Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Planning Commission Packet- November 4, 2003
CITY t3F CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA November 4, 2003 - 7:00 p.m. ~ ~ ~ l~iext Planning Corornission Resolution No. 600 I. MEETING CALLER TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Chuck Piland ,Candy Fish, I7on Faster, Paul Lunte, Connie Moczygemba, Rick Ferry and Wayne Riggs III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES A. Review and approval of Goober 7, 2003, Planning Commission Minutes VI. PUBLIC APPEARANCES ~I. BUSINESS A. Public hearing to review a land use application. for a three lot tentative subdivision on a single tax lot containing approximately 22 acres. The subject parcel is identified in the records of the Jackson County Assessor as Map 37 2W 02D, Tax Lot 100 in the C-~, Tourist and C}ffice Professional district. ITEMHAS BEENPOST P01VEA ANl? WILL .13E REVIEWED WITH THE ~`C.~RRESPf)NI~ING SITE PLAN APPLICATICIN FQR A PR4Pfl~S`El3 WALMART SUPER VENTER AT A LAT.~R 13AT~: B. Public hearing to review an application for a zoning map amendment that would replace R-1-10, Residential Singh Family {10,000 square foot minimum} with R-1-6, Residential Single Family {x,000 square foot minimum} zoning. The tax lots are located east of Gebhaz•d Road, and north of Walnut Grove Lane on Map 36 2W 35I3D, Tax Lots 1200 & 130(}. l'at;es l-l~ C. Public bearing to consider a tentative plan fora 122 lot subdivision known as Bluegrass Dawns located east of Gebhard Road, and north of Walnut Grove Lane in the R-1-10, Residential Single Family zoning district on Map 36 2W 3SDD, Tax Lots 1200 & 1300. Pages 18-28 D. Public hearing to review a revised Site Plan application and Conditional Use Permit application at the existing McDonalds restaurant. The restaurant is requesting approval for the constructions ofadditional seating area and a play stzucture. The subject parcel is in the C-4, Tourist and C)ffice Professional district and is identified in the records of the .Iackson County Assessor as map 37 2W 42CD, Tax Lots 2940 and 3444. Pages 29-47 E. Public hearing to review the City Council adoption of an ordinance amending and clarifying the language in the C-4, Tourist and (Jffice professional zoning district. Pages 48-`~3 F. Public hearing to receive public input regarding the adoption of an ordinance that will amend the City's current fence regulations. The regulations are being modified to meet Federal flood prevention requic•ements. Pages 74-86 VII. MISCELLANEQI.~S Corrected Assignment of Resolution Numbers VIII. ADJQURNMENT Pcl lU=~2{l()3 City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes f~ctober 7, 2443 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL: Chairman Chuck Piland, Candy Fish, Don Foster, Paul Lunte, Connie Moczygemba, Rick Perry, and Wayne Riggs were present. Also in attendance were Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director; Nancy Hanson, Parks & Recreation Director, Ren Gerschler, Community Planner; and Lisa Morgan, Planning Secretary. III. CORRESPONDENCE There was correspondence received for the Spurill Subdivision and a Public Works staff report for the Furniture Row application.. IV. MINUTES Commissioner Lunte made a motion to approve the minutes from the Sept 2, 2003 meeting, with two corrections. I} On Resolution S8'~, Commissioner Moczygemba made the first motion for approval, and Commissioner Lunte, seconded the motion. 2} Under Mel & Carol Coffin's explanation for their subdivision application, the applicants will be building a covered parking area to meet City zoning codes, for parcels 1 & 3. Commissioner Riggs made a motion to approve minutes with the corrections above, Commissioner Lunte seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Fish, yes; Foster, yes; Lunte, yes; Moczygemba, yes; and Perry, yes; Riggs, yes, Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. Public hea~•ing to revier~v Central Point Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan. Nancy Hanson, Parks and Recreation Director, presented the Central Point Parks and Rccreatioza Draft Master Plan. Mrs. Hanson explained the process of how the Master Plan evolved and the extensive efforts put forth by community rx~embers and staff members. Planning Commission Minattes ©ctaber 7, 2Qt13 Page 2 In order to be competitive with other cities in applying for grants, it was necessary to have an updated Parks and Recreation Master flan. Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director, stated that city maps will be updated with the Parks and Open Space zoning category once this new zoning designation has been approved. There was discussion about the preference indicated in having open space rather than designated sports playing fields, since these types of sports fields are available in other areas of the Rogue Valley as a regional service. There is nothing in the works for baseball fields, though the City is hopeful that temporary soccer fields could be put in Twin Creeks where there island designated for a future school. The Planning Commission would like the City to look into the possibilities of having some softball or baseball playing fields. Other discussions included items such as maintenance of the parks, if there are triggers in place that require periodic reviews of SDC fees, {currently there are no triggers} forming partnerships with sports organizations such as Little League, which could potentially help raise funds for park development, and the recommendation within the Draft Master Plan of dedicating property along creeks for pathways. Commissioner Fish made a motion to recommend the Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan, along wi#h the following recommendations: look further into incorporating baseball ball fields into the Master Plan, look into contracting out parks maintenance vs. hiring staff for maintenance including the intangible costs, look into establishing SDC triggers far re-evaluating SDC fees, and update the maps once the Parks and Clpen Space zoning designation passes. Commissioner Moczygemba seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: The motion pass unanimously. 13. Public hearing to review an application far a Conditional Use Permit, far the purpose of developing a church located within the proposed Snowy Butte Station subdivision. The subject parcel is sifuated near the center of the fanner Central Poi~xt Mill Site in an area that is proposed far "Civic" zoning and is identified in the Jackson County Assessor Map as 37 2tV 11.C, Tax Lot 9400. Tom 1-Iupllrey, Community Development Director, presented the staff report. Mr. I-Iumphrey pointed out that the proposed church site will end up along Haskell Street. Ptfcraning C'orrrrnissian Minutes October 7, 2(}03 Acrge 3 The conditional use application was submitted as part ofthe Snowy Butte Station Subdivision Master Plan. Planning staff would like to see additional access off of Cheney Loop Street. Commissioner Lunte asked if the additional access could be from the southern portion of the parking lat. Mr. i-Hmphrey agreed. Mr. Humphrey stated that this Master Plan is unique because it includes space far a church facility. The applicant has found that it is difficult for a religious organization to afford enough. land at residential lot prices to build a church, later in the development. Mr. Craig Stone, of Stone & Associates explained that this is a piece of a larger plan that offers a complete neighborhood. Mr. Stone said that with his power of attorney to act an behalf of the applicants, he can agree to the additional access from Cheney Loop to the church. Mr. Stone° s clients are not sure what denomination will occupy the church, however it is designed to accommodate up to two different occuants. There were questions whether or not the parking is adequate and if there will lac lighting. Mr. Stone stated that the parking meets the City's requirements and that lighting would be similar to the decorative street lighting in the TQD developments. Commissioner Moczygemba made a motion to adopt Resolution 596, approving the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed development of a church located within the proposed Snowy Butte Station subdivision, with additional access to the church provided off of Cheney Loop Street. Commissioner Riggs seconded the oration. ROLL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. C. Public hearing to review an application for a four lot subdivision known as the Spruill Subdivision. The subject parcel is in a R-1-8, Residential Single Family Dis#rict and is identified in the records of the Jackson County Assessor Map as 37 2WIID, Tax Lot 1700, otherwise known as 3458 Burrell Road. Chairman Piland asked if there were any ex-parte communications or conflicts of interest to declare. Commissioner Moczygemba stated that she visited the site for this development, and was offered an opportunity to tour the lat. Commissioner Mocygemba said that the tour did not affect her ability to render an unbiased decision. Ken Cerschler, Community Planner, presented the Planning Department Staf~'report. He stated that the existing zoning requires lot sues to be a ~~inimum 8,0(30 square feet, and the tentative plan does not reflect that. flawever, the inclusion ofa private road in the area calculation would satisfy the requirement. The pz-ivate road will have to be built to Public Work standards, and Pltrnning Contrrtission Minutes C?ctober- 7, 20tJ3 Ptrge 4 be individually named for purpose of emergency service. The existing home will have to have a new address assigned to the new street name. Mr. Gerschler read the letter submitted to the Planning Commission from Mr. Winney expressing concerns for the proposed subdivision. Mr. Spruill, the applicant indicated that he designed his site plan with the understanding that the zoning would be going from R-1-8 to R-1-6. 1-le is certainly open. to ideas and very willing work out whatever he can to make this happen. When asked about the existing well, Mr. Spruill said that he uses it for irrigation and can share with the neighbors ar can fill it in. Chairman Piland opened the public portion of the meeting. Brenda Jensen, resident on Forest Glen Drive, read the letter she intended to submit for the record. Ms. Jensen's main concerns were to restrict the height of the new homes to the same as the existing borne, to provide adequate setbacks to allow for solar access to existing homes, and to preserve as many trees as possible for additional privacy. Further discussions determined that building two-story homes would not jeopardize existing solar access for Ms. Jensen's home. Mr. Spruill assured Ms. Jensen that he is willing to work with her to plant some trees to provide more privacy, and that the homes will be built back far enough to add to her privacy. Mr. Spruill also stated that he does not have any significant trees an his property, the only trees that would be removed are bushy shrubs. Commissioner Fish made a motion to adapt Resolution 597, approving Tentative Flan for Spruill Subdivision, subject to the private street being built to Public Works Standards and that the private street be named, lot lines be adjusted to meet the minimum lot size requirements for R-1-8 zoning, and to save as many significant trees as possible. Commissioner Perry seconded the motion. RC3LL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. D. Public hearing to review a site plan application for the development of a 53,0(10 square foot furniture store in the Mountain View Plaza commercial development. Tl~e subject parcel is in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District and is identified in the records of the .lackson County Assessor as Map 37 2W 02D, Tax Lot 1300. Toz1~ l lumphrey, Community Development l~irectar, presented the staffreport and gave a brief history of Mountain View Plaza. 1'trrnning Cornrraissian Mirnrtzws Qctaber 7, 2t1t?3 Page S Mr. lumphrey then provided some background information on Furniture Row which is based out of Colorado. He explained that there arena other furniture stores of this type inside Central Point. Mr. Humphrey stated that the commission must made finding to determine whether a furniture store is a compatible use in the C-4 zone. There was discussion regarding average daily trips (ADT's}, semi truck traffic, and parking requirements generated by Furniture Row. It was determined that the proposed use would be similar to permitted uses in size, traffic, impact and appearance as well as other attributes. Commissioner Lunte asked what would happen ifone of the four separate furniture stores under this 53,000 building went out ofbusiness, if any would become vacant. Mr. Humphrey referred this question to the applicant. Richard Moreau, representative for Furniture Row addressed the commissioners with some additional background history for Furniture Row. Furniture Row is 3 (} years old and has over 2213 stores located through out five states. fart of the continued success of Furniture Row is that in the event that certain furniture demands decrease in any ofthe individual stores, it would adapt to the market and provide furniture that is in demand. There would not be any vacant stores. Mr. Moreau. discussed that the 53,0{30 square foot site wi11 house four different stores, all different from each other, with separate entrances and each having different architecture. Furniture Row would like to continue the Plaza Avenue boulevard and landscaping, Other points Mr. Moreau made were as follows: ~/ Low impact use ,~ Creat shield for the back ofAlbertsons giving a more attractive first impression from the freeway exit. / Trucking access will have a good flow, with 5 delivery berths. There will only be eight to nine weekly deliveries, with two dclivezy trucks bearing the Furniture Row logo for local customer deliveries. They anticipate filling these trucks three times daily. ~/ It will provide for the demand of a growing community. Planning Camrnissian Minutes L?ctataer 7, 2Q1?3 Page 6 ti! There will be three signs, one ofthem being a small monument sign as they enter on the property via the newly landscaped boulevard. / All truck aprons will be concrete. Becca Croft, resident on Beebe Road, asked what regional attraction a store like this would have in a C-4 zoning district. It was explained that, this development will have some regional attraction. l"lowever, the traffic will be less than the motel that was originally proposed for Mountain View Plaza. The traffic will be from people in the market for furniture, and will not have large daily traffic impacts, and will not compete with any existing businesses within Central Point. This project is a compatible use, each new development applz'cation is reviewed on a case by case basis, as to how it conforms with existing uses, findings of fact and conclusions of law. This development would not set precedence for other applications in any way. Chairman Piland asked how far the advertising market would extend demographically. Mr. Moreau explained it would be targeted for the Rogue Valley. Dawn Brevee, a property manager far Mountain View Plaza, spoke in favor of Furniture Row, explaining how this would be an attractive and great addition in this area. They are very excited about this project and the many improvements it will bring. Chairman Piland closed the public portion of the meeting. Chairman Piland asked the applicant about the expected time line for this project. Mr. Moreau said that if ali goes well, they should begin within 60 days, and should be completed within five to six months. Commissioner Fish made a motion to adopt Resolution 598, determining that this type of business meets the requirements to become a permitted use within the C-4 zoning district. Commissioner Ferry seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Lunte made a motion to adopt Resolution 599, approving the Site Plan for Furniture Row, Co~r~missioner Moczygemba seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes October 7, 2f)t13 Page ? VII. MISCELLANE(.~US Mr. Humphrey announced the upcoming traffic improvements on Haskell and that the City is to take jurisdiction ofHighway 99. A master plan will be prepared with ftiuading from a TGM grant. The trailer park on West Pine Street will be getting dressed up. Bidding for Pine Street improvements will begin in March, 2004, with estimated completion by Christmas in 2004, Some of the items coming before the commission in November will be an enclosed play area for McDonalds and a zone change for Blue Grass Downs. VIII. ADJC}UF;NMENT Commissioner Lunte made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Moczygemba seconded the motion. RQLL CALL: Motion passed unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 10:10 P.M, PLANNING I3EPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE: November 4, 2043 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: Tom Humphrey A1CP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing -Zone Map Amendment for 36 2W 35DD, Tax Lots 1240 8~ 1344 Owner/ Duncan Developrr~ent, LLC, Mike Duncan Applicant: P.O. Box 5456 Central Point, Oregon 97502 Gerald & Wendy May 5098 Gebhard Road Central Point, Oregon 97502 Agent: Douglas McMaon/Hoflbuhr & Associates 315.5 Alameda Street # 201 Medford, Oregon 975(}1 Property Descrz~ion 36 2W 351=}D, Tax Lots 12048c 1340; 26.7 acres Summa, ry The proposal involves a Zone Map Amendment to change the zoning on two tax lots from R-1-10, Residential Single Family (10,400 square foot minimum lot size} to R-1-6, Residential Single Family (6,004 square foot minimum lot size}. The subject property is located east of Gebhard Road and north of Walnut Grove Lane. Authority CPMC 1.24,024 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make recommendations to the City Council on amendments to the Zoning Map. Notice of the Public Hearing was given in accordance with State law. Applicable Law: CPMC 1.24.014 et seq. -Public Hearing Procedures CPMC 17,88,010 et seq. -Amendment Zane Map Ammendment The applicant, Mike Duncan is requesting that tlae zoning snap {Attachment A} be amended to create a residential density that is not substantially greater than the one currently shown on the City's zoning; map. ~.~ . The current zoning on Mr. Duncan's property is R-1-10 which allows the creation ofa 1 U,0~70 square foot minimum lot. The new zoning, R-1-6 is still a single family zoning category but allows the creation of 6,OC10 square foot lots. The subject property is adjacent to R-1-8 zoning to the east {New Haven Estates} and R-3, Multiple Family residential zoning to the south. The land use to the south is actually single family residential but is part of a PUD where homes have been permitted on smaller lots. The change in the minimum lot size would actually be a better utilization of land. City staff has received correspondence from bath the applicant and the residents of New Haven Estates {see Attachment B}. The applicant wrote a letter to property owners in the vicinity of his project to inform them ofhis plans and describe the amenities that he will add to Bluegrass Downs. New Haven residents have submitted a petition from some 13'7 people objecting to the proposed zone change for various reasons. They would prefer that the zone not be changed but if it is, they would like it to be zoned R-1-$ rather than R-1-6. They would also tike to see more land set aside for park space in addition to the wetland area being proposed. Staffbetieves that there would be no appreciable difference in traffic given the fact that single family residences alt generate an average daily number ofvehicte trips. Extending Jeremy Street and Rabun Way to the west has been contemplated by the City since New .Haven Estates was approved and this effort to improve street connectivity is part ofthe Central Point Transportation System Plan {TSP}. Regional planning to create urban reserve areas indicates support for expanding the Guy's UGB north of this site so that larger rural lots are less important now then they were when New t-taven Estates was approved. Given the fact that the Comprehensive Plan. designation is a general residential one, it was not necessary to amend it. The only thing the Commission is being asked to do is change the zoning district and then forward a recommendation to the City Council. Staff assumes that the state will concur with our proposal to modestly increase the residential zoning density on this property. Findings of Fact: The Planning Department offers the following findings; 1}the subject property is bounded on two sides by similar land uses at single family residential densities; 2}six thousand square foot lots are a better utilization ofland than ten thousand square foot lots and will prolong the development ofland for residential use in the UGB; 3}the future direction ofCentral Point's growth does not necessitate larger lots to buffer urban uses from agricultural {rural} ones; 4} there is no significant adverse impact to amending the zoning district. If the Commission can answer in the affirmative to the above listed findings of fact, then they may choose to recommend approval ofthc zone change. t-lowever, if the Commission receives evidence that prevents them from affirming the statements above, they may deny the application. ~,~~ Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions; 1. Adopt Resolution Rio., approving the Zone Map Amendment, based on the f ndings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the record; or 2. Deny the Zone Map Amendment, being unable to make the required findings of fact. 3. Continue the review of the subject application at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments: A. Area Map with Current and Proposed Zone Changes B. Correspondence C. C}rdinance No.