
00
0 o
O
O
'
O
b
U
J
O LO
CEO N
O
O
O O
~ LO
LO
O
Z
N 60
Ln
V r
V'
Q
r
10
~
U
Z
O O
O
O
O
U
O Ln
O
O O
Z'
Q
N r
O
O
O
O O
O O
O O
Z
Ln
I~ M
fi
N
v
c
w
6q
6
)
w
Z
JI JI
i~I
~I QI
~
-
cn
}
ci
O
NI
rl Lo1
_
J
l
OI C)
N LO
F-
M r
U
Z z
r
- -
O
d
Z
a
O
0
<
O
a
Q
F-
U
H
W
W
Z
Z
w
2
W
Z
fi
L
0
F-
>
w
j
L
o
L
o
Q
Q v
-
w
w
o
LL
}
o
a
2
W
o0
^I
V
J
Z
D U)
Z
W
Q
t
J
O
2
ui
W
Q
~a
ti N
Q
=
w
W
o
w
W
Q
W
w
z
o
d a
CL
LL
C.)
W
U)
O
of
Q
Q
Q
• ~
w
W
U
o
a
Z
N
o
c o
~
w
Q
;2t uo
~
~
-
?
Z
Z
w
v z
[
L1
•
a)
a)
U
U
H
' y
Z
~
uj
L L
7
m
=p tea/)
7 LL
_j
Q
~
~
/Z
/
/ l1
U)
Q
O
It
CD
75 -0
• V
P
W
cc
O
Q
w O
~
W
Q
° ~2
~
CJ ,tp
Q
C.0 C14
0
- -
m
0
10
~
'
U)
a-
EXHIBIT C - PAGE
C) rl 0
o ~ O o
O CO LO O
O t~ O O
O O O
~ t~ O O
,:,"I O O
N ~ O O
I~ O ~ N
;19 09
09
O co O C O
I Ci
OI
t~91 JC"'4O tOflI
M C,
r,_ 0
l
N
,
,
CD m
LO 00 0 0
r NI V• 6~i M
O
W
r
N
W
I
to
N
r
U
Q
O O O
°
O
°
O
O
°O C
'
O
V
) C)
N LO U
N O
a
O
0
I~ ~ O
N
~
cfl
to
g±
z
o
Z
_
LL
°~n~
°O
°
w
F-
i~1 i»I inl
j
~
o
N
7
fn
O
W
U-1 U-1 U-1
J J J
wl
J
pp~~
~
Kd
J
H
O O C
V) 0
h
I
-1
z
N o
o V
U
M
w
a
~
J
~
H
fi
Q
o
p
~
j~
W
U
R
~
J
Q
W
C
U
O
(ri
O
U
Do
LL
}
O
O
U
42
`r
•
J
U
Y
V ~
CL
LL.
O O
z
4
W
c
C, W
U U
0
W
C C
z
^
a
Z
W
~i z
O
X
W
'r
j
LL LL
~
c
M M -
l
o
O
O
O
O
Lo
N
M
W
Q
z
z
D
0
W
J
0
H
M
10
O
0
N
W
Q N
•v O
N
°z
U
U
T o
°o
1,4
~dw
EXHIBIT ~ PAGE
~z
o 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
C,
I
C,
O
0
00
00
0
O
0 0
O O
O O
Cl
O
O
N
M
0.
O O
O O
O O
O
O
O
04
N
C; C;
6 C=i
ci
C;
C;
`
N
N
°
°
°
°
°
°
°
°
N
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0 0
0 0
0 0
O
C)
LU
C) LO
C) U)
C) U')
0
LO
LO i~
LO
LO
co
O
r
r
r
Z
I I
I I
I I
Q
OO
OO
CD O
O
I
E-
tL
OO
OO
OO
O
O
J
U
b
O
o
0
N
co)
a0 ,
. fp
N h
t-
OO
o0
OO
O
o
y
O O
o o
O O
o
O
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 00
0
0
0
0
0
0
J
Q
O O
o u>
O O
O O
O
O
H
r-
o u>
LO r-
o LO
LO r`
0
cfl
LO
1--
0
69
co
ON
VIN
0
0
0
0
0
0
°
o
0
0 0
0
0
o
Z
0
o
o 0
0
0
0
Q
0 0
O
0
0
0
L
r>
J
O O
o 0
0 0
C) CD
C) 0
0 C)
M
M U)
M
Z
^
LO
Q
F~-
l
I
l
I
l
I
I
w
Q
w
Q
w
Q
J
U)
Y
x
>
U'>I t-1
Unl -I
Unl -I
o
<
F-
p
+
I
d
Z
N
z
Y
Q
a
it
V;
Y
C O
o U
y
c O
o U
-~C
"
C O
o U
-FD
-FD
C:
o
5E
o
~E
o
.3E
o
-C
Q o
o
t
Q o
O
c>
Q o
~o
>
~o
a>
o
a
J ❑
J ❑
J ❑
Z
Z
Z
0
W
W
LL
Y
d
If-<4
0
0
N
N
o 14~
o
•J O
N
O O
~z
U ~
a ~
a
EXHIBIT _ PAGE 0
Figure 1.5 - Northwest Area Conceptual Facility Plan
1
--A -
~
F
1 _
w°X ?
1 -
_
Mk k .n.L A. r
~
YA(LL AriT4L~-__~.~-,.-y _
e
'
NY AREA UGB 1WXPANS1C}N
11
I
-
4L.
Mff AWA Gt1X7Lf' UAt U71.M ►i qmq ft AN
I
Source: ON of Redmond Public Works Department
July 2006 15
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
LXHIBIT -E- PAGE 2-0
Water and Wastewater Master Plan updates are already programmed in the 2005 Water and
Wastewater C[Ps. Master Plan updates are scheduled for Phase II (2006-2010), Phase III (2011-
2015), and Phase IV (2016-2020).
The City proposes to adopt the following findings in the Public Facilities and Services Technical
Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Addendum 8) in order to reflect changes being made in other
supporting documents.
Findings:
Seuer and Water
1. The city's sezeer and zettter plans are ada7mte to aanrrmxdate the urban area projected population to 2015.
2. A Public Facility Plan zees adopted by the City in 1987. It is a support doal Trent to the Radrwud Urban A ma
CaWmbozsiw Plan
3. The 1987 Public Facility Plan is based on an Urban Grazeth Bourulary population of 24,000 persons.
Houezer, this update qfthe 1987 Periodic Reziewp*ts a 37, 686 population for the Ra&bnd Urban Grcrraxh
Boundary by the year 2020. Baause of e ra v rapid growth in the Reazrrnnd UGB as well as a rnadur of
associated factors fonds for the dezeloprrent of a ryw public facilities plan has bfn hdgi d by the City of
R"raid Public Works Departnm for fiscal year 1998-1999.
4. The Water and Wastezoter Master Plan upate d those seaiorls of the Public Facility Plan aril zeuss adoptal by
the City in 1995.
5. Reusions to the Water and Wastemter sazions of the Public Facility Plan were made in 2006 to aawrmxxdate
population p74ect d for 2025. Urban area population is prgaAd to be 45,724 in 2025,
6. TbJ"cal rEmorandurrs that pmude the basis for these rezsiorrs are auad)ad as Exhibit D and Exhibit E to
the 2006 Con prehmzw Plan A nvzb vrl UGB Expansion
7 The tin ing and location q f ocpanlad sezeer and voter facilities are factors uhicb direct urban ecpargim
8. The city has adopted a sewer and neater lire octerzsion poluy to facilitate prnper growth densities and Inr
amstnaion
9. There are areas within the Urbrin Growth Boundary ubi& are not sme d by sewer and/or neater systerra but are
induded in the plans to aawmxxlate the prnjaxad population to the )par 2015.
10. Pnwte independent utility pmuckn can curate serious rmnag mm prablon and can mpede the logical and
aunaywd eetension q f city sewer and voter serzices.
11. Of the apprnxinnztely 4,600 - 4,700 city neater sercices only 173 are not nvereed Wbm ourxnbrip cbargs on
any 6f these 173 properties catering will by required
July 2006 16
N
C."
a
a.
V
a~
z c) ~o
o
h ~
O
b O
a) N
o ~ a
v o O p
'C
fd
2
0
N Y
>~"'v~ ~O
~ ~ Y
O•~ d S
a
Y
Y m N a
O •o O
~y~ U
C3
C ~
"°o
Y M N
O ~
O
a~
KT y N
o o ~
o 0 .
b
'+.oW
0 C)
a~
EXHIBIT C PAGE 2'L--
o000
000
Z
v O v 0
UD LO to
D
sr 070
NNN
H
'0
~ r
a
0 0 0 0
o o O O
O O O
o 0 0
W
ao OOO
OOO
N
0 ~
r ~ f
~ 0 0
`n
n
'
rncoMn
O N O M
n~o
(A d)
v n
N
ooio
oi
o
o
o
~
mOCflO
~
~
~
000
p
~ LO
r r r
O
o
o
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
N O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
~
O
N
N
0 0 0 0
O O O
0 0
0
o
O
O
O
00
0
0
0
0
0
O V
O
O
O
O
O
N a0
O
W
aD
aD
N
~
M
N
W
W
a
0
CC.
N
O
n
M
M
M N
°ov °o• °ov o ~°o. °ov D°o;
0
OI
O
O O
0 0
O M
O r
69
o~
0
O
0 0
O N
O
O
O
O
M
O O
ocq
O CD
O
~ CD
W
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
i CO JI UI JI JI JI N
M O 0 O O O O .-1
N N fMD V M C1D M
r a0 N o r NI
O
M
U
a
~LL
W
Q O
z °
o
z w
N N
3
0 3 > > ~ c v
az ~ ~ ~aQ~ ~ L) o
w ~o in U) a) a) o U) c v o
L L L E 2
d j L C j C j ° c~i 2 U O
w O Q U
Q 8 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
oio ololo~o~o
m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ CD 0000000 O
N 0000000 ~f
N CD O O O N O N N ~
v~noo~u~co~nr v
M CA O O~~ ~ r r N
M CA 0 0 N O r V' ~ Q1
r a0 N N st O~~ O r
ao
6e
o~o~o~o~o~o~o~
0 o O O o o O
a a
°o
cn U
O
❑ ❑
OO
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N V 0 0 0 N O N N N
r N 0 0 In CD to r
ocDOOVV.-nom m
m 0 0 0 N O r O
N N V O LD Q) It
O m N
L +ti w Fn
o r L Z
cQ•ma'LC~n w
m O E O N
y (D (D W
of C ~
O c6NO~0
0 O a
a1 O
C iC F-
U C H J~ LL
„mac ~J LL
WWO~ o
J
O f~ oO ~ r r Q
4k~kik### ~O
vi 2i 2i 2i F..
N a) ? L ? m
a M M a a a U
a
t`
0
a
N
N
° o
V O
N
° rZ°.
U
U
~ O
N ~ L
~~W
,iBIT PAGE 2-7--_
a
Q
U
J
U
4
LL
N
N
tD
N
a
to
z
O
Q
O
0
OI
O
N
N
o ?o o°
o
O py 0cd r,
. o W o vv,
Z (A Cd °o, p u A, c~
+ fn
bn O K,
4a :s a ~
Lr~
0 ~16%~ o~
0 74
+
uo 3Y o
~ op N N ;,y~
O N 00 I O 1--~ ~
O ' N LR O
4-1 ~ -0 0 + e
O O , cu
az 4C2 a~
4 aA
14. 0 , Q)
a bn a N H -d a
0 0 4 4
.0 CZ v
cd ~ wo0~ aonUUo a Qln•0 p o O
a.
0. o ~Z
rl o~1 o 0 -0 Q., o
Lr O 11-, .o O o Ol
N c~ V4-1
)i N
o A.orn O Y~ 00
° o cd
a~
O p N u o p c. ON
O a -
42 d v 073 O
c
73 o `moo Q~
N
J., 1111 o
z v~ °ua o
Y O °O O a 5 f_ o
W N ~p+ J "cG~d cV
ots. a 00
i Q Z o `q U Ca bn ~ o u V)
i p«~~
0 "-s
d LL O 0 N• rtii o N+ V
z
O
> W (3 a "Cj 4 " o 6D
.1~ a~ N
C's u
L V J; 5 O py a) c y ~-'q N y U 04
C U) a y~ O Cl, u v c V
c~ 0
C7 a~ y au P-4 (u c a> o D, o a~ -o e
C w 0 fW N M 4 Lri ~ ~ d W
c~(I IIBIT PAGE 2-3
Figure 1.6 - Draft Transportation System Plan (TSP) Map
~'.c n xo-rrm
t 'E }
1
^Y
h ~
ti
Source: City of Redmond
n3
July 2006 19
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 0
EXHIBIT r, _ PAGE --LV--
V. CONFORMANCE WITH STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS
A. FOR PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT
The following narrative provides responses and findings in support of the proposed UGB
amendment of 2,299 acres, illustrated in Figure 1.1.
Goal 1.• Citizen Involvement
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to he
involved in all phases of the planning process.
Response: A series of public outreach efforts have been involved in the proposed map
amendment, including those related to developing Redmond's Urban Reserve Area (URA),
preparing the 2025 Comprehensive Plan Update, and reviewing the proposed map amendment.
ECONorthwest was contracted by the City of Redmond and Deschutes County as part of the
Redmond URA project to conduct a survey of people's attitudes and ideas for the way Redmond
should grow over the next 20 years. The survey was given to almost 1,000 residents and was
completed by about 250 of them, in November and December 2001.
Additionally, the URA project involved over 12 public hearings and work sessions with the public
and frequent meetings with an Urban Reserve Stakeholder Group over an 18 month time period.
More than 1,800 notices were mailed to affected property owners. After nearly a year of receiving
testimony, both written and oral, the Redmond City Council unanimously recommended to the
Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners that 5,664 acres of land under county
jurisdiction be designated URA, more land than was initially under consideration by the City and
County. After meeting with County Commissioners, City Council sent out notice to owners of
property included in the revised and expanded URA proposal. The City Council held a second
public hearing on June 14, 2005 at the Redmond Fire Hall, specifically to receive the testimony of
the notified landowners. County Commissioners reviewed the URA proposal and findings (Exhibit
J) at a public hearing on August 23, 2005. The Board of Commissioners adopted the URA as an
amendment to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan on September 7, 2005, and the URA
went into effect on December 12, 2005.
The foundation for these map amendments was laid as part of the 2025 Comprehensive Plan
Update. The plan update project involved two public workshops, three advisory committee
meetings, and one City Council/Planning Commission work session. The first public workshop was
held March 19, 2005 at Eagle Crest. The meeting introduced the project to interested members of
the public, and gave an overview of Redmond's planning history, urban land needs, and public
facilities status as well as of basic urban design principles that were then used in a series of table
exercises. Products of this workshop included a small sample of completed community
development surveys, summaries of what participants liked about Redmond and what they would
change, and suggestions for locations of neighborhood centers that would be dispersed around the
community, not solely focused along Highway 97 and Highway 126. The second public workshop
was held on April 20, 2005 at the Deschutes County Fairgrounds. This workshop reviewed the
results of the first workshop, provided updates about technical studies, and further explored design
concepts for neighborhood centers that were identified in the first workshop.
July 2006 20
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
LAHIBIT _ PAGE
The document Visio4rtg&4rondwas the culmination of the workshops. As explained in its opening
lines: "This document includes visual representations and policy statements for guiding urban
growth and development in the greater Redmond area through the year 2050."
The City next held a series of meetings explaining options for expanding the urban growth boundary
(UGB) and managing land added to the boundary. Those meetings occurred in 2006 on January 9,
January 23, February 21, and March 10. On March 21, the Planning Commission held a public work
session about the proposed amendments to the plan and on April 4, the Planning Commission and
City Council held a joint meeting and approved a proposed UGB amendment. Details of these
meetings and presentation materials are available on the city's Community Development
Department web page at: http://www.ci.redmond.or.us/Departments/Community_Development/.
The Redmond City Council and Planning Commission scheduled and held a series of workshops on
the proposed UGB amendment and specifically invited interested citizens, property owners and
developers to participate in the process of establishing the new UGB. These workshops were very
well attended and several hundred people attended. The dates of the workshops were: January 9,
2006; January 23, 2006; February 21, 2006; March 10, 2006 (Developer's meeting); April 4, 2006 and
the Deschutes County Planning Commission and the City Planning Commission held their own
workshop on May 25, 2006. The Redmond Planning Division had received over 80 letters and e-
mails by the time the Planning Commissions held their joint public hearing.
City planning staff scheduled two community meetings in the evening to invite public comments on
the UGB amendment and they also made presentations to other civic organizations such as the
Rotary Club at luncheon meetings.
The other public involvement efforts for this proposed map amendment were structured to meet
the notice and hearing requirements for legislative actions in Article II (Land Use Procedures) of the
Redmond Development Code (RDC Sections 8.1100 to 8.1125) and Deschutes County Code, Title
22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance, Chapter 22.12 - Legislative Procedures.
The following public hearings were held:
■ Joint County and City Planning Commission public hearings on June 8 and June 22, 2006.
■ Joint Redmond City Council and Deschutes County Board of Commissioners public hearing
held on July 11, 2006.
The hearings were noticed in local newspapers and the City mailed notices to all property owners
located in the UHA west of State Highway 97 which exceeded the Measure 56 requirements. This
notice was supplemented by notice and project information on the County's website with a link on
the City's website. Additionally, the City mailed individual notice of the joint City Council / Board
of County Commissioners hearing to all parties who attended the joint Planning Commission
hearing or who submitted written testimony into the Commission's record.
Two parcels have been added to the proposed UGB expansion area following the last hearing based
on property owner requests. Refered to as the Elliott property (taxlot 1413330001000) and the
Russell property (taxlot 1513290001200), adding these properties can be characterized as a matter of
July 2006 21
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT L PAGE
"housekeeping" since the existing or proposed UGB bisects these lots and the request is that the lots
be entirely included.' No additional notice or public process is necessary for thiese additions.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond engaged citizens in a process that allowed citizen participation for
establishing Urban Reserve Areas.
2. The City of Redmond engaged citizens in a visioning process that resulted in the development of
an urban form concept.
I The City of Redmond held hearings and engaged citizens in discussions about alternative UGB
amendments to address identified residential land needs and to amend the comprehensive plan
to manage land brought into the boundary.
4. The City of Redmond held public meetings, workshops, and hearings and provided
opportunities for citizens to comment on proposals to amend the comprehensive plan.
5. The City of Redmond has taken steps to inform the public in general and affected property
owners in particular about the public hearing process. The Guy's efforts to involve citizens,
property owners, developers and any other interested persons far exceeds the minimum
requirements of state law and the local ordinances.
6. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County considered oral and written citizen testimony prior
to adopting amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
7. The City and County both established web sites to post information about upcoming meetings
and to provide detailed information about meetings that had been held. Citizens were
encouraged to regularly visit these sites to receive current information provided by the Redmond
Planning Division and to preview upcoming meetings.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for citizen involvement per Statewide
Land Use Planning Goal 1.
Goal 2.• Land Use Planning
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions
and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions
and actions.
Response: Establishing an Urban Reserve Area (URA) for Redmond and updating the City's
Comprehensive Plan in 2005 set the stage for the proposed map amendment. The proposed
amendment is supported by proposed text amendments that update existing policies and procedures
for managing land in Redmond and managing the process for adding land to the City's UGB.
The proposed text amendments include policies that establish plan designations for all land in the
UGB, including a new Urban Holding Area (LJHA) plan designation for areas brought into the UGB
for which land use planning has not been completed. Urbanization policies include master planning
provisions that must be followed to complete the land use planning process for Urban Holding
areas and Great Neighborhood planning principles to create diverse, mixed-use neighborhoods with
a variety of transportation and housing options in close proximity to places where Redmond
residents will work and recreate. There also is a policy allowing small parcels (less than 10 acres)
designated Urban Holding Area to obtain urban zoning and development approval.
' Physically separate from the proposed UGB expansion area, separate findings are provided for the Russell
property later in this report (Section Q.
July 2006 22
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 a€
L/,~iiid!T _ PAGE
Urbanization policies also make reference to a Rahrnnd Urban Agra Frarrrwk Plan, which is a
concept planning document that provides general guidance for the anticipated urban form for
unplanned areas in the UGB and for urban reserve areas. The Rabm& Urban Ama Franmornk Plan is
an urban design concept that was developed for land that is designated in the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan as Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA) and for unincorporated areas in the
Redmond UGB that are designated Urban Holding Area. The first Frarrrwk Plan was developed
through a public visioning and urban planning process associated with the 2006 expansion of
Redmond's Urban Growth Boundary. The Plan is appended to this report as Exhibit L. The
Frar rumk Plan is not an adopted element of the Redmond Comprehensive Land Use Plan, although
it is referenced in the Comprehensive Plan.
The UHA, Comprehensive Plan update, and this proposed map amendment are based on the
following technical studies that have been prepared by the City or by firms contracted by the City.
