TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Keith Stahley, City Manager
FROM: Peter Fernandez, PE, Public Works Director
SUBJECT:
title
Continued Public Hearing - Supplemental Staff Report regarding a petition to vacate Cross Street SE west of 20th Street SE.
Ward(s): 2
Councilor(s): Nishioka
Neighborhood(s): Southeast Salem Neighborhood Association
Result Area(s): Safe, Reliable and Efficient Infrastructure
end
SUMMARY:
summary
The City of Salem received a petition to vacate Cross Street SE west of 20th Street SE. This supplemental report is provided in response to some of the issues raised during discussion of this petition at the Council meeting on November 14, 2022.
end
ISSUE:
Shall the City Council deny the vacation of Cross Street SE west of 20th Street SE?
RECOMMENDATION:
recommendation
City Council may deny the vacation or approve the vacation upon determining the extension of the Cross Street right-of-way is unlikely in the foreseeable future and, therefore, the right-of-way is not needed for transportation purposes.
body
FACTS AND FINDINGS:
The City of Salem received a petition from DEW Investments, LLC (principal David E. Withnell) to vacate a portion of right-of-way for Cross Street SE west of 20th Street SE. The area proposed for vacation is approximately 6,858 square feet. City Council opened the public hearing on November 14, 2022, and after taking testimony, continued the public hearing until December 5, 2022. This report supplements the staff report provided for City Council meeting of November 14, 2022, Agenda Item 4.d. (Attachment 1).
Why is staff recommending denial of the vacation?
Staff’s recommendation to deny this petition is based on adopted Council policies expressed in the Salem Comprehensive Policies Plan and the Salem Transportation System Plan (Salem TSP). These plans include policies relating to local street connectivity and block standards to support all modes of travel (Attachment 1, pages 2-3).
Can City Council approve the vacation?
Yes. This is a policy decision for City Council based on its interpretation of current policies and the specific details of the request. Specific details that could inform a Council interpretation to support the vacation include the lack of right-of-way immediately east or west of the area proposed for vacation and the barrier presented by the railroad further west. If Council chooses to approve the vacation, Staff recommends it do so with the following conditions:
1. Utility easement is provided for the 15-inch sanitary sewer line within the area proposed to be vacated.
2. Utility easement is provided for the PGE utility pole.
3. In lieu of the Assessment of Special Benefit, Petitioner provides an easement for the sewer line in the western portion of their property (see discussion below).
Will the upcoming update to the Salem TSP impact a decision?
The update to the Salem TSP will not contain any new policies that would impact a decision on this proposed vacation. The TSP is a high-level policy and project document. The TSP will continue to support the goals and policies included in the Salem Comprehensive Policies Plan, which includes a goal for local street connectivity.
If the Council chooses to retain this right-of-way, when will a local street extension be constructed?
There is no current project to extend Cross Street to the west. Making this connection could be funded by the City in the future through the Capital Improvement Plan or tied to future development or redevelopment of these or adjoining properties.
Why did the City not pursue previous opportunities to extend Cross Street SE further west?
In his testimony, Mr. Shipman raised a few past occasions, including in the 1970s and 1990s, when the City chose not to pursue extending this local street. There are several reasons that the City may have chosen not to pursue an extension of Cross Street in the past. City policies change over time, as do interpretation of policies by different City Councils. There may also have been limitations on what could have been required through development exactions.
What are the impacts on utilities?
As described in the November 14th staff report, there is a 15-inch sanitary sewer line and a PGE power pole located within the area proposed for vacation (Attachment 1, page 3). As described above, if Council chooses to approve the vacation, staff recommends this approval include the condition that the Petitioner provide easements for these existing utilities.
Outside of the area proposed for vacation, the sanitary sewer line extends west through both the Hyundai Dealership (Petitioner) property and the adjoining Credit Union property. This sewer line was installed in the 1950s. Staff has not been able to locate documented easements for the sewer line through these properties. If Council decides to approve the vacation, the property owner has tentatively agreed to provide an easement for the sewer line on their property (approximately 180 linear feet) in lieu of payment of the assessment of special benefit. The City cannot condition approval of the vacation on the owner granting the City an easement. Conditions of approval must have a nexus to the proposed land use and be proportional to the impact of the development. In this instance, the sewer line is not within the right-of-way and the proposed vacation will not affect the sewer line. The City and the property owners are working on a purchase and sale agreement, conditioned on approval of the vacation and waiver of the assessment of special benefit, that is expected to be executed prior to December 5th.
If Council chooses to deny the vacation, staff will separately pursue acquisition of an easement for the existing sewer line.
Is there a possibility to create a pedestrian-only connection?
Given the current land uses and the lack of existing right-of-way through the petitioner’s and the adjoining bank property it is unlikely that a pedestrian-only connection can be created at this location.
Next steps
If Council approves the vacation with conditions, staff will prepare an ordinance bill to support this decision and bring it back to Council for enactment. The vacation would only be recorded with Marion County after the conditions have been satisfied by the Petitioner.
Robert D. Chandler
Assistant Public Works Director
Attachments:
1. Staff Report for November 14, 2022, Agenda Item 4.d. (with attachments)
2. Link provided by Councilor Stapleton that was referred to during the November 14, 2022, public hearing
3. Public Comment received November 15, 2022