~ Amending the Central Point Zoning Map ~~ r~-~ .~Zoni~z,~ ~~a~ -~x ~`IT~ ~'.~`NT~9!L ~'OINT Population 13,81$ N zoH~r~GREwsea aECEM6ER ta, 2400 oRalt~tAtiCE st 8t s THIS ~ufAp 1S DESIGNED sauRGE: CITY GF GENf'RAI. ACNNF ~(}}'~ ~I~NNIN~ P~..AF1h11NG aERARTMEN7 \ ~~~P~}SE~ ~NGY. LydA O7 AUGi1ST 2403 G:iGIS44PR'slcayoniryF22x 17 "~'> ~~'Ci C~~ ~L f ~~~~~~~~ rt.':,". NrF ~a ti -~~ ~~.~- ~ ,., ~, ~ ~~ ~~. October ZZ, ZUU3 Janis Z.. Ramanski Z3Z3 S~ James Way Ventral Paint, OR 4 ~SU2 Dear Janis: 6EVelopment, R ~~~~ rM. _ ~ 3--vet -~z ~~ _~-- `"1 ..~.~.,J,.r This letter is to introduce .Duncan L}evelapment, and our upcoming residential subdivision, "Bluegrass .Dawns': Duncan Development has been in the residential land development business far aver 3l? years, Z7 a, f thaw in Portland trod the last three years here in central Paxnrr We are a small, Iocal company dedicated to developing quality projects with the highest degree of livability we can achieve; projects that c©mplement the comntrenities we are in. Bluegrass Dawns will cansut of cylpraximately YZ2 lots far single family detached frames. There wi11 be no townhouses, condominiums, manufacture homes, mobile Names, eta The neighborhood will be a standard subdivision, oat a planned unit devetopmen~ The streets will be nice, wide, neighborhood streets. There will be mare than two acres of the subdivision dedicated for wildlife preservation and will include walkways and observation decks, This area will be, fenced to prated bath the wildlife species as well as visitor Bluegrass .Downs will consist of building lets from approximately 6,QtI[l to 9,ZUU square feet, with homes in the ~I9tl,t1+Q4 to $27S,t1(l11 price rang+~ Construction materials will be, at a minimum, consistent with thaw used in surrounding areas. On N©vember 4, Z11U3, the pity of Central Point will hold a public hearing to crrnsider this new neighborhood We would wekame any comments or concerns you may have prier to this hearing. ,~tiso, please k»c~:-~ than" ii s +*>icc r::~' is o,~,cr': f.~",~`~:b'=^ c"•"j"-~':~~` (fur Baal is to be the best neighbor we can throughout both the development and building phases, Please feel free to call our office, or y©re can a-moil us at: rluncantlevelot~nrenit'utc7sarter. net, Sincerely: Mike Duncan ~ ~~~ PO Box 5656 Central Point, Oregon 97502 {541)665.1.At~1D fax {541} ~'r55-2979 E-rnai1: greerrval4~yt7grr~s~a~cl~arter.net CCB #14685$ ~ 0/27/03 To: Tom Humphrey Planning Director City of Central Point Attached is a petition regarding the proposed Bluegrass Downs subdivision {Map 362W 35DD, Tax Lots 1200 and 1300}, This is in response to the possibility of a zoning change as described in the letter sent out by the city on 10114103. The 137 petitioners are all residents ofthe adjacent New Haven Estates subdivision. Not ail residents were contacted, but almost every one who was signed the petition.} Among the concerns: 1. Since Jeremy and Rabun are being planned as through streets into the new subdivision, changing the zoning to R 6 will create an abrupt and inconsistent change. {;New Haven lots are R-8 and R-10.) 2. Changing from R-10 to R-6 would be a 40 °lQ increase in density. Since many of the people in the new subdivision will cut through New Haven to access Hamrick Road, this will cause a significant increase in traffic. 3. The increased traffic through New Haven will create a safety issue for the many children who play and ride bikes on our streets. 4. Une reason children play in the streets is because New Haven has no provision for any open space or park areas for residents. The proposed new subdivision has no such provision either. 5. There already are nearby subdivisions that have R-6 lots and most people indicated that having a subdivision with larger-size lots would be a much more attractive addition to the city of Central Point. The petitioners are asking three things: 1, That the zoning not be changed from R-10 to R-6. 2. That, although we prefer that the zoning remain R-10, if the city feels it has to make a change, it should be no greater than from R-10 to R-8. 3. That a small area of land between Jeremy Street and a designated wetland be set aside as an open space. {See attached developer's map of subdivision} We hope that you and the other members ofthe Planning Commission will give careful consideration to our concerns in this matter. Thank you. Signed, 137 Residents of New Haven Estates t~~ PETITIOI~I: A. "VVe oppose the zoning change from I2.- I -14 to R- I -6. B. ~f the city decides a zoning change is necessary, it should be no greater than from R.- -1 {~ to R-1-8. C. We support the proposed open space parr reserve. ~.I`(~ v 1 j l ~, ~c tc 1~ ~: IL f ii IC ([fi`G l ~ Name Address Date A, ,. B. ~. . b - 7 -- F i ~ ~ {/ .ry ~ ~ ~. lam- ! 7 .~ 3 ~-- ~..--~' t ~ ~ tr`--~ ~~~ `} It .«r F'~ 3 I'ETITI4N: A, We oppose the zoning change from R.-1- ~ d to R.- ~ --~. B. Ifthe city decides a zoning change is nec~r;,ary, it shourd be na greater than fiozx~ ~.-1-t4 to ~.-1-8. C. Vie support the proposed open space park reserve. Name Address Date A. B, C.. ~,c~ ~~ ~.~ „~3 ~~ ~~ ~d .~ 7 ~~ ~~ ~t ~~ ~W ~~ r7'~ > ~ f ~. ~-~ ~- Ire- l~ 3 ~ ~~ . ~~ ~.."~ ~. L.~ 1 ~~ ~..~ - ,gyn.-~. i- ~~ - ~ `~-~C'~`.~ ?`~ ~ ~.. 1 " r ~ ~ ' ~/ ~~ /~ i ~ i tl 1 ~ ~ f~ ~--~-~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ t ~x .. . , r '~. _.- . ~ ... 4 C7`-^ tl u/ ~ ~1~~ ~ i L'1.-.~L, j S ~ ~ ` l ~ ~~ ~ i t ~ - t, if '` -dm..__ P~TITIfJN: A. We oppose the zoning change from R-1- ~ 0 to R-1-~. I3. If the city decides a zoning change is necessary, it should be no greater than fiom R-1-1 C? to R- l -8. C. We support the proposed open space park reserve. Name ~`~ ~~! t ~~ . ~~{'~ Y~ t ~""' c~T V Address Date A. B. C. , r `'~ ~ t } ``t ~% _'""/7) y jf,`,% jt (/~^,~~ ( /fly 1 /" }///5 f t .3 ~ ~ !' ~ ~f~ i}I <.~ f ... .+~~~`."t ._ } ( V ,~ / ~~5.+' ••T ?•~ l~ ~4-"~~ 1 ~~r l./~f t r, l~ `f \ ~ ~1 ~M rr /n x ~,,JJff tt f t ~~ ~ ~ - C.- b ~' ~ ~ v'r' c/. r ~~/ h ~j~ i j ~/ ~ r f'j" ~„_J. f J• i ~ ~ [ ~ ~ ~rti ~~ ,_„ r ~ r~ ~ M1'~ ( f ~ . t i (j~' /~ r ~.. ~ ~' • ~ ~~ ~t~` f ~~ E ~ ~ ~I V r 'J 5 ~ „ ~ ,,,_ ~ f i'~ .r' ~~ I'1=TI"PION: ~1, W~ oppose the zo~~~ng c;ha~~ge ii•onl IZ.-1- i U to I~.- i-G. I3. If the city ciecicies a ~v~~i~ig cha~~ge is neecssa~y, it shonic# be no greaten t1~an 1`i~om IZ-1-10 to R-1-i1. ~, We support the proposed open space park reserve. dame Aciciress Date .~. B. C, . 5~~ ~i~ //{ ~ ~1 z bf ~4 6` 7 7 7~ ~~ ~~ 7~ W.... m_ ~~ ~ /n~ ~ ; --~~i~~-'e'-'4 -.7~r~p~r-~~ ry"..,.,..~t~~s^~--~~~ •'7~ ~ (~~..Fi.' ~~1-,'~-~1a2._..eq'~ i._.`r~~ ~(.~ j` i! ~ ~~ " ~ _ ~ ~'?~ ~ ^' ~ ! _/ r~' ~ t i ~ ~ Ifs Y, _ f r ~ ~ 1 'yam r7 ~ / ~/ , , ~[..-{_,..U. ~...1 ~ ~ t~r`j ~--~i'{(:..L'..,rjl,(~°~ ~ ~i fJ ` ~ t~ ~'. ~~ --• ~~ r i ~ _ i •~" {~ .. 1 T~• ~ f~, \~ ,,~~ 1 C.~~~ 1 ~~~~M ~ i G~r~.." ~ J ~ J (j ~ ~~ ~_ P~;TIT10N: A, W e appose the zoning change from R- I -14 to R-1-~. B. If the city decides a zoning change is necessary, it shauid be no greater than from R- ~ -10 to R-1-8. C, We support the proposed open space park reserve. Name Address Date A. B. ~.., 7~ f/{ ,. 4 1 .. ,.~---- Vf~ ri .any f jf `~~ f ~ w --~ , ^~, j~ ;.. ~~ ~G' ~ ~ y r ~ d ~? ~'~ ~ ~ ~o c ~':~~- c~~ rl~ t~ r/~' 7` ~' 4~ S S< S, ~` d s ~fi ~: ~; ~~ ~~ ~,, w~ . I'~;`~'~rp10N ,t~.. Vde oppose t1~e zoning; change ~i-on~ .~~.- ~ - ~ 0 to K-1-6. ~3. ~f the city decides a zorlit~~; change is necessary, it should be no greater than i`rom ~~.-1- ~ 0 to I~- I-~. ~. We support the proposed open space park reserve. ~.,~ Dame address Date A. B. C, . ~-7 `~ `~~ ~~1C ~/~ I I~(~ l0~ f '+/ l~ l~~ l~ ~~, 14` 9~, ~.... `Y y_ */ "' ~.-Y~:m~F,-"r~~i..+~.+~..r-"~.-.w ~LS+~{J G~ ~ ~V~f ~4TY 1?j+f1 /" I • a.....-s~+~M ~ y ~ ~yY ~ ~V V ~~ Y~~ / ~ t ' 'V ~'y ~~ ~ ~~ .- ~ ~~~ ...: ~~ ~~ PETITIQN: A. We oppose the zoning change from R-1- l U to R-1-~. B. If the city decides a zoning change is necessary, it should be no greater than from R-1- l f} to R-1-S. C. We support the proposed open space park reserve. Name ~ Address Date A. B. C.. 1~~,~ l l~, ~~~ ~1~ CIS 1!~ 1~~ ~~~ . - .-~! ... .-'~ ~_~ /' ~- ~ ~ ~~~~ r~, ~ '" F r. j ~ ~~~ PETITION. A. We oppose the zoning change from R- I - I O to R- I -b. B. Ifthe city decides a zoning change is necessary, it should be no greater than From R-I-I(} to R-1-8, ~. We support the proposed open space park reserve. carne Address Date A, B. C.. .~. ~ ,fig ~ ~ < ., ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ `~ ~' €...--` ~..--' z .~- .~., ~w ~w PETITION: A. ~Ve oppose the zoning change from R-I-14 to R-I-~. B. Ifthe city decides a zoning change is necessary, it should be no greater than from R-1-10 to R-J.-B. 1'~ame Address Date A. B. C.. C. We support the proposed open space park reserve. x - t .. L' ~ , "7 `7 ,-,'"''°""''.J ~..~~.~~!-,~~~,:'~_. _ar,~W~.~.-ter. ~..: ~~,~~.`~~~ --~' ,.~.~,.n.. l E 1 1 1 1 ..~}~ ~.~~~ C}RDINANCE NU. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TI'IE CENTRAL POINT ZONING MAP {36 2W 35DD, Tax Lots 12{}0 & 1300} RECIITALS; 1. The City of Central Point {"City"} is authorized under Oregon Revised Statute {ORS} Chapter 197 to prepare, adopt and revise comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances consistent with the Statewide IJand Use Planning Goals. 2. The City has coordinated its punning efforts with the State in accordance with ORS 197.040(2}{e} and OAR 660-030-0060 to assure compliance with goals and compatibility with. City and County Comprehensive Plans. 3. Pursuant to authority granted by the City charter and the Oregon Revised Statutes, the City has determined to amend the C"er~tt-al .Paint Zoning .trap which was originally adopted onAugust 29, 1980, and has been amended at various times since then. 4. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in CPMC Chapter 1.24 and. Chapter 17.96, the City has conducted the following duly advertised public hearings to consider the proposed amendments; {a} Planning Commission hearing on November 4, 2003. {b} City Council hearings on November 20th and December 11th, 2003. Norv, therefore; THE PEQPLE t3F THE CITY {~~` CENTRAL PC}INT, OREGON, D4 ©RDA~N AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. At its public hearings on November 20th and December 11th, 2003, the City Council received the findings of the Planning Commission, reviewed the City Staff Report, and received public testimony from all interested persons. Based upon all the information received, the City Council adopts the findings and conclusions set forth in the City StaffReport, and based upon the same, the City Council finds that there is sufficient public need and justification for the proposed changes, and the proposed changes are hereby adopted entirely, Section 2. The City Zoning Map is hereby amended asset forth on Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. .. ~ ~. ~w Section 3. The City Adrrainistrator is directed to conduct post acknowledgment procedures defined in 4RS 197.b10 et sect. upon adoption oi'the changes to the Zoning Map. Passed by the Council and sighed by m.e in authentication of its passage this day of , 2003. Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this day of , 2003. Mayor bank Williams 2 w,. Orda,nance Nc~ . (0313C}3 } ., .~~~~~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPURT MEETING DATE: November 4, 2043 ICI: Central Point Planning Commission FR(~-M; Torn Humphrey AICP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Public Dearing - To consider a Tentative Plan fora 122 lot subdivision between Gebhard Road and Scofield Street {New Ravens Estates and north of Walnut Grove Lane in the R-1-6 proposed) zoning district X36 2W 35DD Tax Lots 1240 and 1344) Applicant/ (.}caner: Duncan Development, LLC, Mike Duncan Gerald & Wendy May P.t~3. Box 5656 Central Point, CSR 97502 A_,,~ent~ Douglas McMahonlDoffbuhr & Associates, Inc. 3155 Alameda #241 Medford, t7R 9'751}1 Summary: The applicant has submitted a development proposal to subdivide two existing tax Tots into 122 residential lots {Attachment A) pending prior recommended approval of a residential zone change. The property has recently been annexed to the City and the applicant is aware of the concerns and the requests of his neighbors. He is actually working on a compromise proposal that he will introduce at the Commission meeting. Authority. CPMC 1.24.054 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application for a Tentative Plan. Notice of the Public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 {Attachment B}. A licabie Law: CPMC 16.10.014 et sect. -Tentative Plans CPMC 1'7.24.010 et seq. - R-1, Residential Single-Family District Discussion• Bluegrass Downs is one of the last large pieces of developable land in the eastern area of the Central Point Urban Growth Boundary (UGB}. A lot of development has occurred in this area over the past few years including the New I-laven Estates Subdivision, bidden Grove Subdivision and the Green Valley Subdivision. The adjacent subdivisions are all single family residential uses however they differ in zoning (R-1-8 and R-3), lot size and style. As was stated in the previous staff report which addressed the zone change, neighbors from the adjoining neighborhood ofNew Haven Estates object to the having any more small single family fats to the west. They would also like to see the area around the wetlands expanded to afford children more recreational options. The applicant is aware ofhis neighbor's concerns and has discussed same compromises with City staff. Mr. Duncan could not have his plans completed in time far distribution but intends to present an alternative at the Planning Commission meeting. Jackson County Roads and Parks, Rogue Valley Sewer Services and Fire District #3 were notified of this application and have each submitted their comments {Attachment C). This property currently has water rights with Rogue River Valley Irrigation District. The developer must resolve the issues with their water rights and water diversions prior to final plat approval. The Planning Department has reviewed the tentative plan for earrzpliance with the City's Zoning code and Comprehensive Plan. The area is designated for low density residential development and has ap~~rposed zoning ofR-1-6, which is a 6,000 square foot residential lot minimum. The 1221ots that comprise Bluegrass Downs range in size from 6,000 to 9,238 square feet. The Public Works Department is finalizing their comments, recommendations and requirements for this application which will be presented at the meeting {Attachment D}. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Staff suggests the following findings of fact and conclusions of law as applicable to the project and necessary for its approval. The project site is located in the R-1-6, Residential Single-Family Zoning District and increases residential land use efficiency in this area. The proposed tentative plan for single family residential development is a permitted use in the R- 1-6 zoning district. The zoning in turn is consistent with the Lour Density Residential Comprehensive Plan map designation. The Comprehensive Plan encourages innovative residential planning and development techniques that would help to increase land use efficiency and reduce the cost of utilities and services {Comprehensive Plan, Page XII-12). 2. The project consists of a tentativc plan application for the subdivision of approximately 2.00 acres for the purpose ofdeveloping asingle-family residential subdivision, Bluegrass Downs. The total number of fats proposed for the subdivision is 123, one of which is a wetlands and open space area. The proposed single-family subdivision meets the density requirement for the R-1-6 residential zone which is a maximum. of 4.5 units per acre. Each lot within the subdivision meets the requirement of the City's subdivision and zoning codes for residential lots as well as the specific requirement ofthe R-1-6 zone. The tentative plan. includes all information required by CPMC 16.10.010 et seq. 3. The Planning and Public Works Departments have reviewed both the tentative plan far the proposed subdivision and the findings of fact and determined. that the project meets all City standards and requirement subject to the recommended conditions found in Attachments D and E. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: 1. Adopt Resolution No.~, approving the tentative subdivision subject to the recommended conditions of approval Attachments D & E}; or 2. Deny the tentative subdivision; or 3. Continue the review of the tentative subdivision at the discretion of the Commission. Attachments: A. Reduced Copy of Tentative Plan B. Notice of Public Hearing C. Correspondence from Affected Agencies D. Public Works Staff Report (to be presented at the meeting} E. Planning Department Conditions of Approval f~ Yud } T,L S3Da (3S 2W 350) 1 ~ CAtSANAN ~ . 1 ! r.L t7o4, ~ (Sa zw 3saa ~ HDYVyV~] I~» SANITARY S£tYER UNE 30.ItAROSKY~ I ~.., a..`"."p""'T gy' I fig• t 5• gg^ I __....i s, #. 1 I I, I L I azrn E~ # !: 1~?.3~~.22 ;„21 }„2C}tI„ # 9,,1 =DNts f 3 Y.L +raa €I~ s zw 35p)# ;,xua$6u - - c } ,a zw` 554F} HusaARD E ~~ t ~E 220a I s'iw nF 'FiC7/F5-OH e ~. I # _. r.L s4D i i T.i. 244 I T.L :41 tsd 2w 354} ~ ~ {3s zw SsD} ~ t3s zw 35ay HARP NIC}SQFAS SMiTN ..._ _..._. _., - - .._ _ qs1 as' t` sa' ~ 36' 1 64' ~ sa' f~ ea' ~E sa~ ~ fia y au y , o0 ^~M1 ~ ` 7,Sa4SF, # e S~p I c_I o7 of o I ©I <sI ~ c ~` cl ~Id,64p5F I$.$aa5f Id,s4a5F #B,Sa4SF #d,$4a5F I$.$apSF I$.daD 3%~8,30IISF\ 2 t t y . +11 # , Cc3r1 J3~i ~53_,.t BO'~a"~,.5"~,_3,0' SO.,,",F 80',.-,~ e4'~ &0 I I 55' I 53' :5' SS'.' ' 5{' 124' p~i,F4d5F ,~ 5a .{~ _ ~ - J........... ,,. __._ r i 1 1 I I i, 1 z ~r r `.L4q i-•- ~ 473` _,,. 8 «17 ° 1 6 n 9 5 Hl 4 "°„ 1 J ° 5.335sF ~" ,, 3>~' ~ 7;' -'"~ sa-"f sa'~ so'~ ao'"°"1 so"~ ca # I i I $A33 ~'4$.!" 0 !/k`, 9.23SSF aSFls.s0asF S,64asFl$,6aa9F d,d40sF sF ~ ''~ k..37 74 k~ 75 ~ 78 ~ 77 ~ 78 ;a 79 ~'Fto ,~ ~ # .,~„}a,-;,, ~9' 'S' s' S' I s s5• 1 " &,$a55F ` -1 ,-'~- ~"'-~' ~"-i""~'.^^-~S ^'~,- -£ -~- -" °5'~ 2"~"3 ~ 31' ~ S '"~ .tl i6.6$p5f 6.SSOSF b,BbaSF B.d98SF 5.705SF S 728SF ]_ ~ 8n4' RA6,lJNS, WAY _ ....,_ ,,. -'-. ~ sod ~o''~ ~°" -''}a° x o.\ s$` I d4` i sa' I ea' i eo' i c°; i' $r '"i75` ~ - d35' s 1 C 7..r ,+'""~""' ""1',.,,"-..,, 1~.Pi"MTAtr~rwT,wr~aPesw # 74' { saw 35' ..9' S' 36' M55 SS' 24 Y~4 Ss~ 7# P` ''O.7.app5Ft,.*,.,"~"'I ww~w, .l e, ! ~'{' 1 (11 ~ I (~"3t' t?3~ ~ .,} ('~3t. I ~FF ~ ~ ~ $~ ~t~t~ ~ 5:20. \ 9A89S~ ^'1 ~ ~ ~ , y'f '~P~~r.8a88f ' I iI ci °oI gul g 7J °oI I ~ 8,528SF .°n ! iry i I # t;t, #a /Loa °l n5\0~ ~ ` 7 89~ ",1.87 4 86 b 8_ " 84 .- 82 i ~_ _ i ~ i• 6.~ ~° 54 65 ~_66..ri67 „B8 _69 7D '~ 72 \~ o ~ #$,a3dsF Id,00C5F Id.aaasF I6,na4sF #6,4325F 'I, .~ 0 ~ i7~.t745F Id.5855F+e, 85Sfib,S$SSF16,S855FI$,583SF~8,5$7S~~ 9.7t5 .4f ~ Q7.a00 3 f ~ ~~ P• f ~ tr~ 50~, 6Q~ ~,}„~ 8p' ~ Sa' ~,},,, $0' ~ w ~ 25'129; # 7.:54SF ~ ,,,~," S5' L5$' S5' ~ 55~. 6'~ 55' ~ ~ : "0' i,,/ ' `rti~ c dD' I 5t' ~f /~54~'~4' I $4' $4' i 54' TTT~["`'yllf.,,Nly45~.Ik$,N~``~,C i'" jta' "~~I~~~ }, ~ I~NIA,~E\ i ~ 1~ '~~'~ff:. I;PHAS£ uNe# ,P?.4 Im 7, 59F .,,~.II ~1 I'~.Gk'~ { s# i°Si ~{~ iN ~~-'f~""~'SN•,~r TIN J7"~y"3~ia;~~I'"~~~~ #'- taa' I~~ 7,"a14SF=I'$'.4$a5Ti 6.i$OSFI$,d8aSFFS.480SF1$.t865F~.484Sf(13,4805ff8,480SFF~2,3 SF! 2r 44 5t 5t' I t' 7 S4' 34` St' S4' St' 76~`"< 7~asasF ~~L,_ x JE32E3viY STREET' s~ {{ titl' __~I~ -~' ~ . ~._..' «.. ~-593•x... ,~-.