■ Preliminary urbanization and public facility studies conducted by OTAK, 2003-2004
■ Deschutes County Coordinated Population Forecast, Deschutes County, 2004
■ Urban Reserve Findings, OTAK, August 23, 2005 (Exhibit J)
■ City of Rind Urbanization Study, ECONorthwest and Angelo Eaton & Associates (AEA),
2005 (Exhibit C)
■ Water and Sewer Technical Memorandum, City of Redmond Public Works, 2006 (Exhibit D
and Exhibit E)
■ Conceptual Facility Plan, City of Redmond, May 2006 (Exhibit F)
■ Draft Transportation System Plan (TSP) Map, City of Redmond, May 2006 (Exhibit G)
• Conceptual Urban Reserw A ma and NW A ma Sewer and Water Study, David Evans & Associates,
2005 (Exhibit I)
■ Conceptual Transportation Circulation System Map for Urban Reserve Areas, David Evans
& Associates PEA), 2005
■ VisioningR6w~ AEA, 2005 (Exhibit K)
■ Redmond Urban Growth Boundary Workshops, City of Redmond, 2005-2006
■ Creating Great Neighborhoods, Neighborhood Planning Workshops, City of Redmond,
2006
■ Redmond Urban Area Framework Plan, SERA Architects and AEA, 2006 (Exhibit L)
In particular, the results of housing and employment projections prepared by ECONorthwest in the
2005 Raannd Urbanization Study provide the foundation for the size of the proposed UGB expansion
area. The public facility studies, public workshops, and concept plans inform the location and
character of the UGB expansion area. This is further discussed in the responses and findings for
Goals 9, 10, 11, 12, and 142.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond established a fact-based analysis of future urban land needs, and concepts
for delivering public facilities and transportation services to future urban lands.
2 One parcel added to the proposed UGB map amendment area in July 2006 has been included for needs other than
housing and employment. The Elliott parcel (taxlot 1413330001000, 36 total acres) was bisected by an earlier
proposed UGB amendment, leaving 18 acres of the lot outside the UGB. Consolidating the lot will allow the whole
lot to be included in the UGB expansion. Further, the parcel is among land in the northern portion of the proposed
UGB expansion area that lies within Dry Canyon. This land is intended to be designated as open space park reserve
(OSPR) to help serve the open space and recreation needs of the UGB expansion areas.
July 2006 23
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT _ PAGE
2. The City of Redmond prepared a technical analysis for expanding the urban growth area
primarily based on the logical extension of urban services, particularly sewer and transportation
services.
3. The City of Redmond modified the factual basis in the Comprehensive Plan to be consistent
with coordinated population forecasts and area employment forecasts.
4. The City of Redmond amended its Land Use Planning policies to list Comprehensive Plan Map
designations and corresponding city and county zoning districts that are compatible with the
plan designations.
5. The City of Redmond revised its Urbanization policies to include urban growth management
procedures for adding land to the UGB and for completing land use planning for all properties
in the UGB prior to development approval.
Conclusion: The City and County have complied with state requirements for land use planning per
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 2.
Goal9 Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces.
Response: The expansion of Redmond's UGB is intended to include a 20-year supply of land to
meet housing and economic development needs. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have
coordinated efforts to establish an Urban Reserve Area (URA) for Redmond that provides a 50-year
supply of land from which UGB expansions are drawn. In September 2005, 5,664 acres were
designated for the URA, and the proposed map amendment is part of the URA.
The timing of urban expansion may necessitate bringing land into the UGB before all land use
planning is complete for the properties being brought into the UGB. When this occurs, Redmond
Urbanization Policy 10 requires that the property be designated Urban Holding Area (UHA) on the
Comprehensive Plan Map. Land designated UHA is subject to rural zoning and uses that are
consistent with their existing use.
Before land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be designated for urban uses and
zoned for development, it must either:
1. Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
2. Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
Urbanization Policy 12.d requires that an applicant's master plan include an inventory of significant
resources and measures for protecting resource sites consistent with the city's Goal 5 resource
protection program. Urbanization Policy 18.d requires that properties of less than 10 acres that
secure urban planning approval through a site development approval process to demonstrate that
Goal 5 resources are identified and managed according the Redmond's adopted Goal 5 resource
management program. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of Redmond
Development Code also requires applicants to identify significant resource sites, particularly
irrigation canals and significant natural features (RDC 8.3025.2)
July 2006 24
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE
The City of Redmond's Comprehensive Plan addresses Goal 5 resources in Chapter 5, the Open
Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources Element. The chapter specifically
addresses the Redmond Dry Canyon, the Redmond Caves, and canals. Of these three resources,
canals and parts of Dry Canyon are found within and adjacent to the boundaries of the proposed
UGB expansion area. In particular, land in the northern section of the proposed expansion area lies
within Dry Canyon, and is intended for designation as open space and park reserve (OSPR), a
category of land which had not been provided for in the expansion recommendation made by the
Ra mid Urla mzation Report (Table 6-7, Exhibit C). Parts of three canals are found within the
proposed expansion area in the following general locations.
■ Lateral "CC" Canal in the northwest portion of the proposed UGB expansion area, which
runs generally along Northwest Way;
■ Pilot Butte Canal in the south between South Canal Boulevard and Highway 97; and
■ Lateral "B" Canal in the south that travels through the future high school site west of South
Canal Boulevard.
Technical studies conducted by OTAK relating to the establishment of the Redmond URA and
background information that are included in the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan show that
there is currently only one significant Goal 5 resource that Deschutes County has identified in the
URA3, and this site is not located within the proposed UGB expansion area. However, there may be
scenic views and potential open space areas that would not be deemed significant in a rural setting
but would be considered significant in an urban setting. Consequently, the city and county have
agreed, as a matter of policy, to require that master planning inventory potentially significant
resources rather than relying on the existing county inventory.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond's Comprehensive Plan addresses Goal 5 resources in Chapter 5, the Open
Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources Element. The chapter specifically
addresses the Redmond Dry Canyon, the Redmond Caves, and canals. Of these three resources,
canals and parts of Dry Canyon are found within and adjacent to the boundaries of the proposed
UGB expansion area.
2. A fragmented lot (taxlot 1413330001000) is being consolidated, and this and other land within
Dry Canyon in the northern portion of the proposed UGB expansion area is intended to
provide for an open space park reserve (OSPR) not accounted for in UGB recommendations
made in the 2005 Rakwnd Urbar&ation Study:
3. There are no Goal 5 resources identified within the proposed UGB expansion area in Deschutes
County's existing inventory.
4. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted an Urban Holding Area (UHA) plan
designation for land added to the UGB that has not completed land use planning.
5. The City has adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated Urban Holding to
analyze air, water and land quality impacts as a condition for completing land use planning prior
s Urban Reserve Area findings presented at the Joint Planning Commission Public Hearing (Feburary 7, 2005)
idenfied one inventoried Goal 5 significant resource property in the proposed urban reserves. The site, known as
the Negus Land Fill, is designated Surface Mining (SM) and is located in an eastern portion (E-1) of the proposed
urban reserves. The site has been mined for fill material and has served as a primary landfill for northern Descutes
County. Ths site was identified as a Goal 5 resource because it has approximately 2 million cubic yeards of fill
material, which is about 26% of the total fill material in the county.
July 2006 25
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT PAGE
to obtaining approval for urban development. The County has adopted the City's
Comprehensive Plan by reference as to areas outside the City.
6. Urbanization Policies 12.d and 18.d require applicants seeking land use approval for urban
development to inventory and manage significant open space, scenic and historic areas, and
natural resources in accordance with the city's acknowledged Goal 5 resource protection
program.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for open space, scenic and historic
areas, and natural resources per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 5.
Goal 6Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.
Response: The expansion of Redmond's UGB is intended to include a 20-year supply of land to
meet housing and economic development needs. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have
coordinated efforts to establish a URA for Redmond that provides a 50-year supply of land from
which UGB expansions are drawn. In September 2005, 5,664 acres were designated for the URA,
and the proposed map amendment is part of the URA.
The timing of urban expansion may necessitate bringing land into the UGB before all land use
planning is complete for the properties being brought into the UGB. When this occurs, Redmond
Urbanization Policy 10 requires that the property be designated Urban Holding Area (UHA) on the
Comprehensive Plan Map. Land designated UHA is subject to rural zoning and uses that is
consistent with their existing use.
Before land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be designated for urban uses and
zoned for development, it must either:
1. Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
2. Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that applicants demonstrate the master plan or development project can meet
requirements for complying with Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources with special emphasis
placed on storm water management. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of
Redmond Development Code also requires applicants to identify significant impacts related to air,
water or land resources through special studies and investigations (RDC 8.3030).
Technical studies conducted by OTAK relating to the establishment of the Redmond URA and
background information that is included in the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan show that
there are no natural surface water features in the URA. Canals found in the area are not designated
as resources of concern for water quality.4 Redmond is not located in a federally designated air
4 The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan (Water Resources, Section 23.112) addresses irrigation canals in
terms of protecting and improving the efficiency of water supply. The Water Resources Element does not address
the canals as a water quality issue or Goal 6 resource.
July 2006 26
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE
quality management area.5 There are no federal or state designated hazardous waste sites in the
designated urban reserve areas.6 Of Environmental Cleanup Sites reported on Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality's website, there were no sites identified in the proposed UGB expansion
area or on land adjacent to it.7 The City of Redmond has developed a groundwater protection
program to minimize adverse impacts from urban development on groundwater resources,
particularly from the infiltration of stormwater runoff into the ground and is cooperating with other
jurisdictions in Central Oregon to develop a set of uniform standards for managing stormwater.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted an Urban Holding Area (UHA) plan
designation for land added to the UGB that has not completed land use planning.
2. The City has adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated Urban Holding to
analyze air, water and land quality impacts as a condition for completing land use planning prior
to obtaining approval for urban development. The County has adopted the City's
Comprehensive Plan by reference as to areas outside the City.
3. There are no identified air, water, or land resources of concern in the Redmond URA.
4. The City of Redmond has developed urban storm water management regulations to protect
ground water resources from potential sources of contamination.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for air, water
and land resources per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 6.
Goal 7Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
To protect people and property from natural hazards.
Response: City and County background maps do not identify land in Redmond's URA, including
land that is part of this proposed map amendment, as subject to natural disasters or hazards.
Redmond Urbanization Policy 10 requires that rural lands added to the UGB before completing land
use planning be designated Urban Holding Area (UHA) on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Before
land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be designated for urban uses and zoned
for development, it must either:
1. Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
2. Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through
the special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that applicants demonstrate the subject properties can meet requirements for
complying with Goal 7, Natural Hazards. Urbanization Policy 12g requires master plans to address
natural hazards. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of Redmond Development
Code also requires applicants to identify hazardous conditions through special studies and
investigations (RDC 8.3030).
5 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas in Oregon as reported on the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) website: http://www.deg.state.or.us/aq/agplanningjindex.htm#control
6 No listings for Deschutes County in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) database (http://www.gpa. og v/sgperfun(l/sites/siteinfo htm)
Oregon DEQ Environmental Cleanup Site Information (ECSI) database, April 28, 2006
July 2006 27
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE 3 2_-
Findings:
1. City and County background maps do not identify any Goal 7 hazards within the proposed
UGB expansion area.
2. The City of Redmond has adopted an Urban Holding plan designation for land added to the
UGB that has not completed land use planning. The County has adopted the City's
Comprehensive Plan by reference for areas outside the City.
3. The City has adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated Urban Holding to
identify areas subject to natural hazards prior to obtaining approval for urban development.
4. The City of Redmond has requirements in its Development Code to disclose hazard areas
through its site and design review regulations (RDC 8.3030).
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for natural
hazards per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 7.
Goal 8 Recreational Need
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where
appropriate, to provide for the siting ofnecessary recreational facilities including destination
resorts.
Response: Redmond's existing Comprehensive Parks Master Plan calls for 10 acres of park land
for every 1,000 residents.8 A Systems Development Charge (SDQ for parks is assessed as part of
development in Redmond - based on adopted charges and an approved methodology' - so that
eventual development in the proposed UGB expansion areas will help pay for the development of
more parks as needed. Currently, the Redmond Dry Canyon serves as the largest and popular
recreation and open space closest to and within the UGB expansion proposed in this map
amendment. There are no park sites currently identified in the Parks Master Plan for the URA. The
city has budgeted funding to update the Parks Master Plan and identify locations in areas being
added to the UGB that need park facilities.
The Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources Element of Redmond's
Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 5) establishes the policy that canals and the right-of-ways shall serve
as recreation linkages for bike paths, hiking and jogging trails throughout the urban area. There are
several canals in the proposed UGB expansion area
■ Lateral "G" Canal in the northwest portion, that runs generally along Northwest Way;
■ Pilot Butte Canal in the south between South Canal Boulevard and Highway 97; and
■ Lateral "B" Canal in the south that travels through the future high school site west of South
Canal Boulevard.
The proposed UGB expansion area provides some of the land needed for projected parks and
recreation.to The 2005 Rabnand Urbanization Study estimates that 280 additional acres of land is
needed for parks when expanding Redmond's UGB to accommodate the next 20 years of growth,
based on a standard of 10 acres per 1,000 residents. Land within Dry Canyon in the northern
8 As referred to in Chapter 6 of the Redmond Urbanization Study, prepared by ECONorthwest and Angelo Eaton &
Associates (2005)
9 City of Redmond Systems Development Charges - 2004 Update
to Examples of park land needs are given in this report in Table 1.4 (Table 6-7 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization
Study, Exhibit Q.
Jury 2006 28
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT --j5- PAGE 3.2 -
portion of the proposed UGB expansion can provide open space, open space reserves and
recreation opportunities. This land is intended to be zoned as open space park reserve (OSPR) once
annexed into the City.
Redmond Urbanization Policy 10 requires that rural lands added to the UGB in advance of
completing land use planning be designated Urban Holding Area (UHA) on the Comprehensive
Plan Map. Before land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be designated for
urban uses and zoned for development, it must either:
1. Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
2. Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through
the special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 16.
These policies require that applicants identify possible park sites for complying with Goal 8,
Recreation and with the city's park plan. Urbanization Policy 12e requires master plans to address
park and open space opportunities in the planning process.
Findings:
1. Redmond's existing Comprehensive Parks Master Plan establishes a standard of 10 acres of park
land for every 1,000 residents.
2. The current Parks Master Plan does not identify any park sites in the proposed expansion area.
However, funding has been budgeted for an update of the plan to be completed in 2007 and the
Framework Plan indicates that parks have to be provided in the UGB and Master Plans.
3. The Redmond Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 5) identifies canal rights-of-way as land for
recreational paths. Portions of Lateral Canal "C", Lateral Canal "B", and Pilot Butte Canal are
found in the proposed UGB expansion area. The Framework Plan identifies the BPA easement
as a possible trail system.
4. The 2005 Rabmnd Urbanization Study estimates the need for at least 280 acres of park land for the
next 20 years. Lands within Dry Canyon in the northern portion of the proposed expansion
area will meet part of the need for both open space and recreation land.
5. The City of Redmond has adopted an Urban Holding plan designation for land added to the
UGB that has not completed land use planning. The County has adopted the City's
Comprehensive Plan by reference as to areas outside the City.
6. The City and County have adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated Urban
Holding Area to identify park sites prior to obtaining approval for urban development.
7. The City has completed a Framework Plan that identifies areas in the proposed UHA that could
be potential park and recreation areas. The Framework Plan states that parks will be provided
throughout the growth area.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for park and recreational needs per
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 8.
Goal 9 Economic Development
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities
vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.
July 2006 29
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT^ PAGE
Response: The proposed UGB map amendment primarily addresses residential land needs, but
does include some land for commercial use, namely for Neighborhood Commercial Centers. The
2005 Ra brand Urfa m'zation Study concluded that Redmond has an overall surplus of employment
land, which the study defines as a combination of industrial, commercial, and public lands. Among
the individual categories of employment land, however, the city has a deficit of commercial and
public land and a surplus of industrial land (Table 1.1).tt Although there is a sufficient amount of
industrial land in Redmond's existing UGB to serve industrial employment projections for the next
20 years, the land is concentrated on the east side of Redmond and presents transportation
challenges for residents that are concentrated on the west side of the city. Barriers to east-west
transportation include Dry Canyon, Pilot Butte Canal, Highway 97, and the Northern Burlington
Santa Fe railroad.
ECONorthwest found in the 2005 study that the deficit of commercial land applied particularly to
land designated for neighborhood and visitor commercial uses, namely the G4 (Limited Service
Commercial) and G5 (Tourist Commercial) zones. The City has a relative surplus of land
designated for strip commercial uses (G 1 zone). This reflects the city's past as a small highwa)-
oriented town, but is no longer appropriate or sufficient for the growing city's needs. An
employment center or office park is needed west of Highway 97, possibly along Highway 126, a
natural and accessible corridor for employment development. The City of Redmond Framework
Plan proposes Neighborhood Centers that would include small scale commercial at the intersections
of Maple and Northwest, along Obsidian between 35th and Helmholtz, and along Elkhorn Avenue
between Canal and Helmholtz (Figure 1.7 and Exhibit L).
Table 1.1 - Buildable commercial and industrial land, employment capacity, and
employment forecast, Redmond 12
Vacant Employm Employm Capacity
Buildable ent ent Surplus
Plan Designation Code Acres Capacity Forecast (Deficit)
Strip Service Commercial C1 234.0 3,695
Central Business District Commercial
Special-Service Commercial
Limited Service Commercial
Tourist Commercial
Subtotal
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Subtotal
Public
C2
17.8
255
C3
22.4
350
C4
8.8
135
C5
13.2
210
296.1
4,645 6,559 (1,914)
M1
459.0
4,345
M2
343.3
3,258
802.3
7,602 3,733 3,869
na
1,424 (1,424)
Total 1,098.4 12,247 11,716 531
Source: ECONorthwest
Findings:
1. Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 9 and the administrative rule that implements Goal 9 (OAR
660-009) require cities to complete an economic opportunities analysis; a buildable lands
11 See Table 6-3 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q. The capacity analysis shows a deficit of
1,914 jobs on commercial lands. This figure may overstate the deficit; some commercial uses will probably locate
on lands designated for light industrial uses.
12 Table 6-3 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
July 2006 30
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE 3S
inventory (BLI), and establish policies for commercial and industrial development. The 2005
Rabnond Urbanization Study presents the results of an economic opportunities analysis and a BLI,
and the existing Chapter 9 (Economic Development) and proposed text amendments to Chapter
9 of Redmond's Comprehensive Plan establish economic development policies.
2. The BLI in the 2005 Rabnond Urban nation Study identified about 1,098 vacant buildable acres
designated for commercial and industrial uses within the Redmond UGB in 2004.13 At a
medium average annual growth rate of 3.5%, the study projected an increase in employment of
11,716 jobs between 2003 and 2025.14
3. The land needs for employment growth in Redmond have been estimated assuming both a
relatively high and low number of employees per acre. By 2025, Redmond will need between
672.9 and 1,337.5 gross buildable acres to accommodate new employment. Between 44% and
53% of this land will be needed for industrial uses, and between 39% and 46% for commercial,
and between 8% and 10% for public.15
4. The employment capacity analysis identified capacity for about 12,247 jobs on land designated
for commercial and industrial uses within the Redmond UGB in 2005, assuming 20 employees
per net acre for commercial land and 8 employees per net acres for industrial land. The
comparison of employment capacity for buildable commercial and industrial lands in the
Redmond UGB and the employment forecast shows an overall capacity surplus of 531 jobs. The
surplus, however, is primarily in land designated for industrial uses; the capacity analysis shows a
surplus of 3,869 jobs on industrial lands. The deficit of commercial land is equivalent to 1,914
jobs.l6
5. While the City has a surplus of commercial land, that land is not properly designated or located
to foster transportation-efficient development patterns. Redmond is still a relatively small city
and the land pattern in its existing comprehensive plan was appropriate for a city of its size. As
the City grows to 45,000 people in the next 20 years it will need to plan for two to three
additional retail and employment centers. The City of Redmond Framework Plan identifies sites
for these centers (Exhibit L).
6. Downtown remains the central location for government services such as City Hall, the
Deschutes County library, the Police Department, Deschutes County Community Development
Department, Deschutes County Sheriff's Office, Redmond Chamber of Commerce, REDAP,
and the Oregon State Employment Office.
7. According to economic analysis completed for the 2005 Ra mnd Urbanization Study, the bulk of
new jobs in Redmond come from small businesses.
8. "Businesses services" is the fastest economic growth area in Central Oregon.
9. Redmond is a State designated Enterprise Zone.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for economic
development per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 9.
13 Table 3-5 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
14 Table 5-12 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
15 Table 5-15 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
16 See Table 3-9 and 6-3 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q.
July 2006 31
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT_ PAGE - 3(,--
Goal 10 Housing
To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
Response: The primary purpose of the proposed UGB expansion and map amendment is to
provide sufficient land for housing. To identify housing needs consistent with the Goal 10
requirements, ECONorthwest performed a housing needs analysis based on local data and policies
that would account for single family attached housing options17, which ECONorthwest estimated
could comprise up to 10% of the housing need. The 2005 Rind Urbanization Report (Exhibit C)
identifies the following housing needs for the 2003-2025 planning period:
■ 11,628 new dwelling units between 2003 and 2025
■ 60%/40% tenure split (owners and renters)
■ 60%/40% single-family/multi-family mix
" The Oregon Department of Housing and Community Services models do not distinguish between single family
attached and detached housing.
July 2006 32
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PAGE_
Figure 1.7 - Draft UGB Expansion Framework Plan
DRAFT City of Redmond framework Plan
.l
i
a
0 /
~oµ
F-
LIS
f
x
y
b Y 2
r T?
F
Source: SERA Architects
July 2006 33
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT _C_ PAGE
■ Additional government assisted units
■ Senior housing
ECONorthwest found that 1,962 gross acres of residential land would be needed to accommodate
11,628 new dwelling units between 2003 and 2025 (Table 1.2). However, the analysis also found
that up to 4,699 housing units could be accommodated within the UGB, given residential zones are
built out with only residential, and not public facility, uses. This leaves 6,929 needed dwelling units
that cannot be accommodated in the existing UGB.
Table 1.2 - Buildable residential land, residential capacity, and needed dwelling units by
plan designation, Redmond"
Vacant
Capacity
Buildable
Housing
Needed
Surplus
Plan Designation
Code
Acres
Capacity
DU
(Deficit)
Limited Residential
R1
95.5
210
581
(371)
Limited Residential - Planned
R2
486.5
1,474
1,163
311
Limited Residential - Planned
R3
123.1
333
2,558
(2,225)
General Residential - Planned
R4
584.3
2,403
3,605
(1,201)
Urban High Density Residential
R5
101.4
279
3,721
(3,442)
Total
1,390.7
4,699
11,628
(6,929)
Source: ECONorthwest; 2005 Urbanization Study
As shown in Table 1.3, the analysis divided the needed housing units between the City's residential
zoning districts based on a residential mix of 60% single-family (including 10% manufactured) and
40% multi-family (including 13% condominiums/townhomes). Assuming densities between 6 and
Table 1.3 - Alternative forecast of needed housing units, Redmond, 2003-202519
Density
Net to
Gross
Density
(DU/net
Net Res.
Gross
Res. (
DU/gross
Housing Type
New DU
Percent
res ac)
Acres
Factor
Acres
res ac)
Single-family detached
5,814
50%
6.0
969.0
25%
1,291.9
4.5
Manufactured
1,163
10%
8.0
145.3
20%
181.7
6.4
Subtotal
6,977
60%
6.3
1,114.3
1,473.6
4.7
Multi-family
Condo/Townhomes
1,512
13%
9.0
168.0
15%
197.6
7.7
Multifamily
3,139
27%
12.0
261.6
10%
290.7
10.8
Subtotal
4,651
40%
10.8
429.6
488.3
9.5
Total
11,628
100%
7.5
1,543.9
1,961.9
5.9
Source: ECONorthwest; 2005 Urbanization Study
18 See Table 6-2 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C). Development capacity for commercial,
industrial, residential, park, open space, and public facility uses is presented separately in Table 3-9 (Exhibit C).
19 Table 4-17 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
July 2006 34
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
LXHIBIT S,_ PAGE
12 dwelling units per net acre depending on the zoning district, the analysis found that a UGB
expansion of at least 1,516 acres is needed to accommodate sufficient housing and associated public
facilities.
Table 1.4 - Estimated size of UGB expansion to accommodate growth between 2003 and
202520
capacity
Assumeu
Acres
Deficit
Density (EPA
Acres
Needed for
Total
(Employees
or DU/Gross
Needed for
Public
Acres
Plan Designation
Code
or DU)
Ac)
DU/Emp
Facilities
Needed
Airport
Airport
na
0.0
0.0
Strip Service Commercial
C1
0
20 emp/net ac
0.0
0.0
Central Business District Commercial
C2
0
20 emp/net ac
0.0
0.0
Special-Service Commercial
C3
0
20 emp/net ac
0.0
0.0
Limited Service Commercial
C4
1,200
20 emp/net ac
75.0
75.0
Tourist Commercial
C5
400
20 emp/net ac
25.0
25.0
Fairgrounds
FG
not available
0.0
0.0
Light Industrial
M1
0
8 emp/net ac
0.0
0.0
Heavy Industrial
M2
0
8 emp/net ac
0.0
0.0
Park Reserve - Open Space
OSPR
not available
0.0
0.0
Park
PARK
not available
0.0
280.0
280.0
Public Facility
PF
1,424
20 emp/net ac
89.0
89.0
Limited Residential
R1
371
6.0 du/net ac
82.4
125.0
207.4
Limited Residential - Planned
R2
0
6.0 du/net ac
0.0
125.0
125.0
Limited Residential - Planned
R3
2,225
7.5 du/net ac
404.5
125.0
529.5
General Residential - Planned
R4
1,201
8.5 du/net ac
184.8
125.0
309.8
Urban High Density Residential
R5
3,442
12.5 du/net ac
344.2
344.2
Total
1,205.0
780.0
1,985.0
Source: ECONorthwest; 2005 Urbanization Study
Table 1.4 estimates that an UGB expansion of at least 1,985 acres will provide sufficient land for
identified needed land uses to support the next 20 years of growth. The proposed UGB expansion
of 2,299 acres provides adequate land for residential, public facility, parks, and commercial needs.
The ECONorthwest analysis also identified policy measures the city could employ to ensure
adequate land is provided to meet needed housing types and to expand opportunities for using land
that already is in the UGB for housing. Those recommendations are implemented through the
housing policy amendments (Goal 10.7 and Policies 10.7, 10.34, 10.35, 10.36) proposed in the text
amendments that accompany this map amendment. Amendments to policies in the Economic
Development Chapter (Chapter 9) promote housing development in the downtown and in
neighborhood commercial districts to expand housing choices and opportunities for residents to live
in closer proximity to jobs and services (Policies 9.42 and 9.43). Policy amendments also include
several housing related policies that were formerlyin the Urbanization chapter, and eliminate several
policies that relate to urban design and site development. Those policies were considered
unnecessary because they do not relate to goals for meeting housing needs and are addressed in the
city's development code. Finally several policy changes are included to comply with state laws
regarding the regulation and siting of mobile homes (Policies 10.8, 10.9).
20 Table 6.7 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
July 2006 35
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE UD
Findings:
1. The following are the residential land use zones designated by the Redmond Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan Map:
R 1 Limited Residential Zone
R-2 Limited Residential Zone
R-3 Limited Residential Zone
R-4 General Residential Zone
R-5 High Density Residential Zone
UH 10 Urban Holding Zone
The UH 10 zone is part of the proposed text amendments to Chapter 2 (Land Use) of the
Redmond Comprehensive Plan being submitted in conjunction with this map amendment
proposal. The UH 10 zone is designed for land brought into the Redmond UGB that has not
yet completed land use planning or been incorporated into the city.
2. Local housing policies must meet the requirements of Goal 10 (ORS 197.295 to 197.314, ORS
197.475 to 197.490 and OAR 600-008). Goal 10 requires incorporated cities to complete an
inventory of buildable residential lands and to encourage the availability of adequate numbers of
housing units in price and rent ranges commensurate with the financial capabilities of its
households. The 2005 Ra#momd Urfa nization Study conducted a buildable lands inventory (BLI)
that found approximately 1,390 vacant buildable acres of land designated for residential uses
inside the existing UGB 21
3. According to the US. Census, nearly 1,500 households in Redmond-about 31%-paid more
than 30%a of their income for housing in 2000. Among renters whose household income is less
than $10,000, nearly 75% are considered cost burdened.
4. The City and County adopted a coordinated population projection of 45,724 residents in
Redmond in 2025. The 2005 Rind Urbamzation Study, ECONorthwest determined that
11,628 additional dwelling units would be needed to accommodate the population projected for
2025 using an alternative forecast to the Oregon Housing and Community Services mode1.22 The
alternative forecast is based on the assumption that the Redmond housing market will respond
to demographic and economic trends and local development opportunities that enable
developers and investors to take advantage of an array of opportunities to develop and deliver
diverse housing products.
5. The housing needs analysis indicates that Redmond will need about 1,544 net residential acres,
or about 1,962 gross residential acres to accommodate housing needs of 11,628 units between
2003 and 202523
6. Actual net densities in Redmond from 2000-2004 ranged from 4.5 to 7.5 units/acre (average 5.1
units/acre), according to the 2005 Rabrond Urbanization Study. Development in the R 1 and R-2
designations occurred at more than 90% of maximum allowable density. The R-4 designation-
the zone with the greatest amount of activity-averaged 83% of maximum density. The R-3
designation averaged 56% of allowable density, while the R-5 designation averaged 42%.
21 Tables 3-5, 3-6, and 6-2 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
22 Tables 4-17, 4-19, and 6-2 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
23 Table 4-17 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
July 2006 36
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 w
EXHIBIT t PAGE -Y~--
7. Based on past demand and estimated need, the study assumed a residential mix of 50% single-
family, 10% manufactured (mobile home), and 40% multiple family (13% condo/townhomes
and 27% multi-family) for the 2003-2025.
8. Assuming net densities between 6 and 12 unites/acre per housing type (average 7.5 units/acre)
and accounting for parcel constraints, the 2005 Rind Urbanization Study concluded that 4,699
units could be accommodated within the existing UGB 24 Using the same assumptions, the
study concluded that at least 1,515 gross acres would be needed for residential land in a UGB
expansion.25 Additional land will be needed for associated public facilities, parks, open spaces,
and commercial services.
9. UGB expansion in the proposed map amendment area is consistent with and implements a
visioning process completed by the Redmond community (See Visi%ning Rabn%i~ Exhibit K),
and the creation of Neighborhood Centers as illustrated in the Redmond Framework Plan
(Exhibit L). These Centers will reduce the need to travel across the city for services, will reduce
energy consumption and congestion, and increase livability.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for housing
per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 10.
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services
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.
Response: The City of Redmond has prepared detailed plans for how services will be provided to
the Northwest Area. (See Section IV - Proposed Text Amendments of this report) Beyond this
area, the city is in the process of updating master plans for its water and sanitary sewer systems,
including the entire area proposed for UGB expansion26. According to the City's Public Works
Department, these plans are being prepared using retained earnings and SDC revenue from city
enterprise funds. The Public Works Department also reports that transportation system needs are
being evaluated through an update to the city's Transportation System Plan with assistance from the
State of Oregon through a Category 1 Transportation Growth Management Act Grant. The City of
Redmond is evaluating park needs in consultation with the Central Oregon Park and Recreation
District (COPRD). The park master plan update is an important public facilities issue because
Redmond coordinates investment in public facilities (streets, parks, utilities, other) through a
common capital improvement program (C[P) that is developed using adopted master plans as a
basis for selecting projects and priorities, according to the City's Public Works Department.
The city anticipates that it will update its Public Facility Plan (PFP) when work on city water and
sewer master plans has been completed sometime in the next 12 to 15 months. At that time, the city
will be in a position to demonstrate full compliance with Goal 11 and OAR 660-0011 for areas being
annexed to the UGB. According to the City's Community Development Department,
transportation components of the city's PFP will be added in when the city completes the update to
24 Tables 3-9 and 6-2 of the Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
25 Sum of land needed for residential uses in Table 6-7 of the Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
26 General provisions for public facilities are made for public facilities in the proposed UGB expansion area as
estimated in Table 1.7, Framework Plan Capacity Analysis, in responses and findings for Goal 14.
July 2006 37
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 w
BNRI1~1T_-C -PAGE (fZ
the TSP in June of 2007. No change is expected to the stonnwater element of the PFP, which is
non-existent in Redmond because local soil and geologic conditions enable stormwater to be
managed on-site throughout the city. Redmond does not discharge stormwater to any water body or
stream.
With regard to other public facilities, including parks, schools, health care, energy, and other utilities,
the City will be updating intergovernmental agreements and planning scenarios with the public and
private entities that are responsible for delivering these services. Until such time as those plans and
agreements are updated, all land being added to the UGB is placed in an Urban Holding Area
(UHA) plan designation. Urban development is not permitted on these lands until findings have
been made demonstrating compliance with Goal 11 and OAR 660-0011.
Redmond Urbanization Policy 10 requires that rural lands added to the UGB in advance of
completing land use planning are designated Urban Holding Area (UHA) on the Comprehensive
Plan Map. Before land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be designated for
urban uses and zoned for development, it must either:
1. Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
.2. Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through
the special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that findings be adopted during the master plan / annexation process to
identify necessary public facilities in order to comply with Goal 11, Public Facilities and with the
City's PFP. Urbanization Policy 121 requires master plans to provide a Public Facilities Analysis and
Diagram.
l)
the PFP.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond has received a grant to update its Public Facility Plan (PFP). This update
will address needed public facilities to 2025 in the Caty's urban growth areas.
2. The City has prepared a list of short-term improvements to serve public facility needs for the
Northwest Area of the proposed UGB expansion area (Exhibit D and Exhibit E).
3. Master planning for unincorporated areas inside the UGB that plan to annex to the City requires
analysis and planning for at least sewer, water, and storm water facilities. The proposed public
facility improvements must be consistent with the City's PFP and related public facility master
plans.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for housing
per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11.
July 2006 38
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT E_ PAGE
Goal 12 Transportation
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.
Response: The City of Redmond is embarking on a coordinated planning process to develop an
updated, comprehensive, coordinated multimodal transportation and investment framework that will
result in an updated Transportation System Plan (TSP) that is consistent with the policies of Statereicle
PlawdT Gad 12 - Transportation Additionally, the City retained DKS Associates to conduct a
transportation planning assessment for the Northwest Redmond Planning Area to meet OAR 660-
012-0060 requirements. The Northwest Area is the first phase of a 2,299 acre UGB expansion and
consists of 360 acres for residential development and 40 acres for commercial development. The
City produced a Technical Memorandum (dated April 24, 2006) which serves as an update to the
2001 Pubic Facilities Plan until such time that the TSP is updated to reflect the entire 2025 UGB
expansion.
Findings:
1. The City applied for a Transportation & Growth Management Program (TGM) grant in
August 2005, and the City was awarded $85,000 from ODOT to add to $150,000 of City
resources to update the Transportation System Plan.
2. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the City have developed a Work
Order Contract (WOQ to obtain consultant services to:
A. Conduct research, collect transportation data, analyze current and future transportation
needs and establish a list of transportation projects for adoption by the City Council, in
compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 12, the Transportation Planning Rule, the Oregon
I-fiighwayPlan (OFT) and the US 97 Comdor Strategy (Madras - California Border), and
B. Re-evaluate improvement option contained in the adopted 2000 Redmond TSP.
C. Update the City of Redmond Traffic Model (prepared by TPAU for the US 97 Reroute /
Glacier - Highland Couplet Projects) to reflect an additional 2,299 acre boundary
amendment for the Redmond UGB.
D. Prepare an updated Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for transportation improvements
to implement recommendations arising out of the TSP and Comprehensive Plan Update and
reflecting the expanded UGB.
E. The TSP Update will be finished in the summer of 2007, and will follow the specific
requirements set out in OAR 660, Division 12, Transportation Planning Rule. The Scope of
Work (SOW) set forth in the WOC sets out the planning process and identifies the
relationship between the land use and transportation system alternatives.
3. The City is updating the 2001 Public Facilities Plan and has completed a Transportation Analysis
of the impact of development in the Northwest Area. The 400 acre Northwest Area has been
assumed to generate 2,500 PM peak hour trips distributed within the existing transportation
network.
A. The purpose of the analysis was to analyze and mitigate the transportation impacts resulting
from development in the Northwest Area until the TSP can be updated for the entire 2,299
acre UGB amendment.
B. The DKS study (June 21, 2006) analyzed the impacts of 2,500 PM peak hour trips and lists
mitigation projects associated with those impact (see NW Area Public Facilities Needs List).
The total estimated cost for improvements within the Northwest Area is $5,567,378.00 and
the total cost for mitigation projects outside the Northwest Area is $7,999,626.40. The total
cost of projects is $13,567,004.40.
July 2006 39
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT _ PAGE 4 y
C. The City is amending the 2001 Public Facilities Plan to include the mitigation projects to serve
the Northwest Area via adoption of a Transportation Capital Improvement Plan specific to
development within the Northwest Area.
The remaining areas located within the proposed UGB amendment area will have to wait until
the City's TSP update and corresponding Public Facilities Plans are adopted before urban
development can occur. Annexation and development will be dependent on a Master Plan being
approved for the area along with concurrent public facilities and services, including
transportation.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for
transportation per Statewide Planning Goal 12.
Goal 13 Energy Conservation
To conserve energy.
Response: The proposed UGB expansion is founded on the need for housing. If sufficient
housing is not provided in Redmond, then people working or accessing services in Redmond maybe
forced to live in other communities and drive into the city for work and services, unnecessarily
increasing fuel and energy usage in the city. Insufficient housing in Redmond may also lead to
inefficient "release valve" development patterns in neighboring communities that do not have the
existing public facilities and infrastructure to capitalize on that Redmond does.
Expanding the UGB to the north and west is also part of a vision to create more neighborhood
centers around the City of Redmond so that not all commercial activity is concentrated along the
highways. In particular, Neighborhood Centers are conceptually planned for three different
locations within the proposed UGB expansion area: Maple Avenue and Northwest, Obsidian east of
Helmholtz, and Badger west of Canal (Figure 1.7; Exhibit L). More neighborhood centers will
provide the opportunity for residents to choose means other than driving alone walking, biking,
and taking transit in order to get to services that otherwise could only be accessed by car.
Allowing for these transportation choices will conserve fuel and energy, minimize pollution
associated with vehicle emissions, and reduce congestion.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond will adopt a Framework Plan for land inside the Redmond URA.
2. The Framework Plan designates three Neighborhood Centers in the proposed UGB expansion
area. These centers will be characterized by denser development and a mix of uses, including
commercial services. Neighborhood Centers will alleviate the need to drive to Highway 97 for
all services. In addition, the City's Master Plan requirement and Great Neighborhood Principles
require new neighborhoods to demonstrate how they will be environmentally friendly and
energy efficient.
3. Road, pathways and sidewalk facilities will accommodate and encourage walking and bicycling in
addition to driving in these centers. Residents will have a choice of transportation modes in
getting to the neighborhood services.
4. Providing transportation choices and making efficient use of infrastructure conserves fuel and
energy, reduces transportation related pollution, and reduces congestion.
5. The City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended, requires master plans to demonstrate how new
neighborhoods are environmentally friendly and energy efficient.
July 2006 40
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
Enhlbl I t - PAGE ~eJ a_
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for energy per
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 13.
Goal 14 Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to
ensure efficient use ofland, and to provide for livable communities.
LandNael
E stablishnort and charms of urban growth bwiaanes shall bt? based on the fallaavy..
(1) Demonstrated need to aaamisdate long ram urban population amsistern with a 20 year population fomt?mast
wmrkrratad uith off local gozemrm&,
(2) Danorstrated nwd for land suitable to acmwnjdate housing, wployrrerrt opportunities, lizubility or uses such as
pubic facilities, streets and roads, schools, parks or open spaw, or any mviirration ef the nail categories in this
suhsa-tion (2);
In detmaning nffl~ local goze»rrmit mzy specify dmraamstia, such as parcel size, topography or prwirr ,
ne essary for land to be suitable for an idar#Sed creed
Prior to etpanding an urban growth boundary, local gozernrrrnts shall derrxrnstrate that nods canner reasonably be
aanmrrx&ted on land already inside the urban grozeth boundary.
Response: The City of Redmond and Deschutes County completed a long-range planning to
determine suitable areas for future urbanization by designated 5,664 acres in an Urban Reserve Area
(URA) in 2005. It has been determined that the urban reserves can accommodate the City's
forecasted residential, commercial, and employment growth over the next 50 years and that these
areas are appropriate for future UGB expansion.27 The proposed map amendment and UGB
expansion draws from the URA and enables the City to meet residential and associated land needs
for the next 20 years, as demonstrated below.
In its 2005 Rairohnd Urbanization Study, ECONorthwest provides population growth forecasts for the
city over the next 20 years (Table 1-5), consistent with the county coordinated population forecast.
The population average annual growth rate (AAGR) was 0.9% from 1980-1990 and 6.4% from
1990-2000. The overall AAGR between from 1980-2002 was 4.4% and that rate was assumed for
the period 2003-2025.
2' Information about the need for designating urban reserves can be found at:
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/download.cfm?DownloadFile=6EC9E7B6-BDBD-57C 1-90A 1 A644AOCBE 1 I E.
July 2006 41
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT - E _ PAGE
Table 1.5 - Historical and forecast population and employment, Redmond, 2000-202528
Year
Population
Employment
Pop/Emp
2000
15,505
na
2003
17,645
10,354
1.70
2005
19,249
11,091
1.74
2010
23,897
13,173
1.81
2015
29,667
15,646
1.90
2020
36,831
18,582
1.98
2025
45,724
22,070
2.07
Change (2003-2025)
Number
28,079
11,716
2.40
Percent 159% 113%
AGGR 4.4% 3.5%
Source: U.S. Census, City of Redmond, Employment Security 202 data;
2000 - U.S. Census Data
2003 - PSU Estimate
2025 - Population and Employment forecasts by ECONorthwest
Employment AAGR from 1982-2002 was 5.3%. The range of AAGR used to project employment
from 2003-2025 was 3-4%. A "medium rate" of 3.5% - the midpoint of the range - was assumed for
employment growth over the planning horizon (Table 1.5), which will more than double the amount
of employment in the city. Distribution among the main employment land use types was assumed
to be similar in the future, with an increase in industrial employment offset by reductions in
commercial and public (Table 1.6).