-5= - .........~...... _ y......... 1"` 28 uiE ~.,} La 'I'4 ~ "~^' S5' SS' x''"35' SS' S5' ~ 5' SS' -~-•-SS' ~t^• 7~7..a5F r~ ~ 3r'~ l I } ~ 1 ~I I ~ I S ~ I " t14°~~} Ira i~F !#m I--~ IarVw tm Em i~ I~ im I~ iW 29 ri) 9 - C# S1 52 - .a r=54~ 85 I}9~ I"96 -97 ?,7545F ~ E E4.S855F i8.+63'=FI6,i83SFI4.4$EgFI&.t83SFt 8,4d35FI8,4S3SF7~3.t$3SfI b,Sb3Sfl 8.t85SFI8. S ( 7 1- I ~ , P•~ 11~t~~''T9&,9275F f a 4Q _ ry 27D' _ '~3/,~~~ ~~,^~ 3~ 4 ~.~ 3aT bD' T &4' T 80' T 8{S, . >< '1 ,.."`'1' 7,44rSF 16,804SF Id,8005f i6,8aD5F ]6,BDOSF kris se3S4 ~ .~''~' \ 1 18 °.a1 19 ° i 2~ ° 121 ° 122 8 t~S~~Y tw\iASF ~9,'„7„ ~D'~~'~.~ ~ .~.- e• ~ 6,48aS q~ I gg d. 7,648SF8`~ o ~~ TRACT "A" F e,s4a sF`_ .,c///.- r4s.plz $F ,,! ~I`"` }"~q0~ (2.34 ACRES} ,r t } 7.L z4ao 46C} C w AlAP6 {I, ._....., t..... «.... _l. ~..... 3413 .6w~38cc1 {191} I (f 92} T~~€TATIV~ PLAT OF PROPt}SE3? "BI.E~RASS ~kQWNS„ LOCATED 1N: Y}~1E S£ E j+4 DF SECT]DN 35, T36S, R2W. WM. JACKSON CDUN'[Y, OREGON TAX LOTS 12OD & 1300 {36 2W 35DD) WAY APPL#GANT: DUNCAN D£YELOf'M£NT, LLC. P.O. 66X 5696 CENTRAL POINT, OREGON 97542 {54i} 665-3263 nwN£R: GERALD ~. MAY do W£HDY GOATS MAY 5098 GEBHARD ROAD OENTRAL PO1HT, OREGON 97SO2 ' {541} 684-8590 HOFfBUHR &~~5, INC. 3158 ALAMEDA 5?RE£T, Si1IT£ 201 }AEOFORD, CREGOH 47504 {54i} 773-4$41 E 5 A'1£5, PHASE V11!} i1 {NEW HAV } {189} F ~ ( {166} B 2WI 38CC} ; t a6 _~~ ~ _ _ RASE L€NE i # 127 " # s 2w s$cc} I yy ROUSS ~ i # {152} {151} {111} - STRSE T {HEW HAVEN E$?A?£5. PNAS£ Y} :y ~ L~i.ll ihl ~ {144) D7 ~l i r ~j.'~ {t t 1 12} '~a'A~,-.~ t j (' 1G} ~' EEr :74: ~~ Ba' Syi„ 35' ~"~.isfi_..E_;'s' S',L, `c~~}s~'S' S ~ .~ 72 ", t 233~?_ ~ ..... .."" ..... .._ ~ lwi~ Jt) ;a' (a I-84' ~S} 3 5$~ 56' ( 98' i 96' ~ 58' #' SB~~SS' i SfiT"~56'~ fi2' in # t}`,~, nl I I l ~{}rja ~ JONHSQN38CC) i~~ 5~4~ -cc ~~~~ 7~7aSSF ~# #. !!!~ (lj I!!#~ I• I~ i~ fff#^ #'1 Q~iiti C}7 i 1 t76 I~{}5 I i Q4"~7~4aF . # ",~ E~ ~ ~ {1os} ill eE {107} 7.fry s94a lI -"~ :,ate 2s•~z5•#~4$ m_Q.7 _d.6 S45 _4~s. 43 42 ~ '~ _ {36, W 350} CO io .i~n# 111 t !! i 3 is• !!~`;. 326 2a~"" 7.L 232T i 'L.EFS4N i tti +~ 7.aB3SF #5,64$Sf#4,8275~d,8a8SFi 8.3895f]S,37a5F#8,S6SSfI16.5325~ 5l3S~8,4945£38.4755~7.; 425E i° 1[}~ ~' 1 I ~ ~ d~ CNC234CG} i 7: 285E j r 8,413SF j i .. ~ Ca ~ Ln32' iT.37'~ ~5°32~ La34,~ /// ~ . . i 70' s4'13~` ~Sd~ ~ fi-',.~ 55'.._.I Sfi~ 98'~ 56` ~,,, 8' L58' ~,",5E L6"~, ~ hQj, ~ ~. ~ J ~~, ~ {1 G8} II ~" - # 575 ,". L- _ `""' t3s`'iw' a5a)i j ~ a, _ ~- ~` ~"'" ?j~~U GRASS dR1V~ s3s'rw,},-^ t ... ~ ... ~ k~sas `~./'' Ir.~. xns I i {71} 4F4RlCX~ ~ i ~~ 5-I"} 57. ~} 57•~ S7, ~ 57• ~ 5~• X57: X37, {} 57~ S 57~' ~7~~~~„5„7.'~. 57'..•}• 57t' ••]T- 57' -i'--37• '7}"'48 }6 7{Sb 2W 38CC}I (4 ~1 I I. I. I I I ! I I. I I I +a 1 I. 44. T.L 6a0 ^3 i NiX 1 6,84CSF 6,84DSF 8.$4a5f 8405E S,8tO5F 8.84DSF 6,844SF B,BM?SF 8,$40SF f1,84a5f $A405F 6,8445£' 6.$ SF $.6sa5F 8$4tlSF 4225E iY.728SF (3d 2W 36Da} ~ {70} J i 2a 2DI. J2 ~.> °.7~F $.~.~ r36 07 NJ'8 x'39 4¢Q 41 ° ° o _~ ~ ST JAM£5 WAY -.L :7CD _ f~ I_ _ 1-T !r #= 1~ i° I>' Sw ~ I« I~ I~ #~ ~ .. {36 2W ssn) [`[ IY{[j {S ~~ jt 708 # i 4 -1 # 1 # 12 N 13 1 A, 1'15 ~-1 1 6 ts' SANITARY SEWER Ir.S. 2zr I}.- ~ OpNCAN ~ .I t] } 8,3l SSF #~1~ d.C.ffR• 98- 430A i i I # I (>~ # I I I i 1 I EASENEN7 TD Ci7Y OF {38 2W 38CC} RJ~ u^ I -`~_ .. ~^-^ { ^^++44 1 j cfNiRAG POENr ^-3.Z ~scv &S !~3 Y _' ~ ~ ~ _. ~~N~.i 70' }t 57' I 97' /~ 7' S7' S7' I 57' S7' S7' 1 57' (~57' < 5T' S7' 5T' S'7 57' d3' 70' ._4i ~ -- {-} I _ E T.L30Da a I i I ( I t lt34 2W i33a6~078' i i IPA k I ( ~ _ { } ~~f I <C ~ ~t~ ~L zsD~ [al (4D' aaco4s ~~ ig~ g ~~ 8U 8 « g~ w ~~ ~ S~ e~~ 8« ~~ IYO ~ ~~ 1 is ~ !1(] ~6 7 (frr n INS I°" Ir.,ry li+= I« I«+- Iryr„ SI4 #°~'.+ #=_ ~~,~ ~~~ 5 u I"~ I! 33 ~- } ~ 7 {36 2W 35Dy 3i' t25) ~ Jam. ...,«„ ~« u~ ~_ "'trd D-' 4. '~ .J `" "'•~ O .~« tia~r, "1 S~ H ! { ) w kNKlEY I I.~ X26}i~.. I.:w iwm I~~ I.~ #~ Ise i-'~ (a I~~ i~„ #~'~ } I~ I~- ~ ,~, - 3 {663 i~ i W i_ ~ c~.A~~~~ uvA~.~ ~.5. zdaa I ~~ ~ {z4j`tr" ~„L,27} ~ t2s} ~ {2s} ~ {3D} j {31) } {32) ~ {33} ~~{~a} ~ {a~} 1 {3s} ~~taz} I {36} E {ae} ~ {40) I {tia~ 13~~ \ t~ I _ _ Icnl I •~...... TIC ~' ,~,• {S6k Kl.e'°} { - --cwAtSat#l' GROVe LA.NE'-~ - ° - -' ) I 9 ~+n { ~,_ I ~ i }...,,_ ~~.. .,._ ..,~.. -~ I ~- ._..._ «.. _.. --- ~ .---- ...._ ~ _....~,1 # I t33} # I r s~ ~Er a 1 ` ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 E3 ~ l 4 ~ -. ~ W = ~ 1 I ~ {35} I I ! iaGh y l@9 ft I iii ~-3 #Y1 i~I Iii 3 t3D} 1 I 1------I ~~...~.~~..__-_-_-____------ I I'` I ICI Io# I=3 -°! (Fi1DDEN~G~iDVE} 1 ~ sAVArir~A~ oR~v~ ...~ I i # ~ 1 1 ~ S (~I f d i ~ ! ~ ss } ~s rrah co~AieR I I I~# ICE #~3 1`I I --_ ~I I I i ~' I I~1 i~l `~} i i l ~ i} 2 i ? '~ k ~ C~~ f k i I °vY: c"~C7,.lC LAS G. MGMA47A,\ i E t ~IS~ ~ pr~'~,~,~} E~A7=: A~~.~J: ~~_ ..~ _ I GRE£H VALi.EY WAY } U~Q, ~ RAY y.~i:3 - i=eoacG,: ,,,,_ J a6assx8aera ,5~ a.5' PR.OJcC'F hO. I~ ~ ~' i ~~~~,'~{ PROEES8IQNAG I-4s' s s' .s~-I F~AUTinkc-: ;"! r1 "~"'"" i~=mz tAtUD SURVEYQR S .SGAL=. i ~ r' ~, k~ i s~,y;ra'o'.It^rs•~.~Ww~~ ~ ~AGss~4~t~res~.. u~'c. Fa,~vlscxl rta. 1 ~t`~y.~ ~,•i ~,+ 3 ... ..:.. ...... ........ " ~ !2EVI93C7hk CaA7~: 4477 ~ ~c o ~ ~ aia5 ua~tra sf., ~A5i5 Lx= 6~ARI~: C7!~~^"EN vA4.4cY 8C aro 5012E 2a3 L7F..'AtLC4 ~Y: n4UG[A3 Ca McMAFtAN h'MU* 7' 1•.O" }ryCFORp. 4R 476x4 ~+o. ;a,3 fs~'7~~ c,...,.ec r8aa,. {Brit Ira-4t44i Fi9Yl.»t>Fu BY: a6 2W 35DD TL 1200 & TL 1300 RENEWS 13 37 jD4 r'Ax ta4i1 77a-tars SWEG' k ch= r V~GSt#tITY t'FAF"' CI ty of Central Poln~a`~~+~ I~L.A.NNING .I~.~'PA.~~'.1~1~'N~' Tam Humphrey, AICP Planning Director lien Gerschler Gornmunity Planner Dave Arltens Planning Technician Lisa Mr~rgan Planning secretary notice of Pubic ~1~Ieeting I~a>Ee of ~ot~ce; C.~ctaber 14, 2003 Meeting Date: November 4, 2003 Time: '~:00 p.m. {Approximate) Place: Central Paint City Hall 15S youth second street Central Point, {~regon NATURE (~F MEETING ~3eginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review land use applications for a zone change and tentative subdivision plan on two tax lets which total approximately 2~ acres. They are identified in the records ofthe Jackson County Assessor as Maly 362VV 35DD, Tax Lots 1200 and 1300. The parcels are located in the R-1-10, Residential dingle Family zoning district (10,000 square foot minimum lot size} and could be re-zoned R-1-6 {6,0{10 square foot minimum lot size). The tentative subdivision has proposed the creation of 11'7 lots. The Central Point Planning Commission will review the zone change and tentative subdivision applications to determine if all of the requirements of the Central Point Municipal Code can be met. If the Commission determines that the application meets the City's standards, a decision could be issued subject to annexation into the City of Central Point and the approval ofthe City Council. CRITERIA FC}R DECISIt~N The requirements for zone change and tentative subdivision are set forth in Chapters 16 and 1'T of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General Information and conditions on the project approval. PUI3f,IC CtJMMENTS 1. Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up until tl~e close of the aneeting scheduled for Tuesday, November ~, 2003. f";f>~ .w~ Ste' 2. ~'ritten comments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hail, 155 South Second Street, Central Paint, CSR 9'7502. 3. issues which may provide the basis for an appeal on the matters shall be raised prior to the expiration of the comment period noted above. Any testimony and written comments about the decisions described above will need to be related to the proposal and should be stated clearly to the Planning Commission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant are available for public review at City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, f)regon. Copies ofthe same are available at 15 cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public may contact the Planning Department at X541} 664- 3321 ext. 292. SUMMARY C1F PR{)CEDURE At the meeting, the Planning Commission will review the application and technical staffreports. The Commission will to hear testimony from the applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the applications. if allowed, any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion ofthe review the Planning Commission may recommend approval or denial of the applications as submitted. r~~ ~outn ,~e;conct street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ! (5A~1 664-3321 !Fax: (541} 664-6384 ~~ ,;~; ~., _- JACKSON COUNTY Roads September 3Q, 2t}E33 Attention: Torn Humphrey City of Central Point Planning 156 South Second Street Central Point, QR 975x2 hE: Subdivision off Gebhard Raad - acounty-maintained road. Planning file: 03C}59; Bluegrass Downs Subdivision< pear Mr. Humphrey: ~a~a~ Eric Niemc?rer, P~ Traffic .~ .r7evela~rnext ix~~r 20d FtCtteJo~s Road White City OR 87503 Phona. (549}77A-6230 FAX: {~a¢1 }774-E205 nlemey~t c{~~'arksoncourz#y.arg wwsFr jaaE;s~sncauniy,org Thank you for the opportunity #o commen# oi~ this application far Bluegrass Downs Subdivision, a ore-hundred twenty-twa-unit development off ~ebhard Road. Roads and Parks has the following comments: ~ . The applicant shall submit construction drawings to Jackson County Roads and parks and obtain county permits i€ required. 2. The applicant shall obtain road approach permits from Roads and Parks for road approaches to Gebhard Road, The paved approaches shall have 3t3' approach radii and a 3{7' width. There shall be no direct driveway approaches off Gebhard Road. 3, We concur with the 20' wide strip to be dedicated. 4. Gebhard Road has a load limit restrictions the applicant needs to indicate to the bounty where the al#ernative construction access will be located. If you have any questions or need further inf©rmation feel free tQ call me afi 774-623Q. Sincerel , ErlC ~Cerrl+~Y+~r, PE Traffic ~. l~eveloprnent Engineer ~:t~' Ci C,~~ C1+~SC{Cl~~t1414(7CT1Q hCi("i~~) ~.~`L('r ~~'1C.~~©.~~.~~.W~l C3 F a t 3 r4~: ~ ~ ~ RC~CU~ VALLEY SEWER ~Ei1V+CE~ I,acatian: 138 West V'il<~s Road, Central Paint - Maili4lg Address. I~.~}. I3as 3130, Ce~ttra] Paint,Oli 9'7502-lJ(lfl5 Tel. {541 } 664-63003 ar {54I } 779-I I44 FAQ {541) ~~-717 ] ~~~~,~v.RVSS.us September ~~, ~~}~}~ Ken Gerschler ~'~ ~(j~.-(3$t}. City of Central Paint Planning Department 155 Sauth Secand Street Central Paint, 4regan 9752 Rec Bluegrass Downs Subdivision. Dear Ken, There is an $ inch sewer main an Gebhard Raad which can be extended to serve the prapased development. This main line has suffzcient capacity to serve the prapased development. All new construction must be lane in accardar;rce with RVS standards. If you need additional information, please call me at 779-41 A4, Sincerely, ~~~ Carl Tappert, P.E. District Engineer I~.:IDATAIAGENCII~SICENTPTIPLANNGISUBDZ V 1SICtN1BLUEGRAS Sl:)Q'~1 NS .DC}C ~~:; f ~ +,,} 1 z - ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ' ~' ~~~av Se~~~~~~t^ 20fJ3 i' ~;IrY~r ~~r~~~~~~~~~,a' C:~'1 ~~Y"~e~~'11~~~~'.~~~Y~~~'~`` PLr~IVNi3`~C~ C~' 13~J1i.~~r~C7 t~ " PUf3L.IC i~~'CRKS (]~ P°I'. C~ ~~ ~~~~;n -~~~~~i~: a~ ~t~r ~€~~i~~n ~~~ ~°~I c~~~j~~~~~~~ ~~,r~~~l E~~~~. ~~~~~~~drar~ ~c~~:~a~~.i~~~ ~~ed ~~ ~~~~ ~~Aii~~ ~~~~c~ ~~~~:~~~~q~~~ bpi :~~~ ~`~~~°~; c~i~-~:~~~:~.e ~~i~fi:~rv~~:~:~~~r~ i~~~~~o ,~ ~,~ ` •~ ~ ~P ~~ N[~~`1~ &~~~~E~~~ ~~L~~~ II [ lirrl I~,, 11~'"'~tt Public Works Staff Report T~} ~~ {~~StrlbUt~C~ at thE' ~~~'~tln~ s ~~~ ~:~ ~; ATTACHMENT E PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED C4Nl~T~QNS Cl-F APPROVAL l . Friar to final plat appraval, the applicant shall submit to the City a cagy of the proposed covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs} far Pheasant Creek Estates Subdivision. 2. The applicant shall comply with ail requirements imposed by affected public agencies and utilities as they pertain to the development of the Pheasant Creek Estates Subdivision. Evidence of such compliance shall be submitted to the City prior to final plat approval. 3. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state and local re~ulatians, standards and. requirements applicable to the development anal construction of the Pheasant Creek Estates Subdivision. 4. The developer must resolve the issues with their water rights and water diversions prior to final plat appraval. ~~~: ~.~ ~;::, PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REP{~RT HEARING DATE; November 4, 2003 TtJ: Central Point Planning Commission FROM: I~,en Gerschler, Community Planner S CSBJECT: Conditional Use Perrr~it Modification and Site Plan. Review -Upgrades at McDonalds Restaurant C}vvner/ Applicant: McDonalds Cozporation 10220 NE Points Drive, Suite 300 Kirkland, Washington 98033 Agent: Loy Taylor 1 I500 NE 7b`~ Street, Suite A3, Vancouver, Washington 98b62 Pro er Descri tp,_io~nl 37 2W 02CD, Tax Lot 2900, 3000 - 0.88 acres Zonis C-4, Tourist and Office Professional District SU 1T1Tt1arY The applicant is requesting a review of an existing conditional use permit and the approval of a revised site plan to add. a play center, additional seating capacity and a modified drive through access to the McDanalds restaurant on Pine Street. Authority: CPMC 1.24.OS0 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to hold a public hearing and render a decision on any application far a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan. Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.Ob0 (Exhibit B). Applicable I..,aw CPMC 17.44.010 et seq.- Tourist and C}ffice Professional Zoning District CPMC 17.76.010 et seq.- Conditional Use Pe~•tnit CPMC 17.72.010 et sell. -Site flan, Landscaping and Construction Plan Approval CPMC 17.64.010 et sect. - C}ff Street Parking and Loading ~: ,.~. Discussion The applicant, McDonalds Cozporation is requesting that the Planning Commission review the existing conditional use pez-mit and approve a site plan application that would allow the business to construct additional improvements at 1014 East Pine Street. Originally approved and constructed in i 996, the restaurant has been a popular attraction in Central Point for locals and travelers passing through the area on interstate Five. The applicants would life to upgrade the existing facilities by improving traffic circulation to the drive through window, together with additional seating and a new childrens play area {Attachments A and E}. The addition would constitute about 1690 square feet of new floor area. Traffzc impact upon the surrounding roads has been a major issue for McDonalds since the original approval. in 1995, the traffic engineering firm l~.ittelson and Associates conducted a traffic impact study which indicated that the restaurant would not reduce the level of service on the existing z•oad system. in 1991 the Oregon Department of Transportation had made considerable capital izzzprovements in the area, particularly the installation of a new signal and road alignment at Freeman Road and East Pine Street. During the constz•uction of the restaurant, a concrete median was installed along a large portion of Freeman Road near the Pine Street intersection. A gap in the median was left open near IvicDonalds so that motorists could access the restaurant when traveling northward on Freeman Road rather than driving onto fine Street to access the Ninth Street driveway. The median gap was left open as long as left hand turns into the facility remained safe. ~ittelson recommended that the gap be closed ifthe area became unsafe {Exhibit D). According to the records of the Police Department, there have been no signifzcant accidents at the median gap, however the Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission assign a condition to close the median gap at such time that the City Public Works anti Police Deaprtments determine that it is unsafe. The parking lot anal trash enclosures have been modified or relocated to accommodate a revised circulation plan for the drive through window. There are now two drive through lanes and ordering stations that are separated by a landscape island. The two lanes merge into a single lane as motorists approach the service window. The new configuration is intended to improve service. The trash enclosure location has shifted approximately ~0 feet west ofits present location. A new landscaped and signed traffzc median is shown at the Freeman Road connection that directs traffic to travel towards the right in a south direction on Freeman Road. The applicant is proposing to add another access onto Ninth Street since there have been problems with the ingress and egress of delivery vehicles. Additional seating area and play area have been pz•oposed which will add approximately 1'700 square feet to the existing restaurant. The single story building pz•ofile for the addition will be similar to the existing building except for the portion where the play area requires a "pop-up" to accommodate the play equipment. The new addition will displace approximately 750 square feet of landscaping to othcz- areas on site to include the new driveway medians. The existing site signage will remain virtually unchanged except for a new "playplace" sign that will be installed. None of the operating characteristics ofthe business will be changed in relation to operating houz•s. f~a ~<F'~~ CPMC 17.64.010 identif ies the offstreet parking requirements for restaurants as being one space per each three seats. The total seating capacity for the restaurant will be 110 which is 37 spaces. This requirement has been met by the applicant. The applicant has provided findings of fact for consideration by the Commission {Exhibit E}. The Jackson County Road and Parks, Jackson County Fire f7istrict Number 3 and the Rogue Valley Sewer Services {RVSS} have been notified of these applications and have responded with memorandums {Attachment F}. RVSS has indicated that there will be additional fees associated with the improvements. Fire Officials will require that the applicant keep adequate access around the building. Roads and Parks had no comment. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of L aw Conditional ~Tse Pe~rnit The Planning Commission in granting a conditional use permit shall find as follows: That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use and to meet all other development and lot requirements of the subject zoning district and all other provisions of the code; ^ The McDonalds restaurant was approved by the City in 1996 on two tax lots with a combined acreage of 0.88. The original building size was approximately 2500 square feet and would be increased by approximately 1'700 square feet. The proposed addition will meet all area, width and yard requirements for the C-4, Tourist and f}ffice Professional District. That the site has adequate access to a public street or highway and that the street or highway is adequate in size and canditian to effectively accommodate the traffic that is expected to be generated by the proposed use; ^ Access #o this site is provided by Freeman Road and South Ninth Street. Presently, most of the traffic accesses the restaurant from Freeman Road since there is a signalized intersection at Freeman Road and East Pine Street. A portion of a concrete median was left open to allow vehicular access to the restaurant for motorists traveling north from the vicinity of the Mountain View Plaza. The Planning Department has recoznrnended that the median be closed atsuch time that The City Public Works and Police Departments determine that it is unsafe. That the proposed use will have no significant adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof In making this determination, the commission shall consider the proposed location of improvements on the site; vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; setbacks; height of buildings; walls and fences; landscaping; outdoor lighting; and signs; ^ This proposed use will not have any significant adverse effect on surrounding properties since the proposed modifications to the building, play structure and drive through access are located approximately 300 feet from the nearest residential structure. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will comply with local, state and federal health and safety regulations and therefore will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or worming in the surrounding neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community. ^ The proposed facilities will need to meet any applicable local, State and Federal regulations. That any conditions required for approval of the permit are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety and general welfare. ~ An approval of this project would be subject to any recommended conditions of approval assigned. by the Planning Commission {see Attachment C}. Site .flan Reuie~v In approving, conditionally approving or denying the plans submitted, the City bases it's decision on the following standards fz•om Section 17.72.O~E}: A. Landscaping and. fencing and the construction ofwalls on the site in such a manner as to cause the same to not substantially interfere with the landscaping scheme ofthe neighborhood, and in such a manner to use the same to screen such activities and sights as might be heterogeneous to existing neighborhood uses. The Commission may require the maintenance of existing plants or the installation of new ones for purposes of screening adjoining property. ^ The applicant has proposed that the loss of landscaping will be redistributed to other parts of the site due to the new building footprint. B. Design, number and location of ingress and egress points so as to improve and to avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ^ As mentioned in the finding for traffic related items in the Conditional Ilse Permit, there are issues related to access, particularly far vehicles traveling north from the vicinity of the Mountain View Plaza towards Pine Street. C. To pa•ovide off=street parming anti loading facilities and pedestrian and vehicle flow facilities in such a manner as is compatible with the use for which the site is proposed to be used and capable of use, and in such a manner as to improve and avoid interference with the traffic flow on public streets; ~3~~ ~ ;~ ~-~+ ^ 37 parking spaces have been proposed and the street parking requirements have been met for this facility. D. Signs and other outdoor advertising structures to ensure that they do not conflict with or deter from traffic control signs or devices anal that they are compatible with the design oftheir buildings or uses and will not interfere with or detract from the appearance or visibility of nearby signs; ^ The play area will have additional signage that will meet the sign requiremeants of the code. A sign permi# will be required prior to installation of the new signs. E. Accessibility and sufficiency of ire fighting facilities to such a standard as to provide far the reasonable safety of life, limb and property, including, but not limited to, suitable gates, access roads and fire lanes so that all buildings on the premises are accessible to fire apparatus; ^ An approval of this project would be subject to the recommendations of Jackson County Fire District lYumber 3. F. Compliance with all city ordinances and regulations; ^ The proposed construction meets the minimum setback requirements for the C-4, Tourist and C)fhce Professional District. G. Compliance with such architecture and design standards as to provide aesthetic acceptability in relation to the neighborhood and the Central Point area and it's environs. ^ The proposed building addition and play structure are standard McDonalds motif. Architecturally, the improvements comply with the intent of the district and are aesthetically acceptable to the commercial activities in the area. g-~ ~:: ~~ Rec©~aa~endatian Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take one of the following actions: i .Adopt Resolution No. ,approving the Conditional LTse Permit Modification and Site Plan subject to the recommended conditions ofapproval; or 2. Deny the proposed Conditional Use Permit Modification and Site flan; or 3. Continue the review of the Conditional LTse Permit Modification and Site Plan at the discretion of the Commission. Attac~anaents A. Site Plan, Floor Plan, Building Elevations B. Notice of Meeting C. Planning Department Recommended Conditions ~. Kittelson and Associates Year 1995 Report E. Applicants Finds of Fact F. Correspondence from Public Agencies ~~ ; ~s~ ~ ins$ QgM1rxNG wAS FR[FARED 3ASED "1 YARi Cv MS Eh."rNAE CIXIttiAC iCR 51.µL CCHEa1CT THE CCN$"'~.ICiWii i99b 4;uGYA1,R'$ SiT[ [yJ,v, GRAC%Y6 h UTAf:t RCAAS. 11~iS kl A HhvNfR 3,3TICN YaSE MN.3dIL OISQVPRCN t4 fuf4RNA'T:pY IS 8EU£S'FD f4 RE REUA9EE, NCMf'.LR, 11E$tECn tNE E%K7'uG MrRAVMR'S CC4RdMM1:£ WIH iN! I ' E.`M N££AfxG AC^.SP:s` ND AE$Paxg9AiiY AR.( a+£ A:LUVACY ucpaN%t4'S STq+E xiANA(ER syt+tw 74 ANY F PR'fR 'i! S:AR:ING f.Cn51RUCDtm, {(•k titAC14R S+uyt (IiIU tM$R::Pnpu t0 Dia3£..praU YRAf(k, t4N,fr n:t Exi5In1G USL1nFS AND £:.EvAhpxS .•;°i~'4'"+ + N©R7H x,+s,.~ ~~ _ ~o+ .,I ~'~r. .. . 4 :; ~. ..;, ~,„... r.''. / f.. ,~. t ~. j:• t ^T. c e .NS' Fy' a ~ 7+ ( 1 .... ~.~, 1. Y CCCRbWAtE r u4os vRac YaNAEER.--.,,.-,„,_ ~ ~ ~ :.-"`.,_.SA»GRT ~ { ` , ~~ ~ / r TO NtTUn xArq RAR u,ptG~ ANUtNG ~ rrvf' .AwCUf As AEa'o uce asrA:v}, °\, .~ ,p''. '.. ~ {rv„'"} .`~" ..l ~, n+a a~a a a~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q ans~o c~ u... .. ", an E. a o rla at o O"por~Y'aa"5 F ~'^ tfHTYACTCR 5AV csrAa£ New ! ~ ~~. ^: •, ~ Td;w CCUCRETe PAYEukldt p~np a rsy h t h+ EY rcy :+ U ~ PA•+EUEJli wRx , IslU4 IAz at.~.:gfy R9C GG^ t>GEO ~ a vUr a$ OK 74! O StC7'E xo aRA;Y 3xh+C4i C ...r . a+G.o~,c ar:G^ :G atat: ;° ton.3vaGx+G:' VC*iEiNG wAiER T9 :ME E%+STNC .. .........................»... 4N ~9TE :RAfNAGE 515tC33~ ASPNKT PAtEYEHi PATCH TWµ 5t:E AkfA + +?.Otlpt SE ExTC euerxNC AEanaN - zaso s.c. x n£w £Nr:•.Dwc wmncN - Taa4 5.c x PAR]{ViG PiEDU34ED - iCO SEAT$/3 SEATSfSTA:L - Si S;AEa5 -AR%.MG FFG'rGE4 - '8 5rA:tS KEY NO'i'E9 ~a AEWO'~E fxlShkG GuR4 ~f.Cw 7rpE 'C CCNCRCT£ CUAf3 ~c coxcRETE wµ%5 wTN GRUCN Fxsn ~-°~"see°ovAaEp ~'~~ r o'o +v+eNim+.a3Ax~~s ~C 6 CiktERF. fF. RM14P, SFX'I,RF' 5UftF'TCC k S,p+( Iq uC£i A.O.A. 5FEC$ Qi[Ox0`.T EX S1+.vG yGEwAU( Atn^ YAyE G%F'-SfTE GCF 4.5RC5A1 ~~ w pc'uc-1T+aU u[uv ¢pAU„ mnt C.RV. r~~ E-sEU eaAao VGht£wAr xFjQ{S QETEG'dE {$} 0£TECTPR LDLP {4} l'.'1 aEltlCATEb kEJ+p 84AP4 ,va COa. COCRaNAiE w~ u;4~s PRR[Cf uusAGEa ~n REicCATE uCNR RptR4 .v.U G0.0 AS WSACATEb ~PAWT ,roEW ARPDwS AxR StRlPUtti AS R[CUR(p. ~R~PAMT 4' pIX:41E KCibx S'tR~PE MiH 4" 9E1'3£EN STR~$ ~A£fIpYE £x1Si N9 5fRrANCJPAN}e£NT MAM14»$ ~GASCN [%YG pJRQ ~XEW L,lM1°~^.AAE AREA ~RENpv£ Fx iG A$RNµT RAy$D•£x7 ANO sIM1yE #F-9fE ~ Faa asrp;M. ~NEw LCrvCFC7E PxYEYEfl7 Ew tUUCRETE A`tDlER ASRNµt PAVEkCNE A RAiEN EXTG S EDGE # AA3'CVENi MIY.Wf PaYVRING MAiCN SMU °EAL d(kNT. f:i5aA7Cii CgS7MC ChaCR£'E PAtEU.yT aRwCt 4':nJR £ktSiaaG lYN{3~1£ 5tAR MYN Jx R£RMt difXit Nh) tJT'+ np ES b 12" OG PN42C1 AT ud AufS DuArNG GG.YS3ttRL5CYL n+IT Y7ANACE ~~ShA[,E 3.E RCPNREa Ai RGMI4ACFptS E%P£NS4 ~NCw iE' CRIt£wAY AfxAR4Ai%RFR tlTY SIDS \.~mvau care N3+ecE sia+s /",'t ik"ACi P VEl iN Vy~n(W IRps c(MCRER TG tC vM1LaM+„ta! SEE OE-M aq.ECw ~^. (y' I + ,_ ............_____.__.__.. ..._... ..._._., a i Kin<t ez ate: wo~xe ~t ~ ` ~ ,.Kx~.x~~~.. ~, .~.•~...w .. _ I~ .~..x,,, K~,.~ ~~,~ „, ~ I E ° (i _... _...... ~i.'v:ia ia+:cGl2nrc~i .. . ~._.__.,n I ~ I .. r.nwrco ..twKJ n.c..vo. _c.d.. __~-~-1. . „3.~.,,,~,~,,. a..e,..e. .. gg i t [a ~- .r 1 45 ',~;,~ Y ~~~ t =Y '_' ~ [£~ ~ ,~ w V () ~ t ~ } ~ ~{ r +%1/ 1 ... .. i :~ ... .. :.. . ~, G. •0 7 . ~ S S ir.+..i t.. . ~ a+~-...r wc3 + ' ii " ° f k ~. , ~ t s.erxro .~ ,..~r. ... eer s... t x w ~ L .• t ,~ N i1 ~, ~ ~ _ .. 4, ~.A ~ r _ __ E ~ , E( .e. aee.. ..., , a , ~ i ~F ( , I { r us +e, ~ ; r ,nv wYa nh`[3. f i Y.~+w W _.......... _.__......._..___....~...... .. _.__....__..__ . __...__._.._...: ~4{ ~ N. r c Hr~xn.>~ r~olHr ~rt.con ~AG+.SCV R.ar:..~ -. p^.,..aY ~- 3 + .. aa: n VIGI~N3~ MAP b ~` ,,,~a C~n~tral Poi~t~, ~regan t Q tion . ~A' ~ ~~ ' ~~xi,a,g PtaVPiace I Dininc ~Addition - €~ ~ztw+h~. ~~~".°~ Pre ~ni~nary F1oor~k'1an ~m b ~ N §rn m 0 z :s:, ~~}:__~:,:_, r-fcra:vr.=. ~'" jY],McDataaid`s Carparafio» ."_... ~~~--~:-: Y1:c%4i F~L':.C .'rH~;vi s4:v;c': '.; ~ „_ ,-*.-»~.-.......«.. rY",-m -.. .._. . ....... ........... .....~. ...... .n..»..~.,,. "«..°w ...w"P".»'...+. ,w.... rte. ~~ ARC NITEC7S, INC.. P.S. M sr roc r~u ~s+cnu. ..__..,.._... ... ~ ~M.f ~.: 4 ~~ -~ s }ti y:~,~yj; ~ ; j ~ ~ ~ ii i !C ~ E .__ ' ° 'E %~ } F ; ~' 3 ~ ~~~i ~ ---,. ~~ F ~ ~s ! i lj 1 ~ it ----i-i! ~ I`~; ~' ~~~ ~_ ~ ; ~ i 1 :. 1 j ;r - ----- ~` ~~t i~l I - - ' - ~.~_ ~ ~' \ _ ~$ k G l '{ - - f '`J ' „'tf ' _ _ ~ ~f~ f i-_ " _- ~ =`-:. _ y s ~ , .«. ."' ~~ .~~ .. -° l ~4 {t _ ~ ~t 4 fir ~ 4r~ ~~ ~ :: -~-i fii ~ ,~ C ^ -A` ~ ,qr m 9 ~ 2 ti 6 ~ 5~ 8 s~ ~.. o omfx xwwt. a.wom .. ~~s r ;~1;~>, ~- v r ..-. mfY},Mc~anald's Carporat3an ..mm.__ _.. t'i:L:/f}~r^~~ '«.S-.'r i..: ..SF 1!. ~U~~ ..._...... x.t%. F'a'+4 l MMYr Crae.M W MMM cs+1 v~ "..P"..."°~.. ~»."'~""i,~«.:>'w.....«.~.,K.s~ ARCHITECTS INC. P.S. se.ec.+sosa PRIX w~xa».w~ n.rwaaw e~unen ,, s'~ ~y5 ~~' {,~ ~.: r,ri~k .'t,~~~y~ "~ -~LiH.t Y.~.~.~t r ~1.:~,~.~ L L ~.~.Li.l Y .~7 ~.•~~ , ., ~;.~`t. •~ `l'ozxr liurnpl~rey, AICP ~~'EGa~ 1'lazaning Director Ken Gerschler Community Planner Dave Arkens Planning 'technician Lisa Morgan Planning Secretary Nonce of Pubic 1Zeeting Date of Notice: C)ctober t4, Z~U3 Meeting Date Time: Place: NATURE dF MEETING November 7, 2~~3 7:0(} p.m. (Approximate) Central Paint City 1lall 155 South Second Street Central Point, dregon Beginning at the above time and place, the Central Point Planning Commission will review revised site plan and conditional use applications at the existing McDonalds Restaurant. The restaurant is requesting approval for a building; and play area addition to accommodate the popularity of the facility in Central Point. The subj ectparcel is inthe C-4, Tourist and df~ce Professional District and is identified in the records of the 3ackson County Assessor as Map 37 2W (}2CD, Tax Lots 2}€~(} and 30401. The Central Point Planning Commission will review the site plan application to determine if all of the requirements ofthe Central Point Municipal Code can be met. Ifthe Commission determines that the application meets the City's standards, an approval could be issued. CRITERIA FdR DEC1S1dN The requirements for site plan review are set forth in Chapter 17 of the Central Point Municipal Code, relating to General information and conditions on the project approval. PU8L1C CdMMENTS Any person interested in commenting on the above-mentioned land use decision may submit written comments up until the close of the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, November '7, X443. 2. Written commments may be sent in advance of the meeting to Central Point City Hall, 155 a~~ South Second Street, Central Point, t~R 97502. 3. Issues which trtay pa•ovide the basis for art alapeal ot~ the tx~attct's shall lac raised l~t•ior to the expiration ofthe cotnznent period noted above. Any testit~~tony and written cotntnetats ahctut the decisions described above will nec;cl to he re:latecl to tlae; proposal at~cl should be stated clearly to the Planting Coanzrtission. 4. Copies of all evidence relied upon by the applicant a--e availablc for public t-cvicw at City Hall, 155 South Second Street, Central Point, Qregon. Copies of the sazx~e arc available at 15 cents per page. 5. For additional information, the public tray contact the Planning Department at (541 } 664- 3321 ext. 292. SUMMARY {JF PRQCEI#~URE At the meeting, the Planning Commission. will review tl~e application and technical staffreports. The Commission at their discretion, may decide to hear testimony from tl~e applicant, proponents, opponents, and hear arguments on the application. If allowed, any testimony or written comments must be related to the criteria set forth above. At the conclusion of the review the Planning Commission may approve or deny the site plan as submitted. City regulations provide that the Central Point City Council be informed about all Planning Co~~rnission decisions. 155 South Second Stt-eet • Central Point, flR 97502 ~ {541. 664-3321 * Fax: {541 664-6384 A`I'TACIIMI~;NT C RECOMMENDED PLANNING DEPARTMIaN7' C:ONDI'I'IONS OF APPROVAL The approval of the Variance and Site Plan shall expire in one year on November 5, 2fl04 unless an application for a buildzng permit or an application for extension has been received by the City, The applicant shall submit a revised site plan. depicting any changes discussed and approved at the public hearing within 60 clays of Planning Cozn~nission approval. 2. This Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan must comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. 3. The City will require that the median gap on Preeznan Road be closed at such Brno that The City Public ~Vorlcs and Police Departments determine that it is unsafe. c`~_ " !November 7995 McDonald's fast Pine StreeUFreen-ran Road ~xecutfve Summary executive summary ~ ~ ~~'~~`~`~ ~ ~~£ The McDonald's Corporation is proposing to develop afast-food restaurant on the south side of East Pine Street between Freeman Road and South 9th Street in Central Point, C}regon. The development includes a 2,500-square-foot sit-down restaurant with adrive-through window. Two access driveways are proposed to serve the site: aright-inlright-out/left-in access on Freeman Road, approximately 120 feet south of East Pine Street and afull-access driveway 130 feet south of East Pine Street on South 9th Street. Based on the results of the traffic impact analysis described in this report, it is concluded that the proposed McDonaid's restaurant can be developed while maintaining acceptable levels of service and safety at the site driveways and on the surrounding transportation system. The analysis resulted in the following findzngs and recommendations: FINDINGS • All the intersections within the study area currently operate at acceptable levels of service • The proposed fast-food restaurant with drive-through window will generate approxi- mately 1,??5 daily trips, of which. 90 trips will be during the weekday p.m. peak hour. 4~f the 90 trips during the weekday p.m peak hour, approximately 50 trips are considered net new trips to the surrounding transportation system. • All the intersections within the study area will operate at acceptable levels of service under 1996 full-buildout conditions. • The proposed South 9th Street full-access driveway, located approximately 130 feet south of East Pine Street, provides adequate sight distance and spacing from the East Pine StreetJSouth 9th Street intersection. • The proposed site plan provides for safe and efficient vehicular on-site circulation, • 9Sth-percentile queue lengths at the intersection of Freeman Road-10th StreetJEast Pine Street will not exceed the available storage distance during the weekday p,m, peak hour. REGC?MMENDATIDNS • 1~ue to the close spacing to the East Pine StreetJFreeman Road intersection and limited sight distance to the south, it is recommended that left-turn egress movements at the proposed Freeman Road access be restricted. Appropriate signage should be placed at the site-access drivewayJFreeman Road intersection to prohibit left-turns out of the site. Queue lengths on the northbound approach to the Freeman RoadJEast Pine Street intersection should be monitored, and if left turns into the site create an unsafe situation on Freeman Road, left-in maneuvers should also be restricted at this site-ac- cess driveway. • ©n-site signing should be provided directing Interstate 5 travellers to exit the site at the South Pine Street driveway. • On-site walkways and bicycle facilities should be provided to encourage these alterna- tive modes of travel. Kiitelson & Associafes, Inc. ~ Cyu y , ~-`~`"i;Q-~.t~~,~ AMT `t~~.~. '~ '~, `~. Mc©onald's Corpora#ion 9022(} NE Points drive, Suite 30~ Kirkland, Washington 98033 {425} 827-9700 Pax: {425} 828-9907 September 5, 2003 RF: McDonald's Restaurant Conditional Use Modification Application 43 S. Ninth Stree# Central Point, Uregon ~ 7.76.40 findings and conditions A} Cur existing McDonald's Restaurant was gran#ed a conditional use permit approximately August of 1095. At tha# time we met all of the City development and lot requirements far this zoning distric#. The addi#ion of our proposed playplace will include a '1695 square foot structure, which will be a similar profile to the existing building, with the exception of a `pop up' section of the structure fo accommodate the interior play equipment. The height of this `pop up' will not exceed the maximum building height requiremen#. The size and shape of the proposed playplace structure will not have adverse impact with regard #o onsite traffic flow, existing onsi#e circulation remains the same. The exception would be that we propose #o modify the existing drive-fhru service lane to accommodate an additional service lane adequate to provide two order points. The development of this system will increase speed of service in the drive-thru, and eliminate car queue back-up problems, which impact onsite traffic flow, as well as impact to the drive access at Freeman Road. We also propose to modify the existing drive access of Ninth S#reet. Because of delivery truck ingress and egress problems, we propose #o develop a separate exit access. The existing curb cut will remain as the entrance, and the exit curb cut will not exceed the maximum 24 foot requirement. The new structure will accommodate 50 additional seats. Along with the existing dining seating, we propose to have 100 to 110 total seating capacity. The City development code for this zone requires one parking unit per 3 seats. This would require a total parking requirement of 34 fo 37 parking units. ©ur proposed parking will include 37 parking units. tour proposed modifica#ions will not adversely affect landscaping requirements. Our original developmen# in 1996 exceeded the current landscape requirements far this zone. All perimeter landscape buffers will remain. The proposed playplace addition will displace approximately 750 square feet of landscaping, however, we propose fo add approximately the same square footage of landscaping with the development of the double drive-thru system. B} In the granting of a conditional use in 1996, our development was in compliance with regard fo adequate access to streets and highways and that the streets and highways were adequate in size and condition to accommodate generated traffic. Our proposed building addition for a playplace structure is to provide an additional service to our customers and accommodate long distance #ravelers #o rest and relax, while #heir children entertain themselves in the play area. We have not realized significan# increases in traffic generation with the development of playplace structures. In fact, this additianal feature has increased customer stay time, which decreases our ability to service additional customers. We do not anticipate significant increases in additional traffic. ©ur proposed modification to the existing access at Ninth Street will help eliminate our ingress and egress problems with our delivery trucks, and lessen automobile conflict with regard fo egress onto Ninth S#reef. C} Our proposed modifications will have no significant adverse effect on abutting property. As mentioned above all existing perimeter landscape buffer zones, along with fences will remain, and are adequate #o meet the zoning requirement. The overall landscape system exceeds the zoning requirement, Also, as mentioned above, onsite traffic circulation will remain the same, with the exception of the proposed modification to the drive-thru system. This modification, however, will not sign'sficantly impact the existing onsite traffic circulation. Additionally, the modifications proposed at the Ninth Street access, which include a separate egress drive access, will improve ingress and egress movement. C)ur proposed modification is in compliance with zoning ordinances regarding building setback and building height requirements. All A:iGenieal ptzinicondlFionsfind~ngs_tloc Page 1 of 2 Last }rrinted 9J5t2063 2.25 PM r8 d"'~ ~,~ cp'~ ~~ Mc©onald's Corporation ~ 10220 Nl~ Points Drive Suite 300 Kirkland, Washington 98033 {425 827-9700 existing site lighting and signage will remain the same, with the exception of a proposed PLAYPL.ACF sign to be mounted at the northwest side of the playplace mansard roof. D} In 1996, the granting of a conditional use permit provided that our development was not detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhood or detrimental of injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community. Our proposed modifications will not adversely effect this requirement. The operation and maintenance of our existing restaurant has been successful since we opened our doors December 18, 1996. We have enjoyed a good relationship with the neighborhood, and the community. We have enjoyed our participation in community activities, including local sports, fundraising, and the support of local education initiatives. Our proposed modifications will provide additional needed services, which will enhance our contribution to the community. Our proposed playplace addition will provide an additional safe place for children to play, and parents to rest and relax. We meet ail criteria for adequate food safety= and we will submit our proposal to the County Nealth Department to obtain all necessary permits. E} 1 } The lot size and yard areas are in compliance with existing zoning district requirements. Our proposed modifications will not adversely impact this requirement. 