Table 1.6 - Projected employment growth by land use type in the Redmond UGB,
medium-range assumption, 2003-202529
2003
2025
2003-25
Sector
Emp, of Total
Emp, of Total
Growth
Industrial
2,667
26%
6,400
29%
3,733
Commercial
6,242
60%
12,801
58%
6,559
Public
1,445
14%
2,869
13%
1,424
Total
10,354
100%
22,070
100%
11,716
The 2005 Radmnnd Urbamwtion Study identified the following housing needs for the 2003-2025
planning period:
■ Need for 11,628 new dwelling units (average 2.41 people/unit)
■ A 60%/40% tenure split (owners and renters)
■ A 60%/40% single-family/multi-family mix30
■ Needs for additional government assisted units
■ Needs for senior housing
28 Table 6-1 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
29 Table 2-5 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
30 As noted in Chapter 4, the 72%/28% single-family/multi-family mix may inadequately reflect the need for rental
units as the City reaches a population of 30,000.
July 2006 42
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT 1E-PAGE
The following assumptions were used in calculating the housing units that could be accommodated
within Redmond's existing UGB.
■ Net densities between 6 and 12 units/acre depending on housing type, with an average of
7.5 units/acre (Table 1.3). Actual net densities in Redmond from 2000-2004 ranged from
4.5 to 7.5 units/acre, resulting in an average of 5.1 units/acre 31
■ 1,391 total acres of vacant buildable residential land between the five different residential
zones inside the existing UGB (Table 1.2).
■ Residential zones are built out with only residential, and no public facility, uses.
As a result, 4,699 dwelling units can be accommodated in the existing UGB. This leaves 6,929 units
that cannot be reasonably accommodated given that a substantially higher density of development
has been assumed than has been demonstrated by recent development. Including public facilities
directly associated with the needed housing, ECONorthwest estimated that these 6,929 dwelling
units would require at least 1,515 gross residential acres outside the 2005 UGB (Table 1.4). This
assumes the same net densities and constraints related to parcel size, configuration, and natural
features that were used in analyzing housing capacity within the existing UGB. Approximately 500
acres of land for other public facilities (e.g. schools), parks and open space, and limited commercial
is included in the proposed UGB expansion in order to properly serve future residential
development (Table 1.4).
The proposed UGB expansion helps achieve community aspirations and goals as articulated in
Visioning Rabrond (2005). The proposed Framework Plan expands on the Visioning document and
proposes Neighborhood Centers that would include small scale commercial in the vicinities of
Maple and Northwest, along Obsidian between 12th and Helmholtz, and along Badger between
Canal and Helmholtz (Figure 1.7; Exhibit L). Centers denote:
■ higher density development as you move towards the heart of the Center;
■ a mix of land uses, including commercial, institutional, residential, and public space; and
■ transportation options.
The development of centers in the proposed UGB expansion area will provide local services for
needed new housing, land for employment, and opportunities for higher density housing, and
generally make efficient use of the land.
Botmdary L aattion
The location of the urban growth boundary and oharges to the bounahry shall be detmr nned by euduating alternatiw
boundary locations cams ern with ORS 197.298 and with mideration qf the fdlouirgfactors:
(1) E ff ciertt aanmrrx dation ef id~ land neeti
Response: The proposed UGB expansion area has been drawn from the City of Redmond's
adopted URA, consistent with ORS 197.298. The proposed expansion is driven by the need for
housing. If sufficient housing is not provided in Redmond, people working or accessing services in
Redmond may be forced to live in other communities and drive into the city for work and services.
This will negatively impact the city by increas ing congestion and air pollution. The amount of land
in the proposed UGB amendment is guided by the estimated land needs for the next 20 years found
31 Table 4-10 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
July 2006 43
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT _h.._PAGE t
in the 2005 Rind Urlxtnization Study (Table 1.4) 32 Higher density and build-out of the residential
land inside the existing UGB were assumed in making efficient use of this land, and the same higher
housing densities were used in calculating the size of land needed outside the existing UGB. In
particular, net densities of 6-12 units/acre per housing type (average 7.5 units/acre) were assumed
for housing in 2003-2025, whereas actual net densities in Redmond were 4.5-7.5 units/acre (avg 5.1
units/acre) in 2000-2004.
The location of the expansion has been determined using public facility studies and a community
vision for the city as articulated in Visionirg Rakmnd (Exhibit K) and the Framework Plan (Exhibit
L). UGB expansion to the west and north has been selected because it requires the least amount of
additional infrastructure. Compared to other parts of the URA, the proposed UGB expansion area,
and the Northwest Area in particular, has the following advantages over other parts of the City's
URA.
■ Can be served by extending proposed sewer lines in the public street grid;
■ Requires no major new sewer facilities;
■ Will have less impact to the existing transportation system; and
■ Extends and expands the existing transportation system in an efficient pattern based on the
City's grid street policies.
(2) Orderly and aort nw p muzon public facilities andsmices,
Response: The Redmond URA encompasses 5,664 total acres. The northwest and western
portions of the URA consistently received higher overall ratings for sewer, water, and storm
serviceability in OTAK's Urban Reserve studies33. These areas also rated favorably in the Conceptual
URA and Nafdmest Neighborhood Seceer/Water 2005 Study prepared by David Evans & Associates
(DEA) in June 2005 (Exhibit I).
The total 20-year residential land need is estimated to be roughly 2,000 acres to provide land for the
6,929 needed dwelling units that cannot be accommodated inside the existing UGB (Table 1.4) 34
This estimate accounts for public facilities directly associated with these residential needs -
approximately 500 acres - as well as approximately 370 acres of land for general public facilities (e.g.
schools), parks, and open spaces. Land in Dry Canyon that is part of the proposed UGB expansion
area is constrained and cannot be developed and is serving as open space and park reserve.-Land for
commercial uses is also needed to serve these residential uses, and the 2005 Rakamd Urb ration
Study includes 100 acres for neighborhood and visitor commercial services.
The Northwest Area of the proposed UGB expansion poses the opportwzity for the most "orderly
and efficient" provision of public services of all of Redmond's URA. Gravity-flow sewer Line "D",
running along the western edge of Redmond, has conveyance and treatment capacity for
approximately 1,700 homes.35 The area is being served by the West Side Sewer Interceptor Project
(WSSIP), and the Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) on the northern edge of Redmond is
32 Table 6.7 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
33 Table B-2 in Urban Reserve Study Areas Evaluation Worksheets of Redmond Urban Reserve Analysis memo,
June 30, 2003
34 Table 6.7 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
35 In a memo dated November 26, 2003, the City of Redmond Engineering Department reports that its Westside
Sewer Interceptor/Line D has capacity for 1,715 housing units (1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 0.729 gpm per
dwelling unit).
July 2006 44
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT - -PAGE '19 -
being expanded from treating 2.99 million gallons daily (mgd) to 3.55 mgd.36 In terms of drinliing
water, new wells and reservoirs will be needed to serve all subareas of the URA, and this service
investment need does not necessarily recommend one subarea over another. This application
includes amendments to the Water and Wastewater sections of the City's Public Facility Plan (PFP)
(Exhibit D and Exhibit E) that specify short-term improvements for the Northwest Area of the
proposed UGB expansion area.
Similarly, all subareas will need to undergo significant transportation improvements in order to serve
urban-scale development. A new bridge across Dry Canyon on Maple Avenue is due to be
completed in late 2006, which will provide a significant benefit to the proposed UGB expansion
area, in particular the Northwest Area. Expanding the UGB to the northwest and west avoids direct
traffic impacts on Highway 97.
(3) G&4wraaw owmnrrerrta4 aamw w and serial comajuaw, and
Response: The environmental, energy, economic, and social consequences for future urban
expansion were studied in general terms as part of the Redmond URA analysis, and were found to
be in order to adopt URA.
Environment
There are no natural surface water features in the proposed UGB expansion area. Groundwater is
an important natural resource in the region, and the City has a groundwater protection program that
minimizes adverse impacts of urban development on groundwater resources, particularly from the
infiltration of stormwater runoff.
The proposed UGB expansion is founded on the need for housing. If sufficient housing is not
provided in Redmond, then people working or accessing services in Redmond maybe forced to live
in other communities and drive into the city for work and services, increasing fuel consumption and
pollution.
The proposed UGB expansion will provide the opportunity for more efficient development patterns
than those that were established when Redmond was developing as a small town along a state
highway. The proposed UGB expansion area includes sites with existing transportation facilities and
other assets that make them good sites for Neighborhood Centers, characterized by mixed uses and
higher density development. The Framework Plan (Figure 1.7; Exhibit L) illustrates these centers,
which will allow jobs and services to be closer to housing. In turn, trips will be shorter and residents
will have more transportation choices, all of which should reduce fuel consumption and pollution
related to vehicle emissions. These centers will alleviate some of the demand on the services along
Highway 97 and reduce congestion and pollution there.
Economy
The UGB expansion will provide land so that sufficient housing can be provided to support
employment growth. Employment growth itself is anticipated largely on land inside the existing
UGB. However, Neighborhood and Mixed Use Employment Centers will provide land for types of
commercial uses not sufficiently provided for inside the existing UGB (Table 1.4), will serve
36 According to Wastewater Collection and Constraints sections of DEA's June 2005 memo, the following areas
will require pumping: the north half of N-2; the north edge of N-1; east edge of E-1; the south edges of the URA
subareas south of Forked Horn Butte; and the west edges of URAs W-1, W-2 and W-3.
July 2006 45
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT - L- PAGE
residential development in the UGB expansion area, and will disperse employment from being
concentrated primarily along Highway 97 and in industrial areas east of the highway. Avoiding
focusing all economic development along the highway and the new bypass will help alleviate
congestion; congestion and travel delays reduce economic productivity. Similarly, residents who live
near the proposed Employment and Neighborhood Centers and work or access services there will
benefit from reductions in travel time.
Economic development in the proposed UGB expansion area according to the Framework Plan
(Figure 1.7; Exhibit L) should make the most efficient use of public utilities and facilities currently
serving the area or can be reasonably extended to serve the area. The Framework Plan proposes
Mixed Use Employment Centers adjacent to Highway 97 and Highway 126 in the Framework Plan,
which capitalize on existing transportation facilities. Development in the UGB expansion area, and
the Northwest Area in particular, will generally be easier to serve with public facilities, especially
sewer.
Energy
The proposed UGB expansion is consistent with the statutory requirement that there be sufficient
land for housing over the next 20 years. This prevents people from having to live in outlying
communities and drive into Redmond for work and services, which, in turn, reduces fuel and energy
consumption. The proposed UGB expansion area is directly adjacent to existing UGB, which allows
for most efficient extension of urban services. The Northwest Area of the proposed UGB
expansion area has been determined as the most easily serviceable part of the City's URA. Redmond
residents will not need to always drive to Highway 97 for jobs and services because of proposed
Neighborhood Centers and Mixed Use Employment Centers dispersed throughout the UGB
expansion area. The closer proximity of housing, jobs, and services allows for shorter trips,
transportation choices, and less fuel and energy consumption.
Social
The 20-year housing need was determined assuming a mix of single-family detached and
manufactured units, and multi-family townhome and apartment units to meet the differing needs of
Redmond residents. The proposed Neighborhood Centers and Mixed Use Employment Centers in
UGB expansion area are sited to take advantage of existing major roadway intersections and
corridors. These centers will provide the opportunity for housing to be integrated with jobs and
services, or at least to be located closer to jobs and services than is currently found in the city. The
mixed use nature of the centers allows for housing of different types and density, which creates
more housing choice and affordability. Residents will also have more choices about how to travel
the shorter distances to the centers, which can improve the fairness and health of a community.
The proposed UGB expansion is designed to provide sufficient land for housing over the next 20
years. Land needed for public facilities, parks, and open spaces are included in meeting the
residential land needs for the planning horizon, which helps ensure equitable access to these public
services. The proposed UGB expansion area is adjacent to the existing UGB and public facilities.
Some of these facilities are more easily extended to parts of the proposed UGB expansion area than
other parts of the Redmond URA. This difference in the ease of public facility provision may help
keep housing costs down.
(4) Conpatibdity of the proposed urban uses wth marby agwdtural and forest aacisities omining on farmand forest
land outside the UGB.
July 2006 46
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT ! PAGE S L
Response: The Redmond URA, including the proposed UGB expansion area, is generally zoned
EFU (Exclusive Farm Use) and MUA 10 (Multiple Use Agriculture) by Deschutes County.
However, only Class V and VI agricultural land is naturally occurring in the area. Further, because
Class 1 and II soils are not present and specified perennials37 are not being grown, the proposed
expansion area does not qualify as "high-value farmland". In this sense, the agricultural land in this
area is of the lowest priority. Designation of the area as an URA makes it the highest priority for
urbanization, per ORS 197.298.
Further, land brought into the UGB that has not completed land use planning must be designated
Urban Holding Area (UHA) according to Redmond Urbanization Policy 10. The UHA zone and
designation overlays the existing zoning so that land zoned EFU and MUA 10 will continue to be
regulated by those zones which permit agricultural and rural uses and prohibit more intensive urban
uses.
Before land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be designated for urban uses and
zoned for development, it must either:
1. Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
2. Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
The Framework Plan (Figure 1.7; Exhibit L) and land need calculations show the proposed UGB
expansion area as largely residential. Helmholtz, which runs most of the north-south length of the
proposed expansion area, is planned as a boulevard, which will provide a buffer and transition
between urban development and continuing agricultural uses. An analysis of the conceptual land
uses proposed in the Framework Plan for Residential, High Density Residential, Mixed Use
Employment, Mined Use Neighborhood Commercial, and Open Space is in the table on the next
page titled Franruork Plan CapacityAnalsis. The table shows that the urbanization concept presented
in the Framework Plan is consistent with the needs identified in the June 2005 Urbanization Study.
Areas designated "Residential" on the Framework Plan map will accommodate 3,875 dwellings
assuming an average gross density of 4.5 units per acre. Assuming all these units would be single
family detached, there is capacity for 388 more units than the Urbanization Study identified. There
are areas in the Residential category that are not expected to achieve this density, however, because
plan policies call for a transition of development density at the perimeter of the UGB to "soften" the
urban impact on adjoining rut-al lands. Areas on the perimeter of the UGB are likely to be zoned
using the city's R 1 zone, which allows a maximum density of 2 units per acre. There also are areas
at the northwestern perimeter of the UGB that are difficult to serve and that he in a secondary
canyon. These areas are candidates for Open Space designation and may not be developed. For
these reasons, the arithmetic capacity shown in the table for Residential land is unlikely to be
realized.
37 Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660 Division 33, Section 8(b) describes "specified perennials" as perennials
grown for market and research purposes, such as nursery stock, berries, fruits, nuts, Christmas trees, vineyards, but
not including seed crops, hay, pasture, or alfalfa.
July 2006 47
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT --Ae, PAGE 51-
Table 1.7 - Framework Plan Caoacity Analvsis
Land Use Analysis
Housing Anal sis
Framework
Devel.
Public
Adjusted
Gross
Category
Acres
Land
Facilities
Acres
Density
Capacity
Target
Balance
Open sace *
158
158
-
Constrained
384
384
-
Institutional
114
-
Mixed Use
Employment
186
11%
42
144
Residential
detached
1,068
65%
243
825
4.7
3,875
3,487
388
High Density
Residential
288
18%
66
222
9.5
2,110
3,142
1,032
Neighborhood
Center Retail
101
6%
23
78
300
Total
2,299
100%
(916) 1
1,269
5,985
6,929
944
'vacant land in Dry Canyon
public easements (canals, BPA, road rights-of-way)
H.S. School Site, BPA Substation
Source: ECONorthwest Urbanization Study, Table 7
The analysis also shows that High Density Residential land has capacity to absorb 2,110 units at an
average gross density of 9.5 units per acre. This figure is 1,032 units below the target for attached
dwellings from the 2005 Urbanization Study. There are several reasons why additional High Density
Residential areas are not needed in the Framework Plan than are depicted. Part of the target
attached housing products will be developed in mixed use centers and in Downtown Redmond.
Assuming 200 units are developed in each neighborhood center and 300 units are developed in the
downtown, the attached dwelling "deficit" is reduced from 1,032 to 532. There also is significant
potential for attached housing in the existing UGB along commercial corridors, especially the US
Highway 97 Couplet area, which is a candidate area for redevelopment. The Urbanization Study
shows that Redmond has a surplus of commercial land, so it is reasonable to assume that some
owners of investment properties in existing highway corridors will take advantage of opportunities
to develop housing projects that will generate an immediate return on investment rather than waiting
for market conditions to "ripen" for high value commercial uses.
Finally, the City's development code allows attached housing products as a permitted use in its R2,
R3, and R4 zones, which are the districts likely to be applied in areas shown on the Framework Plan
as Residential. If 2% of that area develops with higher density attached housing products, this
would accommodate 144 multi-family dwellings. The combination of allowances for developing
housing in mixed use centers, in the downtown, in commercial districts, and in other planned
residential areas provides reasonable assurance that there is an adequate land base to meet multi
family and higher density housing needs.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County adopted an Urban Reserve Area (URA) of 5,664
acres for Redmond in 2005.
2. The Qty and County adopted a coordinated population projection of 45,724 residents in
Redmond in 2025.
July 2006 48
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT _ PAGE
3. In the 2005 Rabmnd Urbanzation Study, ECONorthwest determined that 11,628 additional
dwelling units would be needed to accommodate the population projected for 2025.
4. Assuming net densities between 6 and 12 unites/acre per housing type (average 7.5 units/acre)
and accounting for parcel constraints, the 2005 Rairand Ubbamzation Study concluded that 4,699
units could be accommodated within the existing UGB. Actual net densities in Redmond from
2000-2004 ranged from 4.5 to 7.5 units/acre (average 5.1 units/acre).
5. Using the same assumptions, the study concluded that at least 1,515 gross acres would be
needed for residential land in a UGB expansion.
6. UGB expansion in the proposed map amendment area serves a visioning process completed by
the Redmond community, and the creation of Neighborhood Centers as illustrated in the
Redmond Framework Plan. These Centers will reduce the need to travel across the city for
services, will reduce energy consumption and congestion, and increase livability.
7. According to OTAK's Urban Reserve studies and DEA's Conceptual URA and Noydmzt
Neigh&yboal Sever/Water 2005 Study (Exhibit I), services to the Northwest Area and western
portion of the Redmond URA, particularly water and sewer, can be extended more efficiently
than to other parts of the URA.
8. Amendments to the Water and Wastewater sections of the City's Public Facility Plan (PFP) and
the supporting documentation (Exhibit D and Exhibit E) included in this application specify
short-term improvements for the Northwest Area of the proposed UGB expansion area.
9. There are no natural surface water features in the vicinity of the proposed UGB expansion area.
The City of Redmond has developed a groundwater protection program to minimize adverse
impacts of urban development on groundwater resources, particularly from the infiltration of
stormwater runoff into the ground. No adverse impacts to water resources are anticipated from
the proposed action.
10. The Framework Plan provides an overview of the development pattern planned for the
proposed UGB expansion area. In terms of meeting social needs, the Neighborhood and Mined
Use Employment Centers proposed in the plan will provide for a mix of land uses, a choice of
housing, and access to local jobs and services. Land in the proposed UGB expansion area is also
set aside for public facilities (e.g. schools), parks, and open spaces.
11. The development concept presented in the Framework Plan is consistent with the residential
land need and commercial and land needs identified in the 2005 Ra uzd_ Urbamn ration Study and
is expected to deliver a pattern of development that will meet identified needs.
12. Land in the Redmond URA that is currently zoned EFU or MUA 10 will be designated as an
Urban Holding Area (UHA) and zoned Urban Holding 10 (UH 10) when brought into the
UGB. The UHA designation and UH 10 zone will permit agricultural, rural, and any other uses
permitted by the underlying zone to continue and will prohibit more intensive uses until land use
planning and master planning are completed, and the land is annexed to the City of Redmond.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for
urbanization per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 14.
July 2006 49
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT .P=_ PAGE JS~
B. FOR NORTHWEST AREA OF PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT
The Northwest Area comprises approximately 400 acres of the total 2,299 acre proposed UGB
expansion area, and is illustrated in Figure 1.2. The Northwest Area is expected to be the portion of
the proposed UGB expansion to urbanize fast because it will be most easily and efficiently served by
water and sewer services. Accordingly, short-term water and wastewater improvments, as well as
transportation and park improvements, are being planned by the City. These improvements appear
in this application as amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and more specifically to the Public
Facilitiy Plan (PFP) sections and Transportation System Plan (TSP) that are elements of the
Comprehensive Plan. Supporting documentation is included as Exhibit D, Exhibit E, Exhibit F,
Exhibit G, and Exhibit H. The following narrative provides responses and findings in support of
the proposed Comprehensive Plan, PFP, and TSP text amendments for the Northwest Area of the
proposed UGB amendment.
Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services
Response: Compliance with Goal 11 is demonstrated by showing compliance with OAR 660,
Division 11.
Public Facility Planning - OAR 660, Division 11
Purpose... to aid in aAodng the raui s qf Gad 11, Public Facilities and Smicz, and in plerrm ORS
197.712(2)(e), ubkb mFd 7u that a city or aunty shall adopt a public facility plan for amas within an urban growth
boundary amtaimng a population gmater An 2500 person;.
660-011-0010
The Public Facility Plan
(1) The public facility plan shall a ntain the fcllmrtg it m:
(a) A n ircwrm y and mineral assessment of dx condition of all the signifuant public facility s)sterna which
st ffw the land uses designated in the acknozekdo cnnp taberrsiw plan;
Response: Redmond's existing Public Facility Plan (PFP), through the City`s water and sewer
system master plans, includes an inventory and assessment of existing service delivery systems in the.
existing Redmond UGB. There are no existing urban services in the proposed UGB expansion area
that need to be added to the existing inventory. The City's amended Transportation System Plan
(TSP) includes an assessment of transportation facilities in the Northwest Area of the proposed
UGB expansion area There are no storm drainage facilities in the expansion area other than those
that are part of the street system.
The planned land uses in the Northwest Area are identified in the proposed Framework Plan (Figure
1.7 or Exhibit L) and include single family, high density residential uses, public facilities, parks, and
commercial services. Water and sewer improvements that will adequately serve the Northwest Area
are specified in the amendments proposed for the City's Water and Wastewater sections of the PFP
and in the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and Exhibit E in this application.
The City of Redmond has received a Technical Assistance Grant from the Oregon Department of
Land Conservation and Development to update portions of its PFP to address water and wastewater
improvements that will serve the Northwest Area, the first portion of the proposed UGB expansion
July 2006 50
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBI' _C _ PAGE _t
area expected to urbanize. Those PFP text amendments are proposed as part of this application.
The proposed text amendments were crafted based on an analysis of water system and sewer system
capacity needed to serve the Northwest Area, and how utility service to this area would be integrated
into larger system-wide improvements that are needed to serve the entire west-side urban expansion.
For the Northwest Area, an assumption was made that 360 acres of the 400 acres would be
developed for residential use and 40 acres would be develop for commercial use. In this context,
high density residential uses would be considered a commercial use. (See Exhibit D and Exhibit E)
The technical analysis shows that sewer service to this area would be provided through a new Far
West Side Interceptor sanitary sewer line that would be extended from the sewage treatment plant in
Dry Canyon and extend south to convey sewage to the treatment plant for most areas being added
to the UGB on the city's west side. Preliminary engineering studies indicate that in the lower reaches
as it passes through the Northwest Area, this sewer line needs to be 36" in diameter.
The Northwest Area would be the first urbanized area served by this new sewer interceptor. Sewer
flow estimates for the Northwest Area are based on an average net density of 7.5 dwelling units per
acre for the 360 acres of residential development and 1,350 gallons per acre per day for the 40 acres
of commercial development. These densities are consistent with the planned densities that are
represented in the 2005 Rabnmd Urbanization Study and represent a significant increase in average
residential densities, which currently stand at 5.1 dwellings per net acre 38 This trend is consistent
with emerging development patterns in Redmond and with assumptions in the Urbanization Study
Land needs Analysis, which indicates densities willrise out of necessity to meet affordable housing
needs and local incomes. 39 The land use assumptions are consistent with the anticipated land use
development pattern in the newly adopted Framework Plan for the unincorporated parts of the
urban growth boundary. The 40 acre commercial area may actually be larger than is needed, but this
assumption adds a level of conservatism to the analysis of expected sewer flows. (See the
Framework Plan, Figure 1.7 and Exhibit L).
The analysis also considered where local sewer collectors would need to be constructed to convey
sewage to the Far West Side Interceptor. Those sewers were sized based on the number of acres
and types of development they would serve. The analysis includes a map showing the location of
those sewers and for the West Side Interceptor. The analysis also shows the expected cost and
timing for constructing these facilities 40
For Water Service, the same land use and development assumptions were used. An engineering
analysis shows that the Northwest Area will require a new well and 4 millions gallons of storage.
Water requirements are based on the following development assumptions:
Residential: 360 acres, 7.5 dwelling units per acre, 2.5 people per dwelling unit
450 gallons/capita/day
Demand =3.04 million gallons per day (mgd)
Commercial: 40 acres, 1,350 gallons/acre/day
Demand=0.05 mgd
Total Demand: 3.09 mgd (2,150 gallons per minute)
(See Exhibit D)
31 Table 4.10 of the 2005 Rahn d UAunization Sw4 (Exhibit Q
"Table 4.17 of the 2005 Rabw7d Urbarazation Study (Exhibit Q
" Table 1 and Figure 1 of TwlW alMawran4= NWA= Was&waterFaa1i65 (Exhibit E)
July 2006 51
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE (A
The engineering analysis includes a map showing the proposed location of water supply lines and
their estimated costs.
The proposed amendments to the Capital Project List in the city's Public Facility Plan were taken
from the above referenced water and sewer engineering studies.
Transportation improvements needed to serve the proposed expansion area are detailed in
amendments to the Redmond TSP. A draft TSP Map for the proposed UGB expansion is included
in this application as Figure 1.6 (Exhibit K), and a list of projects for the Northwest Area is found in
Exhibit H
There are no area stormwater management facilities proposed to serve the Northwest Area or any
other areas being added to the UGB. All stonnwater from private development must be retained
on-site per Redmond development regulations (RDC 8.3035.7a). Stormwater runoff from public
streets is conveyed to injection wells or infiltration facilities in public right of way. Street related
runoff is managed through the city's public works design standards. (Rabmnd Public Works Standard
and Sp4uations, Design Standards, Sation H..A.13). This existing management approach will be used in
the expansion area to manage stormwater runoff.
(b) A list of dx signifuant public facility projects that aye needed to support the plarmd land uses in the
acknou dgeel wnpnheresize plan aye u6& & in the city's adopted Public Facility Plan
(c) Rough cast estimates gead6 public facility project;
(d) A map or untten description 4e~pudic faality project's general location or smite area;
Response: Water and sewer improvements that will be needed to adequately serve the Northwest
Area are specified in the amendments proposed for the City's water and wastewater sections of the
PFP and in the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and Exhibit E in this application. These
amendments and exhibits provide project descriptions, general location, and cost estimates. More
specific location of the improvements is given in a conceptual facility plan map in Figure 1.5
(Exhibit F).
Transportation improvements are addressed in amendments to the Redmond TSP. The draft TSP
Map for the proposed UGB expansion is included in this application as Figure 1.6 (Exhibit G), and
a list of projects for the Northwest Area is located in Exhibit H.
Storm water facilities needed to serve the expansion area will largely be associated with road
improvements that are addressed in the TSP and Rabnmd Public Works Standard and Spmficatiom,
2003. Otherwise, storm water facilities are regulated by the Redmond Development Code (RDC
8.3035.7a).
(e) Policy statem *s) or urban growth management agr t hgbr ing the prouder of eaob publ u faahty
span If there is mom' than one prouder Keith the authority to pmude the system within the arm wwral
by the public faahty pl=y then the p raider of e prvjat shall le daignaW
Response: The City of Redmond is responsible for coordinating the provision of public facilities in
the Redmond UGB. The Urban Growth Management Agreement (UGMA) between Redmond and
July 2006 52
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 E
EXHIBIT -F- PAGE ~J -
Deschutes County specifies all service providers with authority to provide services in the area
covered by the PFP.
(f) A n estimate cf uben eadr faality project udl be n and
Response: Water and sewer improvements that will be needed to adequately serve the Northwest
Area are specified in the amendments proposed for the City's water and wastewater sections of the
PFP, in the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and Exhibit E, and in the Conceptual Facility
Plan (Figure 1.5; Exhibit F) in this application. Improvements for the Northwest Area are proposed
for inclusion in the Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan project list under Phase II -
2006-2010.
The transportation improvements needed to support development in the Northwest Area are
presented in a Northwest Area Public Facilities Needs List entitled Transportation Financing Plan
(Exhibit I-1). Improvements are needed within the Northwest Area ($5,567,378) as well as outside
the Northwest Area ($7,999,626) to accommodate the traffic impacts that are expected to result
from development.
0 A cbscussion qf the pnxzder's existing JundT nwr anisrn and the ability of these and passible ww
nrchanisrn to fond the dezelopnv& of ewh public facility project or system
Response: The existing Redmond PFP describes how it finances water and sewer system
improvements. The proposed improvements and amendments to the PFP are ordinary in nature
and do not require any additional or special financing arrangements. Most water and sewer
extensions will be financed by private development as required improvements associated with
development approval. Sewage treatment capacity is financed with a combination of SDCs, user
fees, and general obligation bonds. The water system production and storage improvements are
financed using water system SDCs and utility rate revenue.
(2) Those public faalities to be addressed in the plan shall indude, but need not be I mad to those spwM in OA R
660-011-0005(5). Facilities inducted in the public facility plan other than those indudeel in OAR 660-011-
0005(5) will not be mzkued for mV1ianx with this nde
Response: The PFP addresses sanitary sewer and domestic water. Transportation system needs
and improvements are addressed in the City's TSP and project needs are listed in the PFP. All
stormwater in Redmond is managed on site, with the exception of drainage systems associated with
the street system. The TSP and related street design standards address street system storm drainage
needs.
(3) It is not the purpose of this ckusion to cause duplication of or to supplant acisting applicable faality plans and
prvgrarrE. Wbrere all or part of an adznozdedged ompro enszw plan facility master plan either of the local
junsdution or appropriate special dist74 cap" irnpmzerrent pragran; ngional functional plan similar plan or
any wn- hinatwn of sudh plans mats all or some of the requirermvz of this diussiory those plans, or prograrrE may
be inwrporated by refer into the public facility plan mTard by this dizision Only those referenczxl portions of
suds doaaniz shall be owidererl to be a pert cfthe public faality plan and shall l e subject to the ad nnistratiw
pmoarim of this cbmion and ORS Chapter 197
July 2006 53
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PAGE
Response: Redmond's water and sewer master plans are incorporated by reference into the PFP.
Water and sewer improvements needed to adequately serve the Northwest Area are proposed as
amendments to the Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan project list under Phase II -
2006-2010. Supporting documentation for these improvements is included in this application as
Exhibit D and Exhibit E, and a Conceptual Facility Plan is found in Figure 1.5 (Exhibit F).
660-011-0015
Responsibility for Public Facility Plan Preparation
(1) Responsibility for the preparation, adoption and anmdrrmt of the public facility plan shall he spo ifid wdxn the
urban grnzeth mmra rt agrt nt If the urban Vvzeth nonage mrt agr rt dies not make proziswn for this
n-xponsiblit} the agn rrt shall be anvzW to do so prior to the preparation of the public facility plan
Response: The Joint Management Agreement OMA) between the City and Redmond and
Deschutes County specifies that responsibility for the preparation of the public facility plan for the
Redmond Urban Growth Area rests with the City of Redmond and identifies other service providers
that participation in the planning process.
(2) The ju-md tion rapomdk for the preparation of the public facility plan shall pmude for the coordination ef such
preparation with the city, wtmty, spawl districts anct as rosary, state andfederal agencies andpnwtepmuchn
gfpuldic faalities.
Response: The City of Redmond is the primary service provider in the Redmond urban area for
municipal water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities. There are two small private water systems in
Redmond that service individual subdivisions: Brentwood and South Heights. Neither provides
service outside their existing service area and their serve areas do not include any of the Northwest
Area of the proposed UGB expansion area. Redmond has lead responsibility for preparing the
Redmond TSP. Deschutes County and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) own
transportation facilities in the transportation planning area and the city coordinates with those
service providers in the preparation of the TSP. There are no other special districts that have
responsibility for public facility plan services.
(3) Special districts, indudirtg port districts, shall assist in the dezdoprn" gthe public facility plan for those faciliw
they p mile Special districts may object to that portion cf dx faaliw plan adopted as part of the copehensize
plan during reziezv by the Conmsion only if they haze conpletea' a spmd district apwror as spot under
ORS 197185 and 197.254(3) and (4) and participated in the debd prwn of such portion cf the public faality
plan
Response: There are no special districts in the Redmond area that are responsible for the provision
of urban services listed in 660-011-005(7). There are two special districts whose boundaries include
all or a portion of the Redmond UGB. The Central Oregon Parks and Recreation District provides
park service to area residents. The Central Oregon Irrigation District operates an irrigation
distribution network through the city. This system is operated for delivery of irrigation water to
district customers through a series of canals. Discharge of storm water or sanitary sewage to the
canal system is prohibited by intergovernmental agreement. There are no port districts in Redmond.
July 2006 54
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT _ PAGE.
(4) These state agencia prong fi#"rg f or or ymk u g etp ertd w-a on public facility systems shall participate in the
dezdopmm of the public facility plan in aaordanx uith their state agency mordination ag wrent under ORS
197.180 and 197.712(2)0.
Response: The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality provided a portion of the funding
for the Redmond Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant. DEQ participated in the preparation of the
city's updated PFP for the treatment plant and the master plan for the sewage collection system.
DEQ considered Redmond's urban expansion when it evaluated expansion of the plant's treatment
capacity, however water and sewer improvements will still be needed to adequately serve the
Northwest Area. These improvements are specified in the amendments proposed for the City's
water and wastewater sections of the PFP, in the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and
Exhibit E, and in the Conceptual Facility Plan (Figure 1.5) in this application (Exhibit F).
The Oregon Department of Transportation is financing improvements to the state highway system
through Redmond. ODOT participated in the preparation of the citys existing Transportation
System Plan (TSP) and in proposed amendments to the TSP associated with this action.
660-011-0020
Public Facility Inventory and Determination of Future Facility Projects
(1) The public facility plan shall indude an imentory of signifuant public facility s)stars. Where the a&nozdedgpd
mmbrdiemize plan hz&gmund daarmerrt or one or mare of the plans or programs listed in OAR 660-011-
0010(3) mntains such an irc mory, that inzentory nuy be incrnporatad by referaxe The inumory shall indude
(a) Mapped location of the facility or serzice area;
(b) Facility capacity or sizq and
(c) Go-eral assessment of condition of dx facility (e- g, my goa4 gooey fair, poor, my poor).
Response: The proposed UGB expansion area, including the Northwest Area, is not served by
municipal water or sewer, so no additional inventory information need be included in the PFP. An
assessment of the road network is in the City's existing TSP; the planning area for the TSP extends
beyond UGB and includes the expansion area. There are no drainage courses, stormwater
conveyance channels, or detention facilities in the expansion area.
(2) The public facility plan shall iclavv* significant public facility pgeas uehuh are nod to support the land uses
designated in the adz nozelgal mmpmhensize plan The public facility plan shall list the title of the pgat and
describe eao~ public facility M act in terms cf A w gcfacility, serzice area, and facility capacity
Response: Water and sewer improvements that will adequately serve the Northwest Area are
specified in the amendments proposed for the City's water and wastewater sections of the PFP, in
the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and Exhibit E, and in the Conceptual Facility Plan
(Figure 1.5; Exhibit F) in this application. Among the improvements are:
■ 36" sewer interceptor;
■ 12" sewer main;
■ Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) expansion;
■ 16" water main;
■ 12" water main; and
■ Two (2) 2-million-gallon reservoirs.
July 2006 55
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT __&-PAGE
Transportation improvements are listed in the proposed amendments to the Redmond TSP and are
as follows:
• NW 27th Street
• NW Maple Avenue
• NW 35th Street
• NW Hemlock Avenue
• NW Spruce Avenue
• Widen OR 126 (State Highway) at specific locations
• Traffic signal at OR 126 / Helmholtz intersection
• Eastbound right turn lane at OR 126 / Helmholtz
• Dual left turn lanes at OR 126 / 27th Street
• Widening of 27th Street
A draft TSP map for the proposed UGB expansion area and a list of projects for the Northwest
Area are included in this application as Figure 1.6 (Exhibit G) and Exhibit H respectively.
Redmond manages stormwater using on-site retention and infiltration systems so there will be no
discharge to off-site stormwater conveyance elements. The public drainage system only serves
public streets and is designed into the street system. Storm runoff from public streets is
"discharged" into groundwater through infiltration systems. There are no discharge points or
outfalls from the storm drainage system to any surface waters.
(3) Project descriptions within the facility plan mzy wire nn*,catiom based on subsayor enumronv l urpact
studies, design studies, facility master plans, capital in pmzerrar program,, or site awilabdityt The pubic facility
plan should anticipate these changes as sp&-#W in OA R 660- 011-0045.
Response: The PFP amendments for water and sewer services proposed in this application serve
only a portion of the proposed UGB expansion area; and given the relatively small size of the
Northwest Area and the scale of the facilities necessary to serve them, it is unlikely that the proposed
system improvements will need modification because of subsequent environmental studies or other
conditional requirements. Future PFP amendments that address the rest of the proposed UGB
expansion area will take the potential for modification into account.
Updates to both sewer and water master plans are programmed in the City's existing Water and
Wastewater Capital Improvements Plans (OPs).
660-011-0025
Timing ofRequired Public Facilities
(1) The public facilities plan shall include a ga7eral estimate cf the tiring for the plamzd public fadlity prt7 This
tin4 mnponow of the public facility plan can k- mt in sezeral wz.)s... The timing of r jerts may also he tied
to spa* yean.
(2) Gimn the ch}ferent nethals used to estimate the timing cf u c facdit es, the public facility plan shall identify
projects as aawnng in either the short term or long terra basal on those factors iihidh are related to project
July 2006 56
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE
dezelopm7x For those projects designata;l for dezdpwit in the short terra the pubic facility plan shall z bit6
an apprm unite yt?ar for dezdoprr m
Response: The proposed extension of water and sewer facilities is dependent on private
investment decisions. The Northwest Area is immediately adjacent to developed urban areas, and
the infrastructure needed to serve some of its future development can tap existing water and sewer
lines that have capacity to serve the area.
The city anticipates that the Northwest Area will develop within the next five years (i.e. year 1-5 of
the PFP QP program). More specifically, water and sewer improvements needed to adequately
serve the Northwest Area are proposed as amendments to the Water and Wastewater Capital
Improvement Plan project list under Phase II - 2006-2010.
660-011-0030
Location of Public Facility Projects
(1) The public facility plan shall identify the grral location of the public facility project in sp 6aty appropriate for
the facility. L orations qrprojects antiap2tad to be carried out in the short term can be sp mvre precisely than
the locations q~pgects antic*ted for dezd prror in the long term
(2) A wvpated locations for public facilities nuy require nx> 4Cuations basal on subsequern amrornrerrtal zrrplct
studras design stua4a, facility master plans, capffd inpozermnt program,, or land awdabdity. The public
facility plan should antiap2te those changers as spa in OA R 660- 011-0045.
Response: Adequate water and sewer facilities will be provided to the Northwest Area by
extending the service network from the adjacent urban area inside the existing UGB and completing
the improvements specified in the PFP amendments proposed in this application, and supported by
Exhibit D and Exhibit E. Locations for the proposed improvements are shown in Conceptual
Facility Plan (Figure 1.5; Exhibit F) in this application. Because the plan map is conceptual, there is
some flexibility in the location of improvements.
660-011-0035
Determination of Rough Cost Estimates for Public Facility Projects and Local Review of
Funding Mechanisms for Public Facility Systems
(1) The public facility plan shall indude rough cast estimates for those sewer, uater, and transportation public facility
projects i bm iai in the facility plan The intent qf these rough out estimates is ta•
(a) Prod& an estimate 6f the fiscal requzrerrents to support the land use designations in the achnoz&lgpd
a>rrprd)miw plary and
(b) For use by the facility prouder in muezurg the pmuder's existing fiaAng nrdv?Zisrrs (eg., gerrral funds,
general obligation and reume bonds,1wd zmpwzerrerr district; system deuioprrent o~aW, etc) andpossdie
altematize finding nchanistrs. In addztzon to irx "ng rough cwt estimates for each proj4 the facility plan
shall indude a discussion of the pwuder's existing fiau rmxhanisnz and the ability of tbae and passible
mw nw6anisns to fund the dezdoprmnt of a h public facility project or system These fi ndzr g nrchanism
may also be desoibed in terra of e al guiddines or knob policies.
Response: Water and sewer improvements that will be needed to adequately serve the Northwest
Area are specified in the amendments proposed for the City's water and wastewater sections of the
July 2006 57
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT-- PAGE ---LL
PFP and in the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and Exhibit E in this application. These
amendments and exhibits provide project descriptions, general location, and cost estimates.
The existing Redmond PFP describes how the Gty finances water and sewer system improvements.
The proposed improvements and amendments to the PFP are ordinary in nature and rough cost
estimates have been provided Most water and sewer extensions will be financed by private
development as required improvements associated with development approval. Sewage treatment
capacity is financed with a combination of SDCs, user fees, and general obligation bonds. The water
system production and storage improvements are financed using water system SDCs and utility rate
revenue.