2} Existing streets are adequate to accommodate the generated traffic for our development. The proposed modifications will not significantly increase additional traffic generation. 3} Our modification proposal incl=~;des a maximum of 11 E} seating capacity. The required number of parking units for this capacity is 37. Our proposed modifications include 37 parking units. 4} The existing drive access at Freeman Road will remain the same. We propose to develop a separate exit access at Ninth street to improve ingress egress for both auto traffic, as well a truck traffic. 5} Our proposed modifications exceed current zoning requirements with regard to landscaping. The displaced landscaping to accommodate the playplace addition will be added back with the development of the double drive-thru system. All existing site lighting will remain. All existing maintenance of parking lot, landscaped areas and surrounding right of way, easements, etc., will remain the same. 6} All existing signage will remain, except for the addition of a proposed Pl_AYP.ACE sign to be located at the northwest mansard roof of the playplace structure. 7} Our proposed modification includes all fences, berms, and landscape buffers will remain. 8} Hours of operation will remain the same. 9} We propose to commence construction activities immediately upon receiving City approvals. 10}Our proposed moderations to the Ninth ;street drive access may require a bond to comply with Public Works criteria. 11}The proposed modifications will not adversely effect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community. Findings are stated above. 12}This modification proposal to the existing conditional use does not include home occupation. Page 2 of 2 C Y: ~ v` F~.C~~ll~ VA.~.~Y ~-EV'~'~R ~~~V1~'~~ I,~cation: i3 we:yf Vilas ~tcsaci:Cuittt~l i't~i€tt - Marling ttddre,~5 i'.C}. I3crz 3i3[t Ccntr t1 i'cas~rt,(JK S}?S{)2-flC3QS "i`ci. {S4 i } Gf~+~-C"}30() cac {S~~ 1 } 77~)-~i l rlt( i~l1X {S~i i } t~(v~-'~ 1'7] ~«+'u'.itV`iS.~ts September 23, 2403 Ken Gerschler FAX 664-6384 City of Centxal Point Planning Department 1.55 South. Second Street Centxal Point, C}regon 97502 Re: N~ci?orzalcls Addition The proposed addition does not require the extension of a sewer service line so there is no permit from T~.VS xeeluired. `T'here are additional development charges associated with the addition. These .must be paid for prior to the start of cozxstr~.~ction. The applicant should contact R.VS so that the fees can be calculated and paid prior to issuance of the building permit. if you need additional information, please call me at 7`79-4144. Sinc~erel.~y, Carl Tappert, P.E. District Engineer T~ :IDATAIAC~aENCIE51CEl~TPT1PZANNCr1Ct1P103062-C1JP_MCl~}OI~IALDS.l~C3C ,s~ . r. ~ vet .c o/ ~.uu.~ uo, cr~+ t3L4~#~bb ti1L~t U.J t~I.s::a 1Jt-L; s'_c~u~ r1.G.t rst, September ~. $, 2Qa 3 City of Central Point Ken Cerschler~Planner r~ ~+ C yes 83 ~ 3 Agate Read White ~%ty ~R 975C~.~~~.t~75 ~~~~.) s2s~7zoo ~voice~ ~~u-~.~ ~~~-~.~~s Cfax~ T~~:~~1'~i"l~Q c~r~ ~~ c~~a~~,a~ ~or~~c SEP 2 4 20Q3 ~~,~ss~~r~~ ~~u~~.a~~~ a RUBf.IC WORKS ~I~PT. a Fire District ~~ CcrmXnents for the fo~lawing project proposed in T'he Cit~r of Central Paint. 44•~'~~ff1~~//,,,++'' McDanalds addition: * h~o additional mater supply will be required, ~~~I~~ ~ Y i R Y Maintain access around the bu~ld~ng. 1~Va! Mari: - Complete set of plans will be required for our review. Access, water supply and suppression systems shall be the major topic of our review. Duncan Development. - Access looks pretty good - 3UQ foot average Fire hydrants spacing, Try and place near lntersect~on corners. David Spruill development Burrell Road. Fire N,ydrant locations need. to be verified and approved by the -~ t~e district. Snowy butte Station. Additional water supply and possible fire suppression and alarm systemrs may be required depending o construction issues, {73063 - spr project: Furniture Row building. Complete plans shall be submitted for our review. Possible fire suppression and alarm systems may be required for this type of building. ' ~.~~~ ~~~~ Mark Moran Deputy Fine Marshal ~:' ~~ 0~i130I2003 11:03 15d1774~295 .SAC}<SCIN C:OI.IN~~Y I'F'S PAGE 01 JACKSON COUNTY roads September 'l9x 2t}U3 Atkentiari: Tam Humphrey City of Central Paint Pl~nr~ing 9 ~5 SQUth Second Street Gentraf Paint, CaR 97x42 Reads ~x~~ ~i~uz~F~ . ~~ ~rssfJle &.~3e~+eingsr~ent~'ngine~r 200 Ant~fcspe'~'t~ad Whits City, 03~ p7a{33 Pttofia: (5di) T74•II230 t~ax: j5d1}774-8255 rti~meyett~jaCissorscouf*ty.o-53 www.jacksaneounty.org R~: Development off ~~st Pine Street - a c'sty-maintained porti4r~ of road. Planning File: C}3C}62-CUP; McC}anald's restaurant Addition. Dear Mr. Humphrey: Thank you for the opportunity to comment Qn this applicatigrt Far a Gandhian Use Permit off East Pine Street. Roads and Pecks has no ccamment. If you haute any questions or' need €urther information feel free to call me at 174-6234. Sin erely, ~riC Niemeyer, Pl; Traffic & Development Engineer I:l~ngir~~etir~giCyeVelapmenflCITIE.SICMTF2l.P`i't~13062-CUP wpd ~ y.~~ PLANNING DEPAIZ`~'MEI~T S'I"ATF REPORT DATE: November 4, 2003 TO: Central Point Planning Commission FRflM: Tom Humphrey A1CP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Central Point Municipal Code, Zozaing Text {{~rdiz~ance} Amendment Applicant! C}~~v~er. City of Central Point Pro er Description; City-Wide Application Zoning. C-4, Tourist and t)ffice Professional Zonizxg Districts Summary: This ordinance {Attachment A} would amend CPMC Title17.44.020 and 1'].44.030 and clarify the permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C-4, Tourist and ~Jffice-Professional Zoning District, specifically the criteria for Community Shopping Centers. Authority CPMC 1.24.020 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make recommendations to the City Council on amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code text, Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060 {Attachment B}. Applicable Law• CPMC 1.24,010 et seq. -Public Plearing Procedures CPMC 17.44.020 et seq. - C-4, Tourist and C}ffice-Professional District CPMC 17.88.010 et seq, -Amendment Background, The City Council considered the attached ordinance and its revisions to the C-4 zoning district in June of this year. Staff presented information in support of the City's definition of a community shopping center and the Council conducted a public hearing to receive comment regarding the specification of a maximum size for an `anchor-tenant' in a community shopping center. The Planning Commission was not given an opportunity to review anal provide their recommendation to the Council and this was pointed out during the public hearings. This opportunity is now being afforded the City Planning Commission. ,~ ~~~ {:n: ~~ Discussion The C-4, Tourist and t~ffice Professional coning district pcr~tnits cotnttrrrnity shnppitrg centers, defined as a group ofcotn~~ercial establishments planned, developed, owned or managed as a unit (this definition is repeated Section 17.08.365 of the CPMC) The tr~aximurn unit area of an anchor tenant is being specified in the attached orclinanee. A list of the land uses that the City envisions are noted in the zoning cede for this district. The City is interpreting a community slroppitrg cetrter as the type devclopecl at Mountain View Plaza (Albertsons} and as originally proposed by I~lauznes, Inc. in 199 For the Pear Blossom Center. A `big-box' store can be considered an `anchor' to the shopping center and, in the case oFMountain View Plaza, is approximately 60,0(}0 square Feet in area. Amendments proposed in the pending ordinance would limit the anchor to 8{},000 square feet in the future. A single big-box store, regardless of the number of uses rt has internally, was not intended to constitute a ccrtntnrrtrr'ty s{rapping center. The scale of a single `big-box' store exceeding 80,000 square Feet is considered to be inconsistent with the surrounding and proposed residential uses and neighborhoods, has the potential to set a negative precedent and would be at cross purposes with Central Point Strategic Plan goals listed as follows. The Central Paint Strategic Plan, adapted in March 199$, addresses the intent of community Leaders acid elected af~eials regarding the City's growth and preservation of community identity. Growth Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan states that we should, Recognize Central Paint's regional cotrtext in making decisions. Allo:v the City to retain its rtnigtte clzuraeter. Strategy 2D under this Baal states that we should, Errcorrrage approprittte snzttll scale industrial and conttrtercial developntetzt. Large retail cet:tern exist itr Medford acrd industrial etnploynrent is rtvailabte irz F3'Irite City, both being near Central Point The Planning Department has prepared the attached ordinance which establishes 84,0{}0 square feet as the maximum floor space for an anchor in a shopping center. The recommended amendments are highlighted in bold text. The Planning Department has also introduced Attachment C which are industry definitions for shopping centers and detailed tenant information tables that identify gross square footages for uses found in a community shopping center {i.e. variety stores, discount department stores, etc.}. Action The Planning Commission may take one of the following actions in regard to the zoning Cade text amendment. l . Adopt Resolution No. ~, recommending approval of the new zoning text, based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the record and subject to Planning Commission revisions; or .~ ~ ~ pro;. ~~ 2. Recommend denial of tl~e zoning text based on ~~~dings of Fact artic~zlc~tecl ley tl~e Commission; or 3. Continue tl~e review ofthc zoning text cat tl~e discretion oftl~c Comi~~issio~~, Aftachmer-ts A. Ordinance No. , An Ordinance A~~tending CPMC 17.4~.t320 and 17.A-x.030 to Better Define Community ~ltopping Centers and to Clarify Dcvelol3~~~ettt Flan Processing Requirements B. DLCD I~Iotice of Amendment and Local ltiloticc of Public I~caric~~; C. Industry Definitions for Community Slto~l~it~g Centers D. Cot~respondence t'" CIRDINANCE NCI. AN C?RDINANCE AMENIJING CPMC 17.44.020 AND 17.44.030 TC} SETTER I7EI~INE CQMMUNI`l'Y SI-1tJPPING CENTERS ANI~ TC~ CLARIFY I~EYEL4PMENT PLAN PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS RECITALS• 1. The City of Central Paint ("City„} is authorized under Oregon Revised Statute (ORS Chapter 197 to prepare, adopt and revise cozxzprehensive plans azzd iznplemez~zting ordinances consistent with the Statewide Land Use Plannizag Goals. 2. The City has coordinated its planr~ir~g effoz-ts with the State izi accordance with ORS 197.6102} and QAR 660-018-0{}20 to assure compliance with goals and noticizxg requirements. 3. Pursuant to authority granted by the City chat-ter, the Qregon Revised Statutes, and the Oregon Administrative Rules, the City has determined that there are extenuating circumstances requiring art expedited review. 4. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in CPIVIC Chapter 1,24 and Chapter 17.96, the City has conducted the following duly advertised public hearing to consider the proposed amendments: {a) City Council hearing on June 12th., 2003. Now, therefore; THE PECIPLE C)F THE CITY CIF CENTRAL Pf)INT, CIREGC)N, IIC) CIRDAIN AS FC)LLCI't~S: Section 1. Section 17.44.020 ofthe Central Point Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.44.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-4 district: A, Professional and financial, including; 1. Banl~s and similar financial institutions, 2. Accounting and boolfkeeping offices, 3. Real estate offices, 4, Insurance company offices, 5. Legal services, 6. Architecture and engineering offices, 7. Professional photo or art studios, 8, Counseling services, 9. Corporate or governmental offices; 1 -- 4rdinan~e No. {(~622C73} ~~..,~ n B. Tourist and entcrtain~ment-related fac:ilitie;s, including: 1. Convenience market; tmeat, poultry, fish and seafood sales; fr~~it and beverage stands, 2. Drugstore, 3. Automobile service station; automobile a~~d rccrcational vehicle pa~•ts sales and repairs; and truck rentals, 4. Motel and hotel, 5. Walk-in movie theater, 6, Bowling alley, '1. Photo and art galleries, 8. Photo processing pickup station, 9, Travel agency, l [l. Barber and beauty shops, 11. Sit-down restaurant or dinner house tincluding alcohol}, 12. Cocktail lounges and clubs serving alcoholic beverages, 13. Tavern with lacer only, 14. Commercial parking lot, 1 ~. Community shopping centers, defined as a group of commercial establish- ments planned, developed, owned or managed as a unit, with n.o individual unit having more than $0,000 square feet of floor space, which may include any ofthe permitted uses in this section and may also include the following uses: a. Supermarket, b. Department store, c. Sporting goods, d. Books and stationery, e. Gifts, notions and variety, f: Florist, g. Leather goods and luggage, h. Pet sales and related supplies, i. Photographic supplies, j. Health food, k. Self-service laundry> 1. Antique shop, m. Delicatessen, n. Pastry and confectionery, o. General apparel, p. Shoes and boots, q. Specialty apparel, r. Jewelry, s. Clocks and watches, sales and service, t. Bakery, retail only, u. Bicycle shop, v. Audio, video, electronics sales and service, w. Printing, lithography and publishing, 1 Ca. Mobile food vendors, 1'7. State-regulated package liquor stores, 2 - Ordnance ~o. {06.203} f'°, ~..~ ¢ ., 18. Other uses not specified in this or any other district, if the planning Commission finds them to be, similar to the uses listed above anti coznlaatible with other permitted uses and with the intent of the C-4 district as providccl in Section 17.60.140. Section 2. Section 17.44.030 of the Cezztral Point Municipal Code is herchy amended to read as follows: 1'7.44.30 Conditional uses. A. The following uses are permitted in the C-4 district when authorized in accordance with Chapter 17.76: 1. Campgrounds and recreational vehicle overnight facilities; 2. Drive-in movie theater; 3, Golf course/driving range; 4. Ice and roller skating rinks; 5. Dance halls; 6. Billiard/pool halls; 7. Miniature golf courses; 8. Amusement center {pinball, games, etc.); 9. Non-industrial business/vocational schools; 1 ~}. Physical fitnesslconditioning center; martial arts schools; 11. Carwash; 12. Taxicab dispatch office; 13. Ambulance/emergency services; 14. Day care center; 15. Drive-in fast food outlets; 16. tJther specialty food outlets, mobile food vendors; 17. Television and radio broadcasting studio; 18. Retail auto parts sales; 19. Accessory buildings and uses customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, such as incidental storage facilities, may be permitted as conditional uses when not included within the primary building or structure; 20. Permitted uses that are referred to the planning commission lay city staff because they were found to exhibit potentially adverse or hazardous characteristics not normally found in uses of a similar type and size. B. Uses other than those listed above may be permitted in a C-4 district when included as a component of a commercial, tourist, oroffice-professional planned unit development that consists predominantly of uses permitted in the zone, which has no individual unit having more than 50,000 square feet of floor space, and is planned and developed in accordance with Chapter 17.68. These uses shall include the following: 1. Department store; 2. Sporting goods; 3. Books and stationery; 4. Gifts, notions and variety; 5. Florist; 6. Leather goods and luggage; 3 -- Ordnance No. {Q612Q37 t-'. ~~ ~:~ 7. Pet sales and related supplies; ~. Photographlc supplFes, 9. health food; 10. Self service laundry; 11. Antique shop; 12. Delicatessen; 13. Pastry and confectionery; 14. General apparel; 15. Shoes and boots; 16. Specialty apparel; I7. Jewelry; 18. Clocks and watches, sales and service; 19. Bakery, retail only; 20. Bicycle shop; 21. Audio, video, electronics sales and service; Printing, lithography and publishing. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this day of , 2003. Mayor Hank Williams ATT1vST: City Representative Approved by me this day of , 2003. Mayor -lank Williams 4 - t~rd~.nance Nom. {06.203} ~.? ':.~~ .Lj l..)1{ ~Yl 1 D L ~ I) ~(~TI~E t~~' P~2.(~P+C~~EI} A~1~~NIll1~~~TT This form znusf be received by DLCD of leasf 4S cla~~rrior fo fire >iirsf evidentiary hearintY per ORS I9~.61 {l, dAFt Chapter 660 -13ivision 18 and Senate Bili 543 and effective an June 30, I999. {See reverse side for submittal reguiretnents} Jurisdiction: , clT`Y OE' CENTRAL P{JZNT Local File No.: p3-043 {ifna number, use Wane} Date of First Evidentiary Hearing: 11-Q4-p3 Date of Final Tearing: ~ 1-~ _p {Must be filled in} {Must he Filled in} Date this proposal was sent or mailed: 08--29-{73 {Date mailed ar sent to t7LCD} ~Ias this proposal previously been submitted to DLCD? Yes: No: ~_ Date;~~ Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment _._-_ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ~ Land Use Regulation Amendment New Land Ilse Regulation Zoning Map Amendment Other; {Please Specify Type of Aetian} Briefly summarize the proposal, Do not use technical terms, Do not write "See Attached,,' To amend and clarzf lan ua e in the C-4 Tourist and t3ffice -Professional Bonin district. The text chap es axe intended to better define communit shopping centers and to clarify development plan processin~* requirements. No_ind.v.idual u~.it to exceed 8Q.000 square feet of floor svace. Plan Map Changed from : N~A to N~~ Zone Map Changed from.; N/~, to N/A ~_ f.ocation; _ Acres Involved: /A Specified Change in Density: Current: T ~/A ~_ Proposed; Applicable Statewide Planning C>•oals: ~~ 1 Az~ ~~ 2 Is an Exception Proposed? Yes; No:_~ Affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Crovernments or Special Districts: >vo>~~ . Local Contact: Tom Htzmphrey ~ Area Code ~ Phone Number: ~ 541 } 664-321. Address: 155 S 2nd Street City: central Point C7R Zip Cade + 4: g~5p2 DLCD Na.: <~ ~p~ ~,.-"~~.~ icy off` ~er~tral Polr~f rte-.-~~'~~ ~ ~- = ~~ ~ ~~ - ~-~-; .~ y ~ PLA~~i~vG o~FaRr~rEnrr ~_ '~ ~ . ,Q~ Tom Humphrey, A1CP Community Development Dlrectarf Assistant CifyAdministrator Ken Gerschier Community Planner visa Morgan Planning Secretary Notice of Meeting Central Point City Planning Commission Hearing Meeting Date; November ~, 2003 Time: 7:00 p.m. (Approximate} Place: Central Point Council Chambers This is to notify yon that the City of Central Point has proposed a land use regulation that, if passed, will affect the permissible uses of your land. L?n November- 4 2t~Q3 the Central Point Plannin Commission will hold a ublic hearin re ardin the re-ado lion o an ordinance amendin and clan in the lan a e in the C-~ Tourist and 4 zce- ro essional zonin district. The Ci has determined that ado lion o this ordinance will a ect the ermissible uses o our ro er and ma reduce the value o our ro er . State law requires that the City use the above language when notifying its citizens ofpendmg land use and zoning changes. This is the first time that the Planning; Commission has considered this ordinance which would clarify the permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C-4 zoning district. The Commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for ordinance adoption or denial. There is the possibility that, if adopted, the results of this new language would have an effect upon the value of your property. However, this does not mean that the impact would be negative or reduce the value of your property and may in fact increase it. To find out more about the ordinance and the text amendments, you may call the Central Point Planning Department at (541.} 664-3321 extension 230. The ordinance and other informational material are also available for inspection at City Hall located at 155 South Second Street in Central Point, Oregon. Copies are available for purchase at 25 cents per page. ..,, ~~~ ~~~ 155 South Second Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ {541} 664-3321 t Fax: X541} 664-6384 ... _,. ~. ._.... __ }iii/_ s`a .