660-011-0040
Date of Submittal of Public Facility Plans
The pubic facility plan shall be leteg adoptsg and suhatted by the time of the responsible junsdiaion's pen4Ac
reri w The pubic facility plan shall be mi vBd under OAR Chapter 660, Dim= 25, "Perio&Reziee Keith the
jurisdiction's conpn heraiw plan and land use regulations. Portions of pubic fmilaty plans adopted as payt qf
co ensiW plans prior to the responsible junschaion's periAc muervNeill k muerted pursuant to OAR Chapter
660, Divi ion 18, "Post A &nouledgrrent Procahtres
Response: The proposed PFP amendments associated with this action are subject to review as a
post-acknowledgement plan amendment.
Redmond does not currently have a policy that defines roles and responsibilities for carrying out
public facility planning in the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary, as required by state land use
planning rules. Public Facility policy 11.36 is being added to Chapter 11 to address this requirement.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have a policy framework for coordinating the
development of a Public Facility Plan for land inside the Redmond UGB.
2. Water and sewer improvements that will be needed to adequately serve the Northwest Area of
the proposed UGB expansion are specified in the amendments proposed for the Qty's water
and wastewater sections of the PFP and in the supporting documentation in Exhibit D and
Exhibit E in this application. These amendments and exhibits provide project descriptions,
general location, and cost estimates.
3. The Conceptual Facility Plan for water and sewer is included in this application as Figure 1.5
(Exhibit F).
4. Water and sewer improvements needed to adequately serve the Northwest Area are proposed as
amendments to the Water and Wastewater Capital Improvement Plan project list under Phase II
- 2006-2010.
5. Transportation improvements needed to serve the Northwest Area are detailed in amendments
proposed to the Redmond TSP. A draft TSP Map for the proposed UGB expansion area is
included as Figure 1.6 (Exhibit G), and a list of projects for the Northwest Area as Exhibit H.
6. Redmond manages stormwater using on-site retention and infiltration systems so there will be
no discharge to off-site stormwater conveyance elements. The public drainage system only
serves public streets and is designed into the street system. Storm runoff from public streets is
July 2006 58
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE
"discharged" into groundwater through infiltration systems. There are no discharge points or
outfalls from the storm drainage system to any surface waters.
The existing Redmond PFP describes how it finances water and sewer system improvements.
Most water and sewer extensions will be financed by private development as required
improvements associated with development approval. Sewage treatment capacity is financed
with a combination of SDCs, user fees, and general obligation bonds. The water system
production and storage improvements are financed using water system SDCs and utility rate
revenue.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for public
facilities per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11.
Goal 12 Transportation -OAR 660, Division 12
Purpose... to in pknvit Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation) and promote the dezeloprrent 9F safe,
amwment and emnornic transportation sytems that am designed to m ice reliance on the auton nbile so that the air
pollution, traffic and other liurbdity pmvblerra facrrl by urban areas in other pans of the muntry might be awided
to explain how fwd gozernrrents and state agmaes ?uponsible for transportation planning demtmstrate owpliarce
with other statewide planning gaols and to identify how transportation facilities are prozu& on rural lands consistent
with the gays. The division sets requinwertts for coordination anuT affaied lezels of gownin nt for preparation
adoptiory refiromr, implementation and amendment of tramponation s3stem plans. Transportation syte n plans
adopted fulfill the 7vTdner7ents for public faalities planning nequired under ORS 197.712(2)(e), Gail 11 and
OAR Chapter 660, Div ion 11... intended to assure that the planned transportation sytem supports a pattern of
trawl and land use in urban areas whid) will avid the air pollutiorg traffic and hwhility problems faced by other
areas of the coin con knEnt state and local efforts to mgt other *eetius, in dudirg amtatning urban
dezelo~ mhrcing the cast cf public senzces, prt cot ftng farm and forest land reducing air, water and noise
pollution cwerzing ereW and raarlcirg emrrssions efgreenhouse gorses that contribute to gloW dimzte orange not
intended to mike local gozerrarern determinations "land use deersior5" under ORS 197.015(10).... hoz&w,,
marry detannations relating to the adoption and inpknoration cf tramportation plans will be land use daviom.
660-012-0015
Preparation and Coordination of Transportation System Plans
(3) Cities and marines shall prepare adopt and anend local TSPs for lands within their planmirg junsdution in
compliance with this ckusionx
(a) Loral TSPs shall establish a system qf transportation facilities and serums adx7mte to rrd wb tified
local transportation na-,ls and shall be consistent with regional TSPs and adopted elements qf the state
TSP;
Response: The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted Transportation System
Plans for the Ubran Reserve Area (URA) and the UGB. These TSP's have been acknowledged by
the State of Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. The City's TSP was
approved by the City Council when they adopted Ordinance No. 2001-10 on May 23, 2001, and
subsequently amended the TSP by adopting Ordinance No. 2001-25, Ordinance No. 2002-05 and
Ordinance No. 2003-12. Deschutes County adopted the Redmond TSP on June 27, 2001, by
Ordinance No. 2001-029. Deschutes County adopted a TSP for the Urban Reserve Area on
July 2006 59
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT Le PAGE
September 7, 2005, by approving Ordinance Number 2005-023. The current Redmond TSP and the
Deschutes County TSP will be completely updated to accommodate the 2,299 acre UGB
amendment (see the draft TSP Map in Figure 1.6 or Exhibit G). The TSPs are being amended to
show the Westside Transportation Corridor which is an arterial street on the west side of Redmond
that will extend from the intersection of Pershall / Highway 97 in the north to the intersection of
Helmholtz / Canal Boulevard in the south. The Counts TSP shows the alignment of the Westside
Transportation Corridor and also eliminates some portions of the collector street system in the
southern portion of the Redmond URA because of topography (i.e. Forked Horn Butte) and the
current alignments of Canal and Helmholtz. The adoption of both TSP amendments is being
coordinated between the City and Deschutes County, however, both jurisdictions anticipate
additional amendments and updates when the master plan for the City's TSP is finished in the Fall
2007.
660-012-0060
Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(1) Where an anvon ent to a functional planti an acknozPlerl d mnpmbmiw plan, or a land use regulation would
significantly affect an ex fisting or plarmed transportation fadlity, the lmd gozenvn" shall put in place nzaswes
as pmuded in swim (2) of As rule to assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the hira# d f inutiorg
caapuaty, and performance standards (e g. lezd of sovice, zd me to capacity wk etc) of the facility. A plan or
land use regulation amurdkv significantly affects a transportation facility.. .
Response: The City is updating the 2001 Public Faalities Plan, as amended, and has completed a
Transportation Analysis of the impact of development in the Northwest Area. The 400-acre
Northwest Area has been assumed to generate 2,500 PM peak hour trips distributed within the
existing transportation network
A. The purpose of the analysis was to analyze and mitigate the transportation impacts resulting
from development in the Northwest Area until the TSP can be updated for the entire 2,299
acre UGB amendment. The proposed development of the Northwest Area assumes that the
City would rezone the study area to allow high to medium density residential development
and potential commercial development (Neighborhood Center) at the intersection of Maple
Avenue / 27th Street.
B. The DKS study (June 21, 2006) analyzed the impacts of 2,500 PM peak hour trips and lists
mitigation projects associated with those impact (see NW Area Public Facilities Needs List).
The total estimated cost for improvements within the Northwest Area is $5,567,378.00 and
the total cost for mitigation projects outside the Northwest Area is $7,999,626.40. The total
cost of projects is $13,567,004.40.
C. The City is amending the 2001 Pubic Facilities Plan to include the mitigation projects to serve
the Northwest Area via adoption of a Transportation Capital Improvement Plan specific to
development within the Northwest Area.
Any property, combination of properties or any other area located within the proposed UGB
amendment area will have to wait until the City's TSP update and corresponding Public Facilities
Plans are adopted before urban development can occur. Annexation and development will be
dependent on a Master Plan being approved for the area along with concurrent public facilities and
services, including transportation.
July 2006 60
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 9
EXHIBIT __-E___ PAGE
The DKS study recommended that the following projects be constructed to serve the additional
demand resulting from approximately 2,500 PM peak hour weekday trips:
• Widen 27th to 5 - lanes from Highland Avenue to Obsidian Avenue
• Construct Eastbound and Westbound right-turn lanes at OR 126 / 27th
• Construct second (double) Westbound left-turn lanes at OR 1261 / 27th
• Construct an Eastbound right-turn lane at OR 126 / Helmholtz
• Construct Eastbound and Westbound left-turn lanes at Maple / 27th
• Construct a Westbound right-turn lane at Maple / 27th
• Install a traffic signal at Maple / 27th
• Construct a Westbound right-turn lane at Maple / 19th
In addition to the road improvements, the study recommends that that the Redmond
Comprehensive Plan and Urban Area Transportation Plan be amended to:
• Designate Maple Avenue as a Minor Arterial within the proposed UGB area and the City
limits
• Designate 27th Street as a Minor Arterial within the proposed UGB area and the City limits
Additionally, the Westside Transportation Corridor (which includes portions of Maple, 27th
Northwest Way and Pershall) will be designated as a Minor Arterial.
The City PFP is being amended to include the projects recommended by the DKS study and the
estimated costs for constructing the recommended projects. The City, County and ODOT
recognize that the TSP / PFP amendments are an interim measure to accommodate development of
approximately 400 acres of land commonly referred to as the Northwest Area. A full TSP and PFP
will be adopted in 2007 for the entire 2,299 acre UGB amendment.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with OAR 660, Division 12
requirements for amending the City and County TSPs. These amendments will accommodate about
2,500 PM peak trips that will be generated by development in the 400 acre Northwest Area.
July 2006 61
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 9
EXHIBIT _E_ PAGE
C. FOR RUSSELL PROPERTY OF PROPOSED MAP AMENDMENT
The Russell property lies on the southern city limits, east of Highway 97 (taxlot
1513290001200). The property is currently bisected by the city limits boundary and UGB so
that one-half acre falls within the city and UGB, and the remaining four acres fall outside of
these boundaries. The property is developed and committed as an urban commercial use, and the
structure on the property is also divided by the city limits boundary and UGB.
The proposed map amendment seeks to consolidate this taxlot so that the whole property falls
within the UGB. As with the other land proposed for UGB expansion, the Russell property will be
designated Urban Holding Area (UHA) according to proposed amendments in Title 20 of the
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and proposed language for Policy 10 of Chapter 2 (Land
Use Planning) in the City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan. This land will also be zoned Urban
Holding zone (UH 10) according to proposed amendments in Title 20 of the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan and proposed language in the City of Redmond Development Code, Chapter 8
of the City's Code. The property owner will be required to apply for a comprehensive plan map
amendment and zone change as well as annexation in order to be annexed into the City and receive
City zoning. This process will follow procedures for obtaining urban zoning and development
approval for parcels less than 10 acres, as established in proposed revisions to the City's
Comprehensive Plan Urbanization policies.
The portion of the property within the city and UGB is currently zoned Light Industrial (Ml) and
the county portion is zoned Mixed Use Agriculture (MUA 10). The CountyMUA 10 designation is
classified as exception land. The existing commercial use is compatible with the City Ml zone. The
property is fully served by public facilities, and its inclusion in the UGB does not materially affect
the city's inventory of commercial land because it is a developed parcel. Its inclusion in the
proposed UGB map amendment is essentially a "housekeeping" matter and an opportunity to
correct an earlier mapping oversight. This allows the City to pursue a policy of including only whole
taxlots in UGB amendments.
Goall. Citizen Involvement
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process.
Response: Because including the Russell property in the proposed UGB expansion is in response
to the property owner's request and essentially makes a map correction, notice in addition to that
already given for the entire proposed UGB map amendment area was unnecessary. The property is
not being included in order to meet identified housing, employment, or other land needs, nor does
it significantly affect the inventory of housing or employement lands.
A series of citizen involvement opportunities were part of designating the Redmond Urban Reserve
Area and evaluating the proposed UGB map amendment, as described in the Goal 1 response and
findings for the entire proposed map amendment earlier in this report. Hearings for the proposed
amendment were preceded by notice in local newspapers and mailed notices to affected property
owners according to Measure 56 requirements. This notice was supplemented by project
information and announcements on the County's website, which provided a link to the City's
website.
July 2006 62
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT L._.__ PAGE
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond engaged citizens in a process that allowed citizen participation for
establishing Urban Reserve Areas.
2. The City of Redmond engaged citizens in a visioning process and in discussions at hearings
about alternative UGB amendments to address identified residential land needs and to amend
the comprehensive plan.
4. The City of Redmond held public meetings, workshops, and special hearings and provided
opportunities for citizens to comment on proposals to amend the comprehensive plan.
5. The City of Redmond took steps to inform the public about the hearing process through
newspaper notices and online information, and to inform affected property owners through
mailed notice and online information.
6. The City of Redmond considered citizen testimony prior to adopting amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. Inclusion of the Russell property in the proposed UGB amendment is a "housekeeping" action
to correct a mapping error and does not address housing, employment, or other land needs nor
does it significantly affect the inventory of these lands.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for citizen involvement per Statewide
Land Use Planning Goal 1.
Goal 2.• Land Use Planning
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision
and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions
and actions.
Response:
Additionally, the proposed inclusion of the property in the UGB expansion area Rather, this
proposal corrects what is more or less a mapping error that split the taxlot in two.
Findings:
1. The Russell property that falls outside of the existing UGB and city limits is part of the adopted
Redmond Urban Reserve Area (URA) and, as such, has undergone the analysis and public
involvement necessary for designating the land for urbanization within the next 50 years.
2. Including the Russell property in the proposed UGB map amendment is not in response to a
need for employment or housing land, but rather corrects a mapping error that currently splits
the taxlot and its structure in two.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for land use planning per Statewide
Land Use Planning Goal 2.
July 2006 63
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 H
EXHIBIT PAGE_
Goal9.• Economic Development
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities
vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.
Findings:
1. The entire Russell property is approximately 5 acres and, if entirely included in the UGB, has
potential for development beyond the single business currently sited on it or for redevelopment.
However, because there is already a commercial use developed on the property and the site size
is small, further development or redevelopment will not significantly add or detract from the
inventory of employment land in Redmond.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for economic development per
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 9.
Goal 11.• Public Facilities and Services
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.
Findings:
1. Because part of the lot is already inside the Redmond UGB and city limits, the Russell property
is currently served by all necessary public facilities including water, sewer, and roads.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for public facilities planning per
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11.
Goal12.• Transportation
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.
Findings:
1. The Russell property is currently served with transportation facilities.
2. The area of the entire Russell property is 5 acres. If further development or redevelopment were
to be proposed for the site, the applicant will need to provide findings for Transportation
Planning Rule (TPR) compliance.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for transportation planning per
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 12.
Goal 14.• Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efpcient transition from rural to urban land use, to
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to
ensure efficient use ofland, and to provide for livable communities.
Land Nail
E stablishm nt and charge cf urban growth bw7danes shall be bused on the fclbwng•
July 2006 64
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 9
Sjr-
EXHIBIT ---F, - PAGE
(1) De nonstrated nerd to aczomrrodate long range urban populatim; comistent with a 20-year population famut
coort inatad with affau d local gozernrrents;
(2) Dm mstrated need for land suitable to acmrrar"te housing, mploynm oppcmunities, hwbility or uses sucb as
public facilities, strew and r cads, schools, parks or open space, or arty mrrlbination qf the n d categories in this
subsaiion (2);
In detenr MT nft~ local gozemrroit nny spa* charactenstics, such as parcel size topography or pracinity,
sary for land to le suitable for an zdarfied reel
Prior to ocpanchrg an urban growth brrurrdary, local gozemrreruts shall dm mstrate that need; cannot reasonably be
as mr>xaated on land alraldy inside the w ban growth bw7dary.
Findings:
1. The inclusion of the Russell property in the proposed UGB map amendment does respond to a
need for housing or employment land. The property is already developed and committed for
urban use.
2. The Russell property is being proposed for inclusion in order to consolidate a taxlot that is
currently bisected by the Redmond UGB and city limits.
Boundary L oration
The location of the urban growth boundary and charms to the brnmdary shall be determined by euzluating altem aw
boundary locations cwa tent with ORS 197.298 and with consideration of the fcflouirg factors:
(1) Effuient aw"r elation of uL~ land rya's
(2) Orderly and aonornc pro ision qj p is facilities and sates;
(3) Cnparatize auirtmr oxg arW, economic and social owayences; and
(4) Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with rmrby agnadiural and font actizities oauning on farmand forest
land outside the UGB.
Findings:
1. The portion of the Russell property currently outside of the Redmond UGB and city limits is
zoned Mixed Use Agriculture WA 10) by Deschutes County. This land qualifies as exception
land.
2. The Russell property is already developed as an urban, commercial use.
3. The portion of the Russell property proposed for inclusion the UGB expansion area is part of
the Redmond URA. ORS 197.298 identifies land in URAs as the first priority for land to be
included in UGB expansions.
4. Including this portion of the Russell property consolidates a taxlot that is currently bisected by
the Redmond UGB and city limits. Bringing the entire property into the UGB sets a precedent
for policy that the City of Redmond wants to establish so that only entire lots can be included in
proposed UGB amendments.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for urbanization per Statewide Land
Use Planning Goal 14.
July 2006 65
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE '0
D. FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS
The following findings are made regarding the compliance of text amendments to the City of
Redmond Comprehensive Land Use Plan related to plan policies concerning economic
development, housing, economic development, public facilities, and urban growth management.
Goal 1. Citizen Involvement
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process.
Response: The public outreach efforts associated with the proposed map amendment, also served
as a forum for reviewing the need for proposed policy amendments to the general plan. Policy
amendments relate specifically to the addition of land into the UGB and the management of that
land in a manner consistent with findings in the 2005 Urbanization Study. Explanations of the need
to revise certain plan policies were explained at community hearings in the spring of 2005 and at
planning commission hearings in June of 2005 concerning map and text amendments. The
enumerated findings in Subsection A above also document the public review process for proposed
plan policy amendments.
Goal 2.• Land Use Planning
To establish a land use planning process and policy ftamewotk as a basis for all decision
and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions
and actions.
Response: The plan text amendment related to Land Use Planning policies 9-11 are intended to
update the existing policy and procedural foundation for managing land development in Redmond
and managing the planning process for adding land to the urban growth boundary. The planning
documents referenced under Goal 2 findings in subsection A above also were relied on to formulate
necessary policy amendments.
The proposed text amendments address two land use planning processes that have not been present
before. The first is to establish a process for bringing land into the Urban Growth Boundary given
that, until recently, there were no designated urban reserve areas adjacent to Redmond.
Urbanization Policies 3, 4, and 5 address how frequently the UGB land supply is to be reviewed,
establish that URAs should be the first areas added to the UGB, and that the city and Deschutes
County should maintain a 30-year supply of land in urban reserves so that the total urban land area
planned for covers a 50-year planning horizon.
The proposed text amendments include policies that establish plan designations for all land in the
UGB, including a new Urban Holding Area plan designation for all land brought into the UGB for
which land use planning has not been completed. Deschutes County has adopted a new Urban
Holding-10 zoning district (DCC Title 20) and applied this zone to all unincorporated land being
added to the UGB. The City of Redmond has adopted a similar UH 10 zone (RDC 8.130).
Redmond Comprehensive Plan Urbanization policies (see Goal 14 below) have been amended to
require master planning that must be followed to complete the land use planning process for land
designated and zoned Urban Holding. Redmond's UH 10 zone codifies requirements for preparing
Jury 2006 66
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE /
master plans (RDC 8.0130.10); these procedures must be fulfilled prior to land being annexed to the
city and rezoned for urban use.
Urbanization policies also make reference to a Redmond Urban Area Framework Plan, which is a
concept planning document that provides general guidance for the anticipated urban form for
unplanned areas in the UGB and for urban reserve areas. There also is a policy allowing small
parcels (QO acres) designated Urban Holding to obtain urban zoning and development approval.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond prepared or secured a fact-based analysis of future urban land needs, and
concepts for delivering public facilities and transportation services to future urban lands.
2. The City of Redmond prepared a technical analysis for expanding the urban growth area
primarily based on the logical extension of urban services, particularly sewer service.
3. The City of Redmond modified the factual basis in the Comprehensive Plan to be consistent
with coordinated population forecasts and area employment forecasts.
4. The City of Redmond amended its Land Use Planning policies to list Comprehensive Plan Map
designations and corresponding city and county zoning districts that are compatible with the
plan designations.
5. The City of Redmond revised its Urbanization policies to include urban growth management
procedures for adding land to the UGB and for completing land use planning for all properties
in the UGB prior to development approval.
Conclusion: The City has complied with state requirements for land use planning per Statewide
Land Use Planning Goal 2.
Goal3. Agricultural Lands
To preserve and maintain agricultural lands
Response: EFU land that is brought into the Redmond UGB is being rezoned UH 10 under Title
20 of the Deschutes County Code. This new zoning district allows most agricultural practices to
continue as a permitted use. Property owners may apply for agricultural farm deferral status under
this zone. The City of Redmond's UH 10 zone is nearly identical to the county zone and allows for
the continuation of agricultural enterprises as a permitted use.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond has adopted an Urban Holding plan designation that allows farm uses to
continue even after inclusion in the Redmond UGB until the land is needed for urban uses. The
County has adopted the City's Comprehensive Plan by reference for areas not within the City.
2. The City of Redmond has adopted an Urban Holding zone that will apply to unplanned land in
the city until the land is needed for urban uses. Farm uses are permitted in this zone.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for agriculture
per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 3.
July 2006 67
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE ?2-
Goal5.• Open Space, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources
To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open space
Response: No policy amendments are proposed to the City of Redmond's acknowledged Goal 5
program. The existing protections afforded to identified Goal 5 resources will apply to land that is
annexed to the city. Until that occurs, the Countys Goal 5 program applies.
Before land designated UHA on the Comprehensive Plan Map can be zoned for development, it
must either:
■ Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master planning process outlined
in Urbanization Policy 12; or
■ Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
Urbanization Policy 12.d requires that an applicant's master plan include an inventory of significant
Goal 5 resources and measures for protecting resource sites consistent with the citys Goal 5
resource protection program. Urbanization Policy 18.d requires that properties of less than 10 acres
that secure urban planning approval through a site development approval process must demonstrate
that Goal 5 resources are identified and managed according the Redmond's adopted Goal 5 resource
management program. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of Redmond
development code also requires applicants to identify significant resource sites, particularly irrigation
canals and significant natural features (RDC 8.3025.2)
Technical studies conducted by OTAK relating to the establishment of the Redmond URA and
background information that are included in the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan show that
there is currently only one significant Goal 5 resource identified in the RURA. There may be scenic
views and potential open space areas that would not be deemed significant in a rural setting but
would be considered significant in an urban setting. Consequently, the city and county have agreed,
as a matter of policy, to require that master planning inventory potentially significant resources
rather than relying on the existing county inventory.
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted an Urban Holding plan designation
for land added to the UGB that has not completed land use planning.
2. The City has adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated URBAN
HOLDING Area to analyze open space and natural resource impacts as a condition for
completing land use planning prior to obtaining approval for urban development. The County
has adopted the City's Comprehensive Plan by reference for areas not within the City.
3. Urbanization Policies 12.d and 18.d require applicants seeking land use approval for urban
development to inventory and manage significant open space, scenic and historic areas, and
natural resources in accordance with the city acknowledged Goal 5 resource protection program.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for open
space, scenic and historic areas, and natural resources per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 5.
July 2006 68
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE '73
Goal 6.• Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state
Response: No policy amendments are proposed to the City of Redmond's acknowledged
comprehensive plan policies related to water resources. Urbanization policies require the
completion of land use planning for land being added to the UGB, which include requirements for
applicants to:
■ Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12; or
■ Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that applicants demonstrate the master plan or development project can meet
requirements for complying with Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources with special emphasis
placed on storm water management. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of
Redmond development code also requires applicants to identify significant impacts related to air,
water or land resources through special studies and investigations (RDC 8.3030).
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted an Urban Holding plan designation
for land added to the UGB that has not completed land use planning.
2. The City has adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated URBAN
HOLDING to analyze air, water and land quality impacts as a condition for completing land use
planning prior to obtaining approval for urban development. The County has adopted the City's
Comprehensive Plan by reference for those areas not within the City.
3. There are no identified air, water, or land resources or areas of concern in the Redmond Urban
Reserve Areas.
4. The City of Redmond has developed urban storm water management regulations to protect
ground water resources from this potential source of contamination.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for air, water
and land resources per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 6.
Goal 7• Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
To protect people and property from natural hazards
Response: No policy amendments are proposed to the City of Redmond's acknowledged
comprehensive plan policies related to hazard areas. Urbanization policies require the completion of
land use planning for land being added to the UGB, which include requirements for applicants to:
■ Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
■ Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that applicants demonstrate the subject properties can meet requirements for
complying with Goal 7, Natural Hazards. Urbanization Policy 12.g requires master plans to address
natural hazards. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of Redmond development
July 2006 69
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT __6___ PAGE
code also requires applicants to identify hazardous conditions through special studies and
investigations (RDC 8.3030).
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted an Urban Holding plan designation
for land added to the UGB that has not completed land use planning.
2. The City has adopted a master planning policy that requires land designated URBAN
HOLDING to identify areas subject to natural hazards prior to obtaining approval for urban
development. The County has adopted the City`s Comprehensive Plan by reference for those
areas not within the City.
3. There are no identified natural hazard areas in the RURA.
4. The City of Redmond has requirements in its development code to disclose hazard areas
through its site and design review regulations (RDC 8.3030).
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for natural
hazards per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 7.
Goal & Recreational Needs
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where
appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination
resorts.
Response: No text amendments are proposed relating to Redmond's acknowledged plan policies
on recreation services or resources. Before land designated UH on the Comprehensive Plan Map
can be zoned for development, it must either.
■ Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
■ Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that applicants identify possible park sites to comply with Goal 8, and with
the city's park plan. Urbanization Policy 12.e requires master plans to address park and open space
opportunities in the planning process.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for park and
recreational needs per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 8.
Goal9.• Economic Development
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities
vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens
Response: The proposed plan amendments include replacing the Economic Development
technical section of the plan with an updated plan element based on the land needs analysis for
employment land uses that was developed byECONorthwest, Inc.
July 2006 70
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT - PAGE
The proposed text amendments also include a number of new and updated policies. Some of these
changes refine or remove outdated economic development policies. Economic Development Goal
5 is revised to promote employment growth closer to residential areas. Policy 9.6 calls for the city to
establish a campus industrial zone. Policies 13.g and 131 call for establishment of mixed use
neighborhood commercial districts in emerging residential areas. Policy 9.14 calls for the city to plan
its economic land needs based on the technical analysis associated with a buildable land needs
analysis. Policies 9.15 and 9.19 call for expanding the city's commercial business disctict (CBD) to
keep pace with population growth and for the development of a special CBD plan.
The proposed UGB text amendments in Chapter 2 include new plan designations that enable the
development of small-scale neighborhood retail uses in future residential neighborhoods. The
amendments also establish a Mixed Use Employment (MUE) plan designation that enables planned
development of employment areas with a mix of industrial and primary employment uses with
limited supporting commercial uses.
Findings
1. While the City has a surplus of commercial land, that land is not in the proper designations or
locations to foster the transportation-efficient development patterns. Redmond is still a relatively
small city and the land pattern in its existing comprehensive plan was appropriate for a city of its
size. As the City grows to 45,000 people in the next 20 years it will need to plan for two to three
additional retail centers. It should also consider designating land for an office park someplace
west of Highway 97. A location along Highway 126 would be and obvious and accessible choice.
2. The proposed designation of approximately 100 acres of land for "Mixed Use Employment"
provides a plan designation for expanding employment to Redmond's west side.
3. Proposed text amendments to existing economic development policies bring these policies in
line with the city's current economic development strategies for the downtown and for achieving
a better balance between housing and employment land areas.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for economic
development per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 9.
Goa110. Housing
To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
Response: The primary purpose of the proposed text amendments is to codify procedures for
adding land to the UGB so that the City and Deschutes County comply with statutory requirements
for maintaining a 20-year supply of residential land inside the Redmond UGB. This will enable the
city and county to more easily ensure there is an adequate inventory of urbanizable land for housing.
The text amendments establish the city's coordinated population forecast for the year 2025 as the
basis for planning residential land needs (Policy 14.2). The amendments also replace the housing
element of the comprehensive plan so that the housing need analysis in the comprehensive plan is
consistent with adopted population forecast (see Text Amendment Exhibit B). The technical analysis
for Goal 10 Housing was developed from an Urbanization study prepared by ECONorthwest, Inc.
To identify housing needs consistent with the Goal 10 requirements, ECONorthwest ran a model
constructed by Oregon Housing and Community Services (HCS) and also applied a secondary
July 2006 71
Adopted by City Council on August S, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT t PAGE
housing needs analysis that they designed. The results of this technical analysis are summarized in
the technical amendment and provide the factual basis for determining Redmond's housing land
needs. The analysis is summarized in the findings in subsection A above.
The ECONorthwest analysis also identified policy measures the city could employ to ensure
adequate land is provided for to meet needed housing types and to expand opportunities for using
land that already is in the UGB for housing. Those recommendations are implemented through the
proposed housing policy amendments (Goal 10.7 and Policies 10.8, 10.34, 10.35, 10.36).
Amendments to policies in the Economic Development Chapter also promote housing development
in the downtown and in neighborhood commercial districts to expand housing choices and
opportunities for residents to live in closer proximity to )obs and services (Policies 9.42 and 9.43).
Policy amendments also include several housing related policies that were formerly in the
Urbanization chapter, and eliminate several policies that relate to urban design and site development.
Those policies were considered unnecessary because they do not relate to goals for meeting housing
needs. The land use issues those policies touched on are addressed in the city's development code.
Finally several policy changes are included to comply with state laws regarding the regulation and
placement of mobile homes (Policies 10.8, 10.9).
Findings:
1. The following residential land use designations and corresponding zones are shown on the
Redmond Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Map:
■ R -L Low Density Residential ; R 1 and R-2 zones
■ R -M Medium Density Residential; R-3 and R-4 zones
■ RH High Density Residential; R-5 zone
■ NC Neighborhood Mixed Use Center, zone under development will favor high density
housing
2. The ECONorthwest housing needs analysis has been used as a basis for updating the city's Goal
10 housing needs analysis.
3. The housing need analysis was conducted in accordance with state rules for determining urban
housing needs.
4. Redmond housing policies have been modified to be consistent with state laws regarding the
regulation and placement of manufactured housing.
5. Redmond housing policies have been updated to establish housing density ranges to ensure a
range of housing choices are available in the community.
6. Redmond plan policies have been modified to expand housing choices in the downtown and
planned neighborhood commercial centers.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for housing
per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 10.
Goal 11. Public Facilities and Services
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.
July 2006 72
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT F- PAGE
Response: Redmond does not currently have a policy that defines roles and responsibilities for
carrying out public facility planning in the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary, as required by state
land use planning rules. Public Facility policy 11.36 is being added to Chapter 11 to address this
requirement.
Urbanization policies require the completion of land use planning for land being added to the UGB,
which include requirements for applicants to:
■ Secure approval for conversion to urban use through the master plan process outlined in
Urbanization Policy 12, or
■ Secure a comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and site plan approval through the
special site approval process outlined in Urbanization Policy 18.
These policies require that applicants demonstrate the subject properties can meet requirements for
complying with Goal 11, Public Facilities. Urbanization Policy 12.1 requires master plans to address
the provision of public facilities. Article IV - Site & Design Review Standards of the City of
Redmond development code also requires applicants to identify how services will be provided to
proposed urban developments through special studies and investigations (RDC 8.3030).
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County has a policy framework for coordinating the
development of a Public Facility Plan for the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary.
2. The City of Redmond has a master planning process that requires updating public facility plans
to ensure compliance with Goal 11 prior to annexation and the approval of urban zoning and
development for all land brought into the UGB.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for public
facilities per Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11.
Goal14.• Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to
ensure efficient use ofland, and to provide for livable communities
Urbanizable Lan
d
Land inside adopted urban growth boundaries shall be considered available for urban development
consistent with plans for the provision of urban facilities and services. Comprehensive plans and
implementing measures shall manage the use and division of urbanizable land to maintain its
potential for planned urban development until appropriate public facilities and services are available
or planned.
Response: The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted polices and regulations that
manage the conversion of land that is brought into the UGB using a two phase process. First, the
City of Redmond has developed an "Urban Framework Plan", which has been adopted by resolution
that provides general concepts for how the Redmond urban planning area is expected to develop
over time. This plan is not parcel specific but it is detailed enough to depict what urban uses are
expected to develop in urban reserve areas and in areas of the UGB but that are not yet fully
planned. The Framework Plan shows locations of neighborhood service centers, employment
July 2006 73
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 w
EXHIBIT C PAGE
centers, areas that have development constraints and maybe set aside for open space, and areas that
are expected to be developed for residential use. It also shows major transportation corridors and
other significant public easements and rights of way.
The Framework Plan includes acreage information and development assumptions for housing and
employment densities associated with the various future urban land uses depicted on it. It is not,
however, a final urban plan and, therefore, all areas that are inside the UGB are designated Urban
Holding on the Redmond Comprehensive Plan Map are zoned for rural / agricultural use. All
parcels being added to the UGB that are in Deschutes County are being rezoned using the county's
UH 10 zone, which functions as a rural county zone. Parcels in the city are zoned using Redmond's
UH 10, which also allows rural uses equivalent to those allowed in the county.
The Framework Plan uses base-line land use assumptions that also will be used by the City when
updating Redmond's Public Facility Plan (PFP) and the Transportation System Plan (TSP) for areas
that do not have urban land use designations and zoning. It is anticipated the TSP and PFP for
areas added to the UGB will be adopted before master planning is completed for land being added
to the UGB. The Framework Plan therefore provides a basis for determining the impact of
anticipated future urban uses in areas that are designated Urban Holding on the Comprehensive
Plan Map.
The second step in the rural to urban land conversion process involves master planning. The master
planning process is a new element in the Redmond planning process. Master plan applications must
be approved by the City of Redmond using criteria that are outlined in Chapter 14, Policy 12 and are
codified in the city's UH 10 zone (RDC 8.0130.10). Master plans may include area design criteria or
special zoning requirements that are tailored to local conditions. The applicant, whether a public or
private entity, must identify the planning designations and zoning for the master planned area and
must document that the overall level of development is generally consistent with the development
concepts and stated objectives outlined on the Framework Plan.
Master plans generally must encompass areas larger than 10 acres and be developed according to
Redmond's Great Neighborhoods design guidelines (Urbanization Policy 17). A special allowance is
made for small parcels (less than 10 acres) for residential uses when the proposed development is
consistent with the framework plan and the applicant uses one of Redmond's land development
approval procedures (PUD, subdivision, or partition). Master plan approval results in a
comprehensive plan map amendment. .
Findings:
1. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted a policy framework for coordinating
the addition of land into the Urban Growth Boundary.
2. Text amendments to the plan's Urbanization element adhere to the state-mandated prioritization
criteria for determining which land should be brought into the UGB.
3. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted an Urban Holding Area plan
designation and an Urban Holding-10 zone and applythis designation and zone to areas that are
needed for future urban development but have not completed land use planning.
4. The City of Redmond has adopted a Framework Plan that identifies the anticipated urban
development pattern for all county land designated Redmond Urban Reserve Area, and for city
and county land that is within the Redmond UGB and designated Urban Holding Area.
July 2006 74
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT ,t PAGE 7-
9
5. Redmond has adopted plan policies that outline a master planning process for completing the
land use planning process prior to designating urban land uses to ensure findings are prepared
that demonstrate compliance with state and local planning requirements prior to allowing urban
development. The County has adopted the City's Comprehensive Plan by reference for areas
not within the City.
6. Redmond has adopted a site plan approval process for small parcels that are intended for
residential use but have not completed land use planning.
Conclusion: The City and Deschutes County have complied with state requirements for Statewide
Land Use Planning Goal 14 - Urbanization.
July 2006 75
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT PAGE --0-
VI. CONFORMANCE WITH STATE STATUTES
ORS 197296 Factors to establish sufficiency of buildable lands within urban growth
boundary; analysis and determination of residential housing patterns.
(a) Inventory the supply of buildable lands within the urban growth boundary and
determine the housing capacity of the buildable lands; and
Response: Buildable lands were inventoried as part of the 2005 Rabramd Urbanization Study (Exhibit
Q. Table 1.8 presents the amount of vacant and partially vacant buildable land inside the existing
UGB by plan designation, and Table 1.9 the approximate development capacity of this land.
Table 1.8 - Net acres of vacant and partially vacant land by plan designation, Redmond
UGB, January 20041
Acres
Percent of
Number
Unavailable
Vacant,
Vacant,
of Tax
Total
for
Buildable
Buildable
Plan Designation
Code
Lots
Acres
Development
Acres
Acres
Strip Service Commercial
C1
112
307.8
22.7
234.0
8.2%
Central Business District Commercial
C2
85
25.4
6.9
17.8
0.6%
Special-Service Commercial
C3
20
34.7
6.0
22.4
0.8%
Limited Service Commercial
C4
16
9.0
0.0
8.8
0.3%
Tourist Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Park Reserve - Open Space
Limited Residential
Limited Residential - Planned
C5
3
13.5
M1
150
490.5
M2
93
382.7
OSPR
2
377.5
R1
179
103.8
R2
478
536.5
0.3
13.2
0.5%
13.3
459.0
16.0%
23.9
343.3
12.0%
0.0
377.5
13.2%
0.1
95.5
3.3%
5.6
486.5
17.0%
Limited Residential - Planned
R3 280
149.7
8.1
123.1
4.3%
General Residential - Planned
R4 902
672.1
46.4
584.3
20.4%
Urban High Density Residential
R5 298
121.0
2.8
101.4
3.5%
Total
2,618
3,224.2
136.0
2,866.6
100.0%
Source: City of Redmond GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Notes: Partially vacant includes only buildable acres.
(b) Conduct an analysis of housing need by type and density range, in accordance
with ORS 197.303 and statewide planning goals and rules relating to housing, to
determine the number of units and amount of land needed for each needed
housing type for the next 20 years.
Response: The 2005 Raavnd Urbanization Study analyzed housing needs and reported them by type
and density. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 1.10.
' Table 3-6 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit C)
July 2006 76
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE 1
Table 1.9 - Estimated development capacity, Redmond UGB2
Plan Designation
Code
Assumption
Housing
Employment
Airport
Airport
not available
-
-
Strip Service Commercial
C1
20 emp/net ac
-
3,695
Central Business District Commercial
C2
20 emp/net ac
-
255
Special-Service Commercial
C3
20 emp/net ac
-
350
Limited Service Commercial
C4
20 emp/net ac
-
135
Tourist Commercial
C5
20 emp/net ac
-
210
Fairgrounds
FG
not available
-
-
Light Industrial
M1
8 emp/net ac
-
4,345
Heavy Industrial
M2
8 emp/net ac
-
3,258
Park Reserve - Open Space
OSPR
not available
-
-
Park
PARK
not available
-
Public Facility
PF
not available
-
-
Limited Residential
R1
4.5 du/net ac
210
-
Limited Residential - Planned
R2
4.6 du/net ac
1,474
-
Limited Residential - Planned
R3
5.5 du/net ac
333
-
General Residential - Planned
R4
6.5 du/net ac
2,403
-
Urban High Density Residential
R5
8.0 du/net ac
279
-
Total
4,699
12,247
Table 1.10 - Allocation of needed housing units by zone, 2002-20253
Plan Desi nation
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
Total
Gross
Gross
Gross
Gross
Gross
Gross
Housing Type
DU
Ac
DU
Ac
DU
Ac
DU
Ac
DU
Ac
DU
Ac
Single-family
Single-family detached
581
129.2
1,163
258.4
1,744
387.6
2,326
516.8
5,814
1,291.9
Manufactured
-
-
-
-
581
90.8
581
90.8
1,163
181.7
Subtotal
581
129.2
1,163
258
2,326
478.4
2,907
607.6
6,977
1,473.6
Multi-family
Condo/Townhomes
-
-
-
-
233
30.4
465
60.8
814
106.4
1,512
197.6
Multi-family
-
-
233
21.5
2,907
269.2
3,139
290.7
Subtotal
233
30.4
698
82.3
3,721
375.6
4,651
488.3
Total
581
129.2
1,163
258
2,558
508.8
3,605
689.9
3,721
375.6
11,628
1,962.0
Percent of Acres and Units
Single-family
Single-family detached
5%
7%
10%
13%
15%
20%
20%
26%
0%
0%
50%
66%
Manufactured
0%
0%
0%
0%
5%
5%
5%
5%
0%
0%
10%
9%
Subtotal
5%
7%
10%
13%
20%
24%
25%
31%
0%
0%
60%
75%
Multi-family
Condo/Townhomes
0%
0%
0%
0%
2%
2%
4%
3%
7%
5%
13%
10%
Multi-family
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2%
1%
25%
14%
27%
15%
Subtotal
0%
0%
0%
0%
2%
2%
6%
4%
32%
19%
40%
25%
Total
5%
7%
10%
13%
22%
26%
31%
35%
32%
19%
100%
100%
Source: ECONorthwest
(6) If the housing need determined pursuant to subsection (3)(b) of this section is greater
than the housing capacity determined pursuant to subsection (3)(a) of this section, the local
2 Table 3-9 of the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
July 2006 77
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT _ PAGE -L2--
government shall take one or more of the following actions to accommodate the additional
housing need.•
(a) Amend its urban growth boundary to include sufficient buildable lands to
accommodate housing needs for the next 20 years.
(b) Amend its comprehensive plan, regional plan, functional plan or land use
regulations to include new measures that demonstrably increase the likelihood
that residential development will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate
housing needs.
(c) Adopt a combination of the actions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
subsection.