~ ?.-' ~-._ !_ ~-r ..~ ...,. _ ~"' . ,. s . ~6..~~,.~sc ,. _ . v~ _ " ? ~ ~ y s~ ? ~~~ 3 3. e T~.~ ~ ~. • f 1 - ~ r~ I 't e w t l ~' 4~'~ N~ »Y X f ,'~ ~ " H ~.it, '~1 .^'xra~~'~~ ~t i; Sn f. ~/~ ~ Kr. / ~l J~ ` ~ ' ` L ~, 1 ~ aht ~t° F c 3. ~. . ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ u ~ C w ~ rf ~,~ ~s „ a.~a E Y y ~ '^.r.~1'Dldi '.J, ~~ p ~ Y' ~ '~ t ~ } _ N.:~` ... ;.. . fix.. N 1 ~ ~¢~i.~ ~ 1 'T .. ~ L X '+3' f 14 4C"~?° t ~ ~~1'$+`SA°rl'r~~' 5 ` ~ ~~ ~~ .~ _ ~ V' ,~... ~~3n °~ ~ {F~. } i r~ ~ '4 ~ ~ ~i~ ~~ yy~ ~~ ~ L _., ?, 5 ~ . ~~9 _, K ! ~ ,~ T `" Fr r •?_ t S~y+~ ~ ~ 1 r Vii:: `1 ~ s ;.. «~ ' . "'rte . , "~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f al s~rp~i ~, ~i ~i' ' ~ x ~~ Y~' .k ~ ~ $ S i .~ x ~ A~ d„ ~ ~. A .i i~ ~.., . ~. ~~ "~ ~~~, ~ lz ,,. _..,. e K ~~` :. ':" ~ ~~ , w~ ~ j.~w ~ x' ~~. ., k R~byk fiti ~'. SN ~Tp. +.(~~ f ~ ~{ e ~. 3 Y F. 1 ~ ~Ep~ 3' h?~~f~ ~e r ' y " 1k'' ~ ti ~ ; ~d -~ 5 t~c"C y ~4-t ?~ ~q, Vf 1 ~ ~ wr a `2 ~~^ i ~1*,~r~3p: H}Y „P~ ~ f .~ ~' ' ~- M ~. ~~,~. k ~ .. ~. t ~, ~. ~ 3 ' ~~'f` r r a4 ~ ~ ? f, $a ~' ~ r t--. M,. ,;.~ .. L , . ,.r ,'t"r~ . ,~ ~4 , ~ ' S .,, "~ ~ ~a, T ,w'e C++ ~evetapment of the Handbook 'he Oregon Transpartatian and Growth Management {TGM} Program prepared his document with assistance from an advisory committee and a consultant. The :ommittee was comprised of architects, developers, city planners, and staff from ~regan's Department of Transpartatian {ODOT} and Department of Land ;anservatian and Development {DECD}, acknowledgments `his project is partially funded by a grant Pram the Transpartatian and Growth Management {TGM} Program, a faint program of the Oregon Department of E"ransportatian and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and development. This TGM grant is financed, in part, by federal Transpartatian 'squity Act far the 22st Century {TEA-21} and State of Oregon funds. The ;antents of this document da not necessarily reflect the views ar policies of the sate of Oregon. ?ublicatian of this Handbook was made passible by the efforts of many people. I'he TGM Pragram would like to thank the fallowing individuals who provided .nput and advice for the Handbook: ProjeccAdvisoryCammittee' Terry Brandt, $randt Development Corporation Kenneth J. Dzener, KJI) Architecture, PC Vickie Dogger, Oregon Downtown Development Association Greg Frftts, Clackamas County Department of Transportation and Development Anne Giffen, AICF~ City of Albany Community Development Department tlVallace Harding, Harris, $eggs and Simpson Larry Ksionzyk, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Mary Kyle McCurdy, 1000 Friends of Oregon Kate Paaie, Oregon Department of Transpartatian John Russell, AICP, City of Salem Community Development Department Lainie Smith, AICP, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Larry Ward, Lane Council of Governments Mark Whitlow, Perkins Caie LLP Developers fiocus Group and C}ther Participants Barry Cain, Gramor Development Dick Clark, Fred Meyer Deb Holmes, Endex Engineering $ab LeFeber, Commercial Realty Associates Dave Leland, Leland Consulting Group Carter McNichol, Spiels Obletz & Jahnsan ' Participation on the Pra~ect Advisory Committee does not imply endorsement of the Handbook recornmcndations. ~"'" ~, :z ~~w {~..t A !'\ lr3tradnct3on } r C3bjectives Plans and Potisies Best Practices • Table 1 compares the Handbook zones to other common land classification systems The ~y Issues . Urban land Institute terms refer to types of individual develo ments and ot to xa i Madet Urdinatt p n n ng districts. Nandborsk urban Land Institute IVew Urbanism I.exicvn 'Typical Lacai Zoning Clydinat7ce Uawntown and Downtown Main Street Core Zane: "The most dense Central Business Main Street business, service, and institutional District, General centez ...usually shared by several Commercial, etc. neighborhoods ... always straddles tnorougnfares at their most active ' intersection ...walking distance a€ a large residential catchment." Nei hbarhaod g I~leiglxborhood Center: Center Zone, Neighborhood Nei hbarhood Cam- g Center Supermarket 3-1C- acres; Center-- "Tna dense multifunc- merciai, Commercial- 50,Ot10 sq. ft, a€ leasable banal social candanser of a Residsntial„ Residen- areatypical; serves neighbarnood ... usually at a tial-Office, Conve- popuiatians o€ 3,Qtltl to central location, within walking nience Commercial, or 4(l,(1g0. Lll.l also refers to ` distance o€ surroundin g ... Wane available smaller Convenience residential areas ... combination of Centers'' residential and other uses° Community Center:.junior Center Zane, Town Center {Most Community Commer- Cornmunity I3epartment Store, Large conventional snapping centers da cial {CC} ,General Commercial Variety Store, Discount not meet the deBnitian of a town Commercial {GC}, Center T)epar~tment Store;l(1-${l center, which Ls similar to, but on a Highway Commercial acres: 15fl,0U0 sq. ft. larger scale than, a nelghborhaod {CH} leasable area typical; center, as described above.} 40,t}DO-lat1,04{} popula- tionserved. {Regional Centers tray exceed 30 acres.} Corridor Typically considered The New Urbanism defines Highway Commercial, suitable far Community ar Corridors as "Lineal sectors Extensive Commercial, Regional Center uses reserved for transportation and General Commercial, greenvray connections." Corridors etc. may also have Wades/centers along them. Sources: 2.3rban Land institute Shopping Center Handbook, Second iclitian; Lexicon of the New urbanism, Duany Plater- Zyberk & Company, Version 2.2 (1999}. As shown in `T'able 1, this Handbook attempts to bridge the Urban Land Institute's conventional shopping center typology with. the New Urbanism's "Lexicon". Since neither classification system addresses existing problems of strip comrrtercial development, we have created the "Corridor Zone° for that purpose. ~ Commercial and Mixed-Use bevelo went • Central development intensity, far exarrkple„ by limiting aff-street parking ar carr~mereial Haar area. The zoning ordznanee can say, far example: "`Not more than [act parking spaces ar ~y~ square feet per commercial use, whichever is less, shall tae permitted". Provide appropriate Building and site design guidernes or standards. Design guidelines and standards far crime prevention, safety, accessibility, desired character noise reduction, parking, circuIaxion, loading, garbage storage, etc. are some of the ways to address neighborhood compatibility, Control automoBiie-dependent uses, such as gas staxions, car washes and drive- through windows. Some of these uses map need xa be limited to certain locations, or prolxibited, if they are likely xo have unacceptable impacts. ~.~ Community Commercial Centers Community eoznmarcial centers are a recent phenomenon. Since creation of xhe interstate highway system and suburbanixation of .America, we have seen the advent of shopping centers, big box centers, freestanding big boxes, regional malls, and other large commercial forms. Some of these developments are anchored by one store, while others have multiple anchors. For the purpose of this Handbook, a Community Carnmercial Center is defined as a commercial or mixed-use area that may serve acommunity-wide or regional market. Key Characteristics '" Nationally, community commercial centers typically serve a population of 40,OOQ to I50,Q00. Land uses may include ,junior department stares, large variety stores, and discount department stores. Cam~r~unity-oriented centers typically have an overall area of approximately l o-3Cl acres, and approximately I50,00(I square feet of gross leasable area, depending an the population served. Some regional centers may contain over 30 acres and over one sniliian square feet of leasable space. The comrrtunity commercial center should be planned and Zoned to accommodate retail, offices, commercial services, entertainment, civic, and institutional uses. Indzvidual uses may range from less than ,QUO square feet„ to aver 200,4f10 square feet. Increasingly, these centers are being developed or redeveloped with multiple family housing. Housing should be permitted as part of a vertical or horizontal mixed-use project when adequate parking and amenities can lee provided far residents. i ~,~ .~.. _ Garrlrnercial and Mixed-Use Development TGM Commercial and Mixed-Use Qevelopment Code Handbook Glossary Access. Permission or ability to enter, approach or pass to and from public and private property. Access managennent, The control of street (or highway} access far the purpose for itnpraving the efficiency, safety andlor operation of the roadway far vehicles; may include prohibiting, closing, or limiting direct vehicle access to a raadway from abutting properties, either with physical barriers ,curbs, medians, etc.} or by land dedication ar easement. , Accessibility. Approachability and usability by people with disabilities. Degree of compliance with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. Amenities, pedestrian. Pedestrian .amenities serve as informal gathering places far socializing, resting, and enjoyment of a particular area and contribute to a walkable district. Typical amenities include extra wide sidewalks, street trees, sitting spaces, weather protection (awnings ar canopies} > pedestrian scale lighting, bus step seating, etc. Articulation, {off-sets, projections, recessed walls, windows, dears, etc_ that provide variation to a building facade. See photographs on page I2. Automobile-dependent uses or activities. Land uses that contain automobiles apolar motor vehicles as integral parts of the uses. Big box stare, Large retail stare, usually aver 35,OOt} square feet, offering wide choice, often at reduced prices. Ballard. A past of metal, woad, ar masonry that is used to separate ar direct traffic (vehicles, pedestrians andlar bicycles}. Bollards are usually decorative and naay captain sidewalk or pathway lighting. $uilding mass. The aggregate size of a building, or the total height, width, and depth of all its parts. Building orientation to the street. See photo and graphic ore pages 7 and 8. Coxrzpaet development, Buildings, parking areas, streets, driveways, and public spaces are developed in a way that shortens trips, and lessens dependence op the automobile; thereby reducing levels of land consumption, energy use, and air pollution. Compact development promotes full utilization of urban services, ~.~. __ .. ~ __~...~. - ~ . Cammerciat and Mixed-Use pevelopment f ~ ~P I'~~~e ~ o f' 2 Tom Humphrey From: Torn Harrison [harrison car orop.comj Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:00 AM To: torch rx ci.central-point.or.us Subject: FW: Major Retailer Sizes Tom- Here are the parameters for store sizes we discussed- Hope this has helps- Kent is a retail developer in Northern California and fhe Bend area. Torn Torn 1-larrison, CCIM Principal Broker tu}regoz~ Qpporfunities 4024 Crater Lake Ave., Ste 101 Medford, C}r 97544 541-944-3131 541-77.2-7401 ltax haz-rison c~x7©rop.cam W W W.dI'Op,C4ri1 -----original Message----- From: Kent Halien ~mallto:khaiien~a sunset:.netj Sent: Thursday, .]une 12, 2003 1.1:53 AM To: Tory Harrison Subject: Majsar Retailer Szes Tom -- This provides you a response to your question as to what constitutes big box retail. In general terms, this can be categorized in to five Categories: 1. S_ uperstores: 200,Oft0-300,000 sf {Costco, Super Wal-Mart, Sam's Club} 2. Mome Improvement Stores: 115,000-150,000 sf {Home Depot, Lowe's} 3. Discount Retailers {large size}:125,000-130,000 5f {Target, Kmart, Shopco, Wal-Mart} 4. Discount Retailers {mid-size): 60,000-100,000 sf {Mervyn's, Kohl's} 5. Discount Retailers {junior to small size}: under 50,000 sf {orchard Supply} • electronics: 25,000-45,000 sf {Best Buy, Circuit City} • Linens: 30,000 sf ± {Linens n' Things, Bed Bath & Beyond} • AppareE: 30,€.100 sf + {TJ Maxx, Ross, Loehmann's} • Im arts: 10,000-20,000 sf {Pier 1, Cost Plus} • Crafts: 10,{100-25,000 sf {Michaels, Aaron Brothers} • ~arti~_Goods: 30,000-45,000 sf {Sports Authority, DART, Sportsman's Warehouse} • Books: 20,040-30,000 sf {Borders, Barnes & Noble} • ~1'f[G#'~u~' Uj~~?tleS: 15,000-30,fl00 sf {©ffice Depot, flfFiCe Max} • PetslGliscount Deets: '10,000-25,000 sf {PetsMart, PetCo} i hope this provides you a basis for understanding "big box" user types and the square footage associated with these users. a `~ ~1~ ~~zoo3 Approximate Square Footage and Acreage of Big Bax Buildings, Parking Areas and Lots Medford ~alznart Building = 135,C}36; Parking = 7 acres; Lat = 15.96 acres Talent Walmart Building =1{}1,930; Parking = 5.29 acres; Lot = 14.16 acres Lowes Costco Building = 143,748; Parking = 4.5 acres; Lot = 1{3.67 acres Building =121,968; Parking = 6.5 acres; Lc~t -12.5 acres Petsmart Building = 26,5'71 North Freddies Building =164,656 Gl Joes Building = 54,885 Target Building =148,90C} Qld K.-Mart Building = 130,244; Parking = 6.98 acres; Lot = 13.62 acres South Freddies Building =1.58,558 C3Id Ernst Building = 63,597 -~ .~' ..,~ zzr uo v.s rx~u u5: ~~ rf~.~ av.s~~Lau r is Lls[.A~~til t;u~v:~[~i.t ~ t~cx LELA~D CC7~ISULT~NG ~RO~.J~' Real Estate Strategists 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 1008„ Portland t~R 37205 ph 503. 222. 1600 fir 503.222. 5078 N©TICE C~7F E'AX TRANSMITTAL DATE: ~, ~ ~'~... ~ J.'~, E4R: t taw~t ~ c..~m ~hre.~ EAX NUIv1BER: J~"t,.~ ~ -- {~-p~ _ ~~ `~~ NAMB OF 1?RC)JE{C"I': I'RCtTBCT NUMBER: ~l u~z 1'~l'O, flP PAGES: {~, . TIt.,ANSMITTED: ~~ ~ ~~,~~a.rs ~~ C.~~ cad- ~1r.~~~,~ ~'~~-'s REMARKS: ~~.~ ~ fl ~~ -- ~. ~ ~- ~,c~+.~,-.sue ~ e~..c-fin. ~..e.,~~~-C,~.-- ~a ~ 1,` o~~~ ~'~.a.u~e... c~.. t~..~l ~ t ~.~ 1r'~~A1~2.. ~Ltn ~..Ir+,~.~1..tJ~t" ~.L~,_.. tk._ £, ~ ~"+~A~ ~~-1 if enclosures receivedt are nat as listed above, please notify Immediately. Thank you. Confsdentia`ity .Note: The documents a~arnpa.nying this facsimile transmission contain information belonging ra lelax-d C:ansulting Group. This information may be cortE'idential andlar legally privileged and is intended only for the use of the addressee designated above. Ifyou are oat the intended recipient, you are hereby nat's$cd that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the talcirtg of any actiati in relation to rho contents of this telecapisd information is strictly prohibltcd. if you have received this facsimile in error, plea3e notify us immediately by telephone. ~.zrua u.s sriu a.u:~:s t~t~~ ~t33zzz~Ur~ 1..tSr.AlYt} t,tll~:iut~i'l~tU >~U01 C j~ Definitions Several farms In this report have standard triage tnrougn- out the shopping center indastry; others have bean de- veloped safety for this survey and report. The defini#ton of a shopping enter is standard. As for- mulated by the #ormer Community Builders Council of UL.I in the 1s50s and reaf~mrmed over tame, a shopping center is a group of commercial estabiisnments planned, developed, owned, and managed as a unit related in lo- cation, size, and type of shops to the trade area it serves. it provides an-sate parking relating to the types and sizes of its stores. '~rp~s o~ ~happ~ng Ce~~e~s As the snapping center evolved, five bastsa types emerged, each disfinct'rve in its awn function: the convenience, the neighborhood, the community, the regional, and the super regional, In all cases, a shopping center's type and func- tion are determined by its ma}or tenant or tenants and the size of its trade area; they are never based solely on the area of the site or the square footage of the structure. A convenience center provides for the sale of per- sonal services and convenience goads similar to those of a neignbornoad center. It contains a minimum of throe stores, with a tote! grass leasable area of up to 3(},OgO square feet. Instead of lacing anchored by a superman ket, a convenience center usually is anchored by some ether type of personalJeonvenience service such as a minimarket. Data on convenience centers are presented In a supplemental report in the Collars & Cents series. A neighborhood center provides for the sale of con' venlence gods {foods, drugs, and sundries} and per- sonal services {laundry and dry aleaning, taarbering, seas repairing, eta.} for the day-today living needs of the im- mediate neighborhood. I# is built around a supem~rarket as the principal tenant and typically contains a gross leas- able area of about 60,OCt0 square feet. In practfce, it may range in size from 30,000 to f{}0,00(7 square #eet. In addition to the convenience goads and personal sen vices offered by the neighLaarhood center, a community center provides a wider range of soft lanes {wearing ap- parel for then, warren, and chlktren} and hard tines {hard- ware and appliances}. The community center makes merchandise available in a Brea#er variety of sizes, styles, colors, and prices. Many centers are built ground a junior department store, variety s#ore, super drugstore, or dis- caunt department store as the major fenartt, in addition to a supermarket. Although a community canter does not have afull-line department stare, tt may have a strong specialty stare or stores. Its typical size is about 150,~Q square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from i tJC1,t}txr to.5f}g,0ofl or more square feet. Cen- ters that flit the genera! profile of a community center but contain mare than 2~f},fl00 square feet are classified as super community centers. In extreme cases, these cen- ters cort#aln more than 1,00{),tf0(} square feet. As a result, the community center is the most di##tcult to estimate tsar size and pulling power. A power center is a type of super community center. It s;antatns at least four category-specific, off-rice ar~hars of 2tf,4d0 or more square filet. These anchors typically emphasize Bard gaols such as consumer electronics, sporting goads, office supplies, home furnishings, Name tmpravement goods, Caulk #oads, drugs, health and beauty aids, toys, and persona[ computer harsiwarelsaftware. They tend to be narrowly focused but deeply merchan- dised °rategory killers" together with the more broadly merchandised, price-oriented warehouse club and dis- caunt department stares. Anchors in power centers typi- cally occupy 85 percent or more of the total' GLA. A regionail center provides general merchandise, apparel, furniture, and home furnishings In ifepth and variety, as well as a range of services and recreational facilities. It Is built around one or two full-line department stares of generally not tress than 50,(K?U square feet. its typical size is about 500,0{?0 square feet of gross Leas- able area; In practice, it may range from 25CI,004 to mare theta 900,C1flU square feet. The regional center provides services typical of a business district yet not as exten- sive as those of the super regional center. A super regional canter offers ex#ensive variety in general merchandise, apparel, furrrlture, acid home fur- ntshings, as well as a variety of services anti recreational #acilities. It is buifit around three or more fait-line depart- ment stares generally of not less than 7,0;€10 square feet each. The typical size of a super regional center is about 1,000,000 square feet of gross leasable area. In practice, the size ranges from about 500,000 to mare than 1,500,000 square feet. All centers typically include within the site area {the gross land area within the property Lines} an area of suf- ficient size to provide customer and empta}ree parking in relation to the gross leasable area as determined by the accepted standard for the parking index {see "Parking," Chapter 7F}. a~ pefinitions 3 .L LtUCY UJ 1t3U tU:44 k'HA a7Ue5LLL:7UItF l.,t.l.,t1t`t17 t;4UiY:?€It:l'1~Vta ~l UU~ = Tenants Most Et'~gti~lrtiy Found iiii U.S. Commiml~r Sopping Centers Genera! Merchandise t?iscoun# departmen# store 7 0,3 65,631 $159.40 $5.10 Food _ . Supermarket 4 0.4 48,775 371.39 __M ~ 6.73 Faod Service ~... Restaurantwi#hou#llquor 12 4.3 3,113 _ 266.55 95.54 Restaurant with liquor 1 0.8 5,124 _ _ 295.03 18,]'3 Sandwich strop 20 0.2 1,380 271.71 16.T2 Clothing and Accessarles Women's speclal#y 13 0.3 3,021 174.78 15.40 Women's ready-#o-woar 2 4.5 4,147 178.&# 13.03 Family wear 3 0.5 5,000 246.69 12A0 Git~slSpsciaEty Cards and gif#s 11 4.3 4,040 141.29 13.40 Jewelry 14 0.3 1,240 4x2.97 20.48 Drugs Ltrugstorelpharn~acy 18 0.2 12,150 366.73 8.54 t?#trer Retail Cosme#icsibeauty supplies 17 02 1,527 31920 18.00 Personal Servtcs~ Women's hair salon 16 0.3 1,280 191.15 13.30 Dry cleaner i5 0.3 1,600 143.24 16.25 Unisex hair 8 0.3 1,280 189.88 18.50 Nail salon 19 4.2 4.097 83.34 15.18 Oftlces 40thsr #han Financial} Medical and dental 5 0,4 1,943 325.00 13.12 i3.s. Cprnrrlunily Shopping den#ers 149 1LtUti U3 ~1itF1 U9. E4 N'fS.A OU~fGG25U~1ti 1.EiI_,13fV1) t,t3N~111;t'iN4x ~. De~ai~ad Tenaat ~afar~nat~oa "galas for Lama 'enan~s fora than ~ ~,q~a Square I`e~t~ iu D.S. ~omrnuni~ Sha~plr~+~ Can~e~s / Mad#ars MacBan Median F et MetiEan Laver CTppe~r Top Ten Tap Tsyo Laver tipper Tap Ten Ta p Two Decite Aectie Percent Percent paeiie r}ec#le _.- Percent __ Parcerst Juniar C3epartment Stare 24 34,004 169.27 2.54 6.85 A-42 14 483 39 3213 285.87 386.95 1.50 3.00 # 520 18.53 Variety Stare 21 24,040 _ 90.77 3,00 4.63 A-03 11 000 1 f 8 796 156.83 166.48 9.31 '#2.97 t3iscatmt t)epartmant Stare # 19 $6,000 171,$$ 2.00 5.46 A-0d 27,9$5 112,554 296.86 488.04 1.04 9.00 10.32 #d.$$ SttowroomlCataiogStara 6 45,170 ~ 8.4f A-45 _ warehouse C#u9 a 119,444 6.15 A-48 Do#tar 5#aceRiovett#es 9 13,766 926.70 4.00 4.77 A-4T Supermarice# 146 48,775 371.39 1.20 8.73 8-11 29,440 65 400 588.23 768.48 1.40 1.81 13.94 17.31 Restaurarst wi#isaut Liquor 9 10,844 234.52 5.44 12.40 C-i}1 Restaurant wins t.tquor 1$ 11,90# 247.89 6.40 18.08 C-42 94131 15,945 486.87 801,&# 3.25 7.60 24.$6 27.21 Women`s Speataity 5 11,244 9.04 17-41 Women's Ready-ta-Wear 21 12,856 164.22 2.41! 14.'#4 Q-42 10,448 34,754 282.75 855.1$ 2.04 5.44 16.84 20.86 Ch#idrers`s Wear 6 24,5$7 14.54 D~77 Fansity Wear d5 25,004 258.31 2.00 14.20 D-49 10,404 51725 457.43 602.92 1.00 2.70 17.30 18.48 Speaiai Appat'e!-Unisex 5 1.4,9ad D-14 E'amtly Shags 7 12.832 187.77 11,$1 R-01 Athiefla t~aotwear 5 15,4110 10.110 E~-05 t=urrstture 25 22,425 200.6$ 3.54 11.48 F-01 11,429 52,619 419,90 441.61 4.91} 8.04 15.63 2b.56 Ba#Fs Shops-teens 11 34,425 111.87 3.00 92.54 F-4$ 10 #68 35,946 18.53 16.73 Hasne Acosssar#es 13 17,825 172.81 5.00 14.40 F-09 14231 48,$97 347.87 309.16 27.44 35.44 AudIaNtdea 5 15,202 G-42 ComputerlCamputerSattware 5 36,079 11.$0 G-O7 . ~1ec#ranics-tSenersi 13 31,743 476.8$ 3.tI0 13.64 G-49 18 364 42.294 19.91 20.28 Hardware i0 21.816 139.80 7.15 r#-~ 11,3$8 65,942 'Hama tmprovemersts 9 10'#,432 5.29 H-44 Automat#~6 (T8A} 8 13,788 10.44 K-41 Sporting Goads--Generaf 1$ 44,625 212.47 2.00 14.41 M-D1 11457 45 476 271.15 374,93 1.5D 3.00 21.09 __M~,, ,,, 22-~8 Hobby 5 12.504 M~£12 „~ ~-~-~.. Toys 19 15,058 231.92 2.75 14.44 M-05 90,$38 48 $80 345.74 346.$5 23.55 25.59 ~ i.h-.~ '{~6 IJ,S, Cornmltnity Sh4pp3ng C6nf~rs 5 ~; 12/U6 Uzi 'I'iiU Uy:1±5 i+AX 5U3G2Z5U723 i.,isi..tlNi~ Ctli`1511t;i'il~4i 11~~. Gommuni~ Shopping Comers {Tenam~s wig Mora fan ~0,00o Square Feet ~ iDU4 • r~ . Median - r s lNed(an e r " c i49edtass r • r Median i.ower upper lap Ten Top Two Lo~rtar Upper Tup Ten 7op?'w~ I Aecite t3adle Percent P ercent DecNe Uesilo percent Percent Arts and CraFts ~ #2 23.264 _ 91x.99 3.00 #0.00 Pot-07 17 766 40.320 _ . 12.x[} 13.6a Carle and G'sits 10 , 11.473 i#4.36 a 5.00 9.86 h3"03 10,584 13964 __ . ~,. t3ooks 25 25,0100 232.69 3.x{7 18.69 N-a5 93 3$6 35 000 277.12 312.26 2.55 5.71 21.48 25.11 CirtigatnretPharmacy 5i 18,600 _ 359.37 Z,QO 8.75 FZ-02 if} 504 3A 34T 572.42 87.4,81 i.Qa 3.t74 13.98 98.82 Fabr€c Shop 12 12,8#5 1x2.49 5.00 7.45 5-01 70 i9# 22 864 185.11 277.51 _ 9,49 1x.51 Pet St1op 22 18,555 134.52 2.50 12.43 S-A3 11013 26 955 193.14 279.8$ i~a.64 17.55 OEtic:e $tlppiias 40 24.798 245.00 #.00 10.82 S-1a i9 853 30 600 390.81 547.94 1.00 2,00 18.10 2x.52 Other Retail 86 15,934 177.77 3.00 8,67 5-99 10,543 37 286 392,59 506.1 # 2.x0 8.40 18.36 25.31 Ottlar Services 10 11,430 7.94 X-99 1a 392 20 76 iieaith Ciub i1 (9,590 7,4(7 W-10 12 x96 36 85(1 14.39 _ 95.?# Ctt~erna--Genera[ {7 ickste and 33 28,004 55.08 10.x0 8,3.1'1 W-!5 Goncegstons 12996 62 981 # #5.7'3 153.48 5.04 1x.04 15,38 23,24 Otter Specialty Entertainment 6 23!089 3.3~ W-21 Attraction Banks $ 10,5(}4 X-01 Qttrer bi'~ces 8 12,614 `3.57 Y-99 ~ (°ti '198 1).S. CatTl1'CIUCI[ty S~i0pp3rig CBSI~ECS `'~~ Chapter I7 Comxaerce and Industry 243 value far surface parking, and multi-deck garages are built. Commercial en- terprise is gradually (arced to seek other locations in order to conduct business. Mass transportation shaves little evidence of correcting the situation. The availability of economical o#i*street parking is a critical necessity. SHC1PPtNG Cl_NTERS In the decade between 1940 and ].950 the suburbs sarraunding citiesb increased 35 per cent, and the rate of growth between 1950 and 196(} jumped to 50 per cent. This remarkable expansion was generated, in large part, by the natural increase in total population bat, also, from the large centxai cities by people waving to the urban fringes. Retail enterprise to serve the sprawling residential suburbs gatheredin scattered clusters. The corner grocery starewas transformed into the neighborhood shappingcenter. This "new soak" suggested a Strang contrast with the shabby and congested commercial streets of conventianai business districts. Convenient parking, without charge was a naves and refreshing experience for the housewife. Nourished by the voluime of new papuiatian, the shopping center became popular. The distinguishing feature of the new center is the positive separation between the aatamobile and pedestrian. Smarting under this new farm of competition, the downtown business districts of the large cities and small towns made belated efforts to improve chapping conditions. 1. The Neighborhood Center is the local source far staple goods and daisy services far a population of between '7,50{1 and 20,000 people. An average size is about 40,000sgaare feet, but it may range between 30,000 and 75,000 square feet of gross floor area. The site should be 4 to 10 acres in area. It is usually designed about a supermarket as the principal retail service. 2. The Carnmuruty Center may serve a population of between 20,000 and 100,000, and extends the services of the Neighborhaoci Center by providing a variety stare or smaiI department stare as the major tenant. The average size is 150,000 square feet of gross Boar area, with a range of between 1.00,000 and 300,000 square feet, requiring a site between 10 and 30 acres in size. 3. The .Regional Center is usually built about a major department store and includes a full complement and range of retail facilities asuaiiy found in a balanced small city. It coaid serve a population ranging Pram 100,1100 to 250,000 people. An average size is about 400,000 square feet of gross floor area, although it may range as high as 1,1100,00£3 square feet. A minimum site of 40 acres is required and centers of the largest size require as many as 100 acres. Shopping centers can be divided into three general categories:g s The 212 standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas of the U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1960, having 54,00{? or mare urban population. a Community .Builders Handbook, Executive Edition, Urban Land Institute, Washingto», I~.C.,1960. ~. u~-~~ P~.~~-~ .~-~ ~.~ C~~z-t~ti~n s acs ~~~ $ -~ $ } q.k ~> ~~ _ 244 Part 4 Planning for the Future Examination of the economic base far retail trade is the initial stage in planning the shopping enter, and the techniques of market analysis have come into full play by authorities in their development. The steps in such an analysis follow a logical sequence: '.;~ ~.. The trading area involves an investigation of the population, in- come levels, places and direction of its growth, the existing and potential - location and volume of trade in competitive establishments. This information ~' will indicate the volume of trade in relation to the site of the new center. `s ; _: t;,;; 2. The gross potential sales far the center is derived from estimated ;; __, :. ~ ex nditures in the tradin area. Famil "` _ `~'_~ ps g y income data will disclose the portion ~' ~ z`;'' al: s devoted to living expenses for various goods anti services-food, furniture, ~" clothing, appliances, drugs, automotive equipment, restaurants, entertain- meat, miscellaneous merchandise. 3. The potential net sales volume far a new center is related to the sales ~} volume in existing and potential competitive enterprise in the trading area, This requires informed judgement of the proportion of existing trade which znay be ~' ~;' attracted to the new location. The sales volume per square foot of retail floor ~~ space for the various goods will aid in estimating the gross sales in existing ~~ ~ j _: ~-i< establishments offering comparable gagds. E~ ~ 4. The physical space that can lac supported by the net sales from the i~ ~ ` ` ` . trading area nriay be estimated from the average annual sales per square foot of ' floor space in the several retail facilities. ~: ~' S. Anticipated income frorrr the center may be determined by application r ` of the probable rental rates r s oars foot of retail s l~ q pace, less operating and F ~ management casts, taxes, insurance, interest and amortization on the loan far _. ~~ °, the capital cast for the complete development. The balance represents the net t s "° return which may be expected lay the developer on his equity investment. i T ~ In formulating the program for a shopping center, the balance, or "mix" of retail facilities is important. The key facility in a Neighborhood Centeris usually a supermarket. Around this maybe ou ed a dru store barber sh ,~ ~' p g , op and beauty _ shop, bakery, shoe repair shop, laundry and cleaning shop, and service station. ~~ ,~'j r ~-, ` ' ' The Community Center will introduce a large variety store or small department ~i~~ ,, store, and augment the facilities of a Neighborhood Center with such estab- ~_ }~'~-~ lishments as an apparel shop, hardware store, radio shop, stationery store, ~_. , `~ . restaurant and bar, bank, and branch past off ce. The distinction of the Regional ~ ~ ~ Center is the full complement of specialty shags and the wide selection of goods t ~ ~ and services offered to the patrons, sometimes referred to as "Noah's Ark." The >~ #~ `~ ~ "ti' ~~~ ~° key elements are major department stares, and there may be a motion picture theater and community meeting hails. Recreation facilities, such as bowling, ~, ; and professional offices may be included in a center of any size, depending upon t ~ °` local conditions. ~ space for automobile parking is a feature of the shopping center. The r `~'~ ~ ' ' requirements for retail facilities vary: some specialty shops are reasonably well _,;~ r -° .~ ,~ ad reduce distances to goads and services, Strategy ~D Encourage appropriate small-scale industrial and cornn~ercial .. development. Large retail centers exist in Medford and industrial employment is available in White City, bath being near Central Point. Aetian Flan: Central Point is well-positioned to develap niche markets for commercial. and manufacturing enterprises. The Con~rriunity Response Team should work with development agencies to discover small to rnid-~ size businesses. Strategy 2.E. Support urban/ruraUfarm partnerships. ,fiction Plan: a.~ Establish a citi2ens' canimzttee to evaluate haw best to develap a partnership. b.) Promote high value crop development, .increasing farm viability. Goal 3: Increase community idenfity and function through improved communication. Strategy 3A. Promote activitieslcelebrations that unite residents. 1'7 ~~ ~ ' `~.. ~~ ~, ;~ ~{3 ~:, ; ;::, , `; , 4 ~, ',1" r, l ,., t~ ~: =~4 r. ; ~~ `.~ ~~ , ~; ~; ~t ~~~ -~~-~~.4 ~~, a .-° ~ n:, ~r ~ "`~ °;` 1 ~ 111.1 Department ©f Land Caz~serva#iczzi and T~evel€~pz~~el~t ii , , ~- ~~ So~.z[17c~rn C~rc.~;ot7 ]"Meld {)ffice 111, ~ r~~',• •i ~~, 155 Nortk-~ First ~itrcet ~'~,~ '~~.. 7'1-ceodore R. Kuloztgt~~ki, C;ot~crnar ~a ~.~.-- Cez~t~•aI Pc~ic~t, {~regoz~ ~J75()2 Pl~ota~: {541) 85f3-;~ i 8~1 1~ax: {541} 85~-3142 V~c:ia address: l-~ttp:ffu~ww.lcd.st~te.c~r.~~s fJctobcr 13, 203 Tom Humphrey City of Central Point 155 S. Second Street Central Point, pregon ~75fl2 Subject: Zoning Qrdinance Text Amendments, DLCD File No. Central Poizat 011-C}3 Dear Tom: The L?epartment of Land Conservation and Development {I3LCp}} appreciates the opportunity to comment on the city's proposed amendmezats to the C-4, Tourist and pffzce-Professional zoning district. We understand floe amendments to be intended to better define shopping centers and to clarify development plan processing requirenxezxts. To better define shopping centers the amendments limit a single coznzncrcial uzxit to 80,~f1~ square feet of floor area. We have one question with regard to the proposed language. The added language is: "witlx no individual unit having more than 8fl,00(7 square feet of floor space." ~Ilaere this language is added to Section 1.44.024{B}{IS} shopping centers are defined as a group of commercial establishments planned, developed, owned or managed as a unit. This implies the whole shopping center is a unit. I-lowever, the added language implies the shopping center is made up of many units. Is a single commercial unit the whole shopping center, one building {unit} in a shopping center, or is it one use that may occupy a tenant space in a building in the shopping center? If this is unclear to us it is going to be an interpretation problem with shopping center developers. ~e understand one reason for these amendments is to try to beep shopping centers at a scale compatible with Central Point. (fur Transportation- and Growth Managenxent Unit has suggested a number of other tactics, which the city may find useful in addressing dais issue. These are: Conservative minimum parking space requirements; Cap on number of parking spaces {maximum parking standard}> Building orientation standards; Block. layout standards; Floor area ratios {minimunx and maximum}; Architectural facade standards; ,~ Pedestrian and public amenity standards; Facade articulation standards; Entrance oriezztation standards; Parking lot location. standard; Maximum front yard setbacks; Pedestrian walkway standards; and Parking lot landscaping standards. We encourage the city to adopt the proposed ame~~dments and consider some of the other approaches listed above. Please enter these cornrrzents into the record 1'or this ordinance. Should you have any questions regarding these comments please do not hesitate to contact zne at (541} 858- 3189. Sincerely, =+~G'_. 3c~hn Rexa.z Southern C}regan Regional Representative cc: LII.CD File No. Central Point 01.1-03 ~~3 ,-~ ~_.. PLANNING DEPARTMENTI' STAFF REPORT DATE; November 4, 2003 TQ: Central Point Planning Commission FRC}M: Tom l-lumphrey A1CP, Community Devclopmcnt Director SUBJECT: Central Point Municipal Code, Zoning Text {C)rdinance} Aznend~aaent APpliyantJ C7vvner: City of Central Point Pro cr Desvri Lion: City-Wide Application Zoning: Fences, Their Use and Limitations Sunnamary; This ordinance would recodify CPMC Tit1e15,20, place Fences under the zoning code Title 17.7 and modify the regulations to meet Federal flood prevention requirements. Authority CPMC 1.24.020 vests the Planning Commission with the authority to review and make recommendations to the City Council on amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code text. Notice of the public hearing was given in accordance with CPMC 1.24.060. A livable Law: CPMC 1.24.010 et seq. -Public Hearing Procedures CPMC 17.$$.010 et seq. -Amendment Bavk~rouncl The existing fence ordinance {Attachment A} has been managed by the Building Department in the past but program management is shifting to the Planning Department. {ether changes being considered also have to do with aligning the City's code with the way fences are treated in a flood hazard zone by the Federal Emergency Management Agency {FEMA}. ~~-~ ~ ~., Discussi€~n Central Paint is one of the few local jurisdictions that laas a fe~ace ordinance:. It is often ignored by local contractors and its enforcement is labor izltensive particularly in the 1Q{~ year flood plain. The Planning Department has assumed more responsibility for monitoring and enforcing the ordinance which has led to two proposed changes attached as Options #1 and #2. City staff would like the Planning Commission to consider Options l and 2 as well as the possibility of eliminating the fence ordinance all together. Tl~e Commission is being presented with preliminary ordinance revisions so that they have tune to entertain public input and to consider the changes. Action The Planning Comrnissian is not being asked to arrive at a conclusion or make a decision at this meeting, The public may be polled for their input and the hearing continued for action at a subsequent mecting. Attachments A. Chapter 15.2fl Fences (Existing Fence Ordinance) B. Option 1, Proposed Fence Ordinance C. Option 2, Proposed Fence Ordinance t~~ ~' ~.. d+ s ~ _~ i.CJ. I ~. ~ ~ ' t ' ~ i., _Y~ ~~..~ s 16.2.0 .~. .. G V .~iy' ~. 'J 15.20,QC} 25.0.060 :i5,~C1.07t} ~.a,?0 Q80 ~.ulC'ot7~~ i_31Z ~ E C1."i.C~(j [~E :1'~' 'l 7=E'.t]t71-Y:~~'.C"1. L:QJL ?,i a.t1iZC(~.', Vv ~ C1.E'.:7 ~XCJ.t, ~. ! t:1J ~ t3 i".:1,_C)li5> i _ , ~' C.?~"tC'E_' J7.C'1cj~lt. 07;; C'C)' t1C'I~ ~(.C)1;;:> :Cx_iiEt; i^c~i:7..or..~ oil :i.c~z;c~~~~ az. i:.}~~:~c~uczt .' c~~:, . r:3ar~~cc~ ~;f.i ,_~,, (v}at:~gC~r.ou::s n~:_ Ix13.~~_c~ly _1_~yr [.",.7Cc'S~----'J~~:?"=L~.~E'Tl ixC)i~:i.C~'_ "f'Q <:)"w'lif?Y", p ' 15,2G.O~.C__.. C~tztx~t.c~}~_ a~t~1_ f:~f..Ac?:~, Tzi:.a.s c t:apf_cr` rta~_`t _~._ _ . a.i~~.~?;~ ~.O cz.L~_ ZQ:C?~ C:.,~.cl a:;~_~::1Cc"~t:l_CJSi:.:~ :^71i~.?7.171 '~~~1(' f~1.'j c3.S ~_:'_:>~E' 1.~? T1.t.~E 7 i of-. ~~11.;~ COt~~E?, E!_'t~. Qi_ fi~~-~"J. G' ~t.)~O~.~Z_.`~:l-O7:1:~ C)1`: {1a7c3pUf'-~~ ~.~ .;~ ~.'~ ~TlC" r~'~ ~..Lf-_' ~_~~ !. e ic~~~.:1_T7~~ .U ~::~"iE? .(_t~C:d l~ 1.C~1~? c~S)C1 xs ~_c;i~C~'[T'iE=_'i?L. cN~ ~e:n~es are ~.~ ao a~p~L~_ca~;1_~ ~.o y~c>"rl~c_t~> a_~=set~j_E~ci ray t'rA7_~; cha.~ ', p7-oYricler~ ~~'nat_ the spec a;_ ~etba.c~}~ z~egt3a_retTaerits of a~ect~n x,1.50.090 ~ha~ ~ nod arap.;i.~r t;.c~ ~E~.ce~>. 40rci. 1'7~~1 _~.2!~~. Q20_ _3.tz.~.=,_dirct p~~:r~n2~__~°C<x~~~~ed~ .~,.%~70 }~~:~~~~1 r~"hc°t2:~.~~OnStz"t1et~ Q1:' Z'F_'CC)i7S'C.rUCL:. a Te?~.C~ C)Ti ctT1,~' ~:f.`Opt~:s:'ti~~' z^. 4th:~~~. the ci c.y ~,~.ri.~c~7oLZ~ a~ ~ rs a ~~r~.:~_~%~_.rtg for ar~d ob1~ a:i_n~.rtc~ ~. b1~~ i_C~1i"zC~ ~C.y_=i11t. L I':a]::1 t~.e c~-~: `~ . `r''LT~' c`-z}7~~.1 ~Cc7¢.~?_OI~ ~O ~` z~ ~7L11 .~_C~_1?`!T~t pE?~`Ct11i:. S}:'.,.c~. ~ 1 C~Jili~.c?;z.Tl `ut1~~l..C~1 e71L ? T? ~CJ7.7Cial`~1.Cin 1;}~~~Y-C~- C12~ Y~O c`3 ;':"~`~1ct-' t}-? C"~ti..~' O~ ~!:lE? T1dt.Llrc'_~ ~OS1~:~O?:1 aIl`1 Yil%Ul:.f':f.1-^ e1.s o~ ~~t~~ -Fez~~ce "t c) ia~: c:or~t~rt~c~iueG aAic~ ti~ha~_~_ }~~ acuor.rir~<~r~i~~. 7,y a 1'JE?r1I11.~ ~eE? :L T?. c~CGO3:C~dT7C~ ~'~1'.:hL~"1G ~ee ~C~?f:'C~.'~'_!£' ~'>~.at.+- 1.~?_shE~~ ~~ti' t~~"?1S JL'~:'1.`3C~1C'L.1.0T? . '1'!lE_' C'~ tl' S}"c~~ ,. C"Z:"~~?i=. :~c~.? C~ ~7E?~ZR1.~ "v~iif it Sa1C~ cz~~i.'~Cat~.l.or' 1S ]_T? ~t1v'-f-? C. ~ ~Tlt j:(~r;;i ~~77C~ gin,?C~t^'.-Xl the t~exAr,~.~. ~?ou1.d x~at ~,Jiolate~`~i~s c~~p~cr c~ arir ocher c,1Q''J1-iCdi~%! e 1c?4V 07 CayCi1I1C174e oL i.?7E' C:2`~b' _ m w ~.. ~11.11Cl.i_~1~ ~E'ri~l~_%S [ .^lr ~~1r..r' ~o~.~.oGJ~;"1L~' `~~~~'1tC°t`.tl?"L'.~.a S}7<1J.~ be c~.CCC71':`lT~c~T11c'-~CA S~~% c9. ;7~ S'e;lii: ~~a c'~x=~, c ~'J ~ cZI7 Z'P_?Jle~:^:~~~~ 1Y> ct:7c1T:1C:uTi.< S~cSeCa (~~~ 'E,'"c.,(.{.7ut~:obl ~GS~ ~~. IJ11;1iC11»3.1~ QE?~>dT.`LL~4~T1:~ c'_° SC}?F.~C:ii~.~. ~S c`3,CLvI7t:.Gi'~,... ~JJy ~~1tY Qi t;V• ~.. Bc"~.:.`Y"~G'"~S c3.~"G11T3C~ SJ3?TT~P._T1C~ ~5~`'0.~5g ~ ?"-°CX'~1~f-'.~C3. ~"J~` the X000 State c~ Oregr~n G_~e ~~~~i °l};,ao--I~'~~~r~ls.?_y^ el~~.~i`~ 5~~.~_ ci.a,1_~y Cade ~~ptaerzdix ~~ ~iz~d the 1~~3 CJregcrn ~. Cttr~~.~. Specialty Cc~a.e, g~p~~ncli C:.~cpter 4; P~ic~s: c~x:c~.~~anc hi~te~ry: tJds. X18, 918, X47, 1342, 1391. , 14r 2 Arad 1467 . 164 {Cxit~~-ai.. Paint 7600} ~.. 15.2(}, 040--15.20.070 15.2{}.040 Fence height on lots. The following shall apply to fences on all lots other than corner lots or through lots: A. The maximum height for fences an or along the front lot line shall be three and one-half feet. B. The maximum height for fences an or along the side lines from the front property line to a point opposite the nearest front corner of the main structure shall be three and one--half feet, and from the nearest front corner of the main structure to the back line of the lot, the maximum height shall be six feet. C. The maximum height for fences on or along the back lot line shall be six feet. {Ord, 1674 {part}, 1992}, 15.20,(350 Fence height an corner lots. For all cor- ner lots, no fence on or along a property line shall be higher than six feet; provided., however, that no fence shall be higher than three and one-half feet where such fence is within the required setback area. {Ord. 1723 §5, 1995c Ord. 1574 {part},.1992}. 