Response: Higher net density of residential development was assumed in determining housing and
land needs for the 20-year planning horizon. Whereas, actual net densities in Redmond from 2000-
2004 ranged from 4.5 to 7.5 units/acre (an average of 5.1 units/acre), the net density assumed for
future residential growth is between 6 and 12 units/acre depending on housing type (an average of
7.5 units/acre)? However, a deficit of residential land remained, and these results are presented by
plan designation in Table 1.2.
While there is an overall surplus of land for employment inside the Redmond UGB, there are
deficits of commercial and public employment land, as shown in Table 1.1.
The shortage of residential land is the primary basis for the proposed map amendment and UGB
expansion. However, there is land intended for public facilities, parks, open spaces, and limited
commercial uses included in the proposed UGB expansion.
ORS 197.298 Priority ofland to be included within urban growth boundary.
(1) In addition to any n?quinwrw establis1W by rule addressing urbanization land may not be induc& uithin an
urban grozetb boundary except under tb e follawT priorities:
(a) Fint priority is land that is desigratal urban reserze land under ORS195.145, rule or nrmpolttan serzix
district action plan
Response: All of the land proposed as part of this UGB amendment is part of the Redmond
Urban Reserve Area (URA) adopted on September 7, 2005, and effective as of December 12, 2005.
Therefore, the proposed map amendment satisfies the statutory requirement that the first priority
for UGB expansion be land designated as an urban reserve.
3 Table 4-18 of the Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
4 Table 4-10 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
July 2006 78
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 M
EXHIBIT 6-PAGE
VII. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Chapter 23.48. URBANIZATION
23.48.030. Urban Growth Boundary Policies.
1. Urbanization Urbanization policies refer to an unincorporated urban growth amas uithin an urban pvuth
boundary but outside the bmnaanes of a city, and are intendesl to assist in the decision making abw the
ammersion (f rural to urban uses, and to help in the derelovrnt of consistent urban area plan More detailed
policies for the urban auras of Ba79 Rafiraid and Sisters am spay in the urban aura plans and they shall be
the primary dacr is for coordination and land use daisions in their mspectiw auras.
a Urban puuth bntndanes idar6 and separate urbanizable land from rural land Cornmion of
urbanizable land to urban uses shall be based on consideration cf
1. Orderly and ffmo nc pro ision for pubic faalities and sertw,
2. A wilability qfsi~fuiaat land for the wriow uses to insure Aices in the marketplace; and
3. Encowagnm of dezelopnvr uithin urban areas lxfore c nzersion cfurbanizable amas.
Response: This proposed map amendment accompanies proposed text amendments to the City's
Comprehensive Plan and the County's urban area plan for Redmond. Those amendments are
intended to facilitate the orderly and efficient development of land needed primarily for housing
over the next 20 years. In particular, they establish the Urban Holding (UH 10) zone for Deschutes
County and the City of Redmond and requirements for master planning or special site plans that
must be completed and approved before rezoning (upzoning) and urban development can occur.
The proposed map amendment and UGB expansion will make sufficient land available for
anticipated residential growth over the next 20 years. The calculation of the overall amount of land
needed for housing needs assumed a mix of single-family and multi-family housing that features
more multi-family housing than is currently provided. The recent proportion has been roughly 75%
single-family to multi-family housing, with manufactured housing making up about 3% of the sing-
family housing. However, there is a lack of affordable housing in Redmond as evidenced by the fact
that over a third of the residents pay 30% or more of their income in housing costs5, and
ECONorthwest increased the amount of multi-family housing in the mix with the expectation that
developers will be providing more diverse housing types as the market grows. Increasing the
opportunities for multi-family housing and manufactured housing is one method of promoting
housing affordability.
The assumptions in calculating the 20-year housing need include:
A 60%/40% tenure split of owners to renters;
■ A60%/40% single-family/mufti-familyhousing mix;
■ 10% of the single-family housing is manufactured homes, and 13% of the multi-family
housing is condominiums/townhomes.
In conjunction with sufficient land for housing and more housing choices, this proposed map
amendment provides land for public facilities (e.g. schools), parks and open spaces, and mixed use
employment centers and neighborhood centers to support new residential development.
5 Table 4-14 of the Redmond Urbanization Study
July 2006 79
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT E_-PAGE
Development capacity within the existing UGB was analyzed before considering the amount of land
needed in a UGB expansion. Residential capacity was determined by assuming higher net density of
development than has actually been recently built. The net density assumed for future residential
growth is between 6 and 12 units/acre depending on housing type (an average of 7.5 units/acre)6
whereas actual net densities in Redmond from 2000-2004 ranged from 4.5 to 7.5 units/acre (an
average of 5.1 units/acre) (Table 1.8). There is not sufficient development capacity inside the
existing UGB for housing needs over the next 20 years, and the deficit is accounted for in the
proposed UGB expansion.
b. Urban growth bwmdaries shall be established or expanded based upon the fdlmng.
1. Derrmtrated nil to actror mdate long range urban population &uteth require mz consistent with
LCDCgads;
2. Naol for haasirrg ernploynrenn opportunities and liwbdi
3. Orderly and ecorw m prousion for public facilities and senw,
4. MaxirnarmgTi envy of land uses within and on the fiirge cf the ceiairg urban ami,
5. Endrorrrmntal, energy, eL mnscandsocial oomaj coon ;
6. Retention of agnadiural land as defined with Class I bang the highest priority for retention and
Class VI the lowest priority; anc
7. Co "tibd4 of the proposed urban uses with rparby agriadiural actizities.
Response: The proposed map amendment and UGB expansion is consistent with the area's urban
reserve designation. The area proposed for inclusion in the UGB is part of Redmond's adopted
URA, is adjacent to the existing UGB, is more easily serviceable than other parts of the URA, does
not affect Class I-IV soils, does not prohibit or limit the continuation of agricultural activities and
satisfies a demonstrated need for urbanizable land within the city's 20-year planning horizon. The
responses and findings for Goals 9, 10, 11, and 14 in this application address the policies in
subsection (b) in more detail.
2. Coordination
a Within an urban growth boundary City and Cara land use regulations and standards shall be
nuau ly supportiz, jointly pnpcsed and adopted aclrrmtered and a fort] and plans to integrate the
type tmrg and location of &Ldopnxw qf public facilities and serucs in a runner to aarrnura date
derund as urbanizable lands ber-are mare urlanizai and to guide the corruna y's growth.
b. Urban deLdoprnrt shall be pennittal in arras uhere seruces are awdabie or can be pmaded in a
num7er uhich will miname casts related to nmsary urban senzias suot as soha , parks, bipkeuys,
police. garbage disposal, fireprotatm libraries and other facilities and serzi ff.
Response: The City and County must jointly adopt the proposed amendment of the UGB.
Amendments to the City and County's Comprehensive Plans are being proposed in conjunction
with this UGB map amendment. The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments establish an
Urban Holding (UH 10) zone for Deschutes County and the City of Redmond and requirements for
master planning or special site plans that must be completed and approved before urban
development can occur. Further, an Intergovernmental Agreement, effective July 26, 2005 commits
the City and County to coordinate plans, policies, and regulations in the urban growth area located
between the City's incorporated boundary and its UGB.
6 Table 4-10 in the 2005 Redmond Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q
July 2006 80
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 9
`PAGE
EXHIBI I
3. Residential dezeloprrra
a, Residential dezeloprrerns should be located so that they are c nzeniat to plac> i of mploynm and
shopping facilities, and they should be deakpad in W whio~ are consistent with the dbaracter cf the
topography and soils on the site Residetial areas should offer a wide wnety of horsing densities in
locations best suital to eadz
b. Residential densities w4 ated on gr?nl al plans should be respail and nflaterl in City and Comty
axles, ordinances and dezdopnm paliaes.
c In residential areas, dezelopnrnt should be encouraged which haze side yards or mar yards along artenial
struts as a rmans oFr eitaT o ?cation through turning nx wok in and out of drizezettys.
d Higher density residential areas should be corxrltratesl near corrawad seruces and public open space
Response: The siting and intensity of residential development in the proposed UGB expansion
area will be by guided by the Framework Plan that has been developed in conjunction with this
proposed map amendment (Figure I). According to the plan, higher density residential is located in
areas slated for development as Neighborhood Centers or Mixed Use Employment Centers. The
centers are distributed throughout the proposed UGB expansion area so that the residential
development in between will have convenient access to jobs and services. Residential development
planned for the UGB expansion area includes single-family detached and attached housing,
manufactured housing, condominiums and duplexes, and multi-family housing.
Prior to receiving a City residential plan designation and zoning, parts of the proposed UGB
expansion wishing to develop must prepare master plans as set out in the proposed amendments to
Chapter 14 (Urbanization) of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Master plans must include provisions
for public facilities, parks, and open space. Once the appropriate land use planning is completed,
the area will be a candidate for annexation to the City of Redmond and, once annexed, will receive
City zoning and be subject to that zone's development and design regulations. Until land use
planning is completed, the UGB expansion area will be designated Urban Holding Area (U1-IA) and
zoned with an Urban Holding zone (UH 10) that will preclude urban development.
4.
a ConYmrial facilities should be allocated in a misonable amount and in a planned relationship to the
people they will serze Any future ecpeansion of coo rrnul uses should be dhdoped as eaters rather
than strips and my carefully considered so that they do not cause unnecessary traffic a rWtion and do
not detract from the appearance of the a mnmty.
b. Neighborhood mnrercial shopping areas, parks, school and pubic uses may be located within Yesmbtial
districts and should haze dezeloprrerlt standards which recognize the nsidanial area. Dezeloprrert
standards should he established for those ca7vmud uses which will pmude off street parking,
landscaping access wntr~ sign nydationns and design reuezu
c Strip wnra- d dezdoprrents along highways should not be cctendai Corrrmual uses alorg major
stn w and bighzettys shall b? subject to spaid dezeloprrent standards rzlatirg to landscaping setbacks,
signs and nrdan strips. No further wnrnrrerzial dezelopnm outside urban gn xeth boandanes, rural
serace centers, planned deulopmnts, or destination resorts shall be perrrattol
d All cornnenzial shoppiT center shall be subjat to spend dezeloprrern standards relating to setbacks,
larulscapvrg pl}nal b4ers, sammg, access, signs, huildirg heights and design mzww Cam shall be
taken to wwd the size of any now conarercial deuioprrents that nuy le required as growth oaurs.
Sites shall not be oanLel to a point where additional uses which zeodd generate traffic from outside the
intended serzice area are necessary to make the dezdoprnn?rlt an emnon7ic sums.
July 2006 81
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT' _ PAGE _LL
Response: As shown in Table 1.4, provisions are made in the proposed map amendment to include
land for commercial development. This development is planned to occur in centers according to the
proposed Framework Plan (Exhibit L), which will provide new residential development in the
proposed UGB expansion area with easier access to jobs and services instead of concentrating all
commercial and employment uses along and east of Highway 97.
5. Industrial
a Convrunity efforts should be dir ' tomni pnmraT prim industrial lands for industrial purposes.
Inakrstrial areas shall be prvtaxed from a title owrtvval and residential uses.
b. Ind atnal areas Gf dx amnonty shall be located uhere nxssary sari can be proziclced and with goal
aases to transportation facilities.
c Conmouty efforts should be diraA d touurd inpming the general appearance cf wnnrraal and
industrial areas so that they make a pas mw contribution to the enurormrrrtt of A cawrunzty
d Industrial areas shall pw de for new industry in a park-like setting.
e All industrial craters shall be su4at to special dezeloprmnt standards relating to setbacks, landscaping
physual buffers, scrtmrag aaess, signs, hddmg heights and design reziezer
Response: There is a sufficient amount of industrial land inside the existing Redmond UGB to
accommodate employment growth over the next 20 years (Table 1.1). However, the land supply is
primarily concentrated on the east side of the city, and is not easily accessible to existing or planned
residential development on the west side of the city. Industrial development is subject to existing
development and design standards contained in the City's Development Code, and no amendments
are proposed to these standards as part of this application.
6 C nminity appearanm
a. Because of slow natural growth and their effecaw use as a zisual and noise huffer, and their relationship
to air T a14, troy or stands of trees shall be prowed uherrzer feasible in imlustna~ cawrercid,
residential and other urban dewApnvz
h. Conan outy appearance shall mntirm to be a major amcem Landscapzrg, sign regulations and buikkrg
design m ewshall minbute to an irnrnvzsd o?dmnnwrtx Major natural features such as rock outcrops,
stmam banks, caryrms, or stands of tw should be pmserzed as a cnnvr o ty asset as the area dewlaps.
c A uoVts by each cnrrnruaity to identify those characrenstus uhich giw the convrxtnity its indizidual
xbmty and to pmserze and expand those characteristics as grazeth ocrun shall be encouraged by the
y..
axint
d Sign regulations shall be adopted uhicr lint the size, location and many er of signs in ca vmzzal and
industrial arras and haze ammizatwn prousions to mmw existing signs which do not mrrform with the
rrgulatiorrs uithin a rwonable period of tirrp-
Response: An area that brought into the Redmond UGB will receive an Urban Holding
designation until the area has completed land use planning. The area will be zoned Urban Holding
10 (UH 10). Until land use planning is complete and an area is annexed, the area will be subject to
the design and development standards of the underlying designations but will not be redeveloped in
a way that impairs future conversions of these lands to urban use (Land Use Planning Policy
2.10(a)). After annexation, an area will adopt City zoning and be subject to that zone's development
and design standards, which regulate buffers, vegetation, landscaping, signs, and building design in
specified cases. This approach assures that appropriate standards designed to address community
appearance will apply as the property redevelops.
July 2006 82
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT ZE PAGE Y?
The Framework Plan and proposed text amendments that are accompanying this proposal and, for
instance, create a new Mixed Use Employment zone will guide some of the community appearance
characteristics of areas brought into the Redmond UGB.
7 Urban transportation
Expresszutt,ts and arterial struts should haze landsoaped nxdzan strips wherezer possibe together with
kft-tum *ge lams. Public transportation routes should be encmraged thmughout the area anc zf
reo3sary, special pmii5iorls mule in street design to aaonm-date uu.)5.
b. Struts and highzuDs should le located and corzstr xW in a manner which will aan vrruate both aamrt
and future traffic nails. Inpl notation of anenal and mUe for mid systars should be joint C eaq
and Clty effort with strict titre soba &,(a and priorities.
c Interurban transportation facilities should be located in or rear the amal business district or ruin
lx#mq Special consideration will be nil to eunluate public transportation nods and possibilities
within the urban arm
d Except for major arterial and mUetor strays, street pattems in residential amz should be desigiel to
pmude mamerrt ams to eacb li=g unit but not acsaclrage thrx@g -traffic Major and aolectorstrcots
should be saurel and dezdoped under a strict time frame so that a reasonable cimdation pattern will
Mult
e Pyozisions should be considered whicb will perwt mass transit vixdes on arsenal and collator sows
within residential ayeas in the future
Response: Transportation improvements for the proposed UGB expansion area are being
developed in conjunction with these proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments, and
will be implemented after planning for the UGB expansion area is completed and the area is
annexed to the City of Redmond. Master planning for these areas will require a Transportation
Analysis and Diagram in accordance with proposed revisions to the Urbanization Element (Chapter
14) of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed transportation improvements will be amendments to the City's adopted
Transportation System Plan (T'SP), and will be subject to the policies and regulations of the City of
Redmond TSP and Comprehensive Plan as well as this policy section 7 and policies and regulations
from the Deschutes County TSP when county roads are involved. The City of Redmond has
provided a Draft TSP Map that is included in this application as Figure 1.6 and Exhibit G.
8. Facilities and sera ff.
a. Efforts should be made ozer a sustaired penal qf tbm to place utility liras undergmurrd in ae tirg and
new yffidarial ar ez.
b. Parrs sboalcl be located within walking distance zf ezery dwelling unit in the mwunity Parks should
be cernrally located and easily accessible to the areas they aye intended to serze (sco Ravatz4.
c Certain priwte rec rational uses such as gif courses or riding stables can be suaessfully w&gratad into
residential areas p sided the loratiory design and operation aye cnr ptible with sunvunding nsubvid
dezel "vits.
d Fire pmtation in the plarnrirg area should be considera l as a cowr on problan by the City, Ca mt)~
water district and the fare protetion district, and equip wr should reflex the o~araaer of land uses in the
corMwubt
e Efforts should be rude to amffage Federal and State agencies to locate in urban areas.
f. Efforts should be made to group public offues in a mire or less crmmn location as a amzeniace to the
publk
July 2006 $3
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24
EXHIBIT PA6
Response: The City of Redmond's Parks Master Plan, TSP, and Public Facility Plan (PFP) will be
updated in conjunction with the proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendments. Until
those updates are complete, there are preliminary PFP updates for water and sewer in the Northwest
Area of the proposed UGB expansion area, a City Draft TSP Map (Figure 1.6; Exhibit G), and
master planning requirements regarding public facilities that are being proposed as revisions to the
Urbanization Element (Chapter 14) of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Master planning for areas
brought into the UGB will require:
■ Land use diagram;
■ Significant Resources Inventory,
■ Parks and Open Space identification;
■ Transportation Analysis and Diagram; and
■ Public Facility Analysis and Diagram.
July 2006 84
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 N
EXHIBIT PAGE I.~
VIII. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
City ofRedmond Chapter 14 - URBANIZATIONELEMENT
1. The Urban Growth Boundary should be ocpandd only to satisfy growth and transportation ra?ls.
Response: As detailed in the responses and findings for Goals 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14, the
proposed UGB expansion and map amendment is designed to primarily meet residential growth
needs identified in the 2005 Rind Urbanazatron Study (Exhibit q. As illustrated in Table 1.4 of this
application, other land needs are included the proposed UGB expansion. These support the needed
housing and residential development in the proposed UGB expansion area.
■ Public facilities directly associated with residential development;
■ Other public facilities such as schools;
■ Parks; and
■ Commercial services
As shown by the legal description and survey of the proposed boundary, the map amendment and
UGB expansion includes major roadways such as Helmholtz that will serve as arterials for the UGB
expansion area as well as boulevards and buffers to other land uses. The boulevard treatment in
particular is depicted in the Framework Plan (Exhibit L) being proposed in conjunction with this
map amendment.
2. The Cary shall establish, and should re" and &we ezery fine (5) to fifteen (15) )ors an Urban Guth
Boundary (UGB) containing buildable land cf a quality and quantity adequate to mist urban pvwxh for the
suox"rg 20-)ear pencd in colcomunx with Oren Reused Statutes Chapters 195 and 197
Response: The City last updated its Comprehensive Plan and reviewed its UGB in 2000. The
proposed map amendment and UGB expansion meets the residential and associated land needs for
the next 20 years as demonstrated in the 2005 Rind Urlanization Study and the findings and
responses for Goals 8, 9, 10, 11, and 14, and summarized in Table 1.4 of this application.
3. To establish or change the Urban Grrvzeth Ba-tndary, the fagouing factors nwt be corridered-
a) Dm mstrated rxd to awwrnxlate urlazn population growth requimrents;
b) Need for housing, errplWro t opportunities and hwhility;
c) Orderly and eeortorr¢c prozisions of prrlaric faaliw and smm,
4 Max brltim 9ficieruy of land uses;
e) Retention of agnadiural land
f) Corrpatibility of urban uses with rparby agriadtural actizities;
E nzinmrer 4 energy, eeo"a and social cons; and
h) Establisbnrnt and orange of the UGB shall be a cooperathe prtxe5s bet uem the city and county
Response: The responses and findings for Goals 9, 10, 11, and 14 in this application address the
policies in section 3 systematically. Regarding subsection h, the City of Redmond and Deschutes
County are generally obligated to coordinate their land use planning according to the Land Use
Planning Elements of their Comprehensive Plans and the Intergovernmental Agreement that
addresses the urban growth area between the city limits of Redmond and its UGB. The proposed
map amendment and UGB expansion involves staff from the City of Redmond and Deschutes
July 2006 85
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 W
EXHIBIT PAGE qD
County, and the appropriate enactments will be adopted by both the City Council and Board of
County Commissioners.
July 2006 86
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24 w
EXHIBIT PAGE I
IX. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY DEVELOPMENT CODE
Section 8.0760 - Criteria forAmendments
The applicant mast show that the cwpre~er lw plan amendrrent is:
(1) In aw forrr4 Keith all applicable State statutes
Response: The proposed map amendment is consistent with the area's urban reserve designation
and complies with relevant State statutes addressed in Section VI of this application.
(2) In w forrraty with the State-wide pla=nggoals kwter they am dmml to h- applicable
Response: The proposed map amendment conforms to relevant State-wide planning goals as
detailed in Section I of this application.
(3) In co fo»nity wth the Rind Corrp 1w Play land use reqtdnwr is and pdiw, and
Response: The proposed action is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan as addressed in
Section VI of this application.
(4) That there is a drarW of czmo atanas or)~?ther studies justEying the arrwd-wr or nistake in the original
ZOM*.
Response: The proposed map amendment is based on an updated population projection for 2025
(Table 1.5). Housing needs and associated needs are analyzed and presented in the 2005 Rind
Urbanization Study (Exhibit Q as well as in the responses and findings for Goals 8, 9, 10, 11, and 14
of this application.
July 2006 8'7
Adopted by City Council on August 8, 2006
Exhibit B to Res. No. 2006-24