15,20.060 Limitations on fences on throw h lots. "Through lots" are defined as lots having frontage on two parallel or approximately parallel streets other than al- leys. Sn addition to the provisions of Section 15.20.040, the following shall apply to fences on through fats: A. Where the back lot line of a through lot is adja~- cent to a major arterial or secondary arterial, as identi-- fied in the city's Comprehensive Plan, no fence higher than three and one-half feet may be constructed on the back lot line unless all of the following conditions are rnet: 1. The major arterial or secondary arterial has a curb and gutter section adjacent to the. property and the right-of-way has been dedicated for the street section as established in the Comprehensive Plan or in a master trans- portation plan; 2. Parking is prohibited along the curb of the major arterial. or secondary arterial adjacent to the prop- erty where the fence is proposed to be installed; 3. No access or driveway curbcut has_been in- stalled or is being used on the back lot line of the prop- erty. If an access or curbcut is located thereon, such access shall be removed before the issuance of a permit, at the expense of the applicant; 4. The public works director may impose any other conditions reasonably relating to vision clearance and sight distance for the surrounding intersections, drive- ways, streets and accesses, {Ord., 1674 {part}, 1.992}. 15,20.070 Barbed wire, dangerous or unsightly fences --Written notice to owner, ~t is unlawful, in construction of fences, to use barbed wire or other Like material which ~>~ ~~.~ 165 {Central Point 9/95} u ? 15.20.084 ---~, '. creates an unreasonable or unnecessary risk of injury, or to use materials which are unsuitable far fencing or which are not designed for exterior use or exposure to the eie- menu and by deterioration may create a hazard or become so unsightly as to tend to impair the good order of the neigh- borhood and the property values therein. A33 fences shall be designed and constructed in a good and workmanlike man- ner. If any fence hereafter constructed is of such materi- al or design that the city building official in his judg- meat determ5.nes that it is in violation of this section, he shall give written notice to the person occupying the prop- erty on which the fence is situated, designating the defect and requiring the correction thereof within ten days. It shall then be the duty of the person so notified to remedy the defect within said period or appeal to the city coun- cii. In the event of an appeal to the city council, the matter shall be set for hearing at the next regular meeting of the council and the city administrator shall give notice thereof to the person in control of the property, At such hearing, all persons interested shall be given an opportu- nity to be heard, and the council shall finally determine the matter. Any person who fails to remedy any condition prohibited by this section within ten days after receiving notice or after the final determination of the matter shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to the general penalty. After the expiration of said ten days, the person responsible for the fence shah be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the fence shall thereafter be permitted to exist in violation of this sec- tion. {©rd. 3.674 {part} , 1992} . 15.20.080 Variance. A. Applications and Review. Requests for fence variances shall be made by application on such form as designated by the city administrator and shall be reviewed in accordance with Chapter 1.24. B. Information Required. Variance applications shah be accompanied by a iegal~ description of the property, plans and elevations necessary to show the proposed devel- opment, and an application fee of two hundred dollars. C. Consideration for Granting Variances. A variance may be granted if findings are made as follows: 1. The strict application of the provisions of this chapter would result in unnecessary hardship; or 2. The following considerations will either result from a granting of a variance or the following consider- ations do not apply to the requested application: a. The variance will provide advantages to the_ neighborhood or the city, . b. The variance will provide beautification to the neighborhood or the city, ~~~ `~°~ 1.6-6 {Central Point 23.!92 } 15.20.{790 c, The variance will provide safety to the neighborhood or the city, d, The variance will provide protection to the neighborhood or the city, e, The variance will not have any adverse im~- pacts upon the neighborhood, f. The variance will utilize property within the intent and purpose of the zone district. D. Conditions of Approval, In granting a variance, the city may attach conditions deemed appropriate in the particular case in the interest of~the public's health, safety and general welfare. {ord. 1674 (part}, 1992}, 1.5.20.090 Violation--Penalty. Any person violating any provision of this chapter shall, upon conviction there- of, be subject to the general penalty, Upon discovering any violation of the restrictions imposed by this chapter, except a violation of Section 1.5.20.070, it shall be the duty of the city administrator, or his designee, to give written notice of the violation to the person in possession and control of the premises on which the offending fence exists or is being constructed, with a demand that the same be forthwith made to conform to this chapter, Upon receipt of such notice, the person responsible for the structure shall. be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the fence is thereafter permitted to exist in violation of the restrictions of this chapter. {Ord, 1.674 {part}, 1992}. Chapter 15,,22 PRIVA'TELY' O~tiINED SWIMMING POOLS Sections• 1.5.22.01.0 Compliance with regulations required. 1.5.22.020 Swimming pool defined. 15.22.030 Setback requirements. 15.22.040 Fence requirements. 15,22,050 Overhead utility lines. 15,22.060 Fees. 15.22.070 General requirements. r~ ~ 167 (Central Point 1.1!92} Chapter 17.57 Fences Sections• 17.57.010 Chapter Application 1'7.57.020 Building Permit required 17.57.030 Fence height on lots 17.57.04(} Ltm~tahons on fences on through lots 17.57.05{} Barbed wire, dangerous or unsightly fences- Wz-~tten notice to Owner 17.57,060 Variance 17.57.070 Violation-Penalty 17.57.010 Chapter A~tilication. 'This chapter shall apply to ali zone classifications within the city as listed. in Title 17 of this code, All of the previsions of Chapter 12.0 and Title 17 relating to the location and placement of fences are also applicable to fences affected by this chapter, provided that the special setback requirements of Section 17.60.090 shall not apply to fences. {Ord. 17$1 2, 1997: ord. 1674 (part), 1992. 17.57.020 Building_~ermit required. A. All fences new or reconstructed must have a building permit. 1. The application must show the position, height, and materials of the fence. 'The fee shall be in accordance with the fee schedule established by the City of Central Point City Council. Permit will be allowed when it is deemed complete and will not violate this chapter or any other applicable law or ordinance of the city. B. Building permits for the following struc#~ires shall be accompanied. by a permit fee and a plan review fee in an amount based on valuation per the building department fee schedule as adopted by the city; l .Barriers around swiinining pools, as required by the 2000 State of Oregon One and Two-Family Dwelling Specialty Code Appendix B; and the 1998 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Appendix Chapter 4; 2, Fences over six feet tall; 3. Masonry Walls; 4. Retaining walls over four feet in height measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall; and 5. Retaining walls, any height, supporting a surcharge. (Ord. 1847 15, 2000: Ord 1'781 3, 1997. Qrd. 1674 {part), 1992. 1'7.57.030 Compliance with height limitations l ,Fencing located within the front yard setback area of all zones, except C-4, C-5, M- I , and M-2, shall not exceed three and one half feet in height measured from the grade. When within a C-4, C-5, M-I or M-2 zone, a fence shall not exceed three feet in height when located within ten (IO} feet of the street right-of--way unless otherwise approved by the Site Plan through the Planning Commission. 2. Fencing located in the side or rear yards (when not athrough-lot} shall not exceed six {6) feet in height and can be placed on the property line. Height shall be measured as follows: ~a} In required yards abutting a street, it shall be effective height measured from the finished grade on the side nearest the street. {b} In other required yards, it shall be the total effective height above the finished grade measured. on the side nearest the abutting property. 3. No fencing shall conflict with the site distance requirements set by the Public Works Department. 4. All fencing should comply with the Uniform Building Code. 5. Gates on primary vehicle entrances adjacent to public streets shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the right-of way. Gates on secondary entrances {e.g. stored vehicles, etc.) may be set back less than 20 feet if approved by the Public Works Department. Gates provided with a remotely operated opening mechanism will be set back 20 feet from the nearest existing or planned vehicular travel lane as deternuned by the Public Works Department. 17.57.040 Limitations on fences on through lots "Through lots" are defined as lots having frontage on two parallel or approximately parallel streets other than alleys. In addition to the provisions of Section 1'7.5'7.040, the following shall apply to fences on through lots: A. Where the back lot line of a through lot is adjacent to a major arterial or secondary arterial, as identified. in the city's Comprehensive Plan, no fence higher than three and one-half feet maybe constructed on the back lot line unless all of the following conditions are met: 1. The major arterial or secondary arterial has curb and gutter section adjacent to the property and the right-of way has been dedicated for the street section as established in the Comprehensive Plan or in a master transportation plan. 2, Parking is prohibited. along the curb of the major arterial or secondary arterial adjacent to the property where the fence is proposed to be installed; 3. No access or driveway curbcut has been installed or is being used on the back lot line of the of the property. If an access or curbcut is located thereon, such access shall be removed before the issuance of a permit, at the expense of the applicant; 4. The public works director may impose any other conditions reasonably relating to vision clearance and sight distance for the surrounding intersections, driveways, streets and accesses. 17.57,050 Barbed wire don emus or unsi htl fences--Written notice to owner. It is unlawful, in construction offences, to use barbed wire or other like material which creates an unreasonable or unnecessary risk of injury, or to use materials which are unsuitable for fencing or which are not designed for exterior use or exposure to the elements and by ~' .~. deterioration may crate a hazard or become unsightly as to tend to impair the goad order of the neighborhood and the property values therein. All fences shall be designed and constructed in a gaol and warlcmanlike manner. If any fence hereafter constructed is of such material or design that the city planning official in his judgment determines that it is in violation of this section, he shall give written notice to the person occupying the property on which the fence is situated, designating the defect and requiring and corrections thereof within said period of appeal to the city council. In the event of an appeal to the city council, the matter shall be set for hearing at the next regular meeting afthe council and the city administrator shall give notice thereafeo the person in control of the property. At such hearing, all persons interested shall be given an opportunity to be heard, and the council shall finally determine the matter. Any person who fails to remedy any condition prohibited by this section within ten days after receiving notice ar after the final determination of the matter shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to the general penalty. After the expiration of said ten days, the person responsible far the fence shall be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the fence shall thereafter be pernr~itted to exit in violation of this section. 17.57.060 Variance A, Applications and Review. Requests far fence variances shall be made by application an such form as designated by the city administrator and shall be reviewed in accordance with Chapter 1.24. B. Information Required. Variance applications sha11 be accompanied by a legal description of the property, plans and elevations necessary to show the proposed development, and an application fee of three hundred. fitly dollars. C. Consideration for Granting variances. A variance may be granted if findings are made as follows: l . The strict application of the provisions of this chapter would result in unnecessary hardship; ar 2. The fallowing considerations will either result from a granting of a variance ar the following considerations do not apply to the requested application: A, The variance will provide advantages tat eh neighborhood ar the city, B. The variance will provide beautification to the neighborhood ar the city, C. The variance will provide safety to the neighborhood or the city D. The variance will provide protection to neighborhood ar the city, E. The variance will provide will not have any adverse impacts upon the neighborhood. F. The variance will utilize property within the intent and purpose of the zone district. D. Conditions of Approval. In granting a variance, the city may attach conditions deemed appropriate in the particular case in the interest of the public's health, safety and general welfare. 17.57.070 Violation-Penalty. Any person violating any provision of this chapter shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to the general penalty. Upon discovering any violation of the ~~.~ :_ ~.~~ restrictions unposed by this chapter, except a violation of section 17.20,fl5t1, it shall be the duty of the city administrator, or his designee, to give written notice of the violation to the person in possession and control of the premises on which the offending fence exists or is being constructed, with a demand that the same be forthwith made to conform to this chapter. Upon receipt of such notice, the person responsible for ht structure shall be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the fence is thereafter permitted to exist in violation for the restrictions of this chapter, ~4 ri~~es'sste tit~.~ ~~ ~''-'ts °1°~tY RicSh~ ~?_ .. ~~ if7ri y~gle r~i~yi-t ~yr~iC~Y~ c~a~~~ V i5'son 'trio~9~e ttt~i ° ttZC!`+~~ Chal~te;r 17.57 Fences Sections: 17.57.010 Chapter Apl~licatioz3 17.57.020 General Regulations 17.57.030 Fences izx the Stream Setback Area 17.5?.040 Prohibited Fcnee Types 17.57.050 Violation-Penalty 17.57.010 Chapter Application. This chapter will apply to all gone classificatiozls within the city as listed in Title 17 of this code. All of the provisions of Chapter 12.20 and Title 17 relating to the location and placement offences are also applicable to fences affected by this chapter. ((Jrcl. 1781 2, 1997: C)rd. 1674 {part), 1992}. 17.57.020 General Regulations A wilding Perznit for all fencing listed in Table l shall be accozztpanied by a per€nit fee and Fence Regula tions R-L R-1 R-2 R-3 CN C-2 m C-4 C-5 M-1 M-2 Fence Permit Required Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Franc Yard Setback For B' Fence 2p' a,b &c 2p' {a,b &c} 2p' {a,b &c 2p' {a,b &c 2p' {a,b &e 2p' a,b &n} 1 p' a,b &c} 1 p' a,b &c 1 p' {a,b &c} 1 p' {a,b &c Sideyard Setback p' p' p' p' p' p` p' p' p' p' Rear Yard Setback p' p' p' p' p' p' p' p' p' p' Corner dot p' {b} p' b p' {b p' b} p' {b} p' b} p' b p' {b p' {b p' {b Barriers For Ponls {d} d} {d} d} {d} {d d d d d} Masanary WaNs, Retaining Walls, or Fences over 6' in height {e} {e} {e} {e} {e} {e} {e} {e} {e} {e} Setback for Gates 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' 2p' Variance f} {f} {f} f} #} {f} {f {f} {A} 42" Hig]t maxi€num fences allowed within front setback area. {B} ]PTO fencing will conflict with the site distance requirements set ty the Put]ic Works Department. {C} Fence height will be measured fro€n t]te fi€tished grade on the side nearest the street. {D} Barriers around swiznming pools, as required ty the 2{}04 state of Oregon Cane and Two-Family Dwelling Specialty Cade Appendix B; and the 1998 Oregon structural specialty Code, Appendix Chapter 4; {l~} Fences more than six feet tall; Masonry Walls; Retaining walls mare than four feet in height €neasured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall; and Retaining walls, any }teigltt, supporting a surcharge. (F} Requests for fence variances s]ta]l to znade ty application on such form as designated ty the city administrator and wi11 to reviewed in accordance wit}t Chapter I.24. {G} Na person shall construct or reconstruct a fence on any property within the city without first applying far and attaining a tuilding permit front the City. ~' •~ 17.57.030 Fences in the Streaz~ Setback Area A. Fences are allowed withizz the building setback for properties abutting a streaz~~z as long as they meet the following criteria. 1. Fences are prohibited inside a flooclway as desig~zatecl oz~ tl~e Federal Iz~zsurancc Rate Maps (FIRM} for Central Point. 2. A setback of hve feet ~5'} from the top of tl~e streazz~ bank is required for all fencing. This allows for periodic inspection oftl7e creek channel by the City. 3. Fences built paralleling tl~e creek must be built in removable sections. A zxzaxiznuzn section width is eight feet (8'}. 4. Twelve feet {l2'} z~iniznum gates must be installed in-between properties that border the creek. 5. Irrigation systezxzs should be designed to allow for Public Works Vehicles to navigate in the setback area. 6. Irrigation systems, fencing or other objects that are damaged in a flood event by the City of Central Point will not be replaced by the City. B. Prohibited Fencing in the Strean-z Setback Area. 1. Block or retaining walls, 17.57.040 Prohibited Fence Tomes A. Barbed Wire Fencing, or other like material, which creates an unreasonable or unnecessary risk of injury. t~5"ca l 7.5`7Violation Penalty. Any person violating any provision of this chapter will, upozz conviction thereof, be subject to the general penalty. Upon discovering any violation of the restrictions imposed by this chapter, except a violation of Section 17.20.£}20, it will be the duty of the city administrator, or his designee, to give written notice of the violation to the person in possession and control of the premises on which the offending fence exists or is being constructed, with a demand that the same be forthwith made to confozm to this chapter. Upon receipt of such notice, the person responsible for ht structure will be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the fence is thereafter pez~xzitted to exist in violation for the restrictions of this chapter. y Miscellaneous Corrected Assi nment of Resolution Numbers C?ctober 3(~, 2{63 Resolution ResolUtlC}Cl DesGriptlon ~C1t"Clber 587 Recommendation to -City Council amending the zone text to include .Parrs, open Space & Civic Zonin 588 Recommending zone changes as presented for areas 2a & ~b 589 Recommending zone changes for area ze from C-N to R- 594 Recommending zone changes for areas 4a & 4b from R-1-8 to R-1-6 591 Recommending proposed zone changes for area 1 as indicafeci 592 Recommending proposed zone changes for Snowy Butte Station area, with the proposed church site bein than ed to Civic zonin 593 .Approving a Tentative Plan for Snowy Butte .. Station Subdivision that would create 98 Tots 594 Approving a Tentative partition that would divide two existing tax lots into four separate tax lots, mown as the Coffin Subdivision 595 Approving the tentative subdivision located south of Biddle Rd and east of Hamrick Rd, creating seven dots known as Hamrick Business Park 596 Approving Conditional Use Permit for the proposed development of a church located within the proposed Sno Butte Subdivision 597 A provin Tentative Plan for Spruill Subdivision 598 Determining that Furniture Row's type of business meets the rectuirements to become a permitted use within the C-4 zonin district 599 A rovin Site Plan-for Furniture Row ~~g